HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - CC - 2018.11.05City Council
City of Burlingame
Meeting Agenda - Final
BURLINGAME CITY HALL
501 PRIMROSE ROAD
BURLINGAME, CA 94010
Council Chambers7:00 PMMonday, November 5, 2018
CLOSED SESSION - 6:00 p.m. - Conference Room B
Approval of the Closed Session Agendaa.
Closed Session Community Forum: Members of the Public May Address the Council on
any Item on the Closed Session Agenda at this Time
b.
Adjournment into Closed Sessionc.
Conference with Labor Negotiators (Gov. Code Section 54957.6)
City Designated Represetatives: Timothy L. Davis, Sonya M. Morrison, Kathleen Kane,
Carol Augustine, and Lisa K. Goldman
Employee Organizations: Burlingame Police Officers Association, Burlingame Police
Sergeants Association, Association of Police Administrators, and Teamsters
d.
Note: Public comment is permitted on all action items as noted on the agenda below and in the
non-agenda public comment provided for in item 7.
Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and
hand it to staff, although the provision of a name, address or other identifying information is
optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in
light of the number of anticipated speakers.
All votes are unanimous unless separately noted for the record.
1. CALL TO ORDER - 7:00 p.m. - Council Chambers
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
3. ROLL CALL
4. REPORT OUT FROM CLOSED SESSION
5. UPCOMING EVENTS
6. PRESENTATIONS
Fire Prevention Month Presentation by Central County Fire Departmenta.
Page 1 City of Burlingame Printed on 12/5/2018
November 5, 2018City Council Meeting Agenda - Final
Violins of Hope Presentationb.
Burlingame Aquatic Center Presentationc.
7. PUBLIC COMMENTS, NON-AGENDA
Members of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. Members of the public wishing to
suggest an item for a future Council agenda may do so during this public comment period. The Ralph M .
Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter
that is not on the agenda.
8. APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR
Consent calendar items are usually approved in a single motion, unless pulled for separate discussion .
Any member of the public wishing to comment on an item listed here may do so by submitting a speaker
slip for that item in advance of the Council’s consideration of the consent calendar.
Adoption of City Council Meeting Minutes October 15, 2018a.
Meeting MinutesAttachments:
Adoption of a Resolution Accepting the Installation of Synthetic Turf and the Purchase of a
Groomer, Sweeper, and Maintenance Plan for Murray Field, City Project No. 84130
b.
Staff Report
Resolution
Final Progress Payment
Attachments:
Adoption of a Resolution Approving the Procurement of Five Vehicles for the City ’s Fleet
System
c.
Staff Report
Resolution
Summary of Bids
NJPA Contract Acceptance and Award Letter
Attachments:
Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Customer Work Order
Agreements with San Mateo County Energy Watch for Energy Efficiency Projects and an
Agreement with PG&E for On-Bill Financing
d.
Staff Report
Resolution
SMCEW Work Order Agreements
PG&E OBF Agreement Template
Attachments:
Page 2 City of Burlingame Printed on 12/5/2018
November 5, 2018City Council Meeting Agenda - Final
Adoption of a Resolution Approving the Tentative and Final Parcel Map (PM 18-06),
Merger of Lots 1, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 and a Portion of Lot 16, Block 20, Map of Lyon
and Hoag Subdivision at 920 Bayswater Avenue
e.
Staff Report
Resolution
Final Parcel Map
August 13, 2018 Planning Commission Minutes
Attachments:
Adoption of a Resolution Approving the Annual Report on the Status of Impact Fees
Collected as of June 30, 2018, Pursuant to the Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code
Section 66000 et seq.), and Making Required Findings Related to the City ’s Development
Impact Fees
f.
Staff Report
Resolution
Attachments:
Adoption of a Resolution Accepting the Procurement of a Prefabricated Restroom from
CXT, Inc. and the Site Preparation Work by Timberline Engineering for the Washington
Park Restroom, City Project No. 85050
g.
Staff Report
Resolution
Final Progress Payment
Attachments:
Adoption of a Resolution to Approve the 2018 Tourism Business Improvement District
Annual Report and to Give Notice of Intent to Levy Assessments for 2019
h.
Staff Report
Resolution
Annual Report
Attachments:
Approval of Out-of-State Travel for City Staffi.
Staff Report
Cost Estimate Summary
Attachments:
Acceptance of a Proclamation Honoring Anson Burlingame and the 150th Anniversary of
the Burlingame Treaty on US-China Relations
j.
Staff Report
Proclamation
Attachments:
9. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Public Comment)
10. STAFF REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS (Public Comment)
Page 3 City of Burlingame Printed on 12/5/2018
November 5, 2018City Council Meeting Agenda - Final
Consideration of Appointments to the Traffic, Safety & Parking Commissiona.
Staff ReportAttachments:
Consideration of Appointments to the Beautification Commissionb.
Staff ReportAttachments:
Consideration of Appointments to the Parks & Recreation Commissionc.
Staff ReportAttachments:
Approval of the Schematic Design and Phasing Plan for the New Community Centerd.
Staff Report
LSA Memorandum
Rendering - Burlingame Avenue side
Rendering - Park side
Attachments:
Consideration of the General Plan Update and Environmental Impact Report (EIR)e.
Staff Report
Draft General Plan - Public Review Draft (August 2017)
Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR)
Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR)
Exhibit A: Responses to Draft GP public comments
Exhibit B: Draft General Plan public comments – original correspondence
Exhibit C: Implementation Programs errata/edits
Exhibit D: 75 CNEL Noise Contour errata/edits
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - October 22, 2018
Attachments:
Discussion of Mayor Brownrigg ’s Recommendation that the City Hire a Public Space
Design Firm to Assist with the Design of the Public Square within the Post Office Project
f.
Staff ReportAttachments:
11. COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND ACTIVITIES REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
Councilmembers report on committees and activities and make announcements.
Vice Mayor Colson's Committee Reporta.
Committee ReportAttachments:
12. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
Page 4 City of Burlingame Printed on 12/5/2018
November 5, 2018City Council Meeting Agenda - Final
13. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The agendas, packets, and meeting minutes for the Planning Commission, Traffic, Safety & Parking
Commission, Beautification Commission, Parks & Recreation Commission and Library Board of Trustees
are available online at www.burlingame.org.
14. ADJOURNMENT
Notice: Any attendees wishing accommodations for disabilities please contact the City Clerk at
(650)558-7203 at least 24 hours before the meeting. A copy of the Agenda Packet is available for
public review at the City Clerk's office, City Hall, 501 Primrose Road, from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
before the meeting and at the meeting. Visit the City's website at www.burlingame.org. Agendas and
minutes are available at this site.
NEXT CITY COUNCIL MEETING - Study Session on Residential Impact Fees
on Wednesday, November 14, 2018 at 6:30 p.m.
Next Regulary City Council meeting - Monday, November 19, 2018
VIEW REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING ONLINE AT www.burlingame.org/video
Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the City Council regarding any item on this agenda
will be made available for public inspection at the Water Office counter at City Hall at 501 Primrose
Road during normal business hours.
Page 5 City of Burlingame Printed on 12/5/2018
Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 11/05/18
Burlingame City Council October 15, 2018
Unapproved Minutes
1
BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL
Unapproved Minutes
Regular Meeting on October 15, 2018
1. CALL TO ORDER
A duly noticed regular meeting of the Burlingame City Council was held on the above date in the City Hall
Council Chambers.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
The pledge of allegiance was led by former Mayor Jerry Deal.
3. ROLL CALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Beach, Brownrigg, Colson, Keighran, Ortiz,
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
4. CLOSED SESSION
a. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS (GOV. CODE SECTION 54957.6) CITY
DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVES: TIMOTHY L. DAVIS, SONYA M. MORRISON,
KATHLEEN KANE, CAROL AUGUSTINE, AND LISA K. GOLDMAN EMPLOYEE
ORGANIZATIONS: BURLINGAME POLICE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION, BURLINGAME
POLICE SERGEANTS ASSOCIATION, AND ASSOCIATION OF POLICE
ADMINISTRATORS
City Attorney Kane reported that direction was given but no reportable action was taken.
5. UPCOMING EVENTS
Mayor Brownrigg reviewed the upcoming events taking place in the city.
Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 11/05/18
Burlingame City Council October 15, 2018
Unapproved Minutes
2
6. PRESENTATIONS
a. PRESENTATION TO HYATT REGENCY SAN FRANCISCO AIRPORT CELEBRATING
ITS 30TH ANNIVERSARY IN BURLINGAME
Mayor Brownrigg congratulated Hyatt Regency San Francisco Airport on their thirtieth anniversary in
Burlingame and presented their General Manager Irby Morvant with a proclamation.
7. PUBLIC COMMENT
Burlingame resident Sandra Lang discussed the Burlingame Neighborhood Network event that occurred on
October 13, 2018.
8. CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Brownrigg asked the Councilmembers and the public if they wished to remove any item from the
Consent Calendar. Councilmember Keighran pulled 8e.
Councilmember Beach made a motion to approve 8a, 8b, 8c and 8d; seconded by Councilmember Ortiz. The
motion passed unanimously by voice vote, 5-0.
a. ADOPTION OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OCTOBER 1, 2018
City Clerk Hassel-Shearer requested Council adopt the City Council Meeting Minutes of October 1, 2018.
b. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION CANCELLING THE PROCUREMENT OF FIVE
PUBLIC SAFETY VEHICLES FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT
DPW Murtuza requested Council adopt Resolution Number 133-2018.
c. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE UPDATED SANITARY SEWER
MANAGEMENT PLAN
DPW Murtuza requested Council adopt Resolution Number 134-2018.
d. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FINAL PARCEL MAP (PM 17-01),
LOT MERGER OF PORTIONS OF LOT 3, BLOCK 5, MAP OF BURLIGNAME LAND
COMPANY NO. 2 SUBDIVISION AT 1128 AND 1132 DOUGLAS AVENUE
CDD Gardiner requested Council adopt Resolution Number 135-2018.
Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 11/05/18
Burlingame City Council October 15, 2018
Unapproved Minutes
3
e. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE CITY OF BURLINGAME RESPONSE
LETTER TO THE 2017-2018 SAN MATEO COUNTY CIVIL GRAND JURY REPORT:
“SMOKE-FREE MULTITENANT HOUSE: NO IFS, ANDS OR BUTTS.”
City Attorney Kane requested Council adopt Resolution Number 136-2018.
Councilmember Keighran asked if the City’s ordinance covered non-medical cannabis. City Attorney Kane
stated that when the City passed a multi-unit housing smoking ban ordinance, non-medical cannabis was not
legal in California. She explained that the ordinance banned all combustion-based smoking except for
something that is required by a medical prescription. Therefore, her reading of the ordinance is that it would
ban recreational cannabis smoking. She noted that the Council should revisit this issue at a later time.
Councilmember Keighran stated that pursuant to the grand jury report, San Mateo County residents who
have received citations were unaware of existing non-smoking ordinances in apartment buildings. However,
in Burlingame, the public was aware of the City’s multi-unit housing smoking ban. She asked how many
citations have been issued in Burlingame. City Attorney Kane stated that she didn’t know the exact number.
She added that the City’s Code Enforcement Officer conducted extensive public outreach to apartment
managers, owners, and residents about the multi-unit housing smoking ban.
Vice Mayor Colson asked if people could anonymously report violations. City Attorney Kane replied in the
affirmative.
Mayor Brownrigg discussed the County movement to talk about flavored tobacco. City Manager Goldman
stated that staff is proposing having this discussion in January.
Mayor Brownrigg opened the item up for public comment. No one spoke.
Councilmember Keighran made a motion to adopt Resolution Number 136-2018; seconded by
Councilmember Ortiz. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote.
9. PUBLIC HEARINGS
There were no public hearings.
10. STAFF REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
a. DISCUSSION OF BURLINGAME AQUATIC CENTER POOL RENOVATION
BURLINGAME
City Manager Goldman discussed the City’s agreement with the San Mateo Union High School District
(“District”) concerning maintenance and use of the Burlingame Aquatic Center (“BAC”) pool. She
explained that in 1997, the City and the District entered into an agreement to jointly fund the construction
and ongoing repair, improvements, and operations of a new 25-yard pool at Burlingame High School. A few
Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 11/05/18
Burlingame City Council October 15, 2018
Unapproved Minutes
4
years later, an anonymous donor gave $1.2 million to upgrade the 25-yard pool facility into a 50-meter pool.
The City contributed $1.167 million and the District contributed $300,000 to upgrade the pool. After the
pool was upgraded, the City and District amended their agreement to expand the hours that the facility could
be open and made other changes.
City Manager Goldman stated that between the time the pool opened and 2011, the City operated the
community programs at the pool, including recreational swimming, lap swimming, swim lessons, and fitness
classes, and managed the scheduling. In 2011, the City contracted with BAC to operate these programs on
the City’s behalf. BAC was already managing competitive programs in adult and youth swimming and water
polo at the pool.
In 2016, the City and the District approved a new pool agreement. The new agreement extended the term by
three years to January 1, 2026, covered how maintenance and operating expenses would be split between the
two parties (the City pays 78%, while the District pays 22%), and how capital expenses are spilt (50-50
basis). The agreement also covered when the City has exclusive use of the pool, when the pool is shared
with the District, and when the pool can be closed for annual maintenance.
City Manager Goldman explained that prior to signing the agreement, the District commissioned a facility
audit of the aquatic center. The intent of the audit was to help the City and District jointly develop a capital
replacement program. The audit listed projects that needed to be undertaken within five years and within ten
years. She noted that under the five-year timeframe, the City and District would need to remove and replace
the pool deck and drainage, and remove and replace the pool finish in the competition pool.
City Manager Goldman explained that earlier this year, the District began undertaking renovations to the
aquatic center; the project included removal and replacement of the deck, removal and replacement of the
pool finish, and the replacement of the interior lights with LED fixtures. She stated that the project was to
begin on June 1 and be completed by September 21. The expected budget for the project was $1,902,659,
with the City’s share at $951,330. Due to a variety of factors, including the need to re-bid the project and
delays getting approvals from the Department of the State Architect, which approves school construction
projects, demolition of the deck didn’t begin until July 2.
City Manager Goldman stated that in July, District staff notified the City that the pool shell contained
problems related to rebar and waterproofing, and that there were additional problems with the light fixtures
and electrical work. She explained that the cost to make the repairs to the electrical exceeded the Public
Contract Code limits that the District is required to follow. Therefore, the repair work needed to be formally
bid, which delayed progress on the pool.
City Manager Goldman explained that in August, the contractor uncovered additional problems with
corrosion of the rebar at various locations, such as the lights, stairs, and floor inlets, and improper concrete
coverage in many areas. As a result of these issues, in September, the District requested that its pool
engineer produce an existing conditions report that highlighted the various challenges with the pool. The
report states that the pool shell is compromised and should be replaced, rather than repaired. She noted that
the City has not seen this report.
Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 11/05/18
Burlingame City Council October 15, 2018
Unapproved Minutes
5
City Manager Goldman explained that City staff and District staff met on September 28 to discuss options
for moving forward. She noted that included in the packet is the District’s PowerPoint presentation that the
District gave to their Board at their October 11 meeting. She stated that at the October 11 District meeting,
District staff presented two options to the Board. The first option is to repair the problems that have been
identified. She explained the pool engineer believes that under this option, the pool is likely to require major
maintenance at some point in the future that will necessitate draining the pool and keeping it closed for
several months at a time. Additionally at the end of the ten to fifteen years, the pool will need to be replaced.
The total cost to repair the pool shell, and additional projects will be $2,538,406. The City would be
responsible for 50% of the costs, and the pool is estimated to reopen March 2019.
City Manager Goldman stated that the second option involves completely reconstructing the pool shell.
She noted that the District staff is leaning towards this option. The scope of this option is outlined on page
21 of the District’s presentation. She stated that this option is estimated to cost $5 million and won’t be
completed until December 2019. She explained that the District believes that under this option, the pool
shell life will be extended to fifty years and there will be fewer shutdowns in the future.
City Manager Goldman stated that District staff feels that option 2 is more financially responsible. The
District staff recommended that the City’s cost be capped at the amount they would pay under the first
option: $1,269,203. This recommendation was presented to the District Board, but they didn’t make a
decision at their October 15 meeting. She explained that the District Board is bringing the matter back on
October 25.
City Manager Goldman thanked the District staff for working with BAC to ensure that the student teams
have places and times to practice. However, she noted that this will become more difficult when swimming
starts at the high schools in the spring.
City Manager Goldman noted that the District may ask the City to contribute more if they decide to replace
the pool. She discussed the current agreement and stated that it doesn’t require the City to pay for replacing
the pool.
Councilmember Ortiz asked if there was any recourse to the contractor or the project manager of the original
pool upgrade. City Manager Goldman stated that the contractor is out of business.
Vice Mayor Colson asked if the facility audit of the pool included the bathroom facilities and if the same
contractor was used. City Manager Goldman stated that she was unsure and would get back to the Council
with this information.
Vice Mayor Colson asked if there was insurance on the pool. City Manager Goldman stated that she didn’t
know.
Mayor Brownrigg opened the item up for public comment.
Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 11/05/18
Burlingame City Council October 15, 2018
Unapproved Minutes
6
Millbrae resident and BAC Masters swimmer Simon Greenwood stated his concern that the pool’s issues
might cause the community to lose some of the excellent staff at BAC.
A Burlingame parent discussed the impact of the closure of the pool on students in the community and how it
was causing stress on families.
Vice Mayor Colson asked if the parents had a suggestion for what the City could do to help out. The
Burlingame parent stated that she wanted the City to voice what the community is losing if the pool is closed
for an extended period of time.
Vice Mayor Colson asked if the parent’s preference would be to go with option one or two. The Burlingame
parent replied option one and added that it would give the community time to raise funds to build a new pool.
Mayor Brownrigg stated that he was concerned that if the District went with the first option, there was a
chance that additional repairs would be need and the pool would continue to close. City Manager Goldman
added that the challenge with option 1 is the unknown of how long the repairs will last and whether the pool
will need continuous repairs over the next ten to 15 years.
Burlingame resident Sally stated that she wanted to see BAC attract good coaches that will stick around and
that she didn’t believe it could be done without replacing the pool.
Burlingame resident Meredith discussed the importance of the pool in the community and how it might be
better to build a new pool on City property.
Mayor Brownrigg closed public comment.
Councilmember Beach asked when the District’s next discussion on this matter would be. City Manager
Goldman stated that the District scheduled a study session for October 25.
Councilmember Keighran stated that the first option is a band aid. She stated that if it doesn’t work and the
pool has to continuously undergo repairs, then costs will increase. She explained that depending on what the
District’s Board decides, the City might need to look at how to assist in transporting students to other pools
and ensuring that they have access to pools.
Councilmember Ortiz stated that he favored option 2, as he was concerned that repairing the pool would not
solve the problem.
Vice Mayor Colson asked when the current contract ends. City Manager Goldman replied 2026.
Vice Mayor Colson stated that if the District builds a new pool that lasts 50 years, it will extend beyond the
agreement. City Attorney Kane explained that all of the changes including expanded repairs are outside of
the scope of the agreement. She stated that the City Manager has asked for the engineering reports and that
staff needs to review these documents. She explained that the City wants to ensure that their investment is
Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 11/05/18
Burlingame City Council October 15, 2018
Unapproved Minutes
7
buying something that the City can have confidence in. City Manager Goldman added that the Board asked
to hear from the engineers directly and that this might occur at the October 25 meeting. She stated that the
Superintendent is aware of her request for more information.
Vice Mayor Colson stated that the City has looked at building its own recreational pool but the difficulty is
location and costs. She stated that the City should review potential locations and funding sources.
Mayor Brownrigg stated that the pool is a great asset. He explained that he believed that the
recommendation of the District staff to the Board was a fair one and that some of the maintenance issues led
to an acceleration of the structural deficiencies. He stated that he supported the speaker’s suggestion that the
City explore building a pool.
b. CITY COUNCIL DIRECTION REGARDING THE PROPOSAL TO INCREASE THE
PARKING METER TIME LIMITS AND CONSIDER PARKING METER CHANGES ON
BROADWAY BETWEEN EL CAMINO REAL AND CALIFORNIA DRIVE
DPW Murtuza gave a brief background on the item. He explained that currently, the Broadway commercial
area consists of a total of 285 parking spaces, between on-street parking and five nearby City parking lots.
Of the 285 parking spaces, there are two dozen 24-minute parking spaces, 61 one-hour spaces, 160 two-hour
spaces, and 40 long-term (nine and ten hour) spaces. On Broadway itself, there are 76 spaces total, with 59
one-hour spaces and 17 24-minute spaces. He noted that individuals could also utilize the two hour free
parking in the side street neighborhoods.
DPW Murtuza explained that the Broadway Business Improvement District (“Broadway BID”) recently
requested that the City increase the parking time limits along Broadway from one hour to two hours based on
feedback they received from customers. He noted that if this request was approved, the total supply of two-
hour parking spaces in the Broadway commercial area would increase from 56% to 78%. He added that
while there is a benefit to changing the parking time limits, there are concerns about decreasing the turnover
of parking spaces on Broadway.
DPW Murtuza stated that at the September 13, 2018 TPSC meeting, the Commission discussed the
Broadway BID’s proposal and received public input. He noted that there were an equal number of residents
and merchants in favor of the change as there was against the change. After conducting extensive
deliberations, TSPC voted three to one, with one absence, to recommend converting the 1100 and 1400
blocks of Broadway to two-hour parking limit for a trial period from November 15, 2018 to July 1, 2019. He
explained that if Council agrees with TSPC’s recommendation, this will create 20 two-hour parking spaces
for the pilot program.
DPW Murtuza discussed the difficulty of parking management. He outlined the issues that staff is requesting
direction from Council on:
1. Undertaking a parking study in the Broadway area to determine current supply and demand and
ensure no negative consequences prior to considering changes to the parking limits;
Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 11/05/18
Burlingame City Council October 15, 2018
Unapproved Minutes
8
2. Implementation of the two-hour parking limits only on the 1100 and 1400 blocks of Broadway while
retaining the existing parking time limits elsewhere;
3. Consideration of changes to the existing parking meter rate on Broadway from 50 cents per hour to
$1.00 per hour; and
4. Timing of undertaking the parking study and implementation of parking time limit changes given the
significant workload already programmed in the current fiscal year, the existing backlog, and the lack
of funding.
DPW Murtuza explained that in an effort to address some of the concerns raised by the Broadway BID, staff
is installing improved way-finding parking signage on Broadway to better direct drivers to the existing two-
hour parking lots. He stated that staff will work closely with the Broadway BID to monitor the results and
help advise as to any further adjustments needed to the signage.
Mayor Brownrigg noted that the staff report states that 27 people were in favor of keeping one-hour parking,
and 25 people were in favor of two-hour parking. He noted that attached to the staff report was a petition
requesting the spots be two hours. He asked if this was in addition to the numbers reported in the staff
report. DPW Murtuza replied in the affirmative.
Councilmember Keighran stated that if the side street parking in residential neighborhoods and the long-term
parking spaces are added to the number of two-hour parking spaces, there is a significant amount of two-
hour parking in the Broadway commercial area.
Councilmember Beach stated that parking management is tricky. She asked DPW Murtuza to explain how
changing the parking spaces on Broadway to two-hour would create a reduction in turnover. DPW Murtuza
stated that there are 59 one-hour parking spaces on Broadway, and the maximum capacity these parking
spaces could provide parking for during the day is 590 patrons. If these are made into two-hour spaces, this
becomes 245 patrons. He added that the City doesn’t have the data concerning the current maximum
turnover on Broadway.
Councilmember Beach stated that changing the parking spaces to two-hours could make it feel like there are
fewer available spaces on Broadway. DPW Murtuza replied in the affirmative.
Councilmember Beach stated that after reviewing the resident emails attached to the staff report, the main
take away was the convenience factor of having two-hour parking on Broadway. She asked if staff is
hearing about lack of availability of two-hour spaces. DPW Murtuza replied in the negative.
Councilmember Beach asked about staff’s concerns with TSPC’s recommendation for a pilot program.
DPW Murtuza explained that the City would need to adopt an ordinance for the pilot program and
highlighted potential confusion of having separate blocks with two-hour parking spaces.
Mayor Brownrigg opened the item up for public comment.
Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 11/05/18
Burlingame City Council October 15, 2018
Unapproved Minutes
9
Burlingame business owner John Kevranian stated that the Broadway BID is proposing the conversion
because they have received complaints from the public about needing more than an hour to conduct their
business on Broadway.
Councilmember Ortiz asked about parking limits in other commercial areas. Mr. Kevranian stated that
Burlingame Avenue is two hours, Millbrae is free parking, and San Mateo is two hours.
Councilmember Ortiz asked about directing individuals to the parking lots near Broadway. Mr. Kevranian
stated that visitors aren’t able to find the parking lots. He added that all parking lots in Burlingame should
have an address instead of a letter. He explained that this way, people would be able to use their GPS to find
the parking lots.
Mayor Brownrigg closed public comment.
Mayor Brownrigg discussed staff’s concern about the potential confusion the pilot program could create. He
noted that the community is used to having 24-minute meters mixed in with one and two-hour spaces. DPW
Murtuza stated that the 24-minute meters are located near the end of blocks and are color coded.
Mayor Brownrigg suggested color coding different parking spaces. He added that confusion would be
eliminated if the pilot program was done in four connected blocks. DPW Murtuza replied in the affirmative.
Councilmember Keighran stated that she went to the TSPC meeting to hear the discussion about the
Broadway parking spaces. She explained that she believed the City needed to first conduct a parking study
of the Broadway commercial area prior to making recommendations for a pilot program. She noted that she
doesn’t have trouble finding parking around Broadway and therefore didn’t know this was a problem.
Accordingly, she felt that a study would allow the Council to get a better idea of the situation. She added
that the City needed to address signage for the parking lots in order to ensure that non-residents are able to
find these lots. She asked that maps of the parking lots be put in all the stores.
Mayor Brownrigg asked why the parking on Burlingame Avenue is two-hours and the parking on Broadway
is one-hour. Councilmember Keighran stated that parking studies were done in the Burlingame Avenue
commercial area, and it was found that most of the parking lots were at 92% capacity. Therefore, because
the lots were full, the parking spaces were changed on Burlingame Avenue to two-hour.
Councilmember Beach stated that she agreed with staff and Councilmember Keighran that there was a need
to improve way-finding parking signage for the parking lots near Broadway. She noted that this is not an
issue of supply and demand but rather an issue of convenience. She stated that she was skeptical of the need
to change the parking spaces to two-hour time limits on Broadway as there are plenty of open spots in the
parking lot. She added that the one-hour time limits on Broadway ensure turnover. She added that she
wasn’t in favor of doing a pilot program on a block or two. Rather, she wanted to see a parking study done.
Mayor Brownrigg stated that he was confused at what a parking study would accomplish in this matter.
Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 11/05/18
Burlingame City Council October 15, 2018
Unapproved Minutes
10
Councilmember Ortiz stated that a parking study would determine how best to ensure turnover on the main
street and what the need for two-hour parking is in the commercial area.
Councilmember Keighran stated that she could go either way on a parking study. However, because the City
is redoing their General Plan it would be nice to undertake a parking study in this area, as one had not been
done for many years.
Vice Mayor Colson stated that she spent time on Broadway talking to merchants. She explained that it is a
split conversation. She noted that there doesn’t seem to be a lot of data on the matter. She stated that if the
City does a study she would want to include discussion of the installation of EV charging stations in the
parking lots and where optimal places are for these stations. Additionally, she stated that accessBurlingame
shows the locations of parking lots in the Broadway area.
Councilmember Ortiz stated that he believed the City could do a better job at signage for the parking lots but
didn’t want to see the parking time limits change on Broadway without additional information.
Mayor Brownrigg asked that the Police Department provide Council with data on the number of parking
tickets given each year on Broadway. He stated that he was in favor of changing the meters to two hours
because the merchants were voicing support for the change.
Councilmember Ortiz stated the number of merchants on the petition is impressive. Therefore he stated that
he would be in favor of two-hour spaces if the City also adds more 24-minute spaces.
Councilmember Beach stated that the difference between Burlingame Avenue and Broadway is
traffic/parking management. She stated that Burlingame Avenue is a much bigger area that people shop in.
Broadway doesn’t have a parking issue as there are plenty of spaces in the parking lots. She stated that
although people want to park on Broadway, there are plenty of spots in the nearby lots. She noted that
changing the meters to two-hours, will reduce turnover and therefore further frustrate residents. She added
that a change shouldn’t be made until a study is done in order to understand the unintended consequences of
having two-hour parking spaces on Broadway.
Councilmember Beach stated that if the Council decides to conduct a parking study it should include both
capacity and pricing.
Mayor Brownrigg asked how a study determines turnover. DPW Murtuza explained that the study includes
surveys, interviews with merchants and patrons, and review of data collected from meters. Additionally, the
study determines the average turnover on a given block and the maximum supply versus what actually
occurs.
Mayor Brownrigg stated that he wasn’t in favor of a parking study.
Vice Mayor Colson asked Mr. Kevranian if he would be willing to work with the City on creating maps and
way-finding of parking lots. Mr. Kevranian replied in the affirmative.
Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 11/05/18
Burlingame City Council October 15, 2018
Unapproved Minutes
11
Vice Mayor Colson made a motion to move forward with way-finding parking signage and other
improvements to assist individuals in finding the parking lots, and delay a decision on changing the parking
meters on Broadway; seconded by Councilmember Beach.
Councilmember Beach discussed utilizing technology that alerts people of available parking spots. She
stated that the City may want to look into these options.
Councilmember Keighran stated that she believed at some point the City would need to conduct a parking
study on Broadway.
Vice Mayor Colson stated that after these improvements are made, the City could then revisit the matter and
see if at that point a study is needed.
The motion passed unanimously by voice vote, 5-0.
c. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE
AN AGREEMENT WITH TYLER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. FOR THE MUNIS®
ENTERPRISE RESOURCE PLANNING (ERP) SYSTEM AND IMPLEMENTATION
SERVICES FOR THE CITY OF BURLINGAME
Finance Director Augustine explained that the Finance and Human Resources departments have been
working on purchasing a new finance system for the City.
Finance Director Augustine explained that staff recommends that the City Council authorize the City
Manager to execute a contract with Tyler Technologies to provide the City with a new Enterprise Resource
Planning system (“ERP”). She noted that last fiscal year, the City hired a consultant to gather input about
what is needed in a new ERP system. The RFP for the system was issued in March, and the City received
three responses. Staff reviewed the responses and chose Tyler Technologies due to the reasons listed on
page two of the staff report.
Finance Director Augustine explained that one of the biggest reasons for selecting Tyler Technologies is due
to the updates deployed over the life of the application with minimal disruption, integrating technological
advances, strategic enhancements, and legislative changes.
Finance Director Augustine stated that staff is close to finalizing negotiations with Tyler Technologies. She
stated that the staff report discusses the implementation stages for the installation of the new system.
Councilmember Keighran stated that according to the staff report, Tyler Technologies has been used by
many cities and asked if any were in the Bay Area. Finance Director Augustine replied in the affirmative.
Mayor Brownrigg asked if this system would handle utility billing. Finance Director Augustine replied in
the affirmative.
Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 11/05/18
Burlingame City Council October 15, 2018
Unapproved Minutes
12
Mayor Brownrigg made a motion to adopt Resolution Number 137-2018; seconded by Councilmember
Ortiz. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote, 5-0.
d. UPDATE ON LONG-TERM UNFUNDED POST-EMPLOYMENT LIABILITIES AND
OPTIONS
Finance Director Augustine began by stating that the staff report was an update to a presentation that was
given last year to the City Council and employees about what the reduction in the discount rate was doing to
the CalPERS plan and City costs.
Finance Director Augustine reviewed the pension benefits and OPEB plan. She stated that the details for
both plans are provided for in the employee MOUs. She noted that these plans have seen reductions in their
benefits in recent years. The California Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act of 2013 (“PEPRA”) created
a reduced tier of benefits for new employees. Under this legislation the new formula for miscellaneous
employees is 2% at 62, and for safety employees is 2.7% at 57. She continued by stating that in the area of
medical benefits, a third tier was implemented for employees hired after 2010/2011. This tier replaced all
the defined benefit provisions with a health reimbursement plan beginning after five years of service except
for the CalPERS minimum contribution towards retirees’ medical coverage.
Finance Director Augustine reviewed a bar graph depicting the current fiscal year’s CalPERS contributions
for the different tiers of employees.
Vice Mayor Colson asked if she was correct that PEPRA employees’ CalPERS contribution rates don’t
include an employee pickup share. Finance Director Augustine replied in the affirmative. The employee
pickup for miscellaneous employees in the 2.5% at 55 tier is 1.5% and the pickup for safety employees in the
3% at 50 tier is 4%.
Vice Mayor Colson stated that the safety employees who are in the 3% at 50 tier created a massive
retirement benefit. She noted that moving the percentage to 2.7% greatly reduced the liability. She asked if
there could be future employee negotiations on the percentage. Finance Director Augustine replied in the
negative, stating that the percentages were set by law.
Mayor Brownrigg asked if he was correct that the City wouldn’t have much unfunded liability for PEPRA
employees. Finance Director Augustine replied in the affirmative.
Mayor Brownrigg asked if CalPERS overestimates their earnings in the future and there is an unfunded
liability, would PEPRA employees be required to do a pickup. Finance Director Augustine replied in the
negative. She noted that the service cost will increase.
Vice Mayor Colson stated some argue that the discount rate jurisdictions should use is the borrowing rate at
which the jurisdiction can borrow money, usually between 4-5%. She explained that this would give
jurisdictions a more realistic view of the risk that is on the table.
Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 11/05/18
Burlingame City Council October 15, 2018
Unapproved Minutes
13
Finance Director Augustine stated that the City’s current unfunded pension liability is $63.7 million. She
noted that these numbers are based on the City’s recent actuarial evaluation. She stated that these numbers
include the impact of the discount rate change. She explained that cities are now required to note these
liabilities on their financial statements. As jurisdictions began noting these liabilities, a lot of jurisdictions
showed a negative unrestricted net position. She stated that what the City wants to see is that this number
doesn’t get further negative. Instead, with the changes in the discount rate and the amortization time table,
staff is seeing that the City’s funded ratio is getting a bit smaller in the next few years.
Vice Mayor Colson stated that the City has outstanding pension obligation bonds, and the market value of its
assets is $168.5 million. She noted that this number is subject to the vicissitude of the stock markets and
therefore a number that the City can’t control. She discussed the likelihood of underperformance and noted
that as the market value of assets decreases, the unfunded actuarial accrued liability will automatically
increase. She stated that it is more important to look at the unfunded actuarial accrued liability and the
funded ratio in terms of a trend line.
Finance Director Augustine stated that the discount rate is defined as the assumed rate of return on CalPERS
investments. This was initially established so that 66% of the funding goals would be from investments, and
34% would be from employer/employee contributions. However, this focus has changed. Instead, the focus
is now on a funded status. CalPERS is now trying to invest for a performance that will sustain the fund over
the long term.
Finance Director Augustine reviewed the CalPERS investment returns since 2012. She noted that in 2009,
the rate of return was -24%, which is what escalated the need to take a closer look at the long-term
investment return assumption. She explained that previously, 7.5% seemed reasonable as that had been
achieved. But as a result of the recession, it has changed everyone’s way of thinking.
Finance Director Augustine reviewed CalPERS’ actuarial changes including
1. Reduction in discount rate (possibly to 6% over 20+ years)
2. New amortization policy
3. Move to more conservative investments
4. Mortality improvements
These changes are all good for the sustainability of the fund, but they all increase employer contribution
rates.
Vice Mayor Colson stated that the new amortization policy shortens the amortization period. She explained
that she is troubled about this because it is putting pressure on schools and absorbing a large chunk of their
excess revenue that came from recent taxes. She stated that she understands why CalPERS would want to do
it, but the City is into the retirement fund for perpetuity. Therefore, when CalPERS reduces the amortization
period, it inordinately squeezes the current group of taxpayers.
Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 11/05/18
Burlingame City Council October 15, 2018
Unapproved Minutes
14
Councilmember Beach asked if CalPERS’ discount rate moves closer to 6% does that mean that the City
would need to change its funding strategy for the Section 115 Trust. Finance Director Augustine replied not
necessarily.
Finance Director Augustine reviewed a chart showcasing the impacts of the discount rate reduction. She
stated that it would peak for miscellaneous employees in fiscal year 2027-28 when the employer contribution
rate is projected to be 39.8%. Safety employees will peak in fiscal year 2031-32 when the employer
contribution rate is projected to be 86.3%.
Mayor Brownrigg asked if he was correct that in fiscal year 2027-28, the City’s pension contribution rate
will be 40% of Burlingame’s payroll for miscellaneous employees. Finance Director Augustine replied in
the affirmative and added that this is due to the unfunded liability.
Finance Director Augustine stated that the City will be 100% funded in 2041. At that point, the required
contributions for employers will be approximately the same as they are today. In 2048, the rates will
decrease and will be similar to the rates in fiscal year 2011-12.
Finance Director Augustine stated that all fiscal issues (long term and short term) have to be discussed in the
context of the City’s entire operating budget. In fiscal year 2018-19, revenues are predicted to increase 3.8%
over last year’s revenue. This is not counting Measure I revenues. She noted that operating expenditures are
up 3.7% without including Measure I expenditures. This sum would be 8.7%, if we included the additional
pension funding.
Finance Director Augustine stated that 80% of personnel costs to the City are borne by the General Fund.
She stated that in fiscal year 2017-18, pension costs were 16.5% of personnel costs, and this will increase to
24% in the near future.
Finance Director Augustine stated that at last year’s Budget Study Session, City Council directed staff to
come back with strategies to prefund long term pension obligations. Staff developed a way to smooth the
impact of future rate increases by creating a threshold rate for each miscellaneous and safety plan. Under this
budget coping strategy, the City would pay CalPERS what is required and would put anything in excess up
to the threshold rate into a Section 115 Trust. Last year, the City established the Section 115 Trust Fund
with an initial $3.7 million contribution. At the previous Mid-Year Budget Study Session, the City Council
voted in favor of contributing an additional $1 million. She explained that the current Section 115 Trust
balance is $8.3 million. This is because the City has already made this year’s contribution of $3.4 million.
She added that staff does not anticipate the need to make a withdrawal from this account until fiscal year
2026-27.
Finance Director Augustine stated that CalPERS includes with their annual evaluation report an alternate
amortization schedule. The schedule shows that over the years, if the City was to have a full fresh start and
pull all of the various tiers of liability into one tier and paid it off over 15 years, the City would achieve
savings of $9.3 million for miscellaneous employees. However, she noted that this is the equivalent of
reducing your mortgage to a 15 year period.
Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 11/05/18
Burlingame City Council October 15, 2018
Unapproved Minutes
15
Vice Mayor Colson asked if any jurisdiction had done a fresh start. Finance Director Augustine stated that
she didn’t believe so.
Vice Mayor Colson stated that unlike a mortgage, the pension liability is fluctuating. Therefore she was not
in favor a fresh start.
Councilmember Beach asked if the City has the ability to use Section 115 Trust funds to make larger
payments now. Finance Director Augustine replied in the affirmative.
Finance Director Augustine next discussed OPEB liabilities, which are the other post-employment benefits.
She explained that OPEB liabilities consist of health care plan premiums, CalPERS health plan minimum,
and health reimbursement arrangements. She noted that total liabilities are $53 million, and there is $14.1
million set aside in a trust fund. Therefore, the unfunded OPEB liabilities are $38.9 million.
Finance Director Augustine stated that there are a lot of ways that OPEB liabilities are similar to pension
liabilities:
1. Require an actuarial study
2. Annual contributions go toward: service costs and unfunded accrued liability
3. Benefits reduced in past 5-10 years.
She noted that the ways that are different is that OPEB liabilities are:
1. Pay-as-you-go until 2013-14
2. Administered by the City
3. No employee contributions
Finance Director Augustine reviewed the OPEB funded status projection, which shows the City will be fully
funded by 2035 and after that will only have to pay the service costs. She noted that the major takeaway is
that OPEB funding has been made systematic, and unless something changes, it will be staff’s
recommendation to stay the course.
Vice Mayor Colson asked what the City is paying on pension obligation bonds. Finance Director Augustine
stated 5.5%.
Vice Mayor Colson stated that the City could accelerate the payment of the pension obligation bonds if
interest rates become inverted. She explained that she liked what the City was doing with the Section 115
Trust Fund.
Vice Mayor Colson asked that staff stay abreast of the California Rule case heading to the California
Supreme Court. Finance Director Augustine replied in the affirmative.
Finance Director Augustine stated that staff would come back with recommendations at the Mid-Year
Budget Study Session.
Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 11/05/18
Burlingame City Council October 15, 2018
Unapproved Minutes
16
Mayor Brownrigg stated that as the new employee MOUs are created, it is important the City discuss these
issues at those negotiations. Finance Director Augustine agreed.
Mayor Brownrigg thanked staff for the presentation.
11. COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND ACTIVITIES REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
a. VICE MAYOR COLSON’S COMMITTEE REPORT
b. COUNCILMEMBER BEACH’S COMMITTEE REPORT
12. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
There were no future agenda items.
13. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The agendas, packets, and meeting minutes for the Planning Commission, Traffic, Parking & Safety
Commission, Beautification Commission, Parks and Recreation Commission and Library Board of Trustees
are available online at www.burlingame.org.
14. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Brownrigg adjourned meeting at 10:21 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Meaghan Hassel-Shearer
City Clerk
1
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA NO: 8b
MEETING DATE: November 5, 2018
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Date: November 5, 2018
From: Margaret Glomstad, Parks & Recreation Director – (650) 558-7307
Subject: Adoption of a Resolution Accepting the Installation of Synthetic Turf and
the Purchase of a Groomer, Sweeper, and Maintenance Plan for Murray
Field, City Project No. 84130
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution accepting the installation of
Synthetic Turf with Purefill and a Brock pad and the purchase of a groomer, sweeper, and eight-
year maintenance plan for Murray Field from Field Turf Products, City Project No. 84130, in the
amount of $785,371.80.
BACKGROUND
On January 16, 2018, the City Council awarded the procurement and installation of Field Turf
synthetic turf, Purefill, and a Brock pad, along with a groomer and sweeper and an eight-year
maintenance plan through CMAS, a purchasing cooperative under the California Department of
General Services Procurement Division, at a cost of $785,371.80.
CMAS, a procurement option for California local governmental agencies, is a receptacle for the
Federal General Services Administration’s previously bid and awarded contracts. CMAS then
establishes an independent California contract for the same products and services at equal or
lower prices. The product is then purchased directly from the manufacturer.
The base bid for site work, including demolition of existing turf, irrigation, and hardscape, was bid
separately and awarded to Interstate Grading and Paving, Inc. (IGP). At this time, there are still
work items that IGP needs to complete before the City can accept their work.
DISCUSSION
The project purchase and installation by Field Turf has been satisfactorily completed in
compliance with the plans and specifications. The final installation, purchase, and maintenance
plan cost was $785,371.80. This includes one change order in the amount of $3,972.80 for
realignment of the turf around concrete boxes.
Accepting the Installation of Synthetic Turf at Murray Field, City Project No. 84130 November 5, 2018
2
FISCAL IMPACT
While the work by IGP hasn’t been completed yet, the following are the estimated final project
construction expenditures:
Interstate Grading and Paving, Inc. $1,114,846.00
Landscape Architect/Consultants $206,957.38
Field Turf Products $785,371.80
Construction Manager $74,635.00
Legal Ads/Permit Fees $2,605.00
Total Expenses $2,184,415.18
There are adequate funds available in the Capital Improvement budget to cover the estimated final
costs.
Exhibits:
• Resolution
• Final Progress Payment
RESOLUTION NO. _______
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME ACCEPTING
IMPROVEMENTS – (MURRAY FIELD PROJECT) BY FIELD TURF PRODUCTS
CITY PROJECT NO. 84130
RESOLVED by the CITY COUNCIL of the City of Burlingame, California, which finds, orders,
and determines as follows:
1. The Director of Parks and Recreation of the City has certified the work done by Field Turf
Products under the terms of its contract with the City dated April 2, 2018 has been completed in
accordance with the plans and specifications approved by the City Council and to the satisfaction of
the Director of Parks and Recreation.
2. Said work is particularly described as City Project No. 84130
3. Said work is accepted.
__________________________
Mayor
I, Meaghan Hassel-Shearer, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, certify that the foregoing
Resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 5th day of November,
2018, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
__________________________
City Clerk
1
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA NO: 8c
MEETING DATE: November 5, 2017
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Date: November 5, 2018
From: Syed Murtuza, Director of Public Works – (650) 558-7230
Subject: Adoption of a Resolution Approving the Procurement of Five Vehicles for the
City’s Fleet System
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution approving the procurement
of five vehicles for the City’s fleet system in the amount of $1,048,115.
BACKGROUND
The Fleet Division is a part of the Public Works Department and provides vehicle maintenance
services for City-owned vehicles and equipment. The Fleet Division maintains approximately 115
vehicles and 137 pieces of equipment for various City departments including Police, Public
Works, Parks & Recreation, Library, City Attorney/Code Enforcement, and Community
Development. The Fleet Division also provides vehicle maintenance services to the Town of
Hillsborough Public Works Department. The services to the Town of Hillsborough consist of
providing preventative maintenance to 35 vehicles and seven pieces of equipment. As part of
providing fleet maintenance services, the Division is responsible for maintaining a sustainable
Vehicle Replacement Program to ensure all City vehicles and equipment are in good working
condition for staff to conduct City business and effectively deliver services to the community.
As part of the Fleet Services Vehicle Replacement Program, staff has identified five vehicles for
replacement during the current fiscal year. The vehicles identified have exceeded their useful life
and must be replaced in order to continue providing uninterrupted public services to the
community.
DISCUSSION
As part of the bidding process, staff requested proposals for the five replacement vehicles from
the National Joint Powers Alliance (NJPA) procurement contract process and also contacted local
dealerships to obtain proposals. Staff solicited bids for the procurement of two utility vehicles
(Ford Transit Connect Van and Toyota Tacoma Truck) from dealerships within Burlingame. The
dealerships declined to submit bids on either vehicle. The City of Burlingame has been a member
of the NJPA since 2008. The NJPA procurement is leveraged nationally and satisfies the City’s
formal and competitive bidding requirements. This cooperative contract purchasing opportunity
Resolution Approving the Procurement of Five Vehicles for the City’s Fleet System November 5, 2018
2
presents both time and money savings for their users by consolidating numerous individually
prepared solicitations into one cooperatively shared process. Staff secured the lowest responsible
bid for the five replacement vehicles through the NJPA procurement process in the total amount
of $1,048,115 as follows:
• One Ford Transit Connect Van from National Auto Fleet Group at the bid price of $27,728.
The Transit Connect Van will replace vehicle #23 in the Facilities Division, a 2006 Ford
Freestar Van, which has been in use for 11 years, and has reached the end of its useful
life. This vehicle will be utilized by Facilities Maintenance staff for transportation of tools
and equipment to and from City facilities.
• One Toyota Tacoma Truck from National Auto Fleet Group at the bid price of $32,245.
The Toyota Pickup will replace the 2009 Ford Ranger used by the Parking Enforcement
Division. The existing vehicle has reached its scheduled life cycle of 8 years. The new
pickup will be ordered with a lift gate to assist Parking Enforcement Division employees
with lifting the containers of coins in and out of the bed of the truck.
• One Hydrovac Freightliner Truck from Municipal Maintenance Equipment (MME) for a bid
price of $429,446. The new equipment truck will replace Vac-Con vehicle #40 in the
Streets & Sewer Division, which is 11 years old, and is at the end of its useful life. The
Hydrovac truck is used for performing maintenance to the City’s wastewater collection
system, which is made up of pipes, manholes, cleanouts, siphons, lift stations, and other
required structures to collect all the wastewater and transport it to the City’s treatment
plant.
• Two Tymco Street Sweepers from GCS Environmental Services for a bid price of
$558,696. The new street sweepers will replace the existing street sweepers #50 and #51
in the Streets & Sewer Division, which have reached their scheduled life cycle of 9 years.
The Streets & Sewer Division operates these two sweepers six days a week, throughout
the year, to sweep main thoroughfares, commercial and business districts, and industrial
areas. These models use a “high-efficiency multi-pass, cylindrical, centrifugal dust
separator” that cleans air in a closed loop air system and does not exhaust air to the
neighboring communities.
Additional details, such as vehicle specifications, can be found in the attached summary of bids.
FISCAL IMPACT
The total cost of the five vehicles under this procurement is $1,048,115. There are adequate
funds available in the Equipment Maintenance Replacement Fund to undertake this procurement.
Exhibits:
• Resolution
• Summary of bids
• NJPA Contract Acceptance and Award Letter
RESOLUTION NO. _______
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME
APPROVING THE PROCUREMENT OF FIVE VEHICLES FOR THE CITY’S FLEET,
AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE PROCUREMENT
WHEREAS, the Fleet Division of the Public Works Department is responsible for vehicle
maintenance services of the City’s fleet, and for managing the vehicle replacement program in a
sustainable and effective manner to ensure the City’s fleet is in good operating condition; and
WHEREAS, the Fleet Division has identified five vehicles for replacement at this time;
and
WHEREAS, the City of Burlingame is a member of the National Joint Powers Alliance
(NPJA); and
WHEREAS, the NJPA procurement process is leveraged nationally and satisfies the
City’s competitive bidding requirements; and
WHEREAS, staff has been able to secure the lowest responsible bid for the
procurement of five vehicles through the NJPA contract as follows:
− One Ford Transit Connect Van from National Auto Fleet Group at the bid price of
$27,728;
− One Toyota Tacoma Truck from National Auto Fleet Group at the bid price of $32,245;
− One Hydrovac Freightliner Truck from Municipal Maintenance Equipment (MME) at the
bid price of $429,446; and
− Two Tymco Street Sweepers from GCS Environmental Services at the bid price of
$558,696.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, AND ORDERED, the above submitted lowest
responsible bids are approved and adopted; and the City Manager or her designee is authorized
to execute the above said procurement.
________________________
Michael Brownrigg, Mayor
I, MEAGHAN HASSEL-SHEARER, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, certify that the
foregoing Resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 5TH day
of November, 2018, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
________________________
Meaghan Hassel-Shearer, City Clerk
Overview
Contract Documentation
Pricing
Marketing Materials
NJPA Contact Information
Vendor Contact Info
Jesse Cooper
Direct Phone: 855-289-6572
jcooper@nationalautofleetgroup.com
www.nationalautofleetgroup.com
National Auto Fleet Group - HD Chassis
Contract#: 081716-NAF
Category: Vehicles and Chassis
Description: Chassis
Maturity Date: 11/15/2020
As an industry leading dealer network with 50 years of experience selling and servicing public entities, the
National Auto Fleet Group (NAFG) offers NJPA members contracted vehicle solutions from over 2200 different
models of Class 6, 7 and 8 Chassis with related equipment. The NAFG contract offers a variety of manufacturers
including Chevrolet, Ford, Crane Carrier, Freightliner, Peterbilt, Volvo, Kenworth and Mack all delivered directly to
NJPA member locations. Purchasers have access to a unique online ordering and quoting system that allows
users to create custom vehicles 24 hours a day with pricing that competes with state contracts across the country.
Home > Cooperative Purchasing >Contracts - Fleet >Vehicles and Chassis > National Auto Fleet Group - HD Chassis
1
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA NO: 8d
MEETING DATE: November 5, 2018
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Date: November 5, 2018
From: Syed Murtuza, Director of Public Works – (650) 558-7230
Andrea Pappajohn, Sustainability & Climate Mgmt. Fellow – (650) 558-7271
Subject: Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Customer
Work Order Agreements with San Mateo County Energy Watch for Energy
Efficiency Projects and an Agreement with PG&E for On-Bill Financing
RECOMMENDATION
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to
execute an agreement with San Mateo County Energy Watch for energy efficiency projects and
an agreement with PG&E for on-bill financing.
BACKGROUND
In August 2016, the Public Works Department completed a comprehensive Building Facilities
Master Plan that identified several energy efficiency improvements projects in addition to other
building infrastructure improvements throughout all the City building facilities. As part of that
effort, staff has been exploring ways to implement projects to make City building facilities more
energy efficient as well as exercise leadership in the area of energy savings and greenhouse gas
emissions reduction. One promising method involves upgrading indoor and outdoor lighting
fixtures of building facilities to light-emitting diodes (LEDs). LEDs use semiconductors, rather
than electrical filaments or gaseous substances, to emit light and produce light in a way that is
different from other lighting technologies. By dispersing light in a specific direction, instead of all
directions, LEDs reduce the wattage needed, making them more efficient. Uniform light
distribution and directionality of LEDs allow strategic placement for safety, security, and comfort
for outdoor applications. Other benefits of LEDs include longer lifespan than traditional lighting
technologies, which helps reduce the cost of bulb replacement and staff time.
In determining the most efficient and effective way to move forward, staff worked with the San
Mateo County Energy Watch (SMCEW) Program, which is an energy efficiency partnership
between the City/County Association of Governments (C/CAG) in San Mateo County and PG&E
that helps public agencies identify and implement energy efficiency retrofits. With the assistance
of SMCEW, staff determined that eight City facilities could benefit from lighting upgrades. The
proposed work includes upgrading all interior and exterior lighting to LEDs, including office areas,
lobbies, restrooms, staircases, garage parking, fixtures, and signage. Under this program, the
Energy Efficiency Lighting Upgrades November 5, 2018
2
City can pay for upgrades directly, or it can use no-cost, on-bill financing with PG&E for those
projects with a payback period of less than ten years.
DISCUSSION
If approved, the energy efficiency retrofits will occur at eight City facilities: City Hall, Corp Yard,
Donnelly Parking Garage, Easton Branch Library, Main Library, Parks Corp Yard, Police Station,
and Public Works Building E. The cost of the upgrades, annual savings, and other metrics are
detailed in the chart below:
Facility Cost Annual
Savings ROI Material
Cost
kWh
Savings
Staff Time
Savings
(Hours)
City Hall $29,506 $9,226 3.20 $17,488 54,735 157
Corp Yard $69,603 $7,055 9.87 $36,411 51,390 255
Donnelly Parking
Garage $8,819 $2,782 3.17 $4,827 5,969 32
Easton Library* $6,371 $205 31.02 $1,650 2,091 22
Main Library $135,006 $15,129 8.92 $65,428 37,710 498
Parks Corp Yard $12,276 $1,562 7.86 $5,354 11,392 40
Police Station $21,393 $6,633 3.23 $8,774 13,570 91
PW Building E* $8,015 $80 100.09 $3,131 513 18.75
Total $290,989 $42,672 4.53* $118,535 175,861 1,113
* Easton Library and PW Building E excluded from OBF Program
The City will finance all but the Easton Library and Public Works Building E energy efficiency
projects through PG&E’s On-Bill Financing (OBF) Program, which provides no-interest loans for
energy efficiency improvements, in addition to providing rebates for implementing energy
efficiency projects. Under this program, the City’s bill after the retrofits are completed will be kept
constant, rather than reduced based on energy savings. PG&E will use the City’s financial
savings from lower energy bills to service the debt associated with the upgrades. In addition to
energy and financial savings, the project will reduce approximately 131 metric tons of greenhouse
gas emissions on an annual basis.
If approved by the City Council, the City will take out six separate OBF loans, for an estimated
total of $277,000. This number equates to the total cost in the chart above, less the cost to
upgrade the Easton Library and Public Works Building E, both of which have paybacks beyond
ten years as listed in the ROI column in the chart above. The Easton Library and Public Works
Building E projects will be paid with Facilities Capital Improvement Program funding previously
approved by the City Council.
Staff is requesting to allow for inclusion of a contingency reserve amount of $58,000 for the
project to allow for possible tariff increases up to approximately 20% on the materials, and also in
case any of the rebates are no longer available when the requisite parts are purchased.
Energy Efficiency Lighting Upgrades November 5, 2018
3
FISCAL IMPACT
Estimated Project Expenditures:
The following are the estimated project expenditures.
Estimated Project Costs $291,000
Contingency (20%) $59,000
Total $350,000
FUNDING AVAILABILITY
Funding in the amount of $277,000 will be paid for by energy savings from the implementation of
the project. The remaining $73,000 will be paid from the Facilities Capital Improvement Program
budget for lighting upgrades to Easton Library and Public Works Building E.
Exhibits:
• Resolution
• SMCEW Work Order Agreements
• PG&E OBF Agreement Template
RESOLUTION NO. _____
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AUTHORIZING
THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE CUSTOMER WORK ORDER AGREEMENTS WITH
SAN MATEO COUNTY ENERGY WATCH FOR ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECTS AND AN
AGREEMENT WITH PG&E FOR ON-BILL FINANCING
WHEREAS, as part of City’s Capital Improvement Program to implement energy
efficiency projects, staff continues to explore ways to make City facilities more energy efficient
and exercise leadership in the area of energy savings and greenhouse gas emissions reduction;
and
WHEREAS, one opportunity involves upgrading facility lighting to light-emitting diodes
(LEDs), which disperse light in a specific direction, thereby making them more efficient, and
have a longer lifespan than traditional lighting technologies, which helps reduce the cost of bulb
replacement and staff time; and
WHEREAS, staff worked with the San Mateo County Energy Watch (SMCEW) Program,
which is an energy efficiency partnership between the City/County Association of Governments
and PG&E that helps public agencies identify and implement energy efficiency retrofits; and
WHEREAS, with the energy efficiency recommendations stemming from the 2016
Building Facilities Master Plan and the assistance of SMCEW, staff determined that eight City
facilities could benefit from upgrading lighting to LEDs, including office areas, lobbies,
restrooms, staircases, garage parking, fixtures, and signage; and
WHEREAS, under this program, the City can pay for upgrades directly, or it can use no-
cost, on-bill financing with PG&E for those projects with a payback period of less than ten years.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDERED BY THE COUNCIL:
1. The City will work with SMCEW to conduct energy efficiency retrofits at eight City
facilities: City Hall, Corp Yard, Donnelly Parking Garage, Easton Branch Library,
Main Library, Parks Corp Yard, Police Station, and Public Works Building E.
2. The City will finance the energy efficiency projects, where appropriate, through
PG&E’s On-Bill Financing (OBF) Program, which provides no-interest loans for
energy efficiency improvements.
3. The City will take out six separate OBF loans, for an estimated total of $277,000, for
lighting upgrades at all of the facilities except the Easton Library and Public Works
Building E, which have payback periods greater than ten years.
4. The City will use Facilities Capital Improvement Program funding to pay $73,000 for
the upgrades at the Easton Library and Public Works Building E.
5. The City will establish a contingency reserve of $59,000 for the project to account for
possible tariff increases up to approximately 20% on the materials and in case any of
the rebates are no longer available when the requisite parts are purchased.
6. The City Manager is authorized to execute the necessary customer work order
agreements with SMCEW and OBF financing agreements with PG&E.
____________________________
Michael Brownrigg, Mayor
I, Meaghan Hassel-Shearer, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, certify that the foregoing
Resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 5th day
of November, 2018, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers:
NOES: Councilmembers:
ABSENT: Councilmembers:
____________________________
Meaghan Hassel-Shearer, City Clerk
Energy Efficiency Proposal for
Burlingame City Hall
Johnson Woo
Burlingame City Hall
501 Primrose Rd
BURLINGAME,CA 94010
Greetings,
As an environmental leader in your community, your business is a great example of doing what’s right.
Participating in this utility-sponsored program is just another way for you to continue to be recognized for
running a sustainable and earth-friendly business. In simple language, the following personalized proposal
shows the value that an energy retrofit brings to you, to your business, and to the planet.
My job is to make sure that business owners like you get the energy efficiency guidance they need in a way
that makes being energy efficient easy for them. I’m available at your convenience to review the details of
this proposal and to answer any questions you might have. I’m looking forward to your approval to begin
work on this project immediately.
Sincerely,
Garvin Lee
Senior Energy Efficiency Consultant
Garvin Lee
Senior Energy Efficiency Consultant
(415) 688-1123
glee@ecoact.org
Fax:(831) 427-1368
Rachel Radcliffe
Senior Installation Manager
(510) 871-0781
rradcliffe@ecoact.org
Opportunity At-A-Glance for
Burlingame City Hall
Your current, average electricity bill
$2,704/month
Your new, average electricity bill after upgrades
$1,935/month
Burlingame City Hall Cost Summary
Installation Cost (labor, materials and recycling)$42,792.17
Project Management Fee Waived
Rebate -$13,286.58
% of Project Covered by Rebate 31%
Net Project Cost $29,505.59
Simple Payback 3.20 Years
Simple Payback without Rebate 4.64 Years
Burlingame City Hall
Project Impact Page
Your Long-term Savings
Timeframe Estimated Savings kWh
Monthly $768.83 4,561.21
1st Year $9,225.95 54,734.52
5 Years $46,129.75 273,673
$46,130
Saved
$9,226
$769 Saved
Saved
Monthly 1st Year 5 Years
Your Energy Efficient Measures
Work Order Materials Labor Fees Rebate Customer Cost
Burlingame City Hall
MLTG $17,487.92 $24,659.25 $645.00 $13,286.58 $29,505.59
TOTAL $17,487.92 $24,659.25 $645.00 $13,286.58 $29,505.59
Environmental Benefits
By implementing the measures outlined in this proposal, you will :
Remove
5.78
passenger vehicles from the road
Save
57,773.45 kWh
which reduces your CO2 emissions
Sequester the equivalent of
84.93
acres of forest
The project cost is based on current equipment prices and rebate levels and is valid for a period of 14 days from the date presented.
*Note - Savings are estimated using standard engineering calculations and are based on the hours of operation as described to the surveyor. Depending on actual
usage as well as changes in your electric utility rate, your savings may be higher or lower. The savings indicated above are NOT guaranteed. Construction costs
may vary slightly depending on fixture quantities and unforeseen conditions.
**Note - Based on DEER property type and measure savings values from the CPUC, this project is deemed to deliver 54,734.52 kWh and 15.10 kW. The rebate
offered for the project is calculated based on the deemed savings values.
Burlingame City Hall Project
Agreement Page
Your Project Schedule
Through this energy efficiency program, the entire process is managed for you including the assessment, installation and rebat e
processing.It really is that simple.
Proposal Signed
We will review your
proposal with you to
make sure that you
understand your energy
savings, rebates,
project utility bill
savings, and co-pay.
Installation Confirmed
We will select and
manage a contractor or
work alongside your
installation partner. You
will receive assistance
from Rachel Radcliffe,
who will manage your
project installation.
Please be available for
the initial project kick-off
call within 48 hours of
project acceptance.
Installation
We will oversee every
detail of the installation
of your equipment with
no disruption of service.
Our goal is to complete
the project within 30
days of receipt of
materials.
If you are managing
your own installation,
please be sure to notify
Rachel Radcliffe when
your project is complete.
Quality Control
We will schedule and
perform post-
installation assessments
to ensure that the
highest quality
standards have been
met. The rebate
payment will then be
released and any
applicable co-pay will be
collected.
Start Saving
After the project
completion, you will
begin to see the
benefits of your new
energy efficient
equipment. The savings
will accumulate month
after month, and you’ll
start to open your
energy bills with
excitement rather than
trepidation.
Recommendations &Savings Checklist for Burlingame City
Hall
Existing Equipment Recommended Upgrade: Lighting
Area AHO Qty Description Watts kWh Qty Description Watts kWh Cost Without
Rebate Estimated Savings
Garage 2,346.30 27 T8 4' 28w 2L NBF -
Existing 3rd Gen 49 3,104.15 27
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 1,900.50 $2,904.31 $211.84
1st Floor 2,346.30 126 T8 4' 28w 4L NBF -
Existing 3rd Gen 96 28,380.84 126
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 8,869.01 $13,572.17 $3,434.08
1st Floor 2,346.30 12 T8 4' 28w 2L NBF -
Existing 3rd Gen 49 1,379.62 12
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 844.67 $1,314.69 $94.15
1st Floor 2,346.30 10 T8 4' 28w 4L LBF -
Existing 3rd Gen 86 2,017.82 10
LED Retrofit Strips
2ft 3pc 18w 4100K
2400L Linmore
17 398.87 $2,204.19 $267.13
1st Floor 2,346.30 4 T8 4' 28w 4L LBF -
Existing 3rd Gen 86 807.13 4
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 281.56 $472.50 $92.50
1st Floor 2,346.30 5 T8 4' 28w 2L LBF -
Existing 3rd Gen 42 492.72 5
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 351.95 $572.87 $24.78
1st Floor 2,346.30 2 T8 4' 28w 1L LBF -
Existing 3rd Gen 22 103.24 2
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 1Lamp 4000K
Espen
15 70.39 $215.47 $5.78
2nd Floor 2,346.30 144 T8 4' 28w 4L NBF -
Existing 3rd Gen 96 32,435.25 144
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 10,136.02 $15,504.91 $3,924.66
2nd Floor 2,346.30 7 T8 4' 28w 2L NBF -
Existing 3rd Gen 49 804.78 7
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 492.72 $784.82 $54.92
2nd Floor 2,346.30 2 T8 4' 28w 4L LBF -
Existing 3rd Gen 86 403.56 2
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 140.78 $257.75 $46.25
2nd Floor 2,346.30 1 T8 4' 28w 2L LBF -
Existing 3rd Gen 42 98.54 1
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 70.39 $148.97 $4.96
Staircase 2,346.30 2 T8 4' 28w 2L NBF -
Existing 3rd Gen 49 229.94 2
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 140.78 $254.95 $15.69
Staircase 2,346.30 1 T8 4' 28w 2L LBF -
Existing 3rd Gen 42 98.54 1
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 70.39 $148.97 $4.96
Exterior
Parking 4,004.00 8 MH 175w 1L 215 6,886.88 8
LED Retrofit 30w
(70w-175w HID)
4000K Encore
30 960.96 $3,811.79 $948.15
Exterior
Signage 4,004.00 3 HPS 50W 1L -
Existing 66 792.79 3
LED Flood 15w (42w
CFL/50w HID)
5000K Yoke ATG
16 192.19 $623.81 $96.10
AHO: Annual Avg. Hours of Operation kWh: Annual kiloWatt Hours Watts: Watts as published by the manufacturer
Materials List for
Burlingame City Hall
The chart below is a summary of materials required for your retrofit. This table shows wattage, quantity, kWh, and price per unit for all involved
materials.
Equipment Qty Equipment Cost*Labor Hrs/Cost*
Driver LED T8 1L-2L Espen 333 $15.63 0.33/$49.50
LED T8 4' 15w 4000K Espen 664 $10.61 0.05/$7.50
Recycle: Non-PCB Ballast from 4' or Shorter 343 $0.00 0.00/$0.00
Recycle: Fluorescent Lamps 4' or Shorter 1256 $0.70 0.00/$0.00
LED Retrofit Strips 2ft 3pc 18w 4100K 2400L Linmore 10 $116.50 0.33/$49.50
LED Retrofit 30w (70w-175w HID) 4000K Encore 8 $151.93 0.75/$112.50
Custom Component 1 8 $50.00 0.25/$37.50
Recycle: Ballast from HID 11 $0.00 0.00/$0.00
Recycle: HID Lamps 11 $2.50 0.00/$0.00
LED Flood 15w (42w CFL/50w HID) 5000K Yoke ATG 3 $72.28 0.75/$112.50
* Per Item Cost
Customer Work Order Agreement
By signing this Customer Work Order Agreement (“Agreement”), Customer (the business entity listed above) agrees to the following:
Measures and Incentives:
I have reviewed the Energy Efficiency Proposal (“Proposal”) provided by Ecology Action (“Implementer”), a copy of which is attached to this
Agreement. I agree that to the best of my knowledge the schedule of operations contained in the Proposal accurately describes the hours of
operation at the facility listed above. I understand that the energy efficiency measures described in the Proposal represent an estimate of
expected energy savings, and that Implementer does not guarantee a specific level of cost savings from the implementation of the proposed
energy efficiency measures (collectively, the “ Project”).
Implementer is implementing the Project on the Customer’s behalf. Incentives for energy savings are calculated using the appropriate baseline
to exceed California Title 20 and Title 24 standards. New products ordered, purchased or installed prior to 1/1/16 or after 12/15/1 8 do not
qualify for an incentive. Resale products, products leased, rebuilt, rented, received from warranty of insurance claims, exchanged, won as a
prize or new parts installed in existing products do not qualify for Incentives. PG&E is not responsible for the economic and technical feasibility,
operational capability, and reliability of the Project.
Program Dates:
To be eligible for incentives, all projects must be installed and completed before December 14, 2018. Funding of incentives is distributed on a
first-come first-served basis.San Mateo County Energy Watch is funded by California ratepayers under the auspices of the California Public
Utilities Commission (“CPUC”). I have received information about other programs offering rebates or services for measures covered by San
Mateo County Energy Watch.
Project Commitment and Installation Completion Process:
I understand that I must have a signed Site Access Agreement on File to confirm Program Eligibility and a signed Customer Agreement to initiate
installation. For each work order, I agree to have Ecology Action contact (a) participating contractor(s) (“Contractor”) who will perform a walk-
through inspection, review the scope of the Projects outlined in the Report, and schedule the Project installation at a time that is mutually
agreeable to all parties. I understand that the total installed costs for the components of the Project are described in the attached listing of
individual work orders. Costs for correcting electrical code violations are not included in the costs quoted above and are not covered by the
Program. Any electrical code violations found during the Contractors’ inspections or during installation will be cause for the Contractors to stop
work on the affected item(s) until such violations are corrected. I understand that the contractor walk- through may result in a Change Order
due to specification or electrical code violations and that I will be notified and approve of any cost adjustments before additional work is
completed.
I will sign an agreement with each Contractor, which shall be solely between the Contractor and Customer, for the out-of-pocket portion of the
Project costs. I understand that San Mateo County Energy Watch will provide a rebate, detailed in the work order listing, to offset the cost of
the Project installations, and the rebate will be paid directly to the Contractors. I understand that I am responsible for paying the balance of the
agreed-to contract price after rebate payment and that payment is due to the Contractor upon completion of the individual work order. At the
completion of the project, I agree to sign the Customer Acceptance/Project Completion Form presented by the contractor on Ecology Action’s
behalf.
The value of Incentives and direct installations is taxable. Implementer will report incentives and direct installations greater than $600 to the IRS
unless you are exempt. Please consult your tax advisor concerning the taxability of incentives. The Customer, not the implementer, is
responsible for any taxes imposed as a result of your receipt of Incentives from this Program. Form 1099 will be issued for the Customer,
regardless of who the payee is, because the Customer receives the benefits of the Incentives.
General Terms And Conditions
1.Project Eligibility and Approval:PG&E in its sole discretion will determine the eligibility and approval of the energy efficiency of Measures
at the Customer’s site (Project). Eligibility requirements include and are not limited to, 1) Project site must receive gas and/or electric
service from PG&E; 2) Customer must be non-residential; 3) whether Measures to be installed satisfy incentive amounts; 4) inspections of
the Project site before and after the installation of Measures; 5) and any additional information or requirements request by PG&E to
implement and approve the Customers Project.
2.Feasibility:If applicable, PG&E’s and/or its consultant’s may review the design, construction, operation or maintenance of the Project,
Measures, Project documentation to determine eligibility, incentives and approval. PG&E’s review does not constitute any representation
as to the economic or technical feasibility, operational capability, or reliability of the Project or its Measures. Implementer is solely
responsible for the economic, technical feasibility, operational capability and reliability of the Project and its Measures.
3.Savings:Implementer is implementing the Project on Customer’s behalf and is solely responsible for ensuring Project savings are calculated
using the appropriate baseline, installed according to Customer’s specifications and is delivering the estimated savings. Customer
understands Incentives will be paid only for energy savings that exceed the California Title 20 and Title 24 standards, or industry standards
in the absence of applicable local, state or federal standards.
4.Funding:Implementer is receiving funds from Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) for this Project, but the Parties agree that PG&E is not liable
to either Party for any losses or damages, including incidental or consequential damages, arising from this Agreement. PG&E makes no
representation or warranty, and assumes no liability with respect to quality, safety, performance, or other aspect of any design, system or
appliance installed pursuant to this Agreement, and expressly disclaims any such representation, warranty or liability.
5.Incidental and Consequential Damages:BOTH PARTIES AGREE NEITHER PARTY SHALL BE LIABLE TO THE OTHER FOR ANY INCIDENTAL,
SPECIAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES.
6.Life of Product:Customer understands Incentive payments are based on related energy benefits over the life of the product. Customer
agrees if 1) Customer does not provide PG&E with 100% of the related benefits for the life of the product or a period of 5 years, whichever
is less, or 2) Customer ceases to be a distribution Customer of PG&E during said time period, Customer shall refund a prorated amount of
Incentive payment(s) to PG&E based on the actual period of time for which Customer provided the related energy benefits as an electric
Customer of PG&E.
7.Customers with self-generation capabilities:If Customer has existing onsite cogeneration or self-generation, Implementer shall not pay
Incentives for energy savings that exceed Customer’s annual energy usage from PG&E. KW, kWh and therm savings are limited to the
previous 12 months quantity of kW, kWh, and/or therms purchased from or delivered by the utility on the meter(s), serving the equipment
to be installed, for which the utility collects as directed by the CPUC. The previous 12 months are defined as the calendar year prior to the
date the Customer signed this Agreement (including usage from Standby Service and less savings associated with pending energy efficiency
applications). This policy is subject to change with 30 day written notice to Customer.
8.Incentives:Incentives, energy savings, and installation costs in the Agreement are ESTIMATES only and may vary upon verification and
completion of the Project approval process.
9.Incentive may not exceed Project cost:Customer must submit Project invoice(s) which include: vendor name/address/phone, itemized
listing of product(s) including quantity, product description(s), manufacturer, model #, and other identifying information as appropriate,
Project cost, date invoice paid or payment terms, and installation date.
10.If Tenant:If Customer is a tenant, Customer represents they have obtained the property owner’s permission to install the Measure(s) for
which Customer is applying for an Incentive payment..
11.Access and Verification Inspection:PG&E requires Project inspections and performance measurements to verify the incentive. These
inspections are not to determine any safety issues.Customer will allow, if requested, a representative from PG&E, CPUC, Implementer, or
any authorized subcontractor reasonable access to Facility to verify the installed product.
12.Compliance with Laws:Implementer shall comply with all federal, state, and municipal laws, ordinances, rules, orders, and regulations,
which apply to the implementation of this Project.
13.Advertising:Implementer and Customer agree not to use the names or identifying characteristics of the Customer’s Facility, Customer’s
name or Implementers name for published Project reports (except to fulfill reporting requirements to PG&E and/or the CPUC), advertising,
sales promotion or other publicity without written approval.
14.No Double-Dipping:Customer understands that Customer cannot receive Incentives for the same product, equipment or service from
more than one California investor-owned utility or third party Energy Efficiency program offering Incentives for the same product,
equipment, or service funded with CPUC. This prohibition applies three years prior to and three years after receiving Incentives for the
same product, equipment or service.
15.No Obligation:California consumers are not obligated to purchase any full fee service or other service not funded by this Program. This
Program is funded by California utility ratepayers under the auspices of the CPUC.Los consumidores en California no están obligados a
comprar servicios completos o adicionales que no esten cubiertos bajo este programa. Este programa está financiado por los usuarios de
servicios públicos en California bajo la jurisdicción de la Comisión de Servicios Públicos de California (CPUC).
16.Availability of Funds:This program is available on a first-come, first served basis until allocated funds are depleted. This Program may be
modified or terminated without notice.
17.CPUC Authority: There terms and conditions can be modified at any time in accordance with any directive of the CPUC and regulation of
PG&E. Any information, results and reports regarding this Agreement and Customer’s Project shall be made available to the CPUC.
18.Tax Liability: PG&E will report incentives greater than $600 as income on the IRS 1099 unless (1) the “Corporation” or “Exempt” tax status
box is marked.
Customer Approval
Burlingame City Hall
I have read and understood the Terms and Conditions. I certify that the information I have provided is true and correct.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed by their duly authorized representatives as of the
date set forth below.
As shown on the Opportunity At-A-Glance page,customer Out of Pocket Cost is $29,505.59.
Customer:San Mateo County Energy Watch
Customer Representative:Johnson Woo
501 Primrose Rd
Burlingame,CA 94010
Phone:(650) 558-7691
Email:jwoo@burlingame.org
Program Representative:Garvin Lee
Ecology Action
877 Cedar Street, Suite 240
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
Mobile:(415) 688-1123
Fax: (831) 427-1368
Email:glee@ecoact.org
\t1\
Customer Representative’s Title
\n1\
Program Representative’s Printed Name
Customer Representative’s Printed Name
\s1\
Program Representative’s Signature
Customer Representative’s Signature
\d1\
Date
Date
Energy Efficiency Proposal for
Burlingame Corp Yard
Johnson Woo
Burlingame Corp Yard
1361 N Carolan
BURLINGAME,CA 94010
Greetings,
As an environmental leader in your community, your business is a great example of doing what’s right.
Participating in this utility-sponsored program is just another way for you to continue to be recognized for
running a sustainable and earth-friendly business. In simple language, the following personalized proposal
shows the value that an energy retrofit brings to you, to your business, and to the planet.
My job is to make sure that business owners like you get the energy efficiency guidance they need in a way
that makes being energy efficient easy for them. I’m available at your convenience to review the details of
this proposal and to answer any questions you might have. I’m looking forward to your approval to begin
work on this project immediately.
Sincerely,
Garvin Lee
Senior Energy Efficiency Consultant
Garvin Lee
Senior Energy Efficiency Consultant
(415) 688-1123
glee@ecoact.org
Fax:(831) 427-1368
Rachel Radcliffe
Senior Installation Manager
(510) 871-0781
rradcliffe@ecoact.org
Opportunity At-A-Glance for
Burlingame Corp Yard
Your current, average electricity bill
$2,071/month
Your new, average electricity bill after upgrades
$1,483/month
Burlingame Corp Yard Cost
Summary
Installation Cost (labor, materials and recycling)$81,288.33
Project Management Fee Waived
Rebate -$11,685.26
% of Project Covered by Rebate 14%
Net Project Cost $69,603.07
Simple Payback 9.87 Years
Simple Payback without Rebate 11.52 Years
Burlingame Corp Yard
Project Impact Page
Your Long-term Savings
Timeframe Estimated Savings kWh
Monthly $587.89 4,282.52
1st Year $7,054.63 51,390.26
5 Years $35,273.15 256,951
$35,273
Saved
$7,055
$588 Saved
Saved
Monthly 1st Year 5 Years
Your Energy Efficient Measures
Work Order Materials Labor Fees Rebate Customer Cost
Burlingame Corp
Yard DLTG $4,751.85 $7,359.66 $0.00 $1,829.00 $10,282.51
Burlingame Corp
Yard MLTG $31,659.01 $36,387.81 $1,130.00 $9,856.26 $59,320.56
TOTAL $36,410.86 $43,747.47 $1,130.00 $11,685.26 $69,603.07
Environmental Benefits
By implementing the measures outlined in this proposal, you will :
Remove
4.41
passenger vehicles from the road
Save
44,091.34 kWh
which reduces your CO2 emissions
Sequester the equivalent of
64.81
acres of forest
The project cost is based on current equipment prices and rebate levels and is valid for a period of 14 days from the date presented.
*Note - Savings are estimated using standard engineering calculations and are based on the hours of operation as described to the surveyor. Depending on actual
usage as well as changes in your electric utility rate, your savings may be higher or lower. The savings indicated above are NOT guaranteed. Construction costs
may vary slightly depending on fixture quantities and unforeseen conditions.
**Note - Based on DEER property type and measure savings values from the CPUC, this project is deemed to deliver 51,390.26 kWh and 9.35 kW. The rebate
offered for the project is calculated based on the deemed savings values.
Burlingame Corp Yard Project
Agreement Page
Your Project Schedule
Through this energy efficiency program, the entire process is managed for you including the assessment, installation and rebat e
processing.It really is that simple.
Proposal Signed
We will review your
proposal with you to
make sure that you
understand your energy
savings, rebates,
project utility bill
savings, and co-pay.
Installation Confirmed
We will select and
manage a contractor or
work alongside your
installation partner. You
will receive assistance
from Rachel Radcliffe,
who will manage your
project installation.
Please be available for
the initial project kick-off
call within 48 hours of
project acceptance.
Installation
We will oversee every
detail of the installation
of your equipment with
no disruption of service.
Our goal is to complete
the project within 30
days of receipt of
materials.
If you are managing
your own installation,
please be sure to notify
Rachel Radcliffe when
your project is complete.
Quality Control
We will schedule and
perform post-
installation assessments
to ensure that the
highest quality
standards have been
met. The rebate
payment will then be
released and any
applicable co-pay will be
collected.
Start Saving
After the project
completion, you will
begin to see the
benefits of your new
energy efficient
equipment. The savings
will accumulate month
after month, and you’ll
start to open your
energy bills with
excitement rather than
trepidation.
Recommendations &Savings Checklist for Burlingame
Corp Yard
Existing Equipment Recommended Upgrade: Lighting
Area AHO Qty Description Watts kWh Qty Description Watts kWh Cost Without
Rebate Estimated Savings
Bldg A 2,346.30 59 CFL 32W Fixture
Existing 32 4,429.81 59
LED Downlight for
CFL/HID 8" 27w
2700K Green
Creative
27 3,737.66 $12,111.51 $115.18
Bldg A 2,346.30 210 T8 4' 28w 2L NBF -
Existing 3rd Gen 49 24,143.43 210
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 14,781.69 $22,329.95 $1,542.82
Bldg A 2,346.30 9 T8 4' 28w 3L NBF -
Existing 3rd Gen 72 1,520.40 9
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 3Lamp 4000K
Espen
45 950.25 $1,308.63 $93.96
Bldg A 2,346.30 4 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
4lamp-El-IS-NLO 112 1,051.14 4
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 4Lamp 4000K
Espen
59 553.73 $778.74 $81.97
Bldg A 2,346.30 5 T8 4' 28w 1L NBF -
Existing 3rd Gen 26 305.02 5
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 1Lamp 4000K
Espen
15 175.97 $646.16 $21.27
Bldg A 10.92 1 T8 U-Lamp 2L NBF 60 0.66 1
LED T8 Type C 2'
8w (11w) 2Lamp
4000K Espen
22 0.24 $216.46 $0.07
Bldg B 2,346.30 68 T8 4' 28w 2L NBF -
Existing 3rd Gen 49 7,817.87 68
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 4,786.45 $7,281.59 $499.58
Bldg B 2,346.30 38 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
6lamp-El-RS-NLO 182 16,227.01 38
LED High Bay >25'
63w 5000K 9000L
145lm/w 80CRI Flex
62 5,527.88 $17,800.46 $1,763.22
Bldg B 2,346.30 10 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
4lamp-El-IS-NLO 112 2,627.86 10
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 4Lamp 4000K
Espen
59 1,384.32 $1,833.85 $204.94
Bldg C 2,346.30 17 T8 4' 28w 2L NBF -
Existing 3rd Gen 49 1,954.47 17
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 1,196.61 $2,140.05 $124.89
Bldg D 2,346.30 47 T8 4' 28w 2L NBF -
Existing 3rd Gen 49 5,403.53 47
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 3,308.28 $5,056.13 $345.30
Exterior 4,004.00 1 HPS 70W 95 380.38 1
LED Flood 15w (42w
CFL/50w HID)
5000K Yoke ATG
16 64.06 $268.93 $50.61
Exterior 2,346.30 4 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
4lamp-El-IS-NLO 112 1,051.14 4
LED Retrofit Strips
4ft 2pc 44w 4100K
5500L Linmore
45 422.33 $815.67 $100.61
Exterior 4,102.28 19 MH 150w 1L 190 14,809.23 19
LED Canopy 40w
(70-150w HID)
4000K ATG
40 3,117.73 $5,210.06 $1,870.64
Exterior 4,102.28 2 MH 150w 1L 190 1,558.87 2
LED Canopy 40w
(70-150w HID)
4000K ATG
40 328.18 $561.83 $196.91
Exterior 4,102.28 13 CFL 32W Fixture
Existing 32 1,706.55 13
LED Downlight for
CFL/HID 8" 27w
2700K Green
Creative
27 1,439.90 $2,928.31 $42.66
AHO: Annual Avg. Hours of Operation kWh: Annual kiloWatt Hours Watts: Watts as published by the manufacturer
Materials List for
Burlingame Corp Yard
The chart below is a summary of materials required for your retrofit. This table shows wattage, quantity, kWh, and price per unit for all involved
materials.
Equipment Qty Equipment Cost*Labor Hrs/Cost*
LED Downlight for CFL/HID 8" 27w 2700K Green Creative 4000k 72 $88.00 0.66/$99.00
CFL 32W Fixture Existing 72 $0.00 0.00/$0.00
Recycle: CFL Screw-in 72 $1.00 0.00/$0.00
Driver LED T8 1L-2L Espen 348 $15.63 0.33/$49.50
LED T8 4' 15w 4000K Espen 772 $10.61 0.05/$7.50
Recycle: Non-PCB Ballast from 4' or Shorter 469 $0.00 0.00/$0.00
Recycle: Fluorescent Lamps 4' or Shorter 1018 $0.70 0.00/$0.00
Driver LED T8 3L-4L Espen 23 $26.04 0.33/$49.50
LED High Bay 63w 5000K 9000L 145lm/w 80CRI Flex 38 $261.61 0.75/$112.50
LED Flood 15w (42w CFL/50w HID) 5000K Yoke ATG 1 $72.28 0.75/$112.50
Recycle: Ballast from HID 22 $0.00 0.00/$0.00
Recycle: HID Lamps 22 $2.50 0.00/$0.00
LED Retrofit Strips 4ft 2pc 44w 4100K 5500L Linmore 4 $122.10 0.33/$49.50
LED T8 2' 8w (11w) 4000K Espen 2 $13.03 0.05/$7.50
Reflector Troffer 2x2 2L 1 $16.41 0.08/$12.00
LED Canopy 40w (70-150w HID) 4000K ATG 21 $117.93 0.75/$112.50
* Per Item Cost
Customer Work Order Agreement
By signing this Customer Work Order Agreement (“Agreement”), Customer (the business entity listed above) agrees to the following:
Measures and Incentives:
I have reviewed the Energy Efficiency Proposal (“Proposal”) provided by Ecology Action (“Implementer”), a copy of which is attached to this
Agreement. I agree that to the best of my knowledge the schedule of operations contained in the Proposal accurately describes the hours of
operation at the facility listed above. I understand that the energy efficiency measures described in the Proposal represent an estimate of
expected energy savings, and that Implementer does not guarantee a specific level of cost savings from the implementation of the proposed
energy efficiency measures (collectively, the “ Project”).
Implementer is implementing the Project on the Customer’s behalf. Incentives for energy savings are calculated using the appropriate baseline
to exceed California Title 20 and Title 24 standards. New products ordered, purchased or installed prior to 1/1/16 or after 12/15/1 8 do not
qualify for an incentive. Resale products, products leased, rebuilt, rented, received from warranty of insurance claims, exchanged, won as a
prize or new parts installed in existing products do not qualify for Incentives. PG&E is not responsible for the economic and technical feasibility,
operational capability, and reliability of the Project.
Program Dates:
To be eligible for incentives, all projects must be installed and completed before December 14, 2018. Funding of incentives is distributed on a
first-come first-served basis.San Mateo County Energy Watch is funded by California ratepayers under the auspices of the California Public
Utilities Commission (“CPUC”). I have received information about other programs offering rebates or services for measures covered by San
Mateo County Energy Watch.
Project Commitment and Installation Completion Process:
I understand that I must have a signed Site Access Agreement on File to confirm Program Eligibility and a signed Customer Agreement to initiate
installation. For each work order, I agree to have Ecology Action contact (a) participating contractor(s) (“Contractor”) who will perform a walk-
through inspection, review the scope of the Projects outlined in the Report, and schedule the Project installation at a time that is mutually
agreeable to all parties. I understand that the total installed costs for the components of the Project are described in the attached listing of
individual work orders. Costs for correcting electrical code violations are not included in the costs quoted above and are not covered by the
Program. Any electrical code violations found during the Contractors’ inspections or during installation will be cause for the Contractors to stop
work on the affected item(s) until such violations are corrected. I understand that the contractor walk- through may result in a Change Order
due to specification or electrical code violations and that I will be notified and approve of any cost adjustments before additional work is
completed.
I will sign an agreement with each Contractor, which shall be solely between the Contractor and Customer, for the out-of-pocket portion of the
Project costs. I understand that San Mateo County Energy Watch will provide a rebate, detailed in the work order listing, to offset the cost of
the Project installations, and the rebate will be paid directly to the Contractors. I understand that I am responsible for paying the balance of the
agreed-to contract price after rebate payment and that payment is due to the Contractor upon completion of the individual work order. At the
completion of the project, I agree to sign the Customer Acceptance/Project Completion Form presented by the contractor on Ecology Action’s
behalf.
The value of Incentives and direct installations is taxable. Implementer will report incentives and direct installations greater than $600 to the IRS
unless you are exempt. Please consult your tax advisor concerning the taxability of incentives. The Customer, not the implementer, is
responsible for any taxes imposed as a result of your receipt of Incentives from this Program. Form 1099 will be issued for the Customer,
regardless of who the payee is, because the Customer receives the benefits of the Incentives.
General Terms And Conditions
1.Project Eligibility and Approval:PG&E in its sole discretion will determine the eligibility and approval of the energy efficiency of Measures
at the Customer’s site (Project). Eligibility requirements include and are not limited to, 1) Project site must receive gas and/or electric
service from PG&E; 2) Customer must be non-residential; 3) whether Measures to be installed satisfy incentive amounts; 4) inspections of
the Project site before and after the installation of Measures; 5) and any additional information or requirements request by PG&E to
implement and approve the Customers Project.
2.Feasibility:If applicable, PG&E’s and/or its consultant’s may review the design, construction, operation or maintenance of the Project,
Measures, Project documentation to determine eligibility, incentives and approval. PG&E’s review does not constitute any representation
as to the economic or technical feasibility, operational capability, or reliability of the Project or its Measures. Implementer is solely
responsible for the economic, technical feasibility, operational capability and reliability of the Project and its Measures.
3.Savings:Implementer is implementing the Project on Customer’s behalf and is solely responsible for ensuring Project savings are calculated
using the appropriate baseline, installed according to Customer’s specifications and is delivering the estimated savings. Customer
understands Incentives will be paid only for energy savings that exceed the California Title 20 and Title 24 standards, or industry standards
in the absence of applicable local, state or federal standards.
4.Funding:Implementer is receiving funds from Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) for this Project, but the Parties agree that PG&E is not liable
to either Party for any losses or damages, including incidental or consequential damages, arising from this Agreement. PG&E makes no
representation or warranty, and assumes no liability with respect to quality, safety, performance, or other aspect of any design, system or
appliance installed pursuant to this Agreement, and expressly disclaims any such representation, warranty or liability.
5.Incidental and Consequential Damages:BOTH PARTIES AGREE NEITHER PARTY SHALL BE LIABLE TO THE OTHER FOR ANY INCIDENTAL,
SPECIAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES.
6.Life of Product:Customer understands Incentive payments are based on related energy benefits over the life of the product. Customer
agrees if 1) Customer does not provide PG&E with 100% of the related benefits for the life of the product or a period of 5 years, whichever
is less, or 2) Customer ceases to be a distribution Customer of PG&E during said time period, Customer shall refund a prorated amount of
Incentive payment(s) to PG&E based on the actual period of time for which Customer provided the related energy benefits as an electric
Customer of PG&E.
7.Customers with self-generation capabilities:If Customer has existing onsite cogeneration or self-generation, Implementer shall not pay
Incentives for energy savings that exceed Customer’s annual energy usage from PG&E. KW, kWh and therm savings are limited to the
previous 12 months quantity of kW, kWh, and/or therms purchased from or delivered by the utility on the meter(s), serving the equipment
to be installed, for which the utility collects as directed by the CPUC. The previous 12 months are defined as the calendar year prior to the
date the Customer signed this Agreement (including usage from Standby Service and less savings associated with pending energy efficiency
applications). This policy is subject to change with 30 day written notice to Customer.
8.Incentives:Incentives, energy savings, and installation costs in the Agreement are ESTIMATES only and may vary upon verification and
completion of the Project approval process.
9.Incentive may not exceed Project cost:Customer must submit Project invoice(s) which include: vendor name/address/phone, itemized
listing of product(s) including quantity, product description(s), manufacturer, model #, and other identifying information as appropriate,
Project cost, date invoice paid or payment terms, and installation date.
10.If Tenant:If Customer is a tenant, Customer represents they have obtained the property owner’s permission to install the Measure(s) for
which Customer is applying for an Incentive payment..
11.Access and Verification Inspection:PG&E requires Project inspections and performance measurements to verify the incentive. These
inspections are not to determine any safety issues.Customer will allow, if requested, a representative from PG&E, CPUC, Implementer, or
any authorized subcontractor reasonable access to Facility to verify the installed product.
12.Compliance with Laws:Implementer shall comply with all federal, state, and municipal laws, ordinances, rules, orders, and regulations,
which apply to the implementation of this Project.
13.Advertising:Implementer and Customer agree not to use the names or identifying characteristics of the Customer’s Facility, Customer’s
name or Implementers name for published Project reports (except to fulfill reporting requirements to PG&E and/or the CPUC), advertising,
sales promotion or other publicity without written approval.
14.No Double-Dipping:Customer understands that Customer cannot receive Incentives for the same product, equipment or service from
more than one California investor-owned utility or third party Energy Efficiency program offering Incentives for the same product,
equipment, or service funded with CPUC. This prohibition applies three years prior to and three years after receiving Incentives for the
same product, equipment or service.
15.No Obligation:California consumers are not obligated to purchase any full fee service or other service not funded by this Program. This
Program is funded by California utility ratepayers under the auspices of the CPUC.Los consumidores en California no están obligados a
comprar servicios completos o adicionales que no esten cubiertos bajo este programa. Este programa está financiado por los usuarios de
servicios públicos en California bajo la jurisdicción de la Comisión de Servicios Públicos de California (CPUC).
16.Availability of Funds:This program is available on a first-come, first served basis until allocated funds are depleted. This Program may be
modified or terminated without notice.
17.CPUC Authority: There terms and conditions can be modified at any time in accordance with any directive of the CPUC and regulation of
PG&E. Any information, results and reports regarding this Agreement and Customer’s Project shall be made available to the CPUC.
18.Tax Liability: PG&E will report incentives greater than $600 as income on the IRS 1099 unless (1) the “Corporation” or “Exempt” tax status
box is marked.
Customer Approval
Burlingame Corp Yard
I have read and understood the Terms and Conditions. I certify that the information I have provided is true and correct.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed by their duly authorized representatives as of the
date set forth below.
As shown on the Opportunity At-A-Glance page,customer Out of Pocket Cost is $69,603.07.
Customer:San Mateo County Energy Watch
Customer Representative:Johnson Woo
501 Primrose Rd
Burlingame,CA 94010
Phone:(650) 558-7691
Email:jwoo@burlingame.org
Program Representative:Garvin Lee
Ecology Action
877 Cedar Street, Suite 240
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
Mobile:(415) 688-1123
Fax: (831) 427-1368
Email:glee@ecoact.org
\t1\
Customer Representative’s Title
\n1\
Program Representative’s Printed Name
Customer Representative’s Printed Name
\s1\
Program Representative’s Signature
Customer Representative’s Signature
\d1\
Date
Date
Energy Efficiency Proposal for
Burlingame Easton Library
Johnson Woo
Burlingame Easton Library
1800 Easton Drive
BURLINGAME,CA 94010
Greetings,
As an environmental leader in your community, your business is a great example of doing what’s right.
Participating in this utility-sponsored program is just another way for you to continue to be recognized for
running a sustainable and earth-friendly business. In simple language, the following personalized proposal
shows the value that an energy retrofit brings to you, to your business, and to the planet.
My job is to make sure that business owners like you get the energy efficiency guidance they need in a way
that makes being energy efficient easy for them. I’m available at your convenience to review the details of
this proposal and to answer any questions you might have. I’m looking forward to your approval to begin
work on this project immediately.
Sincerely,
Garvin Lee
Senior Energy Efficiency Consultant
Garvin Lee
Senior Energy Efficiency Consultant
(415) 688-1123
glee@ecoact.org
Fax:(831) 427-1368
Rachel Radcliffe
Senior Installation Manager
(510) 871-0781
rradcliffe@ecoact.org
Opportunity At-A-Glance for
Burlingame Easton Library
Your current, average electricity bill
$275/month
Your new, average electricity bill after upgrades
$258/month
Burlingame Easton Library Cost
Summary
Installation Cost (labor, materials and recycling)$7,144.91
Project Management Fee Waived
Rebate -$773.95
% of Project Covered by Rebate 11%
Net Project Cost $6,370.96
Simple Payback 31.02 Years
Simple Payback without Rebate 34.79 Years
Burlingame Easton Library
Project Impact Page
Your Long-term Savings
Timeframe Estimated Savings kWh
Monthly $17.11 174.26
1st Year $205.37 2,091.16
5 Years $1,026.85 10,456
$1,027
Saved
$205
$17 Saved
Saved
Monthly 1st Year 5 Years
Your Energy Efficient Measures
Work Order Materials Labor Fees Rebate Customer Cost
Burlingame Easton
Library MLTG $502.45 $816.00 $150.00 $207.95 $1,260.50
Burlingame Easton
Library DLTG $1,147.46 $4,209.00 $320.00 $566.00 $5,110.46
TOTAL $1,649.91 $5,025.00 $470.00 $773.95 $6,370.96
Environmental Benefits
By implementing the measures outlined in this proposal, you will :
Remove
0.13
passenger vehicles from the road
Save
1,283.57 kWh
which reduces your CO2 emissions
Sequester the equivalent of
1.89
acres of forest
The project cost is based on current equipment prices and rebate levels and is valid for a period of 14 days from the date presented.
*Note - Savings are estimated using standard engineering calculations and are based on the hours of operation as described to the surveyor. Depending on actual
usage as well as changes in your electric utility rate, your savings may be higher or lower. The savings indicated above are NOT guaranteed. Construction costs
may vary slightly depending on fixture quantities and unforeseen conditions.
**Note - Based on DEER property type and measure savings values from the CPUC, this project is deemed to deliver 2,091.16 kWh and 0.61 kW. The rebate
offered for the project is calculated based on the deemed savings values.
Burlingame Easton Library
Project Agreement Page
Your Project Schedule
Through this energy efficiency program, the entire process is managed for you including the assessment, installation and rebat e
processing.It really is that simple.
Proposal Signed
We will review your
proposal with you to
make sure that you
understand your energy
savings, rebates,
project utility bill
savings, and co-pay.
Installation Confirmed
We will select and
manage a contractor or
work alongside your
installation partner. You
will receive assistance
from Rachel Radcliffe,
who will manage your
project installation.
Please be available for
the initial project kick-off
call within 48 hours of
project acceptance.
Installation
We will oversee every
detail of the installation
of your equipment with
no disruption of service.
Our goal is to complete
the project within 30
days of receipt of
materials.
If you are managing
your own installation,
please be sure to notify
Rachel Radcliffe when
your project is complete.
Quality Control
We will schedule and
perform post-
installation assessments
to ensure that the
highest quality
standards have been
met. The rebate
payment will then be
released and any
applicable co-pay will be
collected.
Start Saving
After the project
completion, you will
begin to see the
benefits of your new
energy efficient
equipment. The savings
will accumulate month
after month, and you’ll
start to open your
energy bills with
excitement rather than
trepidation.
Recommendations &Savings Checklist for Burlingame
Easton Library
Existing Equipment Recommended Upgrade: Lighting
Area AHO Qty Description Watts kWh Qty Description Watts kWh Cost Without
Rebate Estimated Savings
Entry 1,560.00 3 CFL 36W Fixture
Existing 36 168.48 3
(Platt) LED
Downlight 6" 11w
4100K TCP -
Deviation
12 56.16 $281.83 $19.77
Main 1,560.00 14 CFL 46W Fixture
Existing 46 1,004.64 14
LED Downlight for
CFL/HID 8" 27w
2700K Green
Creative
27 589.68 $5,112.80 $73.03
Restrooms 1,560.00 4 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 368.16 4
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 187.20 $448.90 $31.85
Office Area 1,560.00 1 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 92.04 1
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 46.80 $130.97 $7.96
Office Area 1,560.00 1 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
1lamp-El-IS-NLO 31 48.36 1
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 1Lamp 4000K
Espen
15 23.40 $111.24 $4.39
Breakroom 1,560.00 1 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 92.04 1
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 46.80 $130.97 $7.96
Lion's Den 1,560.00 4 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 368.16 4
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 187.20 $448.90 $31.85
Lion's Den 1,560.00 3 CFL 36W Fixture
Existing 36 168.48 3
(Platt) LED
Downlight 6" 11w
4100K TCP -
Deviation
12 56.16 $281.83 $19.77
Roof Access 1,560.00 2 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
1lamp-El-IS-NLO 31 96.72 2
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 1Lamp 4000K
Espen
15 46.80 $197.47 $8.79
AHO: Annual Avg. Hours of Operation kWh: Annual kiloWatt Hours Watts: Watts as published by the manufacturer
Materials List for
Burlingame Easton Library
The chart below is a summary of materials required for your retrofit. This table shows wattage, quantity, kWh, and price per unit for all involved
materials.
Equipment Qty Equipment Cost*Labor Hrs/Cost*
Driver LED T8 1L-2L Espen 13 $15.63 0.33/$49.50
LED T8 4' 15w 4000K Espen 23 $10.61 0.05/$7.50
Recycle: Fluorescent Lamps 4' or Shorter 23 $0.70 0.00/$0.00
Recycle: Non-PCB Ballast from 4' or Shorter 13 $0.00 0.00/$0.00
Custom Component 1 TCP L11DR56D3540K95 6 $16.50 0.50/$75.00
CFL 36W Fixture Existing 6 $0.00 0.00/$0.00
Recycle: CFL Screw-in 20 $1.00 0.00/$0.00
LED Downlight for CFL/HID 8" 27w 2700K Green Creative Green Creative 57876
27CDLA8/840/277V 14 $88.00 1.00/$150.00
CFL 46W Fixture Existing 14 $0.00 0.00/$0.00
* Per Item Cost
Customer Work Order Agreement
By signing this Customer Work Order Agreement (“Agreement”), Customer (the business entity listed above) agrees to the following:
Measures and Incentives:
I have reviewed the Energy Efficiency Proposal (“Proposal”) provided by Ecology Action (“Implementer”), a copy of which is attached to this
Agreement. I agree that to the best of my knowledge the schedule of operations contained in the Proposal accurately describes the hours of
operation at the facility listed above. I understand that the energy efficiency measures described in the Proposal represent an estimate of
expected energy savings, and that Implementer does not guarantee a specific level of cost savings from the implementation of the proposed
energy efficiency measures (collectively, the “ Project”).
Implementer is implementing the Project on the Customer’s behalf. Incentives for energy savings are calculated using the appropriate baseline
to exceed California Title 20 and Title 24 standards. New products ordered, purchased or installed prior to 1/1/16 or after 12/15/1 8 do not
qualify for an incentive. Resale products, products leased, rebuilt, rented, received from warranty of insurance claims, exchanged, won as a
prize or new parts installed in existing products do not qualify for Incentives. PG&E is not responsible for the economic and technical feasibility,
operational capability, and reliability of the Project.
Program Dates:
To be eligible for incentives, all projects must be installed and completed before December 14, 2018. Funding of incentives is distributed on a
first-come first-served basis.San Mateo County Energy Watch is funded by California ratepayers under the auspices of the California Public
Utilities Commission (“CPUC”). I have received information about other programs offering rebates or services for measures covered by San
Mateo County Energy Watch.
Project Commitment and Installation Completion Process:
I understand that I must have a signed Site Access Agreement on File to confirm Program Eligibility and a signed Customer Agreement to initiate
installation. For each work order, I agree to have Ecology Action contact (a) participating contractor(s) (“Contractor”) who will perform a walk-
through inspection, review the scope of the Projects outlined in the Report, and schedule the Project installation at a time that is mutually
agreeable to all parties. I understand that the total installed costs for the components of the Project are described in the attached listing of
individual work orders. Costs for correcting electrical code violations are not included in the costs quoted above and are not covered by the
Program. Any electrical code violations found during the Contractors’ inspections or during installation will be cause for the Contractors to stop
work on the affected item(s) until such violations are corrected. I understand that the contractor walk- through may result in a Change Order
due to specification or electrical code violations and that I will be notified and approve of any cost adjustments before additional work is
completed.
I will sign an agreement with each Contractor, which shall be solely between the Contractor and Customer, for the out-of-pocket portion of the
Project costs. I understand that San Mateo County Energy Watch will provide a rebate, detailed in the work order listing, to offset the cost of
the Project installations, and the rebate will be paid directly to the Contractors. I understand that I am responsible for paying the balance of the
agreed-to contract price after rebate payment and that payment is due to the Contractor upon completion of the individual work order. At the
completion of the project, I agree to sign the Customer Acceptance/Project Completion Form presented by the contractor on Ecology Action’s
behalf.
The value of Incentives and direct installations is taxable. Implementer will report incentives and direct installations greater than $600 to the IRS
unless you are exempt. Please consult your tax advisor concerning the taxability of incentives. The Customer, not the implementer, is
responsible for any taxes imposed as a result of your receipt of Incentives from this Program. Form 1099 will be issued for the Customer,
regardless of who the payee is, because the Customer receives the benefits of the Incentives.
General Terms And Conditions
1.Project Eligibility and Approval:PG&E in its sole discretion will determine the eligibility and approval of the energy efficiency of Measures
at the Customer’s site (Project). Eligibility requirements include and are not limited to, 1) Project site must receive gas and/or electric
service from PG&E; 2) Customer must be non-residential; 3) whether Measures to be installed satisfy incentive amounts; 4) inspections of
the Project site before and after the installation of Measures; 5) and any additional information or requirements request by PG&E to
implement and approve the Customers Project.
2.Feasibility:If applicable, PG&E’s and/or its consultant’s may review the design, construction, operation or maintenance of the Project,
Measures, Project documentation to determine eligibility, incentives and approval. PG&E’s review does not constitute any representation
as to the economic or technical feasibility, operational capability, or reliability of the Project or its Measures. Implementer is solely
responsible for the economic, technical feasibility, operational capability and reliability of the Project and its Measures.
3.Savings:Implementer is implementing the Project on Customer’s behalf and is solely responsible for ensuring Project savings are calculated
using the appropriate baseline, installed according to Customer’s specifications and is delivering the estimated savings. Customer
understands Incentives will be paid only for energy savings that exceed the California Title 20 and Title 24 standards, or industry standards
in the absence of applicable local, state or federal standards.
4.Funding:Implementer is receiving funds from Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) for this Project, but the Parties agree that PG&E is not liable
to either Party for any losses or damages, including incidental or consequential damages, arising from this Agreement. PG&E makes no
representation or warranty, and assumes no liability with respect to quality, safety, performance, or other aspect of any design, system or
appliance installed pursuant to this Agreement, and expressly disclaims any such representation, warranty or liability.
5.Incidental and Consequential Damages:BOTH PARTIES AGREE NEITHER PARTY SHALL BE LIABLE TO THE OTHER FOR ANY INCIDENTAL,
SPECIAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES.
6.Life of Product:Customer understands Incentive payments are based on related energy benefits over the life of the product. Customer
agrees if 1) Customer does not provide PG&E with 100% of the related benefits for the life of the product or a period of 5 years, whichever
is less, or 2) Customer ceases to be a distribution Customer of PG&E during said time period, Customer shall refund a prorated amount of
Incentive payment(s) to PG&E based on the actual period of time for which Customer provided the related energy benefits as an electric
Customer of PG&E.
7.Customers with self-generation capabilities:If Customer has existing onsite cogeneration or self-generation, Implementer shall not pay
Incentives for energy savings that exceed Customer’s annual energy usage from PG&E. KW, kWh and therm savings are limited to the
previous 12 months quantity of kW, kWh, and/or therms purchased from or delivered by the utility on the meter(s), serving the equipment
to be installed, for which the utility collects as directed by the CPUC. The previous 12 months are defined as the calendar year prior to the
date the Customer signed this Agreement (including usage from Standby Service and less savings associated with pending energy efficiency
applications). This policy is subject to change with 30 day written notice to Customer.
8.Incentives:Incentives, energy savings, and installation costs in the Agreement are ESTIMATES only and may vary upon verification and
completion of the Project approval process.
9.Incentive may not exceed Project cost:Customer must submit Project invoice(s) which include: vendor name/address/phone, itemized
listing of product(s) including quantity, product description(s), manufacturer, model #, and other identifying information as appropriate,
Project cost, date invoice paid or payment terms, and installation date.
10.If Tenant:If Customer is a tenant, Customer represents they have obtained the property owner’s permission to install the Measure(s) for
which Customer is applying for an Incentive payment..
11.Access and Verification Inspection:PG&E requires Project inspections and performance measurements to verify the incentive. These
inspections are not to determine any safety issues.Customer will allow, if requested, a representative from PG&E, CPUC, Implementer, or
any authorized subcontractor reasonable access to Facility to verify the installed product.
12.Compliance with Laws:Implementer shall comply with all federal, state, and municipal laws, ordinances, rules, orders, and regulations,
which apply to the implementation of this Project.
13.Advertising:Implementer and Customer agree not to use the names or identifying characteristics of the Customer’s Facility, Customer’s
name or Implementers name for published Project reports (except to fulfill reporting requirements to PG&E and/or the CPUC), advertising,
sales promotion or other publicity without written approval.
14.No Double-Dipping:Customer understands that Customer cannot receive Incentives for the same product, equipment or service from
more than one California investor-owned utility or third party Energy Efficiency program offering Incentives for the same product,
equipment, or service funded with CPUC. This prohibition applies three years prior to and three years after receiving Incentives for the
same product, equipment or service.
15.No Obligation:California consumers are not obligated to purchase any full fee service or other service not funded by this Program. This
Program is funded by California utility ratepayers under the auspices of the CPUC.Los consumidores en California no están obligados a
comprar servicios completos o adicionales que no esten cubiertos bajo este programa. Este programa está financiado por los usuarios de
servicios públicos en California bajo la jurisdicción de la Comisión de Servicios Públicos de California (CPUC).
16.Availability of Funds:This program is available on a first-come, first served basis until allocated funds are depleted. This Program may be
modified or terminated without notice.
17.CPUC Authority: There terms and conditions can be modified at any time in accordance with any directive of the CPUC and regulation of
PG&E. Any information, results and reports regarding this Agreement and Customer’s Project shall be made available to the CPUC.
18.Tax Liability: PG&E will report incentives greater than $600 as income on the IRS 1099 unless (1) the “Corporation” or “Exempt” tax status
box is marked.
Customer Approval
Burlingame Easton Library
I have read and understood the Terms and Conditions. I certify that the information I have provided is true and correct.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed by their duly authorized representatives as of the
date set forth below.
As shown on the Opportunity At-A-Glance page,customer Out of Pocket Cost is $6,370.96.
Customer:San Mateo County Energy Watch
Customer Representative:Johnson Woo
501 Primrose Rd
Burlingame,CA 94010
Phone:(650) 558-7691
Email:jwoo@burlingame.org
Program Representative:Garvin Lee
Ecology Action
877 Cedar Street, Suite 240
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
Mobile:(415) 688-1123
Fax: (831) 427-1368
Email:glee@ecoact.org
\t1\
Customer Representative’s Title
\n1\
Program Representative’s Printed Name
Customer Representative’s Printed Name
\s1\
Program Representative’s Signature
Customer Representative’s Signature
\d1\
Date
Date
Energy Efficiency Proposal for
Burlingame Grandstand and Parks Corp
Yard
Johnson Woo
Burlingame Grandstand and Parks Corp Yard
850 Burlingame Ave
BURLINGAME,CA 94010
Greetings,
As an environmental leader in your community, your business is a great example of doing what’s right.
Participating in this utility-sponsored program is just another way for you to continue to be recognized for
running a sustainable and earth-friendly business. In simple language, the following personalized proposal
shows the value that an energy retrofit brings to you, to your business, and to the planet.
My job is to make sure that business owners like you get the energy efficiency guidance they need in a way
that makes being energy efficient easy for them. I’m available at your convenience to review the details of
this proposal and to answer any questions you might have. I’m looking forward to your approval to begin
work on this project immediately.
Sincerely,
Garvin Lee
Senior Energy Efficiency Consultant
Garvin Lee
Senior Energy Efficiency Consultant
(415) 688-1123
glee@ecoact.org
Fax:(831) 427-1368
Rachel Radcliffe
Senior Installation Manager
(510) 871-0781
rradcliffe@ecoact.org
Opportunity At-A-Glance for
Burlingame Grandstand and Parks Corp
Yard
Your current, average electricity bill
$1,704/month
Your new, average electricity bill after upgrades
$1,574/month
Burlingame Grandstand and Parks
Corp Yard Cost Summary
Installation Cost (labor, materials and recycling)$14,598.89
Project Management Fee Waived
Rebate -$2,323.32
% of Project Covered by Rebate 16%
Net Project Cost $12,275.57
Simple Payback 7.86 Years
Simple Payback without Rebate 9.35 Years
Burlingame Grandstand and Parks Corp
Yard
Project Impact Page
Your Long-term Savings
Timeframe Estimated Savings kWh
Monthly $130.16 949.31
1st Year $1,561.95 11,391.73
5 Years $7,809.75 56,959
$7,810
Saved
$1,562
$130 Saved
Saved
Monthly 1st Year 5 Years
Your Energy Efficient Measures
Work Order Materials Labor Fees Rebate Customer Cost
Burlingame
Grandstand and
Parks Corp Yard
MLTG
$5,353.56 $8,115.33 $1,130.00 $2,323.32 $12,275.57
TOTAL $5,353.56 $8,115.33 $1,130.00 $2,323.32 $12,275.57
Environmental Benefits
By implementing the measures outlined in this proposal, you will :
Remove
0.98
passenger vehicles from the road
Save
9,762.33 kWh
which reduces your CO2 emissions
Sequester the equivalent of
14.35
acres of forest
The project cost is based on current equipment prices and rebate levels and is valid for a period of 14 days from the date presented.
*Note - Savings are estimated using standard engineering calculations and are based on the hours of operation as described to the surveyor. Depending on actual
usage as well as changes in your electric utility rate, your savings may be higher or lower. The savings indicated above are NOT guaranteed. Construction costs
may vary slightly depending on fixture quantities and unforeseen conditions.
**Note - Based on DEER property type and measure savings values from the CPUC, this project is deemed to deliver 11,391.73 kWh and 1.67 kW. The rebate
offered for the project is calculated based on the deemed savings values.
Burlingame Grandstand and Parks Corp
Yard
Project Agreement Page
Your Project Schedule
Through this energy efficiency program, the entire process is managed for you including the assessment, installation and rebat e
processing.It really is that simple.
Proposal Signed
We will review your
proposal with you to
make sure that you
understand your energy
savings, rebates,
project utility bill
savings, and co-pay.
Installation Confirmed
We will select and
manage a contractor or
work alongside your
installation partner. You
will receive assistance
from Rachel Radcliffe,
who will manage your
project installation.
Please be available for
the initial project kick-off
call within 48 hours of
project acceptance.
Installation
We will oversee every
detail of the installation
of your equipment with
no disruption of service.
Our goal is to complete
the project within 30
days of receipt of
materials.
If you are managing
your own installation,
please be sure to notify
Rachel Radcliffe when
your project is complete.
Quality Control
We will schedule and
perform post-
installation assessments
to ensure that the
highest quality
standards have been
met. The rebate
payment will then be
released and any
applicable co-pay will be
collected.
Start Saving
After the project
completion, you will
begin to see the
benefits of your new
energy efficient
equipment. The savings
will accumulate month
after month, and you’ll
start to open your
energy bills with
excitement rather than
trepidation.
Recommendations &Savings Checklist for Burlingame
Grandstand and Parks Corp Yard
Existing Equipment Recommended Upgrade: Lighting
Area AHO Qty Description Watts kWh Qty Description Watts kWh Cost Without
Rebate Estimated Savings
Corp Yard
Locker 2,346.00 2 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 276.83 2
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 140.76 $282.58 $22.42
Corp Yard
Locker
Restroom
2,346.00 3 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 415.24 3
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 211.14 $388.55 $33.64
Corp Yard
Breakroom
Garage
2,346.00 6 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 830.48 6
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 422.28 $706.48 $67.27
Corp Yard
Breakroom
Garage
1,560.00 4 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
4lamp-El-RS-NLO 118 736.32 4
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 4Lamp 4000K
Espen
59 368.16 $875.80 $60.67
Corp Yard
Parks Dept
Garage
2,346.30 14 T8 8' 59W 2L NBF 109 3,580.45 14 LED Strip 8ft 46w
4000K DECO 46 1,511.02 $3,656.21 $341.04
Corp Yard
Parks Dept
Parts Office
2,346.30 2 T8-8'-59w-1st Gen-
4lamp-El-IS-NLO 219 1,027.68 2 LED Strip 8ft 46w
4000K DECO 46 215.86 $637.36 $133.79
Corp Yard
Parks Dept
Office
2,346.00 1 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 138.41 1
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 70.38 $176.52 $11.21
Corp Yard
Parks Dept
Office
2,346.30 2 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
4lamp-El-IS-NLO 112 525.57 2
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 140.78 $285.38 $63.41
Corp Yard
Parks Dept
Hall next to
Office
2,346.00 1 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 138.41 1
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 70.38 $176.60 $11.21
Corp Yard
Exterior 4,004.00 1 HPS 70W Wallpack 95 380.38 1
LED Wall Pack 28w
5000K Full Throw
ATG
28 112.11 $297.91 $42.92
Grandstand
Building
Exterior
4,004.00 4 MH 250W 1L 295 4,724.72 4
LED Wall Pack 28w
5000K Full Cut-off
ATG
28 448.45 $1,215.60 $684.20
Grandstand
Restrooms 1,042.80 2 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 123.05 2
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 62.57 $282.58 $9.97
Grandstand
Restroom
Exterior
4,004.00 1 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 236.24 1
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 120.12 $176.60 $18.58
Grandstand
Storage
Rooms
52.14 8 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 24.61 8
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 12.51 $918.43 $1.99
Grandstand
Storage
Rooms
260.70 6 T12-4'-34w-2L-Mag
ES-RS-NLO 72 112.62 6
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 46.93 $706.48 $10.83
Grandstand
Seating 2,346.30 10 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 1,384.32 10 LED Strip 8ft 46w
4000K DECO 46 1,079.30 $3,815.81 $48.80
AHO: Annual Avg. Hours of Operation kWh: Annual kiloWatt Hours Watts: Watts as published by the manufacturer
Materials List for
Burlingame Grandstand and Parks
Corp Yard
The chart below is a summary of materials required for your retrofit. This table shows wattage, quantity, kWh, and price per unit for all involved
materials.
Equipment Qty Equipment Cost*Labor Hrs/Cost*
Driver LED T8 1L-2L Espen 32 $15.63 0.33/$49.50
LED T8 4' 15w 4000K Espen 80 $10.61 0.05/$7.50
Recycle: Fluorescent Lamps 4' or Shorter 104 $0.70 0.00/$0.00
Recycle: Non-PCB Ballast from 4' or Shorter 52 $0.00 0.00/$0.00
Driver LED T8 3L-4L Espen 4 $26.04 0.33/$49.50
LED Strip 8ft 46w 4000K DECO 26 $106.20 0.75/$112.50
Recycle: Fluorescent Lamps 5' or Longer 22 $1.12 0.00/$0.00
(Code) Ballast 1-2 lamp T8 8'2 $18.10 0.33/$49.50
(Code) T8 8' 700 series lamp 2 $5.79 0.00/$0.00
LED Wall Pack 28w 5000K Full Throw ATG 1 $103.25 0.75/$112.50
Recycle: HID Lamps 5 $2.50 0.00/$0.00
Recycle: Ballast from HID 5 $0.00 0.00/$0.00
LED Wall Pack 28w 5000K Full Cut-off ATG 4 $115.05 0.75/$112.50
* Per Item Cost
Customer Work Order Agreement
By signing this Customer Work Order Agreement (“Agreement”), Customer (the business entity listed above) agrees to the following:
Measures and Incentives:
I have reviewed the Energy Efficiency Proposal (“Proposal”) provided by Ecology Action (“Implementer”), a copy of which is attached to this
Agreement. I agree that to the best of my knowledge the schedule of operations contained in the Proposal accurately describes the hours of
operation at the facility listed above. I understand that the energy efficiency measures described in the Proposal represent an estimate of
expected energy savings, and that Implementer does not guarantee a specific level of cost savings from the implementation of the proposed
energy efficiency measures (collectively, the “ Project”).
Implementer is implementing the Project on the Customer’s behalf. Incentives for energy savings are calculated using the appropriate baseline
to exceed California Title 20 and Title 24 standards. New products ordered, purchased or installed prior to 1/1/16 or after 12/15/1 8 do not
qualify for an incentive. Resale products, products leased, rebuilt, rented, received from warranty of insurance claims, exchanged, won as a
prize or new parts installed in existing products do not qualify for Incentives. PG&E is not responsible for the economic and technical feasibility,
operational capability, and reliability of the Project.
Program Dates:
To be eligible for incentives, all projects must be installed and completed before December 14, 2018. Funding of incentives is distributed on a
first-come first-served basis.San Mateo County Energy Watch is funded by California ratepayers under the auspices of the California Public
Utilities Commission (“CPUC”). I have received information about other programs offering rebates or services for measures covered by San
Mateo County Energy Watch.
Project Commitment and Installation Completion Process:
I understand that I must have a signed Site Access Agreement on File to confirm Program Eligibility and a signed Customer Agreement to initiate
installation. For each work order, I agree to have Ecology Action contact (a) participating contractor(s) (“Contractor”) who will perform a walk-
through inspection, review the scope of the Projects outlined in the Report, and schedule the Project installation at a time that is mutually
agreeable to all parties. I understand that the total installed costs for the components of the Project are described in the attached listing of
individual work orders. Costs for correcting electrical code violations are not included in the costs quoted above and are not covered by the
Program. Any electrical code violations found during the Contractors’ inspections or during installation will be cause for the Contractors to stop
work on the affected item(s) until such violations are corrected. I understand that the contractor walk- through may result in a Change Order
due to specification or electrical code violations and that I will be notified and approve of any cost adjustments before additional work is
completed.
I will sign an agreement with each Contractor, which shall be solely between the Contractor and Customer, for the out-of-pocket portion of the
Project costs. I understand that San Mateo County Energy Watch will provide a rebate, detailed in the work order listing, to offset the cost of
the Project installations, and the rebate will be paid directly to the Contractors. I understand that I am responsible for paying the balance of the
agreed-to contract price after rebate payment and that payment is due to the Contractor upon completion of the individual work order. At the
completion of the project, I agree to sign the Customer Acceptance/Project Completion Form presented by the contractor on Ecology Action’s
behalf.
The value of Incentives and direct installations is taxable. Implementer will report incentives and direct installations greater than $600 to the IRS
unless you are exempt. Please consult your tax advisor concerning the taxability of incentives. The Customer, not the implementer, is
responsible for any taxes imposed as a result of your receipt of Incentives from this Program. Form 1099 will be issued for the Customer,
regardless of who the payee is, because the Customer receives the benefits of the Incentives.
General Terms And Conditions
1.Project Eligibility and Approval:PG&E in its sole discretion will determine the eligibility and approval of the energy efficiency of Measures
at the Customer’s site (Project). Eligibility requirements include and are not limited to, 1) Project site must receive gas and/or electric
service from PG&E; 2) Customer must be non-residential; 3) whether Measures to be installed satisfy incentive amounts; 4) inspections of
the Project site before and after the installation of Measures; 5) and any additional information or requirements request by PG&E to
implement and approve the Customers Project.
2.Feasibility:If applicable, PG&E’s and/or its consultant’s may review the design, construction, operation or maintenance of the Project,
Measures, Project documentation to determine eligibility, incentives and approval. PG&E’s review does not constitute any representation
as to the economic or technical feasibility, operational capability, or reliability of the Project or its Measures. Implementer is solely
responsible for the economic, technical feasibility, operational capability and reliability of the Project and its Measures.
3.Savings:Implementer is implementing the Project on Customer’s behalf and is solely responsible for ensuring Project savings are calculated
using the appropriate baseline, installed according to Customer’s specifications and is delivering the estimated savings. Customer
understands Incentives will be paid only for energy savings that exceed the California Title 20 and Title 24 standards, or industry standards
in the absence of applicable local, state or federal standards.
4.Funding:Implementer is receiving funds from Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) for this Project, but the Parties agree that PG&E is not liable
to either Party for any losses or damages, including incidental or consequential damages, arising from this Agreement. PG&E makes no
representation or warranty, and assumes no liability with respect to quality, safety, performance, or other aspect of any design, system or
appliance installed pursuant to this Agreement, and expressly disclaims any such representation, warranty or liability.
5.Incidental and Consequential Damages:BOTH PARTIES AGREE NEITHER PARTY SHALL BE LIABLE TO THE OTHER FOR ANY INCIDENTAL,
SPECIAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES.
6.Life of Product:Customer understands Incentive payments are based on related energy benefits over the life of the product. Customer
agrees if 1) Customer does not provide PG&E with 100% of the related benefits for the life of the product or a period of 5 years, whichever
is less, or 2) Customer ceases to be a distribution Customer of PG&E during said time period, Customer shall refund a prorated amount of
Incentive payment(s) to PG&E based on the actual period of time for which Customer provided the related energy benefits as an electric
Customer of PG&E.
7.Customers with self-generation capabilities:If Customer has existing onsite cogeneration or self-generation, Implementer shall not pay
Incentives for energy savings that exceed Customer’s annual energy usage from PG&E. KW, kWh and therm savings are limited to the
previous 12 months quantity of kW, kWh, and/or therms purchased from or delivered by the utility on the meter(s), serving the equipment
to be installed, for which the utility collects as directed by the CPUC. The previous 12 months are defined as the calendar year prior to the
date the Customer signed this Agreement (including usage from Standby Service and less savings associated with pending energy efficiency
applications). This policy is subject to change with 30 day written notice to Customer.
8.Incentives:Incentives, energy savings, and installation costs in the Agreement are ESTIMATES only and may vary upon verification and
completion of the Project approval process.
9.Incentive may not exceed Project cost:Customer must submit Project invoice(s) which include: vendor name/address/phone, itemized
listing of product(s) including quantity, product description(s), manufacturer, model #, and other identifying information as appropriate,
Project cost, date invoice paid or payment terms, and installation date.
10.If Tenant:If Customer is a tenant, Customer represents they have obtained the property owner’s permission to install the Measure(s) for
which Customer is applying for an Incentive payment..
11.Access and Verification Inspection:PG&E requires Project inspections and performance measurements to verify the incentive. These
inspections are not to determine any safety issues.Customer will allow, if requested, a representative from PG&E, CPUC, Implementer, or
any authorized subcontractor reasonable access to Facility to verify the installed product.
12.Compliance with Laws:Implementer shall comply with all federal, state, and municipal laws, ordinances, rules, orders, and regulations,
which apply to the implementation of this Project.
13.Advertising:Implementer and Customer agree not to use the names or identifying characteristics of the Customer’s Facility, Customer’s
name or Implementers name for published Project reports (except to fulfill reporting requirements to PG&E and/or the CPUC), advertising,
sales promotion or other publicity without written approval.
14.No Double-Dipping:Customer understands that Customer cannot receive Incentives for the same product, equipment or service from
more than one California investor-owned utility or third party Energy Efficiency program offering Incentives for the same product,
equipment, or service funded with CPUC. This prohibition applies three years prior to and three years after receiving Incentives for the
same product, equipment or service.
15.No Obligation:California consumers are not obligated to purchase any full fee service or other service not funded by this Program. This
Program is funded by California utility ratepayers under the auspices of the CPUC.Los consumidores en California no están obligados a
comprar servicios completos o adicionales que no esten cubiertos bajo este programa. Este programa está financiado por los usuarios de
servicios públicos en California bajo la jurisdicción de la Comisión de Servicios Públicos de California (CPUC).
16.Availability of Funds:This program is available on a first-come, first served basis until allocated funds are depleted. This Program may be
modified or terminated without notice.
17.CPUC Authority: There terms and conditions can be modified at any time in accordance with any directive of the CPUC and regulation of
PG&E. Any information, results and reports regarding this Agreement and Customer’s Project shall be made available to the CPUC.
18.Tax Liability: PG&E will report incentives greater than $600 as income on the IRS 1099 unless (1) the “Corporation” or “Exempt” tax status
box is marked.
Customer Approval
Burlingame Grandstand and
Parks Corp Yard
I have read and understood the Terms and Conditions. I certify that the information I have provided is true and correct.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed by their duly authorized representatives as of the
date set forth below.
As shown on the Opportunity At-A-Glance page,customer Out of Pocket Cost is $12,275.57.
Customer:San Mateo County Energy Watch
Customer Representative:Johnson Woo
501 Primrose Rd
Burlingame,CA 94010
Phone:(650) 558-7691
Email:jwoo@burlingame.org
Program Representative:Garvin Lee
Ecology Action
877 Cedar Street, Suite 240
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
Mobile:(415) 688-1123
Fax: (831) 427-1368
Email:glee@ecoact.org
\t1\
Customer Representative’s Title
\n1\
Program Representative’s Printed Name
Customer Representative’s Printed Name
\s1\
Program Representative’s Signature
Customer Representative’s Signature
\d1\
Date
Date
Energy Efficiency Proposal for
Burlingame Library
Johnson Woo
Burlingame Library
480 Primrose Rd
BURLINGAME,CA 94010
Greetings,
As an environmental leader in your community, your business is a great example of doing what’s right.
Participating in this utility-sponsored program is just another way for you to continue to be recognized for
running a sustainable and earth-friendly business. In simple language, the following personalized proposal
shows the value that an energy retrofit brings to you, to your business, and to the planet.
My job is to make sure that business owners like you get the energy efficiency guidance they need in a way
that makes being energy efficient easy for them. I’m available at your convenience to review the details of
this proposal and to answer any questions you might have. I’m looking forward to your approval to begin
work on this project immediately.
Sincerely,
Garvin Lee
Senior Energy Efficiency Consultant
Garvin Lee
Senior Energy Efficiency Consultant
(415) 688-1123
glee@ecoact.org
Fax:(831) 427-1368
Rachel Radcliffe
Senior Installation Manager
(510) 871-0781
rradcliffe@ecoact.org
Opportunity At-A-Glance for
Burlingame Library
Your current, average electricity bill
$5,862/month
Your new, average electricity bill after upgrades
$4,601/month
Burlingame Library Cost Summary
Installation Cost (labor, materials and recycling)$150,572.97
Project Management Fee Waived
Rebate -$15,567.05
% of Project Covered by Rebate 10%
Net Project Cost $135,005.92
Simple Payback 8.92 Years
Simple Payback without Rebate 9.95 Years
Burlingame Library
Project Impact Page
Your Long-term Savings
Timeframe Estimated Savings kWh
Monthly $1,260.78 3,142.50
1st Year $15,129.31 37,710.00
5 Years $75,646.55 188,550
$75,647
Saved
$15,129
$1,261 Saved
Saved
Monthly 1st Year 5 Years
Your Energy Efficient Measures
Work Order Materials Labor Fees Rebate Customer Cost
Burlingame Library
MLTG $28,152.01 $46,981.01 $150.00 $5,709.05 $69,573.97
Burlingame Library
DLTG $37,275.60 $38,014.35 $0.00 $9,858.00 $65,431.95
TOTAL $65,427.61 $84,995.36 $150.00 $15,567.05 $135,005.92
Environmental Benefits
By implementing the measures outlined in this proposal, you will :
Remove
9.46
passenger vehicles from the road
Save
94,558.27 kWh
which reduces your CO2 emissions
Sequester the equivalent of
139.00
acres of forest
The project cost is based on current equipment prices and rebate levels and is valid for a period of 14 days from the date presented.
*Note - Savings are estimated using standard engineering calculations and are based on the hours of operation as described to the surveyor. Depending on actual
usage as well as changes in your electric utility rate, your savings may be higher or lower. The savings indicated above are NOT guaranteed. Construction costs
may vary slightly depending on fixture quantities and unforeseen conditions.
**Note - Based on DEER property type and measure savings values from the CPUC, this project is deemed to deliver 37,710.00 kWh and 9.12 kW. The rebate
offered for the project is calculated based on the deemed savings values.
Burlingame Library Project
Agreement Page
Your Project Schedule
Through this energy efficiency program, the entire process is managed for you including the assessment, installation and rebat e
processing.It really is that simple.
Proposal Signed
We will review your
proposal with you to
make sure that you
understand your energy
savings, rebates,
project utility bill
savings, and co-pay.
Installation Confirmed
We will select and
manage a contractor or
work alongside your
installation partner. You
will receive assistance
from Rachel Radcliffe,
who will manage your
project installation.
Please be available for
the initial project kick-off
call within 48 hours of
project acceptance.
Installation
We will oversee every
detail of the installation
of your equipment with
no disruption of service.
Our goal is to complete
the project within 30
days of receipt of
materials.
If you are managing
your own installation,
please be sure to notify
Rachel Radcliffe when
your project is complete.
Quality Control
We will schedule and
perform post-
installation assessments
to ensure that the
highest quality
standards have been
met. The rebate
payment will then be
released and any
applicable co-pay will be
collected.
Start Saving
After the project
completion, you will
begin to see the
benefits of your new
energy efficient
equipment. The savings
will accumulate month
after month, and you’ll
start to open your
energy bills with
excitement rather than
trepidation.
Recommendations &Savings Checklist for Burlingame
Library
Existing Equipment Recommended Upgrade: Lighting
Area AHO Qty Description Watts kWh Qty Description Watts kWh Cost Without
Rebate Estimated Savings
Lower Level 3,284.82 243 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 47,094.46 243
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 3500K
Espen
30 23,946.34 $32,734.41 $3,814.81
Lower Level 3,284.82 125 CFL 52W Fixture
Existing 52 21,351.33 125
LED Downlight for
CFL/HID 8" 27w
2700K Green
Creative
27 11,086.27 $35,525.00 $1,691.68
Main Level 3,284.82 30 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 5,814.13 30
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 3500K
Espen
30 2,956.34 $3,945.42 $470.96
Main Level 3,284.82 2 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
1lamp-El-IS-NLO 31 203.66 2
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 1Lamp 3500K
Espen
15 98.54 $211.37 $17.32
Main Level 3,284.82 98 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 18,992.83 98
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 1Lamp 3500K
Espen
15 4,828.69 $9,145.73 $2,334.25
Main Level 3,284.82 3 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
4lamp-El-IS-NLO 112 1,103.70 3
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 3500K
Espen
30 295.63 $1,184.16 $133.17
Main Level 3,284.82 12 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
3lamp-El-RS-NLO 93 3,665.86 12
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 3500K
Espen
30 1,182.54 $1,608.97 $409.25
Main Level 3,284.82 1 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
4lamp-El-IS-NLO 112 367.90 1
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 4Lamp 3500K
Espen
59 193.80 $187.39 $28.69
Main Level 3,284.82 108 CFL 52W Fixture
Existing 52 18,447.55 108
LED Downlight for
CFL/HID 8" 27w
2700K Green
Creative
27 9,578.54 $22,204.80 $1,461.61
Upper Level 3,284.82 197 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 38,179.46 197
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 3500K
Espen
30 19,413.29 $24,065.12 $3,092.67
Upper Level 3,284.82 6 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
1lamp-El-IS-NLO 31 610.98 6
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 1Lamp 3500K
Espen
15 295.63 $611.04 $51.97
Upper Level 3,284.82 1 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 193.80 1
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 3500K
Espen
30 98.54 $132.97 $15.70
Upper Level 3,284.82 6 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 1,162.83 6
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 1Lamp 3500K
Espen
15 295.63 $615.24 $142.91
Upper Level 3,284.82 85 CFL 52W Fixture
Existing 52 14,518.90 85
LED Downlight for
CFL/HID 8" 27w
2700K Green
Creative
27 7,538.66 $17,560.15 $1,150.34
Staircases 3,284.82 2 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 387.61 2
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 1Lamp 3500K
Espen
15 98.54 $185.41 $47.64
Staircases 3,284.82 6 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
4lamp-El-IS-NLO 112 2,207.40 6
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 3500K
Espen
30 591.27 $655.79 $266.34
AHO: Annual Avg. Hours of Operation kWh: Annual kiloWatt Hours Watts: Watts as published by the manufacturer
Materials List for
Burlingame Library
The chart below is a summary of materials required for your retrofit. This table shows wattage, quantity, kWh, and price per unit for all involved
materials.
Equipment Qty Equipment Cost*Labor Hrs/Cost*
LED T8 4' 15w 3500K Espen 1102 $10.61 0.05/$7.50
Driver LED T8 1L-2L Espen 606 $15.63 0.33/$49.50
Custom Component 1 EM 62 $150.00 0.50/$75.00
Recycle: Fluorescent Lamps 4' or Shorter 1238 $0.70 0.00/$0.00
Recycle: Non-PCB Ballast from 4' or Shorter 617 $0.00 0.00/$0.00
Emergency Ballast staircases 4 $150.00 0.33/$49.50
Driver LED T8 3L-4L Espen 1 $26.04 0.33/$49.50
LED Downlight for CFL/HID 8" 27w 2700K Green Creative 3500k 318 $88.00 0.66/$99.00
CFL 52W Fixture Existing 318 $0.00 0.00/$0.00
Recycle: CFL Screw-in 318 $1.00 0.00/$0.00
* Per Item Cost
Customer Work Order Agreement
By signing this Customer Work Order Agreement (“Agreement”), Customer (the business entity listed above) agrees to the following:
Measures and Incentives:
I have reviewed the Energy Efficiency Proposal (“Proposal”) provided by Ecology Action (“Implementer”), a copy of which is attached to this
Agreement. I agree that to the best of my knowledge the schedule of operations contained in the Proposal accurately describes the hours of
operation at the facility listed above. I understand that the energy efficiency measures described in the Proposal represent an estimate of
expected energy savings, and that Implementer does not guarantee a specific level of cost savings from the implementation of the proposed
energy efficiency measures (collectively, the “ Project”).
Implementer is implementing the Project on the Customer’s behalf. Incentives for energy savings are calculated using the appropriate baseline
to exceed California Title 20 and Title 24 standards. New products ordered, purchased or installed prior to 1/1/16 or after 12/15/1 8 do not
qualify for an incentive. Resale products, products leased, rebuilt, rented, received from warranty of insurance claims, exchanged, won as a
prize or new parts installed in existing products do not qualify for Incentives. PG&E is not responsible for the economic and technical feasibility,
operational capability, and reliability of the Project.
Program Dates:
To be eligible for incentives, all projects must be installed and completed before December 14, 2018. Funding of incentives is distributed on a
first-come first-served basis.San Mateo County Energy Watch is funded by California ratepayers under the auspices of the California Public
Utilities Commission (“CPUC”). I have received information about other programs offering rebates or services for measures covered by San
Mateo County Energy Watch.
Project Commitment and Installation Completion Process:
I understand that I must have a signed Site Access Agreement on File to confirm Program Eligibility and a signed Customer Agreement to initiate
installation. For each work order, I agree to have Ecology Action contact (a) participating contractor(s) (“Contractor”) who will perform a walk-
through inspection, review the scope of the Projects outlined in the Report, and schedule the Project installation at a time that is mutually
agreeable to all parties. I understand that the total installed costs for the components of the Project are described in the attached listing of
individual work orders. Costs for correcting electrical code violations are not included in the costs quoted above and are not covered by the
Program. Any electrical code violations found during the Contractors’ inspections or during installation will be cause for the Contractors to stop
work on the affected item(s) until such violations are corrected. I understand that the contractor walk- through may result in a Change Order
due to specification or electrical code violations and that I will be notified and approve of any cost adjustments before additional work is
completed.
I will sign an agreement with each Contractor, which shall be solely between the Contractor and Customer, for the out-of-pocket portion of the
Project costs. I understand that San Mateo County Energy Watch will provide a rebate, detailed in the work order listing, to offset the cost of
the Project installations, and the rebate will be paid directly to the Contractors. I understand that I am responsible for paying the balance of the
agreed-to contract price after rebate payment and that payment is due to the Contractor upon completion of the individual work order. At the
completion of the project, I agree to sign the Customer Acceptance/Project Completion Form presented by the contractor on Ecology Action’s
behalf.
The value of Incentives and direct installations is taxable. Implementer will report incentives and direct installations greater than $600 to the IRS
unless you are exempt. Please consult your tax advisor concerning the taxability of incentives. The Customer, not the implementer, is
responsible for any taxes imposed as a result of your receipt of Incentives from this Program. Form 1099 will be issued for the Customer,
regardless of who the payee is, because the Customer receives the benefits of the Incentives.
General Terms And Conditions
1.Project Eligibility and Approval:PG&E in its sole discretion will determine the eligibility and approval of the energy efficiency of Measures
at the Customer’s site (Project). Eligibility requirements include and are not limited to, 1) Project site must receive gas and/or electric
service from PG&E; 2) Customer must be non-residential; 3) whether Measures to be installed satisfy incentive amounts; 4) inspections of
the Project site before and after the installation of Measures; 5) and any additional information or requirements request by PG&E to
implement and approve the Customers Project.
2.Feasibility:If applicable, PG&E’s and/or its consultant’s may review the design, construction, operation or maintenance of the Project,
Measures, Project documentation to determine eligibility, incentives and approval. PG&E’s review does not constitute any representation
as to the economic or technical feasibility, operational capability, or reliability of the Project or its Measures. Implementer is solely
responsible for the economic, technical feasibility, operational capability and reliability of the Project and its Measures.
3.Savings:Implementer is implementing the Project on Customer’s behalf and is solely responsible for ensuring Project savings are calculated
using the appropriate baseline, installed according to Customer’s specifications and is delivering the estimated savings. Customer
understands Incentives will be paid only for energy savings that exceed the California Title 20 and Title 24 standards, or industry standards
in the absence of applicable local, state or federal standards.
4.Funding:Implementer is receiving funds from Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) for this Project, but the Parties agree that PG&E is not liable
to either Party for any losses or damages, including incidental or consequential damages, arising from this Agreement. PG&E makes no
representation or warranty, and assumes no liability with respect to quality, safety, performance, or other aspect of any design, system or
appliance installed pursuant to this Agreement, and expressly disclaims any such representation, warranty or liability.
5.Incidental and Consequential Damages:BOTH PARTIES AGREE NEITHER PARTY SHALL BE LIABLE TO THE OTHER FOR ANY INCIDENTAL,
SPECIAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES.
6.Life of Product:Customer understands Incentive payments are based on related energy benefits over the life of the product. Customer
agrees if 1) Customer does not provide PG&E with 100% of the related benefits for the life of the product or a period of 5 years, whichever
is less, or 2) Customer ceases to be a distribution Customer of PG&E during said time period, Customer shall refund a prorated amount of
Incentive payment(s) to PG&E based on the actual period of time for which Customer provided the related energy benefits as an electric
Customer of PG&E.
7.Customers with self-generation capabilities:If Customer has existing onsite cogeneration or self-generation, Implementer shall not pay
Incentives for energy savings that exceed Customer’s annual energy usage from PG&E. KW, kWh and therm savings are limited to the
previous 12 months quantity of kW, kWh, and/or therms purchased from or delivered by the utility on the meter(s), serving the equipment
to be installed, for which the utility collects as directed by the CPUC. The previous 12 months are defined as the calendar year prior to the
date the Customer signed this Agreement (including usage from Standby Service and less savings associated with pending energy efficiency
applications). This policy is subject to change with 30 day written notice to Customer.
8.Incentives:Incentives, energy savings, and installation costs in the Agreement are ESTIMATES only and may vary upon verification and
completion of the Project approval process.
9.Incentive may not exceed Project cost:Customer must submit Project invoice(s) which include: vendor name/address/phone, itemized
listing of product(s) including quantity, product description(s), manufacturer, model #, and other identifying information as appropriate,
Project cost, date invoice paid or payment terms, and installation date.
10.If Tenant:If Customer is a tenant, Customer represents they have obtained the property owner’s permission to install the Measure(s) for
which Customer is applying for an Incentive payment..
11.Access and Verification Inspection:PG&E requires Project inspections and performance measurements to verify the incentive. These
inspections are not to determine any safety issues.Customer will allow, if requested, a representative from PG&E, CPUC, Implementer, or
any authorized subcontractor reasonable access to Facility to verify the installed product.
12.Compliance with Laws:Implementer shall comply with all federal, state, and municipal laws, ordinances, rules, orders, and regulations,
which apply to the implementation of this Project.
13.Advertising:Implementer and Customer agree not to use the names or identifying characteristics of the Customer’s Facility, Customer’s
name or Implementers name for published Project reports (except to fulfill reporting requirements to PG&E and/or the CPUC), advertising,
sales promotion or other publicity without written approval.
14.No Double-Dipping:Customer understands that Customer cannot receive Incentives for the same product, equipment or service from
more than one California investor-owned utility or third party Energy Efficiency program offering Incentives for the same product,
equipment, or service funded with CPUC. This prohibition applies three years prior to and three years after receiving Incentives for the
same product, equipment or service.
15.No Obligation:California consumers are not obligated to purchase any full fee service or other service not funded by this Program. This
Program is funded by California utility ratepayers under the auspices of the CPUC.Los consumidores en California no están obligados a
comprar servicios completos o adicionales que no esten cubiertos bajo este programa. Este programa está financiado por los usuarios de
servicios públicos en California bajo la jurisdicción de la Comisión de Servicios Públicos de California (CPUC).
16.Availability of Funds:This program is available on a first-come, first served basis until allocated funds are depleted. This Program may be
modified or terminated without notice.
17.CPUC Authority: There terms and conditions can be modified at any time in accordance with any directive of the CPUC and regulation of
PG&E. Any information, results and reports regarding this Agreement and Customer’s Project shall be made available to the CPUC.
18.Tax Liability: PG&E will report incentives greater than $600 as income on the IRS 1099 unless (1) the “Corporation” or “Exempt” tax status
box is marked.
Customer Approval
Burlingame Library
I have read and understood the Terms and Conditions. I certify that the information I have provided is true and correct.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed by their duly authorized representatives as of the
date set forth below.
As shown on the Opportunity At-A-Glance page,customer Out of Pocket Cost is $135,005.92.
Customer:San Mateo County Energy Watch
Customer Representative:Johnson Woo
501 Primrose Rd
Burlingame,CA 94010
Phone:(650) 558-7691
Email:jwoo@burlingame.org
Program Representative:Garvin Lee
Ecology Action
877 Cedar Street, Suite 240
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
Mobile:(415) 688-1123
Fax: (831) 427-1368
Email:glee@ecoact.org
\t1\
Customer Representative’s Title
\n1\
Program Representative’s Printed Name
Customer Representative’s Printed Name
\s1\
Program Representative’s Signature
Customer Representative’s Signature
\d1\
Date
Date
Energy Efficiency Proposal for
Burlingame Police Station
Johnson Woo
Burlingame Police Station
1111 Trousdale Dr
BURLINGAME,CA 94010
Greetings,
As an environmental leader in your community, your business is a great example of doing what’s right.
Participating in this utility-sponsored program is just another way for you to continue to be recognized for
running a sustainable and earth-friendly business. In simple language, the following personalized proposal
shows the value that an energy retrofit brings to you, to your business, and to the planet.
My job is to make sure that business owners like you get the energy efficiency guidance they need in a way
that makes being energy efficient easy for them. I’m available at your convenience to review the details of
this proposal and to answer any questions you might have. I’m looking forward to your approval to begin
work on this project immediately.
Sincerely,
Garvin Lee
Senior Energy Efficiency Consultant
Garvin Lee
Senior Energy Efficiency Consultant
(415) 688-1123
glee@ecoact.org
Fax:(831) 427-1368
Rachel Radcliffe
Senior Installation Manager
(510) 871-0781
rradcliffe@ecoact.org
Opportunity At-A-Glance for
Burlingame Police Station
Your current, average electricity bill
$2,419/month
Your new, average electricity bill after upgrades
$1,866/month
Burlingame Police Station Cost
Summary
Installation Cost (labor, materials and recycling)$24,917.06
Project Management Fee Waived
Rebate -$3,523.78
% of Project Covered by Rebate 14%
Net Project Cost $21,393.28
Simple Payback 3.23 Years
Simple Payback without Rebate 3.76 Years
Burlingame Police Station
Project Impact Page
Your Long-term Savings
Timeframe Estimated Savings kWh
Monthly $552.71 1,130.84
1st Year $6,632.57 13,570.03
5 Years $33,162.85 67,850
$33,163
Saved
$6,633
$553 Saved
Saved
Monthly 1st Year 5 Years
Your Energy Efficient Measures
Work Order Materials Labor Fees Rebate Customer Cost
Burlingame Police
Station MLTG $8,773.93 $15,993.13 $150.00 $3,523.78 $21,393.28
TOTAL $8,773.93 $15,993.13 $150.00 $3,523.78 $21,393.28
Environmental Benefits
By implementing the measures outlined in this proposal, you will :
Remove
4.15
passenger vehicles from the road
Save
41,453.59 kWh
which reduces your CO2 emissions
Sequester the equivalent of
60.94
acres of forest
The project cost is based on current equipment prices and rebate levels and is valid for a period of 14 days from the date presented.
*Note - Savings are estimated using standard engineering calculations and are based on the hours of operation as described to the surveyor. Depending on actual
usage as well as changes in your electric utility rate, your savings may be higher or lower. The savings indicated above are NOT guaranteed. Construction costs
may vary slightly depending on fixture quantities and unforeseen conditions.
**Note - Based on DEER property type and measure savings values from the CPUC, this project is deemed to deliver 13,570.03 kWh and 4.51 kW. The rebate
offered for the project is calculated based on the deemed savings values.
Burlingame Police Station
Project Agreement Page
Your Project Schedule
Through this energy efficiency program, the entire process is managed for you including the assessment, installation and rebat e
processing.It really is that simple.
Proposal Signed
We will review your
proposal with you to
make sure that you
understand your energy
savings, rebates,
project utility bill
savings, and co-pay.
Installation Confirmed
We will select and
manage a contractor or
work alongside your
installation partner. You
will receive assistance
from Rachel Radcliffe,
who will manage your
project installation.
Please be available for
the initial project kick-off
call within 48 hours of
project acceptance.
Installation
We will oversee every
detail of the installation
of your equipment with
no disruption of service.
Our goal is to complete
the project within 30
days of receipt of
materials.
If you are managing
your own installation,
please be sure to notify
Rachel Radcliffe when
your project is complete.
Quality Control
We will schedule and
perform post-
installation assessments
to ensure that the
highest quality
standards have been
met. The rebate
payment will then be
released and any
applicable co-pay will be
collected.
Start Saving
After the project
completion, you will
begin to see the
benefits of your new
energy efficient
equipment. The savings
will accumulate month
after month, and you’ll
start to open your
energy bills with
excitement rather than
trepidation.
Recommendations &Savings Checklist for Burlingame
Police Station
Existing Equipment Recommended Upgrade: Lighting
Area AHO Qty Description Watts kWh Qty Description Watts kWh Cost Without
Rebate Estimated Savings
Lobby 8,736.00 2 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
1lamp-El-IS-NLO 31 541.63 2
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 1Lamp 4000K
Espen
15 262.08 $176.22 $46.96
Lobby 8,736.00 6 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 3,092.54 6
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 1,572.48 $639.60 $255.37
Lobby 8,736.00 1 T8 2' 17w 2L NBF -
Existing 33 288.29 1
LED T8 Type C 2'
8w (11w) 2Lamp
4000K Espen
22 192.19 $116.82 $16.14
Office 8,736.00 2 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 1,030.85 2
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 524.16 $215.70 $85.12
Records 8,736.00 2 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 1,030.85 2
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 524.16 $215.70 $85.12
Admin Area 8,736.00 7 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
1lamp-El-IS-NLO 31 1,895.71 7
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 1Lamp 4000K
Espen
15 917.28 $607.40 $164.38
Admin Area 8,736.00 2 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
1lamp-El-IS-NLO 31 541.63 2
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 1Lamp 4000K
Espen
15 262.08 $203.58 $46.96
Server 1,456.00 2 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
3lamp-El-IS-NLO 89 259.17 2
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 87.36 $280.31 $28.86
Copy Area 8,736.00 2 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
3lamp-El-RS-NLO 93 1,624.90 2
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 3Lamp 4000K
Espen
45 786.24 $312.38 $140.89
Hallway 8,736.00 16 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 8,246.78 16
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 4,193.28 $1,699.34 $680.99
107 2,346.00 4 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 553.66 4
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 281.52 $427.65 $45.72
109 2,346.00 8 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 1,107.31 8
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 563.04 $851.55 $91.44
Conference 780.00 4 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 184.08 4
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 93.60 $427.65 $15.20
Break Room 8,736.00 4 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 2,061.70 4
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 1,048.32 $427.65 $170.25
Admin
Services
Coordinator
2,346.00 1 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
3lamp-El-IS-NLO 89 208.79 1
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 70.38 $110.42 $23.25
Traffic 2,346.00 4 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 553.66 4
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 281.52 $427.65 $45.72
Reports 2,346.00 4 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 553.66 4
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 281.52 $427.65 $45.72
Patrol
Sargent 2,346.00 6 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 830.48 6
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 422.28 $639.60 $68.58
Patrol
Sargent
Hallway
8,736.00 2 T8 2' 17w 2L NBF -
Existing 33 576.58 2
LED T8 Type C 2'
8w (11w) 2Lamp
4000K Espen
22 384.38 $229.90 $32.29
129 2,346.00 4 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 553.66 4
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 281.52 $427.65 $45.72
Corporal 2,346.00 4 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 553.66 4
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 281.52 $427.65 $45.72
I.T.2,346.00 2 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 276.83 2
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 140.76 $215.70 $22.86
Training
Room 2,346.00 8 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 1,107.31 8
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 563.04 $851.55 $91.44
Women's
Locker 8,736.00 10 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 5,154.24 10
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 2,620.80 $1,063.49 $425.62
Gym 8,736.00 5 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 2,577.12 5
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 1,310.40 $533.62 $212.81
Men's
Locker 8,736.00 17 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 8,762.21 17
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 4,455.36 $1,805.31 $723.55
Jail 8,736.00 8 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 4,123.39 8
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 2,096.64 $851.55 $340.49
Utility 521.40 1 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 30.76 1
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 15.64 $109.72 $2.54
Interview 2,346.00 1 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
3lamp-El-IS-NLO 89 208.79 1
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 70.38 $110.42 $23.25
Investigation 8,736.00 3 T8 2' 17w 2L NBF -
Existing 33 864.86 3
LED T8 Type C 2'
8w (11w) 2Lamp
4000K Espen
22 576.58 $342.97 $48.43
Investigation 2,346.00 10 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
3lamp-El-IS-NLO 89 2,087.94 10
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 703.80 $1,070.49 $232.54
191 2,346.00 2 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
3lamp-El-IS-NLO 89 417.59 2
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 140.76 $217.10 $46.51
Evidence 8,736.00 5 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
3lamp-El-IS-NLO 89 3,887.52 5
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 1,310.40 $856.40 $432.96
Rooftop
Staircase 8,736.00 6 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 3,092.54 6
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 1Lamp 4000K
Espen
15 786.24 $525.37 $387.46
Rooftop 4,004.00 2 MH 150w 1L 190 1,521.52 2
LED Flood 30w (70-
150w HID) 5000K
Knuckle ATG
32 256.26 $427.09 $202.44
Rooftop
rooms 364.98 11 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 236.87 11
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 120.44 $1,169.47 $19.56
Garage 8,736.00 23 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 11,854.75 23
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 6,027.84 $4,354.88 $978.92
Metermaid
office 2,346.00 4 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 553.66 4
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 281.52 $427.65 $45.72
Ammo Room 1,094.94 4 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 258.41 4
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 2Lamp 4000K
Espen
30 131.39 $427.65 $21.34
East
Staircase 8,736.00 3 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 1,546.27 3
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 1Lamp 4000K
Espen
15 393.12 $264.56 $193.73
AHO: Annual Avg. Hours of Operation kWh: Annual kiloWatt Hours Watts: Watts as published by the manufacturer
Materials List for
Burlingame Police Station
The chart below is a summary of materials required for your retrofit. This table shows wattage, quantity, kWh, and price per unit for all involved
materials.
Equipment Qty Equipment Cost*Labor Hrs/Cost*
Driver LED T8 1L-2L Espen 208 $15.63 0.33/$49.50
LED T8 4' 15w 4000K Espen 390 $10.61 0.05/$7.50
Recycle: Fluorescent Lamps 4' or Shorter 444 $0.70 0.00/$0.00
Recycle: Non-PCB Ballast from 4' or Shorter 204 $0.00 0.00/$0.00
LED T8 2' 8w (11w) 4000K Espen 12 $13.23 0.05/$7.50
Driver LED T8 3L-4L Espen 2 $26.04 0.33/$49.50
LED Flood 30w (70-150w HID) 5000K Knuckle ATG 2 $88.89 0.75/$112.50
Recycle: HID Lamps 2 $2.50 0.00/$0.00
Recycle: Ballast from HID 2 $0.00 0.00/$0.00
* Per Item Cost
Customer Work Order Agreement
By signing this Customer Work Order Agreement (“Agreement”), Customer (the business entity listed above) agrees to the following:
Measures and Incentives:
I have reviewed the Energy Efficiency Proposal (“Proposal”) provided by Ecology Action (“Implementer”), a copy of which is attached to this
Agreement. I agree that to the best of my knowledge the schedule of operations contained in the Proposal accurately describes the hours of
operation at the facility listed above. I understand that the energy efficiency measures described in the Proposal represent an estimate of
expected energy savings, and that Implementer does not guarantee a specific level of cost savings from the implementation of the proposed
energy efficiency measures (collectively, the “ Project”).
Implementer is implementing the Project on the Customer’s behalf. Incentives for energy savings are calculated using the appropriate baseline
to exceed California Title 20 and Title 24 standards. New products ordered, purchased or installed prior to 1/1/16 or after 12/15/1 8 do not
qualify for an incentive. Resale products, products leased, rebuilt, rented, received from warranty of insurance claims, exchanged, won as a
prize or new parts installed in existing products do not qualify for Incentives. PG&E is not responsible for the economic and technical feasibility,
operational capability, and reliability of the Project.
Program Dates:
To be eligible for incentives, all projects must be installed and completed before December 14, 2018. Funding of incentives is distributed on a
first-come first-served basis.San Mateo County Energy Watch is funded by California ratepayers under the auspices of the California Public
Utilities Commission (“CPUC”). I have received information about other programs offering rebates or services for measures covered by San
Mateo County Energy Watch.
Project Commitment and Installation Completion Process:
I understand that I must have a signed Site Access Agreement on File to confirm Program Eligibility and a signed Customer Agreement to initiate
installation. For each work order, I agree to have Ecology Action contact (a) participating contractor(s) (“Contractor”) who will perform a walk-
through inspection, review the scope of the Projects outlined in the Report, and schedule the Project installation at a time that is mutually
agreeable to all parties. I understand that the total installed costs for the components of the Project are described in the attached listing of
individual work orders. Costs for correcting electrical code violations are not included in the costs quoted above and are not covered by the
Program. Any electrical code violations found during the Contractors’ inspections or during installation will be cause for the Contractors to stop
work on the affected item(s) until such violations are corrected. I understand that the contractor walk- through may result in a Change Order
due to specification or electrical code violations and that I will be notified and approve of any cost adjustments before additional work is
completed.
I will sign an agreement with each Contractor, which shall be solely between the Contractor and Customer, for the out-of-pocket portion of the
Project costs. I understand that San Mateo County Energy Watch will provide a rebate, detailed in the work order listing, to offset the cost of
the Project installations, and the rebate will be paid directly to the Contractors. I understand that I am responsible for paying the balance of the
agreed-to contract price after rebate payment and that payment is due to the Contractor upon completion of the individual work order. At the
completion of the project, I agree to sign the Customer Acceptance/Project Completion Form presented by the contractor on Ecology Action’s
behalf.
The value of Incentives and direct installations is taxable. Implementer will report incentives and direct installations greater than $600 to the IRS
unless you are exempt. Please consult your tax advisor concerning the taxability of incentives. The Customer, not the implementer, is
responsible for any taxes imposed as a result of your receipt of Incentives from this Program. Form 1099 will be issued for the Customer,
regardless of who the payee is, because the Customer receives the benefits of the Incentives.
General Terms And Conditions
1.Project Eligibility and Approval:PG&E in its sole discretion will determine the eligibility and approval of the energy efficiency of Measures
at the Customer’s site (Project). Eligibility requirements include and are not limited to, 1) Project site must receive gas and/or electric
service from PG&E; 2) Customer must be non-residential; 3) whether Measures to be installed satisfy incentive amounts; 4) inspections of
the Project site before and after the installation of Measures; 5) and any additional information or requirements request by PG&E to
implement and approve the Customers Project.
2.Feasibility:If applicable, PG&E’s and/or its consultant’s may review the design, construction, operation or maintenance of the Project,
Measures, Project documentation to determine eligibility, incentives and approval. PG&E’s review does not constitute any representation
as to the economic or technical feasibility, operational capability, or reliability of the Project or its Measures. Implementer is solely
responsible for the economic, technical feasibility, operational capability and reliability of the Project and its Measures.
3.Savings:Implementer is implementing the Project on Customer’s behalf and is solely responsible for ensuring Project savings are calculated
using the appropriate baseline, installed according to Customer’s specifications and is delivering the estimated savings. Customer
understands Incentives will be paid only for energy savings that exceed the California Title 20 and Title 24 standards, or industry standards
in the absence of applicable local, state or federal standards.
4.Funding:Implementer is receiving funds from Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) for this Project, but the Parties agree that PG&E is not liable
to either Party for any losses or damages, including incidental or consequential damages, arising from this Agreement. PG&E makes no
representation or warranty, and assumes no liability with respect to quality, safety, performance, or other aspect of any design, system or
appliance installed pursuant to this Agreement, and expressly disclaims any such representation, warranty or liability.
5.Incidental and Consequential Damages:BOTH PARTIES AGREE NEITHER PARTY SHALL BE LIABLE TO THE OTHER FOR ANY INCIDENTAL,
SPECIAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES.
6.Life of Product:Customer understands Incentive payments are based on related energy benefits over the life of the product. Customer
agrees if 1) Customer does not provide PG&E with 100% of the related benefits for the life of the product or a period of 5 years, whichever
is less, or 2) Customer ceases to be a distribution Customer of PG&E during said time period, Customer shall refund a prorated amount of
Incentive payment(s) to PG&E based on the actual period of time for which Customer provided the related energy benefits as an electric
Customer of PG&E.
7.Customers with self-generation capabilities:If Customer has existing onsite cogeneration or self-generation, Implementer shall not pay
Incentives for energy savings that exceed Customer’s annual energy usage from PG&E. KW, kWh and therm savings are limited to the
previous 12 months quantity of kW, kWh, and/or therms purchased from or delivered by the utility on the meter(s), serving the equipment
to be installed, for which the utility collects as directed by the CPUC. The previous 12 months are defined as the calendar year prior to the
date the Customer signed this Agreement (including usage from Standby Service and less savings associated with pending energy efficiency
applications). This policy is subject to change with 30 day written notice to Customer.
8.Incentives:Incentives, energy savings, and installation costs in the Agreement are ESTIMATES only and may vary upon verification and
completion of the Project approval process.
9.Incentive may not exceed Project cost:Customer must submit Project invoice(s) which include: vendor name/address/phone, itemized
listing of product(s) including quantity, product description(s), manufacturer, model #, and other identifying information as appropriate,
Project cost, date invoice paid or payment terms, and installation date.
10.If Tenant:If Customer is a tenant, Customer represents they have obtained the property owner’s permission to install the Measure(s) for
which Customer is applying for an Incentive payment..
11.Access and Verification Inspection:PG&E requires Project inspections and performance measurements to verify the incentive. These
inspections are not to determine any safety issues.Customer will allow, if requested, a representative from PG&E, CPUC, Implementer, or
any authorized subcontractor reasonable access to Facility to verify the installed product.
12.Compliance with Laws:Implementer shall comply with all federal, state, and municipal laws, ordinances, rules, orders, and regulations,
which apply to the implementation of this Project.
13.Advertising:Implementer and Customer agree not to use the names or identifying characteristics of the Customer’s Facility, Customer’s
name or Implementers name for published Project reports (except to fulfill reporting requirements to PG&E and/or the CPUC), advertising,
sales promotion or other publicity without written approval.
14.No Double-Dipping:Customer understands that Customer cannot receive Incentives for the same product, equipment or service from
more than one California investor-owned utility or third party Energy Efficiency program offering Incentives for the same product,
equipment, or service funded with CPUC. This prohibition applies three years prior to and three years after receiving Incentives for the
same product, equipment or service.
15.No Obligation:California consumers are not obligated to purchase any full fee service or other service not funded by this Program. This
Program is funded by California utility ratepayers under the auspices of the CPUC.Los consumidores en California no están obligados a
comprar servicios completos o adicionales que no esten cubiertos bajo este programa. Este programa está financiado por los usuarios de
servicios públicos en California bajo la jurisdicción de la Comisión de Servicios Públicos de California (CPUC).
16.Availability of Funds:This program is available on a first-come, first served basis until allocated funds are depleted. This Program may be
modified or terminated without notice.
17.CPUC Authority: There terms and conditions can be modified at any time in accordance with any directive of the CPUC and regulation of
PG&E. Any information, results and reports regarding this Agreement and Customer’s Project shall be made available to the CPUC.
18.Tax Liability: PG&E will report incentives greater than $600 as income on the IRS 1099 unless (1) the “Corporation” or “Exempt” tax status
box is marked.
Customer Approval
Burlingame Police Station
I have read and understood the Terms and Conditions. I certify that the information I have provided is true and correct.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed by their duly authorized representatives as of the
date set forth below.
As shown on the Opportunity At-A-Glance page,customer Out of Pocket Cost is $21,393.28.
Customer:San Mateo County Energy Watch
Customer Representative:Johnson Woo
501 Primrose Rd
Burlingame,CA 94010
Phone:(650) 558-7691
Email:jwoo@burlingame.org
Program Representative:Garvin Lee
Ecology Action
877 Cedar Street, Suite 240
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
Mobile:(415) 688-1123
Fax: (831) 427-1368
Email:glee@ecoact.org
\t1\
Customer Representative’s Title
\n1\
Program Representative’s Printed Name
Customer Representative’s Printed Name
\s1\
Program Representative’s Signature
Customer Representative’s Signature
\d1\
Date
Date
Energy Efficiency Proposal for
Burlingame Public Parking
Johnson Woo
Burlingame Public Parking
1208 Donnelly Ave
BURLINGAME,CA 94010
Greetings,
As an environmental leader in your community, your business is a great example of doing what’s right.
Participating in this utility-sponsored program is just another way for you to continue to be recognized for
running a sustainable and earth-friendly business. In simple language, the following personalized proposal
shows the value that an energy retrofit brings to you, to your business, and to the planet.
My job is to make sure that business owners like you get the energy efficiency guidance they need in a way
that makes being energy efficient easy for them. I’m available at your convenience to review the details of
this proposal and to answer any questions you might have. I’m looking forward to your approval to begin
work on this project immediately.
Sincerely,
Garvin Lee
Senior Energy Efficiency Consultant
Garvin Lee
Senior Energy Efficiency Consultant
(415) 688-1123
glee@ecoact.org
Fax:(831) 427-1368
Rachel Radcliffe
Senior Installation Manager
(510) 871-0781
rradcliffe@ecoact.org
Opportunity At-A-Glance for
Burlingame Public Parking
Your current, average electricity bill
$355/month
Your new, average electricity bill after upgrades
$124/month
Burlingame Public Parking Cost
Summary
Installation Cost (labor, materials and recycling)$9,777.81
Project Management Fee Waived
Rebate -$959.17
% of Project Covered by Rebate 10%
Net Project Cost $8,818.64
Simple Payback 3.17 Years
Simple Payback without Rebate 3.51 Years
Burlingame Public Parking
Project Impact Page
Your Long-term Savings
Timeframe Estimated Savings kWh
Monthly $231.84 497.44
1st Year $2,782.13 5,969.32
5 Years $13,910.65 29,847
$13,911
Saved
$2,782
$232 Saved
Saved
Monthly 1st Year 5 Years
Your Energy Efficient Measures
Work Order Materials Labor Fees Rebate Customer Cost
Burlingame Public
Parking MLTG $4,826.68 $4,801.13 $150.00 $959.17 $8,818.64
TOTAL $4,826.68 $4,801.13 $150.00 $959.17 $8,818.64
Environmental Benefits
By implementing the measures outlined in this proposal, you will :
Remove
1.15
passenger vehicles from the road
Save
11,452.64 kWh
which reduces your CO2 emissions
Sequester the equivalent of
16.84
acres of forest
The project cost is based on current equipment prices and rebate levels and is valid for a period of 14 days from the date presented.
*Note - Savings are estimated using standard engineering calculations and are based on the hours of operation as described to the surveyor. Depending on actual
usage as well as changes in your electric utility rate, your savings may be higher or lower. The savings indicated above are NOT guaranteed. Construction costs
may vary slightly depending on fixture quantities and unforeseen conditions.
**Note - Based on DEER property type and measure savings values from the CPUC, this project is deemed to deliver 5,969.32 kWh and 0.01 kW. The rebate
offered for the project is calculated based on the deemed savings values.
Burlingame Public Parking
Project Agreement Page
Your Project Schedule
Through this energy efficiency program, the entire process is managed for you including the assessment, installation and rebat e
processing.It really is that simple.
Proposal Signed
We will review your
proposal with you to
make sure that you
understand your energy
savings, rebates,
project utility bill
savings, and co-pay.
Installation Confirmed
We will select and
manage a contractor or
work alongside your
installation partner. You
will receive assistance
from Rachel Radcliffe,
who will manage your
project installation.
Please be available for
the initial project kick-off
call within 48 hours of
project acceptance.
Installation
We will oversee every
detail of the installation
of your equipment with
no disruption of service.
Our goal is to complete
the project within 30
days of receipt of
materials.
If you are managing
your own installation,
please be sure to notify
Rachel Radcliffe when
your project is complete.
Quality Control
We will schedule and
perform post-
installation assessments
to ensure that the
highest quality
standards have been
met. The rebate
payment will then be
released and any
applicable co-pay will be
collected.
Start Saving
After the project
completion, you will
begin to see the
benefits of your new
energy efficient
equipment. The savings
will accumulate month
after month, and you’ll
start to open your
energy bills with
excitement rather than
trepidation.
Recommendations &Savings Checklist for Burlingame
Public Parking
Existing Equipment Recommended Upgrade: Lighting
Area AHO Qty Description Watts kWh Qty Description Watts kWh Cost Without
Rebate Estimated Savings
Exterior 8,736.00 16 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
4lamp-El-IS-NLO 112 15,654.91 16 LED Strip 8ft 46w
4000K DECO 46 6,429.70 $3,722.68 $2,384.72
Exterior 4,004.00 8 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
2lamp-El-IS-NLO 59 1,889.89 8 LED Strip 8ft 46w
4000K DECO 46 1,473.47 $1,865.14 $107.64
Exterior 5,109.72 15 CFL 45W Fixture
Existing 45 3,449.06 15
LED Wall Pack 28w
5000K Full Cut-off
ATG
28 2,146.08 $3,573.20 $208.48
Exterior 4,004.00 2 CFL 26W Fixture
Existing 26 208.21 2
LED Downlight Can
Retrofit for
Incandescent 6" 12w
3000K Green
Creative
12 96.10 $306.13 $17.94
Elevator 8,736.00 1 T8-4'-32w-1st Gen-
3lamp-El-IS-NLO 89 777.50 1
LED T8 Type C 4'
15w 3Lamp 4000K
Espen
45 393.12 $310.66 $63.35
AHO: Annual Avg. Hours of Operation kWh: Annual kiloWatt Hours Watts: Watts as published by the manufacturer
Materials List for
Burlingame Public Parking
The chart below is a summary of materials required for your retrofit. This table shows wattage, quantity, kWh, and price per unit for all involved
materials.
Equipment Qty Equipment Cost*Labor Hrs/Cost*
LED Strip 8ft 46w 4000K DECO 24 $106.20 0.75/$112.50
Recycle: Fluorescent Lamps 4' or Shorter 83 $0.70 0.00/$0.00
Recycle: Non-PCB Ballast from 4' or Shorter 41 $0.00 0.00/$0.00
LED Wall Pack 28w 5000K Full Cut-off ATG 15 $112.84 0.75/$112.50
CFL 45W Fixture Existing 15 $0.00 0.00/$0.00
Recycle: CFL Screw-in 17 $1.00 0.00/$0.00
Driver LED T8 3L-4L Espen 1 $26.04 1.00/$150.00
LED T8 4' 15w 4000K Espen 3 $10.61 0.05/$7.50
LED Downlight Can Retrofit for Incandescent 6" 12w 3000K Green Creative 2 $35.00 0.66/$99.00
CFL 26W Fixture Existing 2 $0.00 0.00/$0.00
* Per Item Cost
Customer Work Order Agreement
By signing this Customer Work Order Agreement (“Agreement”), Customer (the business entity listed above) agrees to the following:
Measures and Incentives:
I have reviewed the Energy Efficiency Proposal (“Proposal”) provided by Ecology Action (“Implementer”), a copy of which is attached to this
Agreement. I agree that to the best of my knowledge the schedule of operations contained in the Proposal accurately describes the hours of
operation at the facility listed above. I understand that the energy efficiency measures described in the Proposal represent an estimate of
expected energy savings, and that Implementer does not guarantee a specific level of cost savings from the implementation of the proposed
energy efficiency measures (collectively, the “ Project”).
Implementer is implementing the Project on the Customer’s behalf. Incentives for energy savings are calculated using the appropriate baseline
to exceed California Title 20 and Title 24 standards. New products ordered, purchased or installed prior to 1/1/16 or after 12/15/1 8 do not
qualify for an incentive. Resale products, products leased, rebuilt, rented, received from warranty of insurance claims, exchanged, won as a
prize or new parts installed in existing products do not qualify for Incentives. PG&E is not responsible for the economic and technical feasibility,
operational capability, and reliability of the Project.
Program Dates:
To be eligible for incentives, all projects must be installed and completed before December 14, 2018. Funding of incentives is distributed on a
first-come first-served basis.San Mateo County Energy Watch is funded by California ratepayers under the auspices of the California Public
Utilities Commission (“CPUC”). I have received information about other programs offering rebates or services for measures covered by San
Mateo County Energy Watch.
Project Commitment and Installation Completion Process:
I understand that I must have a signed Site Access Agreement on File to confirm Program Eligibility and a signed Customer Agreement to initiate
installation. For each work order, I agree to have Ecology Action contact (a) participating contractor(s) (“Contractor”) who will perform a walk-
through inspection, review the scope of the Projects outlined in the Report, and schedule the Project installation at a time that is mutually
agreeable to all parties. I understand that the total installed costs for the components of the Project are described in the attached listing of
individual work orders. Costs for correcting electrical code violations are not included in the costs quoted above and are not covered by the
Program. Any electrical code violations found during the Contractors’ inspections or during installation will be cause for the Contractors to stop
work on the affected item(s) until such violations are corrected. I understand that the contractor walk- through may result in a Change Order
due to specification or electrical code violations and that I will be notified and approve of any cost adjustments before additional work is
completed.
I will sign an agreement with each Contractor, which shall be solely between the Contractor and Customer, for the out-of-pocket portion of the
Project costs. I understand that San Mateo County Energy Watch will provide a rebate, detailed in the work order listing, to offset the cost of
the Project installations, and the rebate will be paid directly to the Contractors. I understand that I am responsible for paying the balance of the
agreed-to contract price after rebate payment and that payment is due to the Contractor upon completion of the individual work order. At the
completion of the project, I agree to sign the Customer Acceptance/Project Completion Form presented by the contractor on Ecology Action’s
behalf.
The value of Incentives and direct installations is taxable. Implementer will report incentives and direct installations greater than $600 to the IRS
unless you are exempt. Please consult your tax advisor concerning the taxability of incentives. The Customer, not the implementer, is
responsible for any taxes imposed as a result of your receipt of Incentives from this Program. Form 1099 will be issued for the Customer,
regardless of who the payee is, because the Customer receives the benefits of the Incentives.
General Terms And Conditions
1.Project Eligibility and Approval:PG&E in its sole discretion will determine the eligibility and approval of the energy efficiency of Measures
at the Customer’s site (Project). Eligibility requirements include and are not limited to, 1) Project site must receive gas and/or electric
service from PG&E; 2) Customer must be non-residential; 3) whether Measures to be installed satisfy incentive amounts; 4) inspections of
the Project site before and after the installation of Measures; 5) and any additional information or requirements request by PG&E to
implement and approve the Customers Project.
2.Feasibility:If applicable, PG&E’s and/or its consultant’s may review the design, construction, operation or maintenance of the Project,
Measures, Project documentation to determine eligibility, incentives and approval. PG&E’s review does not constitute any representation
as to the economic or technical feasibility, operational capability, or reliability of the Project or its Measures. Implementer is solely
responsible for the economic, technical feasibility, operational capability and reliability of the Project and its Measures.
3.Savings:Implementer is implementing the Project on Customer’s behalf and is solely responsible for ensuring Project savings are calculated
using the appropriate baseline, installed according to Customer’s specifications and is delivering the estimated savings. Customer
understands Incentives will be paid only for energy savings that exceed the California Title 20 and Title 24 standards, or industry standards
in the absence of applicable local, state or federal standards.
4.Funding:Implementer is receiving funds from Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) for this Project, but the Parties agree that PG&E is not liable
to either Party for any losses or damages, including incidental or consequential damages, arising from this Agreement. PG&E makes no
representation or warranty, and assumes no liability with respect to quality, safety, performance, or other aspect of any design, system or
appliance installed pursuant to this Agreement, and expressly disclaims any such representation, warranty or liability.
5.Incidental and Consequential Damages:BOTH PARTIES AGREE NEITHER PARTY SHALL BE LIABLE TO THE OTHER FOR ANY INCIDENTAL,
SPECIAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES.
6.Life of Product:Customer understands Incentive payments are based on related energy benefits over the life of the product. Customer
agrees if 1) Customer does not provide PG&E with 100% of the related benefits for the life of the product or a period of 5 years, whichever
is less, or 2) Customer ceases to be a distribution Customer of PG&E during said time period, Customer shall refund a prorated amount of
Incentive payment(s) to PG&E based on the actual period of time for which Customer provided the related energy benefits as an electric
Customer of PG&E.
7.Customers with self-generation capabilities:If Customer has existing onsite cogeneration or self-generation, Implementer shall not pay
Incentives for energy savings that exceed Customer’s annual energy usage from PG&E. KW, kWh and therm savings are limited to the
previous 12 months quantity of kW, kWh, and/or therms purchased from or delivered by the utility on the meter(s), serving the equipment
to be installed, for which the utility collects as directed by the CPUC. The previous 12 months are defined as the calendar year prior to the
date the Customer signed this Agreement (including usage from Standby Service and less savings associated with pending energy efficiency
applications). This policy is subject to change with 30 day written notice to Customer.
8.Incentives:Incentives, energy savings, and installation costs in the Agreement are ESTIMATES only and may vary upon verification and
completion of the Project approval process.
9.Incentive may not exceed Project cost:Customer must submit Project invoice(s) which include: vendor name/address/phone, itemized
listing of product(s) including quantity, product description(s), manufacturer, model #, and other identifying information as appropriate,
Project cost, date invoice paid or payment terms, and installation date.
10.If Tenant:If Customer is a tenant, Customer represents they have obtained the property owner’s permission to install the Measure(s) for
which Customer is applying for an Incentive payment..
11.Access and Verification Inspection:PG&E requires Project inspections and performance measurements to verify the incentive. These
inspections are not to determine any safety issues.Customer will allow, if requested, a representative from PG&E, CPUC, Implementer, or
any authorized subcontractor reasonable access to Facility to verify the installed product.
12.Compliance with Laws:Implementer shall comply with all federal, state, and municipal laws, ordinances, rules, orders, and regulations,
which apply to the implementation of this Project.
13.Advertising:Implementer and Customer agree not to use the names or identifying characteristics of the Customer’s Facility, Customer’s
name or Implementers name for published Project reports (except to fulfill reporting requirements to PG&E and/or the CPUC), advertising,
sales promotion or other publicity without written approval.
14.No Double-Dipping:Customer understands that Customer cannot receive Incentives for the same product, equipment or service from
more than one California investor-owned utility or third party Energy Efficiency program offering Incentives for the same product,
equipment, or service funded with CPUC. This prohibition applies three years prior to and three years after receiving Incentives for the
same product, equipment or service.
15.No Obligation:California consumers are not obligated to purchase any full fee service or other service not funded by this Program. This
Program is funded by California utility ratepayers under the auspices of the CPUC.Los consumidores en California no están obligados a
comprar servicios completos o adicionales que no esten cubiertos bajo este programa. Este programa está financiado por los usuarios de
servicios públicos en California bajo la jurisdicción de la Comisión de Servicios Públicos de California (CPUC).
16.Availability of Funds:This program is available on a first-come, first served basis until allocated funds are depleted. This Program may be
modified or terminated without notice.
17.CPUC Authority: There terms and conditions can be modified at any time in accordance with any directive of the CPUC and regulation of
PG&E. Any information, results and reports regarding this Agreement and Customer’s Project shall be made available to the CPUC.
18.Tax Liability: PG&E will report incentives greater than $600 as income on the IRS 1099 unless (1) the “Corporation” or “Exempt” tax status
box is marked.
Customer Approval
Burlingame Public Parking
I have read and understood the Terms and Conditions. I certify that the information I have provided is true and correct.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed by their duly authorized representatives as of the
date set forth below.
As shown on the Opportunity At-A-Glance page,customer Out of Pocket Cost is $8,818.64.
Customer:San Mateo County Energy Watch
Customer Representative:Johnson Woo
501 Primrose Rd
Burlingame,CA 94010
Phone:(650) 558-7691
Email:jwoo@burlingame.org
Program Representative:Garvin Lee
Ecology Action
877 Cedar Street, Suite 240
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
Mobile:(415) 688-1123
Fax: (831) 427-1368
Email:glee@ecoact.org
\t1\
Customer Representative’s Title
\n1\
Program Representative’s Printed Name
Customer Representative’s Printed Name
\s1\
Program Representative’s Signature
Customer Representative’s Signature
\d1\
Date
Date
Energy Efficiency Proposal for
Burlingame PW Building E
Johnson Woo
Burlingame PW Building E
1391 Rollins Rd
BURLINGAME,CA 94010
Greetings,
As an environmental leader in your community, your business is a great example of doing what’s right.
Participating in this utility-sponsored program is just another way for you to continue to be recognized for
running a sustainable and earth-friendly business. In simple language, the following personalized proposal
shows the value that an energy retrofit brings to you, to your business, and to the planet.
My job is to make sure that business owners like you get the energy efficiency guidance they need in a way
that makes being energy efficient easy for them. I’m available at your convenience to review the details of
this proposal and to answer any questions you might have. I’m looking forward to your approval to begin
work on this project immediately.
Sincerely,
Garvin Lee
Senior Energy Efficiency Consultant
Garvin Lee
Senior Energy Efficiency Consultant
(415) 688-1123
glee@ecoact.org
Fax:(831) 427-1368
Rachel Radcliffe
Senior Installation Manager
(510) 871-0781
rradcliffe@ecoact.org
Opportunity At-A-Glance for
Burlingame PW Building E
Your current, average electricity bill
$70/month
Your new, average electricity bill after upgrades
$64/month
Burlingame PW Building E Cost
Summary
Installation Cost (labor, materials and recycling)$8,097.42
Project Management Fee Waived
Rebate -$82.00
% of Project Covered by Rebate 1%
Net Project Cost $8,015.42
Simple Payback 100.09 Years
Simple Payback without Rebate 101.12 Years
Burlingame PW Building E
Project Impact Page
Your Long-term Savings
Timeframe Estimated Savings kWh
Monthly $6.67 42.71
1st Year $80.08 512.50
5 Years $400.40 2,563
$400
Saved
$80
$7 Saved
Saved
Monthly 1st Year 5 Years
Your Energy Efficient Measures
Work Order Materials Labor Fees Rebate Customer Cost
Burlingame PW
Building E MLTG $3,131.17 $4,331.25 $635.00 $82.00 $8,015.42
TOTAL $3,131.17 $4,331.25 $635.00 $82.00 $8,015.42
Environmental Benefits
By implementing the measures outlined in this proposal, you will :
Remove
0.05
passenger vehicles from the road
Save
500.50 kWh
which reduces your CO2 emissions
Sequester the equivalent of
0.74
acres of forest
The project cost is based on current equipment prices and rebate levels and is valid for a period of 14 days from the date presented.
*Note - Savings are estimated using standard engineering calculations and are based on the hours of operation as described to the surveyor. Depending on actual
usage as well as changes in your electric utility rate, your savings may be higher or lower. The savings indicated above are NOT guaranteed. Construction costs
may vary slightly depending on fixture quantities and unforeseen conditions.
**Note - Based on DEER property type and measure savings values from the CPUC, this project is deemed to deliver 512.50 kWh and 0.00 kW. The rebate offered
for the project is calculated based on the deemed savings values.
Burlingame PW Building E
Project Agreement Page
Your Project Schedule
Through this energy efficiency program, the entire process is managed for you including the assessment, installation and rebat e
processing.It really is that simple.
Proposal Signed
We will review your
proposal with you to
make sure that you
understand your energy
savings, rebates,
project utility bill
savings, and co-pay.
Installation Confirmed
We will select and
manage a contractor or
work alongside your
installation partner. You
will receive assistance
from Rachel Radcliffe,
who will manage your
project installation.
Please be available for
the initial project kick-off
call within 48 hours of
project acceptance.
Installation
We will oversee every
detail of the installation
of your equipment with
no disruption of service.
Our goal is to complete
the project within 30
days of receipt of
materials.
If you are managing
your own installation,
please be sure to notify
Rachel Radcliffe when
your project is complete.
Quality Control
We will schedule and
perform post-
installation assessments
to ensure that the
highest quality
standards have been
met. The rebate
payment will then be
released and any
applicable co-pay will be
collected.
Start Saving
After the project
completion, you will
begin to see the
benefits of your new
energy efficient
equipment. The savings
will accumulate month
after month, and you’ll
start to open your
energy bills with
excitement rather than
trepidation.
Recommendations &Savings Checklist for Burlingame PW
Building E
Existing Equipment Recommended Upgrade: Lighting
Area AHO Qty Description Watts kWh Qty Description Watts kWh Cost Without
Rebate Estimated Savings
Exterior 4,004.00 25 CFL 45W Fixture
Existing 45 4,504.50 25
LED Canopy 40w
(70-150w HID)
5000K ATG
40 4,004.00 $8,097.42 $80.08
AHO: Annual Avg. Hours of Operation kWh: Annual kiloWatt Hours Watts: Watts as published by the manufacturer
Materials List for
Burlingame PW Building E
The chart below is a summary of materials required for your retrofit. This table shows wattage, quantity, kWh, and price per unit for all involved
materials.
Equipment Qty Equipment Cost*Labor Hrs/Cost*
LED Canopy 40w (70-150w HID) 5000K ATG 25 $114.25 0.75/$112.50
CFL 45W Fixture Existing 25 $0.00 0.00/$0.00
Recycle: CFL Screw-in 25 $1.00 0.00/$0.00
* Per Item Cost
Customer Work Order Agreement
By signing this Customer Work Order Agreement (“Agreement”), Customer (the business entity listed above) agrees to the following:
Measures and Incentives:
I have reviewed the Energy Efficiency Proposal (“Proposal”) provided by Ecology Action (“Implementer”), a copy of which is attached to this
Agreement. I agree that to the best of my knowledge the schedule of operations contained in the Proposal accurately describes the hours of
operation at the facility listed above. I understand that the energy efficiency measures described in the Proposal represent an estimate of
expected energy savings, and that Implementer does not guarantee a specific level of cost savings from the implementation of the proposed
energy efficiency measures (collectively, the “ Project”).
Implementer is implementing the Project on the Customer’s behalf. Incentives for energy savings are calculated using the appropriate baseline
to exceed California Title 20 and Title 24 standards. New products ordered, purchased or installed prior to 1/1/16 or after 12/15/1 8 do not
qualify for an incentive. Resale products, products leased, rebuilt, rented, received from warranty of insurance claims, exchanged, won as a
prize or new parts installed in existing products do not qualify for Incentives. PG&E is not responsible for the economic and technical feasibility,
operational capability, and reliability of the Project.
Program Dates:
To be eligible for incentives, all projects must be installed and completed before December 14, 2018. Funding of incentives is distributed on a
first-come first-served basis.San Mateo County Energy Watch is funded by California ratepayers under the auspices of the California Public
Utilities Commission (“CPUC”). I have received information about other programs offering rebates or services for measures covered by San
Mateo County Energy Watch.
Project Commitment and Installation Completion Process:
I understand that I must have a signed Site Access Agreement on File to confirm Program Eligibility and a signed Customer Agreement to initiate
installation. For each work order, I agree to have Ecology Action contact (a) participating contractor(s) (“Contractor”) who will perform a walk-
through inspection, review the scope of the Projects outlined in the Report, and schedule the Project installation at a time that is mutually
agreeable to all parties. I understand that the total installed costs for the components of the Project are described in the attached listing of
individual work orders. Costs for correcting electrical code violations are not included in the costs quoted above and are not covered by the
Program. Any electrical code violations found during the Contractors’ inspections or during installation will be cause for the Contractors to stop
work on the affected item(s) until such violations are corrected. I understand that the contractor walk- through may result in a Change Order
due to specification or electrical code violations and that I will be notified and approve of any cost adjustments before additional work is
completed.
I will sign an agreement with each Contractor, which shall be solely between the Contractor and Customer, for the out-of-pocket portion of the
Project costs. I understand that San Mateo County Energy Watch will provide a rebate, detailed in the work order listing, to offset the cost of
the Project installations, and the rebate will be paid directly to the Contractors. I understand that I am responsible for paying the balance of the
agreed-to contract price after rebate payment and that payment is due to the Contractor upon completion of the individual work order. At the
completion of the project, I agree to sign the Customer Acceptance/Project Completion Form presented by the contractor on Ecology Action’s
behalf.
The value of Incentives and direct installations is taxable. Implementer will report incentives and direct installations greater than $600 to the IRS
unless you are exempt. Please consult your tax advisor concerning the taxability of incentives. The Customer, not the implementer, is
responsible for any taxes imposed as a result of your receipt of Incentives from this Program. Form 1099 will be issued for the Customer,
regardless of who the payee is, because the Customer receives the benefits of the Incentives.
General Terms And Conditions
1.Project Eligibility and Approval:PG&E in its sole discretion will determine the eligibility and approval of the energy efficiency of Measures
at the Customer’s site (Project). Eligibility requirements include and are not limited to, 1) Project site must receive gas and/or electric
service from PG&E; 2) Customer must be non-residential; 3) whether Measures to be installed satisfy incentive amounts; 4) inspections of
the Project site before and after the installation of Measures; 5) and any additional information or requirements request by PG&E to
implement and approve the Customers Project.
2.Feasibility:If applicable, PG&E’s and/or its consultant’s may review the design, construction, operation or maintenance of the Project,
Measures, Project documentation to determine eligibility, incentives and approval. PG&E’s review does not constitute any representation
as to the economic or technical feasibility, operational capability, or reliability of the Project or its Measures. Implementer is solely
responsible for the economic, technical feasibility, operational capability and reliability of the Project and its Measures.
3.Savings:Implementer is implementing the Project on Customer’s behalf and is solely responsible for ensuring Project savings are calculated
using the appropriate baseline, installed according to Customer’s specifications and is delivering the estimated savings. Customer
understands Incentives will be paid only for energy savings that exceed the California Title 20 and Title 24 standards, or industry standards
in the absence of applicable local, state or federal standards.
4.Funding:Implementer is receiving funds from Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) for this Project, but the Parties agree that PG&E is not liable
to either Party for any losses or damages, including incidental or consequential damages, arising from this Agreement. PG&E makes no
representation or warranty, and assumes no liability with respect to quality, safety, performance, or other aspect of any design, system or
appliance installed pursuant to this Agreement, and expressly disclaims any such representation, warranty or liability.
5.Incidental and Consequential Damages:BOTH PARTIES AGREE NEITHER PARTY SHALL BE LIABLE TO THE OTHER FOR ANY INCIDENTAL,
SPECIAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES.
6.Life of Product:Customer understands Incentive payments are based on related energy benefits over the life of the product. Customer
agrees if 1) Customer does not provide PG&E with 100% of the related benefits for the life of the product or a period of 5 years, whichever
is less, or 2) Customer ceases to be a distribution Customer of PG&E during said time period, Customer shall refund a prorated amount of
Incentive payment(s) to PG&E based on the actual period of time for which Customer provided the related energy benefits as an electric
Customer of PG&E.
7.Customers with self-generation capabilities:If Customer has existing onsite cogeneration or self-generation, Implementer shall not pay
Incentives for energy savings that exceed Customer’s annual energy usage from PG&E. KW, kWh and therm savings are limited to the
previous 12 months quantity of kW, kWh, and/or therms purchased from or delivered by the utility on the meter(s), serving the equipment
to be installed, for which the utility collects as directed by the CPUC. The previous 12 months are defined as the calendar year prior to the
date the Customer signed this Agreement (including usage from Standby Service and less savings associated with pending energy efficiency
applications). This policy is subject to change with 30 day written notice to Customer.
8.Incentives:Incentives, energy savings, and installation costs in the Agreement are ESTIMATES only and may vary upon verification and
completion of the Project approval process.
9.Incentive may not exceed Project cost:Customer must submit Project invoice(s) which include: vendor name/address/phone, itemized
listing of product(s) including quantity, product description(s), manufacturer, model #, and other identifying information as appropriate,
Project cost, date invoice paid or payment terms, and installation date.
10.If Tenant:If Customer is a tenant, Customer represents they have obtained the property owner’s permission to install the Measure(s) for
which Customer is applying for an Incentive payment..
11.Access and Verification Inspection:PG&E requires Project inspections and performance measurements to verify the incentive. These
inspections are not to determine any safety issues.Customer will allow, if requested, a representative from PG&E, CPUC, Implementer, or
any authorized subcontractor reasonable access to Facility to verify the installed product.
12.Compliance with Laws:Implementer shall comply with all federal, state, and municipal laws, ordinances, rules, orders, and regulations,
which apply to the implementation of this Project.
13.Advertising:Implementer and Customer agree not to use the names or identifying characteristics of the Customer’s Facility, Customer’s
name or Implementers name for published Project reports (except to fulfill reporting requirements to PG&E and/or the CPUC), advertising,
sales promotion or other publicity without written approval.
14.No Double-Dipping:Customer understands that Customer cannot receive Incentives for the same product, equipment or service from
more than one California investor-owned utility or third party Energy Efficiency program offering Incentives for the same product,
equipment, or service funded with CPUC. This prohibition applies three years prior to and three years after receiving Incentives for the
same product, equipment or service.
15.No Obligation:California consumers are not obligated to purchase any full fee service or other service not funded by this Program. This
Program is funded by California utility ratepayers under the auspices of the CPUC.Los consumidores en California no están obligados a
comprar servicios completos o adicionales que no esten cubiertos bajo este programa. Este programa está financiado por los usuarios de
servicios públicos en California bajo la jurisdicción de la Comisión de Servicios Públicos de California (CPUC).
16.Availability of Funds:This program is available on a first-come, first served basis until allocated funds are depleted. This Program may be
modified or terminated without notice.
17.CPUC Authority: There terms and conditions can be modified at any time in accordance with any directive of the CPUC and regulation of
PG&E. Any information, results and reports regarding this Agreement and Customer’s Project shall be made available to the CPUC.
18.Tax Liability: PG&E will report incentives greater than $600 as income on the IRS 1099 unless (1) the “Corporation” or “Exempt” tax status
box is marked.
Customer Approval
Burlingame PW Building E
I have read and understood the Terms and Conditions. I certify that the information I have provided is true and correct.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed by their duly authorized representatives as of the
date set forth below.
As shown on the Opportunity At-A-Glance page,customer Out of Pocket Cost is $8,015.42.
Customer:San Mateo County Energy Watch
Customer Representative:Johnson Woo
501 Primrose Rd
Burlingame,CA 94010
Phone:(650) 558-7691
Email:jwoo@burlingame.org
Program Representative:Garvin Lee
Ecology Action
877 Cedar Street, Suite 240
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
Mobile:(415) 688-1123
Fax: (831) 427-1368
Email:glee@ecoact.org
\t1\
Customer Representative’s Title
\n1\
Program Representative’s Printed Name
Customer Representative’s Printed Name
\s1\
Program Representative’s Signature
Customer Representative’s Signature
\d1\
Date
Date
U 39 San Francisco, California
Original Cal. P.U.C. Sheet No. 41731-E
Electric Sample Form No. 79-1194 Sheet 1 (N)
Local Agency And District Customers On-Bill Financing Loan Agreement (N)
(Continued)
Advice 5214-E Issued by Date Filed January 11, 2018
Decision Robert S. Kenney Effective February 10, 2018
Vice President, Regulatory Affairs Resolution
Please Refer to Attached
Sample Form
LOCAL AGENCY AND DISTRICT
CUSTOMERS
ON-BILL FINANCING LOAN AGREEMENT
Automated Document – Preliminary Statement Part A Page 1 of 6
Form 79-1194
Advice 3926-G/5214-E
January 2018
The undersigned Local Agency or District1 Customer (“Customer”) has contracted for the
provision of energy efficiency/demand response equipment and services (the “Work”) which
qualify for one or more of PG&E’s applicable rebate or incentive programs. Subject to the
conditions (including the process for Adjustment and preconditions to funding) set forth below,
Pacific Gas & Electric Company (“PG&E”) shall extend a loan (the “Loan”) to Customer in the
amount of the loan balance (the “Loan Balance”) pursuant to the terms of this On-Bill Financing
Loan Agreement (“Loan Agreement”) and PG&E’s rate schedules E-OBF and/or G-OBF, as
applicable (the “Schedule”).
To request the Loan, Customer has submitted a completed On-Bill Financing Application and
associated documentation as required by PG&E (the “Application”). Collectively the Application
and this Loan Agreement (including any Adjustment hereunder) comprise the “Agreement".
1. Customer shall arrange for its Contractor, as identified at the end of this Agreement
(“Contractor”), to provide the Work as described in the Application.
2. The estimated Loan Balance is set forth below. The total cost of the Work as installed,
rebate/incentive for qualifying energy efficiency measures, Loan Balance, monthly
payment, and loan term specified in this Loan Agreement may be adjusted, if necessary,
after the Work and the post-installation inspection described in the Application and/or
herein are completed (the “Adjustment”). The Adjustment will be calculated using the
actual total cost of the Work, as installed, and the estimated energy savings (as
described in the Application) of such Work. In no event will the Loan Balance be
increased without Customer’s written consent, even if Customer is eligible for such
increased Loan Balance. Moreover, in no event will the Loan Balance exceed the
maximum loan amount stipulated in the Application. Customer understands that in order
to be eligible for the Loan, the initial Loan Balance for Work may not fall below the
minimum loan amount, nor may the payback period exceed the maximum payback
period. Accordingly, if after the Adjustment, the Loan Balance falls below the
minimum loan amount or if the simple payback period exceeds the program
maximum payback period, each as described in the Application, PG&E shall have
no obligation to extend the Loan, as the Work would not meet program
requirements. The Adjustment described in this paragraph will be communicated to the
Customer in writing and will automatically become part of this Loan Agreement, ex cept
that any proposed increase in the Loan Balance will only become part of this Loan
Agreement upon Customer’s written consent to such increase.
3. PG&E shall have no liability in connection with, and makes no warranties,
expressed or implied, regarding the Work. The Parties acknowledge and agree that
PG&E is only providing the Local Agency or District cited here with financing. The
Customer has independently hired contractors ("Local Agency or District Contractors") to
perform the work on behalf of the Customer to qualify for financing. The Customer
acknowledges and agrees that the Local Agency or District Contractors are not third
party beneficiaries to this agreement between the Customer and PG&E. To the extent
authorized by law and subject to appropriation of the Legislature, the Customer agrees
that it will look only to Local Agency or District Contractors for any claims related to the
installed equipment or its performance and that PG&E shall have no responsibility or
liability, except for the payment of the loan proceeds, and the Customer shall indemnify
PG&E for any claims made by the Local Agency or District Contractors against PG&E.
1 Local Agency or District as defined in California Government Code §50001 and §58004.
LOCAL AGENCY AND DISTRICT
CUSTOMERS
ON-BILL FINANCING LOAN AGREEMENT
Automated Document – Preliminary Statement Part A Page 2 of 6
Form 79-1194
Advice 3926-G/5214-E
January 2018
4. Customer represents and warrants that (a) Customer is receiving this Loan solely for
Work obtained in connection with Customer’s business, and not for personal, family or
household purposes; (b) Customer, if not an individual or a government agency, is duly
organized, validly existing and in good standing under the laws of its state of formation,
and has full power and authority to enter into this Agreement and to carry out the
provisions of this Agreement. Customer is duly qualified and in good standing to do
business in all jurisdictions where such qualification is required; (c) this Loan Agreement
has been duly authorized by all necessary proceedings, has been duly executed and
delivered by Customer and is a valid and legally binding agreement of Customer duly
enforceable in accordance with its terms; (d) no consent, approval, authorization, order,
registration or qualification of or with any court or regulatory authority or other
governmental body having jurisdiction over Customer is required for, and the absence of
which would adversely affect, the legal and valid execution and delivery of this Loan
Agreement, and the performance of the transactions contemplated by this Loan
Agreement; (e) the execution and delivery of this Loan Agreement by Customer
hereunder and the compliance by Customer with all provisions of this Loan Agreement:
(i) will not conflict with or violate any Applicable Law; and (ii) will not conflict with or result
in a breach of or default under any of the terms or provisions of any loan agreement or
other contract or agreement under which Customer is an obligor or by which its property
is bound; and (f) all factual information furnished by Customer to PG&E in the Application
and pursuant to this Agreement is true and accurate.
5. The Application must include the Federal Tax Identification Number or Social Security
Number of the party who will be the recipient of the checks for the rebate/incentive or any
Loan proceeds. Checks may be issued directly to the Customer or its designated
Contractor or both, for the benefit of the Customer, as specified below. Customer
acknowledges that PG&E will not be responsible for any tax liability imposed on the
Customer or its contractor in connection with the transactions contemplated under the
Agreement, whether by virtue of the Loan contemplated under the Agreement, or
otherwise, and Customer shall indemnify PG&E for an y tax liability imposed upon PG&E
as a result of the transactions contemplated under the Agreement.
6. Upon completion of the Work, Customer shall send a written confirmation of completion
to PG&E’s On-Bill Financing Program Administrator at the address listed in Section 15.
Within 60 days after receiving the confirmation, PG&E (a) will conduct a post installation
inspection and project verification, including review of invoices, receipts and other
documents as required by PG&E to verify the correctness of an y amounts claimed by
Customer; and (b) will adjust, if necessary, the total cost, incentive, Loan Balance,
monthly payment, and loan term as stated above. Customer shall give PG&E reasonable
access to its premises and the Work. If the Work conforms to all requirements of the
Agreement and all amounts claimed by Customer as Work costs are substantiated to
PG&E’s reasonable satisfaction, PG&E will issue a check (“Check”) to Customer or
Contractor (as designated by Customer in Section 15) for all amounts PG&E approves for
payment in accordance with the Agreement. The date of such issuance is the “Issuance
Date”. If the Check is issued to Customer, Customer shall be responsible for paying any
outstanding fees due to Contractor for the Work. If the Check is l ess than the amount
due from Customer to Contractor, Customer shall be responsible for the excess due to
the Contractor.
LOCAL AGENCY AND DISTRICT
CUSTOMERS
ON-BILL FINANCING LOAN AGREEMENT
Automated Document – Preliminary Statement Part A Page 3 of 6
Form 79-1194
Advice 3926-G/5214-E
January 2018
7. Customer shall repay the Loan Balance to PG&E as provided in this Loan Agreement
irrespective of whether or when the Work is completed, or whether the Work is in any
way defective or deficient, and whether or not the Work delivers energy efficiency savings
to Customer.
8. The monthly payments will be included by PG&E on the Account's regular energy service
bills, or by separate bill, in PG&E’s discretion. Regardless whether the monthly
payments are included in the regular utility bill or a separate loan installment bill, the
following repayment terms will apply:
a. The Customer agrees to repay to PG&E the Loan Balance in the number of
payments listed below and in equal installments (with the final installment
adjusted to account for rounding), by the due date set forth in each PG&E utility
bill or loan installment bill rendered in connection with Customer’s account
(identified by the number set forth below) (“Account”), commencing with the bill
which has a due date falling at least 30 days after the Issuance Date.
b. If separate energy service bills and loan installment bills are provided, amounts
due under this Loan Agreement as shown in the loan installment bill shall be
deemed to be amounts due under each energy services bill to the Account, and a
default under this Loan Agreement shall be treated as a default under the
Account.
c. If the Customer is unable to make a full utility bill payment in a given month,
payment arrangements may be made at PG&E’s discretion.
d. Any partial bill payments received for a month will be applied in equal proportion
to the energy charges and the loan obligation for that month, and the Customer
may be considered in default of both the energy bill and the loan installment bill.
e. Further payment details are set forth below.
9. Any notice from PG&E to Customer regarding the Program or the transactions
contemplated under the Loan Agreement may be provided within a PG&E utili ty bill or
loan installment bill, and any such notices may also be provided to Customer at the
address below or to the Customer’s billing address of record in PG&E’s customer billing
system from time to time, and in each case shall be effective five (5) da ys after they have
been mailed.
10. The Loan Balance shall not bear interest.
11. Customer may, without prepayment penalty, pay the entire outstanding loan balance in
one lump sum payment provided the Customer first notifies PG&E by telephoning the toll
free phone number (1-800-468-4743), and by sending written notice to PG&E On-Bill
Financing Program Administrator at the address listed below, in advance of making the
lump sum payment. Accelerated payments that are received from Customer without
PG&E’s prior approval may, at PG&E’s sole discretion, be applied proportionally to
subsequent energy charges and Loan repayments and PG&E shall have no obligation to
apply accelerated payments exclusively to reduction of the outstanding Loan.
LOCAL AGENCY AND DISTRICT
CUSTOMERS
ON-BILL FINANCING LOAN AGREEMENT
Automated Document – Preliminary Statement Part A Page 4 of 6
Form 79-1194
Advice 3926-G/5214-E
January 2018
12. The entire outstanding Loan Balance will become immediately due and payable, and
shall be paid by Customer within 30 days if: (i) the Account is closed or terminated for
any reason; (ii) Customer defaults under the Agreement; (iii) Customer sells the
equipment forming part of the Work to any third party; or (iv) Customer becomes
Insolvent. Customer becomes “Insolvent” if: (i) Customer is unable to pay its debts as
they become due or otherwise becomes insolvent, makes a general assignment for the
benefit of its creditors, or suffers or permits the appointment of a receiver for its business
or assets or otherwise ceases to conduct business in the normal course; or (ii) any
proceeding is commenced by or against Customer under any bankruptcy or insolvency
law that is not dismissed or stayed within 45 days.
13. Customer understands that without limiting any other remedy available to PG&E against
Contractor or Customer, failure to repay the Loan Balance in accordance with the
terms of the Agreement could result in shut-off of utility energy service, adverse
credit reporting, and collection procedures, including, without limitation, legal
action.
14. If there is any conflict among the documents comprising the Agreement, the following
order of priority shall apply: 1. this Loan Agreement; 2. the App lication; 3. any documents
attached to the Application.
15. LOCAL AGENCY OR DISTRICT REQUIREMENT
a. All Payment Obligations Subject to Appropriation
The Customer acknowledges that the cost incurred pursuant to this Loan
Agreement will be part of the monthly bill for electricity use. All payment
obligations and the Work replacement obligations of the Customer under this
Loan Agreement or any related agreement or application is subject to
appropriation by the Legislative body belonging to the Local Agency or District
cited in this loan agreement.
b. No Lien or Encumbrance; Subordination:
(1) Notwithstanding any other provision in this Loan Agreement – , PG&E
acknowledges that nothing in this Loan Agreement shall constitute a mortgage,
charge, assignment, transfer, pledge, lien or encumbrance upon either the Work
or any part of the buildings, structures or related facilities in which the Work is
constructed, installed or situated (collectively, the “Related Facilities”).
Accordingly, PG&E agrees it will not record or file any instrument that would
indicate or imply it has a security interest in the Related Facilities, including but
not limited to a UCC-1.
LOCAL AGENCY AND DISTRICT
CUSTOMERS
ON-BILL FINANCING LOAN AGREEMENT
Automated Document – Preliminary Statement Part A Page 5 of 6
Form 79-1194
Advice 3926-G/5214-E
January 2018
(2) In addition to the preceding paragraph (a), if this Loan Agreement were ever
construed or deemed to create any such encumbrance, then: (i) this Loan
Agreement shall be junior and subordinate and subject in all respects to the
terms and conditions of any and all leases, and indentures related to lease
revenue bonds issued by the Local Agency or District cited here or any other
issuer of bonds on behalf of the Local Agency or District concerning the Related
Facilities entered into in the past, the present or the future (the “Senior Security
Documents”); and (ii) any term or condition of this Loan Agreement relat ing to
any right, title or interest in the Related Facilities or other benefits derived there
from shall be in all respects junior and subordinate to, and subject to the terms
of, the Senior Security Documents.
16. Loan Particulars
This table is to be completed by PG&E
Total Cost Incentive Customer
Contribution
(if applicable)
Loan Balance 2 Monthly
Payment
Term 3
(months)
Number
of
Payments
$ $ $ $ $
Check Made Payable to Contractor □ or Customer □ [customer to select payment method.
Note that only one check can be issued]
2 The Loan Balance shall not exceed one-hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) for commercial
customers and shall not exceed two-hundred fifty thousand dollars ($250,000) for government
agency and multi-family customers, excepting loans to government agency and multi-family
customers where, in PG&E’s sole opinion, the opportunity for uniquely large energy savings
exist, in which case the Loan Balance may exceed two-hundred fifty thousand dollars
($250,000) but shall not exceed two million dollars ($2,000,000).
3 The loan term in months will be established by PG&E at the time of the OBF Loan Agreement
initiation. The maximum loan term shall be sixty (60) months excepting: 1) loans to Government
Agency Customers or Multi-Family Customers will have a maximum loan term of one hundred
and twenty (120) months or the expected useful life (EUL) of the installed energy efficiency
measures, which ever is less; and 2) loans to customers where, in PG&E’s sole opinion, credit
and risk factors support a loan term longer than sixty (60) months.
LOCAL AGENCY AND DISTRICT
CUSTOMERS
ON-BILL FINANCING LOAN AGREEMENT
Automated Document – Preliminary Statement Part A Page 6 of 6
Form 79-1194
Advice 3926-G/5214-E
January 2018
17. This agreement at all times shall be subject to such modifications as the California Public
Utilities Commission may direct from time to time in the exercise of its jurisdiction.
Customer Details Contractor Details
Federal Tax ID or Social Security #, Customer Federal Tax ID or Social Security #, Contractor
PG&E Account # / Service Agreement #
Account Name, Customer Name, Contractor
Service Address, Customer Address, Contractor
Name and Title of Authorized Representative
of Customer
Name and Title of Authorized Representative of
Contractor
Signature of Authorized Representative of
Customer
Date
ACCEPTED: Pacific Gas & Electric Company
PG&E On-Bill Financing Program Manager Date
Address:
PG&E Integrated Processing Center
P.O. Box 7265
San Francisco, CA 94120-7265
1
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA NO: 8e
MEETING DATE: November 5, 2018
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Date: November 5, 2018
From: Syed Murtuza, Director of Public Works – (650) 558-7230
Subject: Adoption of a Resolution Approving the Tentative and Final Parcel Map (PM
18-06), Merger of Lots 1, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 and a Portion of Lot 16, Block
20, Map of Lyon and Hoag Subdivision at 920 Bayswater Avenue
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution approving the tentative and
final parcel map (PM 18-06), for the merger of lots 1, 17,18, 19, 20, 21, 22 and a portion of lot 16,
Block 20, Map of Lyon and Hoag Subdivision.
BACKGROUND
The project consists of construction of a new four-story, 128-unit apartment building with a below-
grade parking structure at 920 Bayswater Avenue. On August 13, 2018, the Planning
Commission reviewed and recommended approval of the tentative parcel map. Staff has
reviewed the map and recommends its approval subject to the following conditions:
1. All frontage sidewalks, driveways, and curb and gutter within the public right-of-way shall
be replaced with new improvements.
2. The existing structures must be demolished before the map can be recorded.
3. A final parcel map must be filed by the applicant within the two-year time period as
allowed by the Subdivision Map Act and the City’s Subdivision Ordinance.
4. No developmental approvals are part of this mapping action.
5. All property corners shall be set in the field and be shown on the map.
6. The final map shall show the widths of the right-of-way for Bayswater Avenue, Myrtle
Road, and Howard Avenue including the centerlines of right-of-way, bearings, and
distances of centerline and any existing monuments in the roadway.
7. The developer is required to underground all utilities that service the project, and
8. Permanent storm water treatment measures and maintenance agreements are required
for each parcel as part of compliance of the NPDES (National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System) regulations in accordance with Countywide Stormwater Municipal
Regional Permit requirements. Said agreements shall be recorded with the County prior
to building permit sign-off.
Tentative and Final Parcel Map Approval at 920 Bayswater Avenue November 5, 2018
2
FISCAL IMPACT
None.
Exhibits:
• Resolution
• Final Parcel Map
• August 13, 2018 Planning Commission Minutes
RESOLUTION NO. _______
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME APPROVING
THE TENTATIVE AND FINAL PARCEL MAP (PM 18-06), MERGER OF LOTS 1, 17, 18, 19,
20, 21, 22 AND A PORTION OF LOT 16, BLOCK 20, MAP OF LYON AND HOAG
SUBDIVISION AT 920 BAYWATER AVENUE
The City Council of the City of Burlingame resolves as follows:
WHEREAS, on August 13, 2018, the tentative parcel map for the property described in
this resolution’s title was approved by the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, City staff recommends City Council approve the parcel map with the
following conditions:
1. All frontage sidewalks, driveways, and curb and gutter within the public right of
way shall be replaced with new improvements. The developer shall provide
necessary bonding for all frontage improvements.
2. The existing structures must be demolished before the map can be recorded.
3. A final parcel map must be filed by the applicant within the two-year time period
as allowed by the Subdivision Map Act and the City’s Subdivision Ordinance.
4. No developmental approvals are part of this mapping action.
5. All property corners shall be set in the field and be shown on the map.
6. The final map shall show the widths of the right-of-way for Bayswater Avenue,
Myrtle Road, and Howard Avenue, including the centerlines of right-of-way,
bearings, and distances of centerline and any existing monuments in the
roadway.
7. The developer is required to underground all utilities that service the project, and
8. Permanent storm water treatment measures and maintenance agreements are
required for each parcel as part of the NPDES (National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System) regulations in accordance with the Countywide Stormwater
Regional Municipal Permit. Agreements shall be recorded with the County prior
to building permit sign-off.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, DETERMINED AND ORDERED BY THE
COUNCIL, AS FOLLOWS:
1. The Final Parcel Map (PM 18-06) with the conditions described above is
approved.
2. Staff is directed to verify that all conditions of approval are met and arrange for
the recording of the tentative and final parcel map.
__________________________
Michael Brownrigg, Mayor
I, MEAGHAN HASSEL-SHEARER, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, certify that the
foregoing Resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 5th day
of November, 2018, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers:
NOES: Councilmembers:
ABSENT: Councilmembers:
__________________________
Meaghan Hassel-Shearer, City Clerk
1
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA NO: 8f
MEETING DATE: November 5, 2018
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Date: November 5, 2018
From: Carol Augustine, Finance Director – (650) 558-7222
Subject: Adoption of a Resolution Approving the Annual Report on the Status of
Impact Fees Collected as of June 30, 2018, Pursuant to the Mitigation Fee
Act (Government Code Section 66000 et seq.), and Making Required
Findings Related to the City’s Development Impact Fees
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council approve this annual report of the status of the Public
Facilities Impact fees, North Burlingame and Rollins Road fees, Bayfront Development fees, and
Burlingame Avenue Parking In-Lieu fees collected by the City, and make the following findings in
regards to these fees and unexpended funds:
• Public Facilities Impact fees, North Burlingame and Rollins Road fees, Bayfront
Development fees, and Commercial Linkage fees are collected to mitigate direct and
indirect impacts from development.
• These funds are expended in a timely manner to fund continued improvements to public
facilities related to the increased demand on the facilities resulting from development.
• There is a reasonable relationship between these impact fees and their purpose.
• These impact fees continue to be required to fund applicable improvements, and as such,
these fees will continue to be collected and deposited into the appropriate fund for
utilization solely for their intended purpose.
In addition, in regards to fees that are collected and remain unexpended for the fifth year
following the deposit of the fee, staff recommends one additional finding be made:
• There is approximately $300,000 in the North Burlingame and Rollins Road fees (and
associated interest) that were deposited over five years ago. Projects identified when the
fee was established are estimated to cost over $2.2 million, and the collected fees are
inadequate for undertaking the identified projects in the North Burlingame and Rollins
Road Plan. These outstanding fees, as well as development fees collected in the future,
will be accumulated in the North Burlingame & Rollins Road special revenue fund to
support these significant projects as the funds become available in sufficient amounts.
Development Impact Fees Annual Report November 5, 2018
2
BACKGROUND
Cities and counties often charge fees on new development to fund public improvements, public
amenities, and public services. For example, transportation mitigation fees are used to fund
transit facilities, streets, bike lanes, and sidewalks. These fees are commonly known as
development impact fees. In 1989, the State Legislature passed Assembly Bill 1600 (AB 1600),
which added Sections 66000 et seq. to the California Government Code, commonly known as the
Mitigation Fee Act. The Mitigation Fee Act sets forth a number of requirements that local
agencies must follow if they are to collect and retain fees f rom developers to defray the cost of
the construction of public facilities related to development projects.
1. In establishing, increasing, or imposing a fee, the local agency must make certain
determinations regarding the purpose and use of the fees and to establish a “nexus” or
connection between a development project or class of project and the public improvement
being financed with the fee.
2. The fee revenue must be segregated from the General Fund in order to avoid
commingling of public improvement fees and the General Fund.
3. For the fifth year following the first deposit of a fee and every five years thereafter, the
local agency shall make the following findings with respect to that portion of the account or
fund remaining unexpended, whether committed or uncommitted:
a. Identify the purpose to which the fee is to be used;
b. Demonstrate a reasonable relationship between the fee and the purpose for which
it is charged;
c. Identify all sources and amounts of funding anticipated to complete financing of
incomplete improvements; and
d. Designate approximate dates on which the funding identified in (c) is expected to
be deposited into the appropriate account or fund. These findings need only be
made for money in possession of the local agency.
The Public Facilities Impact fees, North Burlingame and Rollins Road fees, Bayfront Development
fees, and Commercial Linkage fees (newly applicable in fiscal year 2017-18) collected by the City
of Burlingame qualify as development impact fees and, therefore, must comply with the Mitigation
Fee Act. As required by law, these fees are segregated and accounted for as Special Revenue
Funds. Government Code Section 66006 requires the City to make available to the public the
following information regarding development impact fees for each fund within 180 days after the
end of each fiscal year:
• A brief description of the type of fee in the account or fund;
• The amount of the fee;
• The beginning and ending balance of the account or fund;
• The amount of the fees collected and the interest earned;
• An identification of each public improvement on which the fees were expended, and the
amount of the expenditure on each improvement, including the total percentage of the
cost of the public improvement that was funded with the fees;
• An identification of the approximate date by which the construction of the public
improvement will commence if the local agency determined that sufficient funds have
Development Impact Fees Annual Report November 5, 2018
3
been collected to complete financing on an incomplete public improvement, and the public
improvement remains incomplete; and
• A description of each inter-fund transfer or loan made from an account or fund in
accordance with the Mitigation Fee Act.
This report meets the requirements to comply with the Mitigation Fee Act. It also complies with
the requirement that certain findings be made every five years specifying the intended use of any
unexpended impact fees, regardless of whether the fees are committed or uncommitted.
DISCUSSION
Public Facilities Impact Fees
The Public Facilities Impact Fee, which commenced in November 2008, is a general category of
fees based on the uses, number of dwelling units, and amount of square footage to be located on
the property after completion of a development project. The fees are committed to public
improvements, public services, and community amenities affected by new development. The
purpose of the fee is established upon approval of a permit for construction or reconstruction, and
is intended for improvement in one or more of seven categories. The fee for each of the seven
categories was set upon adoption of the fees in 2008 and remains as shown below:
The following table summarizes the activities associated with public facilities impact fees from
fiscal year 2013-14 through the fiscal year ended June 30, 2018:
The first public facilities impact fees were collected in fiscal year 2010-11 and applied
immediately to capital improvement projects expenditures in that same year. Of the total $1.8
million transferred to the City’s CIP (Capital Improvement Projects) Fund in fiscal year 2010-11,
Public Facilities Impact Fees 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18
Beginning Balance $0 $126,559 $117,579 $312,492 $559,211
Developer Fees 129,634 24,505 190,797 244,292 123,367
Interest Income (Expense)3,120 826 4,116 2,426 2,683
Expenditures (6,195)(34,311)0 0 0
Encumbrances - Current Year 0 0 0 0 0
Ending Balance $126,559 $117,579 $312,492 $559,211 $685,261
Development Impact Fees Annual Report November 5, 2018
4
$650,000 funded Public Facilities projects. Expenditures in fiscal year 2010-11 were largely
related to streets and traffic projects; in fiscal year 2014-15, the public facilities impact fees
helped to fund ADA and parking lot improvements associated with the Library Millennium Project.
The balance of public facilities impact fees as of June 30, 2018, resides in the facility categories
as shown below:
Staff will examine current and planned facility improvements that are eligible to be funded from
the Public Facilities Impact fees and recommend any appropriate fund transfers as part of the
fiscal year 2018-19 mid-year analysis.
North Burlingame/Rollins Road Development Fee:
Properties lying within the geographical boundaries of the study area for the “North
Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan”, adopted in 2004, are subject to payment of a specific
development impact fee applicable only to that study area at the time the property is developed or
redeveloped. One-half of the fee is payable before issuance of a building permit, and the balance
is payable when a certificate of occupancy is requested. Ordinance No. 1751 (2005) provides for
annual adjustment of the fee based on the construction cost index published in the Engineering
News Record (ENR) as of July 1st of each year. As of June 30, 2018, the fees were as follows:
North Burlingame & Rollins Road Development Fee
Rollins Road Area of Benefit
El Camino North Area of Benefit:
Multiple family dwelling or duplex
Any use other than multiple family
dwelling or duplex
$0.60 per square foot of building
$0.60 per square foot of building
$0.76 per square foot of building
Public Facilities Impact Fees
Balance at
June 30, 2018
General Facilities $124,105
Library $14,543
Police $65,144
Parks & Recreation $29,591
Streets & Traffic $295,148
Fire $68,859
Storm Drain $87,869
Ending Balance $685,261
Development Impact Fees Annual Report November 5, 2018
5
Funds collected are to be used to pay the cost of improvements to the City’s infrastructure in the
area, including: sanitary sewers, water, storm drains, and streetscape.
Expenditures of these funds did not begin until fiscal year 2011-12. It is apparent that, of the
$427,519 balance as of June 30, 2018, $298,064 (the fiscal year 2013-14 beginning balance) is
attributable to fees collected more than five years ago. Projects identified when the fee was
established, including medians and a linear park along El Camino Real at Trousdale, Adrian
Road landscaping, and a City gateway at Rollins Road, are estimated to cost over $2.2 million.
Therefore, staff recommends that the Council make the finding that fees collected in the future be
accumulated in the North Burlingame & Rollins Road special revenue fund to support these
significant projects as the funds become available in sufficient amounts.
Bayfront Development Fees
Similar to the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Development Fee, this fee (adopted by ordinance in
1979), applies only to properties lying within the geographic boundaries of the study area for the
Burlingame Bayfront Specific Plan. Per the ordinance, the fees collected are to be used to pay
for “future construction, improvement, and enlargement of major arterials and traffic control
devices for the primary purpose of carrying through traffic and providing a network of roads within
the Bayfront area on the east side of US 101.” Ordinance No. 1739 (2004) provides for annual
adjustment of the fee based on the construction cost index published in the Engineering News
Record (ENR) as of July 1st of each year. As of June 30, 2018, the fees were as follows:
Bayfront Development Fee
Office $2,639/TSF
Restaurant $10,628/TSF
Hotel $865/room
Hotel, Extended Stay $841/room
Office, Warehouse, Manufacturing $4001/TSF
Retail - Commercial $9,716/TSF
Car Rental $61,657/acre
Commercial Recreation $19,135/acre
North Burlingame & Rollins Road 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18
Beginning Balance $298,064 $324,318 $342,152 $424,008 $425,845
Developer Fees 23,579 15,431 76,271 0 0
Interest Income (Expense)2,675 2,404 5,585 1,837 1,674
Expenditures 0 0 0 0 0
Encumbrances - Current Year 0 0 0 0 0
Ending Balance $324,318 $342,152 $424,008 $425,845 $427,519
Development Impact Fees Annual Report November 5, 2018
6
All Other $2,126 per p.m. peak hour trip
as detailed by traffic study
The fund had a zero beginning balance as of the start of fiscal year 2009-10. The balance of fees
collected prior to June 30, 2009 (approximately $78,000) was transferred to the General Fund to
reimburse the General Fund for the Anza Overpass. Although this project was identified in the
Bayfront Development Fee project when the fee was first established, there was insufficient
funding to draw on when the project construction was complete. The table below summarizes the
activity for the Bayfront Development Fee Fund from fiscal year 2013-14 through June 30, 2018.
Fees collected since 2009 were to be used to reimburse the CIP Fund for ADA (Americans with
Disabilities Act) sidewalk improvements along the Bayfront area. The project was under design
beginning in fiscal year 2014-15, but Bayfront Development fees had not been assessed for
several years. The small remaining balance of Bayfront Development fees was transferred to
support the project at the beginning of fiscal year 2015-16. As a high-priority project, $200,000
was added to the CIP project (for a total budget of $521,000) to address the necessary
improvements in the FY 2015-16 mid-year budget, and the project is now complete. No Bayfront
Development Impact fees were assessed or collected in the past five fiscal years.
Commercial Linkage Fees
On July 3, 2017, the City Council adopted an ordinance establishing commercial linkage fees for
new commercial development in Burlingame to support workforce housing in the City. Under the
new ordinance, developers of employment-generating commercial and industrial developments
are required to contribute to the supply of low- and moderate-income housing through the
provision of the fee as prescribed in the nexus impact fee study dated November 2015. The
adopted fees are $7.00 per square foot for new retail development, $12.00 per square foot for
new hotel development, $18.00 per square foot for office projects of 50,000 square feet or less,
and $25.00 per square foot for office development greater than 50,000 square feet. For
developers who utilize prevailing wages or area standard wages, the fees are $5.00 per square
foot for new retail development, $10 per square foot for new hotel development, $15.00 per
square foot for office projects of 50,000 square feet or less, and $20.00 per square foot for office
development greater than 50,000 square feet. Over time, these fees will provide a dedicated
source of funding for programs supporting workforce housing in Burlingame.
Burlingame’s Commercial Linkage fees have been determined to be development impact fees
and are subject to all of the same Mitigation Fee Act tracking and reporting requirements
Bayfront Development 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18
Beginning Balance $1,699 $1,740 $1,774 $0 $0
Developer Fees 0 0 0 0 0
Interest Income (Expense)41 34 0 0 0
Expenditures 0 0 (1,774)0 0
Encumbrances - Current Year 0 0 0 0 0
Ending Balance $1,740 $1,774 $0 $0 $0
Development Impact Fees Annual Report November 5, 2018
7
previously referenced. However, there are no fee revenues to report for the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2018.
Development Impact Fees Annual Report November 5, 2018
8
FISCAL IMPACT
Compilation of this report has no impact on City resources, as all impact fees held by the City for
over five years have either been spent or are committed to specific purposes per appropriate
findings made by the City Council. If findings associated with funds held for a period of over f ive
years are not made, the City must refund the fees to the developers from which they were
received.
Exhibit:
• Resolution of Findings related to the City’s Development Impact Fees
RESOLUTION NO. _____
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
BURLINGAME ADOPTING FINDINGS AS REQUIRED UNDER
GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 66001, REAFFIRMING THE
NECESSITY OF DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
WHEREAS, pursuant to California Government Code Section 66001, the City of
Burlingame is required to make certain findings every five years with respect to the unexpended
fund balance of certain development impact fees; and
WHEREAS, the City’s annual report of development impact fees reflects the
balance in each development impact fee fund or account, accrued interest in said fund or
account, and the amount of expenditure by public project for the fiscal year ended June
30, 2018 .
NOW, THEREFORE the City Council of the City of Burlingame resolves ,
determines and finds as follows:
Section 1. That the recitations above are true and correct.
Section 2. That the following findings are made as required under the Government Code Section
66001:
A. The purpose to which each development impact fee is to be put has been identified.
B. The funds are expended in a timely manner to fund continued improvements to public
facilities related to the increased demand on the facilities resulting from development
C. There is a reasonable relationship between the fee and impacts for development for which the
fees are collected.
D. The fees continue to be required to fund applicable improvements, and as such, these fees will
continue to be collected and deposited into the appropriate fund for utilization solely for their
intended purpose.
Section 3. That the following finding is made as required under the Government Code Section
66001 for fees held by the City for a period of 5 years or more:
Outstanding fees in the North Burlingame and Rollins Road Plan, as well as these
development fees collected in the future, will be accumulated in the North Burlingame &
Rollins Road special revenue fund to support the significant public projects identified when
the fee was established.
_____________________________
Michael Brownrigg, Mayor
I, Meaghan Hassel-Shearer, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, certify that the
foregoing Resolution was adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 5th day of
November 2018, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Councilmembers:
Councilmembers:
Councilmembers:
_____________________________
Meaghan Hassel-Shearer, City Clerk
1
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA NO: 8g
MEETING DATE: November 5, 2018
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Date: November 5, 2018
From: Margaret Glomstad, Park and Recreation Director- (650) 558-7307
Subject: Adoption of a Resolution Accepting the Procurement of a Prefabricated
Restroom from CXT, Inc. and the Site Preparation Work by Timberline
Engineering for the Washington Park Restroom, City Project No. 85050
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution accepting procurement of a
Prefabricated Restroom from CXT, Inc. at a cost of $99,690.20 through the National Joint Powers
Alliance (NJPA), and the site preparation work by Timberline Engineering for the Washington
Park Restroom Project, in the amount of $10,650.
BACKGROUND
The Washington Park Restroom Project included the replacement of a 20-year old prefabricated
restroom that was in disrepair and not meeting accessibility standards. On March 5, 2018, the
City Council authorized staff to purchase a prefabricated restroom from CXT directly through the
NJPA, a purchasing cooperative, at a cost of $99,690.20. The new restroom structure consists of
two accessible rooms with toilets and urinals, changing table, motion sensor LED lights, on-
demand water heater, stainless steel fixtures, soap dispensers, and hand dryers.
The City Council also awarded the site preparation work to Timberline Engineering at a cost of
$10,650.
DISCUSSION
The project has been satisfactorily completed in compliance with the plans and specifications.
The final cost for the structure was $99,690.20, and the final cost for the site preparation was
$10,650. In addition, the City spent funds on temporary port-a-potties and miscellaneous irrigation
and water supply parts to complete the project.
FISCAL IMPACT
The following are the estimated final project expenditures:
Adoption of a Resolution Accepting the Washington Park Restrooms November 5, 2018
2
CXT, Inc. Restroom $ 99,960.20
Site Preparation $ 10,650.00
Temporary Porta-a-Potties $ 225.00
Irrigation/water parts and supplies $ 1,261.43
Total $ 112,096.63
Sufficient funds are available in the Fiscal Year 2019-2019 Capital Improvements Project budget
to cover the final estimated project costs.
Exhibits:
• Resolution
• Final Progress Payment
RESOLUTION NO. _______
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME ACCEPTING
WASHINGTON PARK RESTROOM REPLACEMENT IMPROVEMENTS BY CXT, INC. AND
TIMBERLINE ENGINEERING
CITY PROJECT NO. 85050
RESOLVED by the CITY COUNCIL of the City of Burlingame, California, which finds, orders,
and determines as follows:
1. The Director of Parks and Recreation of the City has certified the work done by CXT, Inc.
under terms of its contract with the City dated April 26, 2018, and Timberline Engineering under the
terms of its contract with the City dated April 30, 2018, has been completed in accordance with the
plans and specifications approved by the City Council and to the satisfaction of the Director of Parks
and Recreation.
2. Said work is particularly described as City Project No. 85050
3. Said work is accepted.
__________________________
Mayor
I, Meaghan Hassel-Shearer, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, certify that the foregoing
Resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 5th day of November,
2018, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
__________________________
City Clerk
1
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA NO: 8h
MEETING DATE: November 5, 2018
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Date: November 5, 2018
From: Carol Augustine, Finance Director – (650) 558-7222
Subject: Adoption of a Resolution to Approve the 2018 Tourism Business
Improvement District Annual Report and to Give Notice of Intent to Levy
Assessments for 2019
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a Resolution of Intent approving the 2018 Tourism
Business Improvement District Annual Report and establish a public hearing date for the levying
of the 2019 annual assessments for the San Mateo County Tourism Business Improvement
District.
BACKGROUND
The San Mateo County Tourism Business Improvement District was formed in 2001 and now has
12 participating cities throughout San Mateo County and the City of Palo Alto in Santa Clara
County. Pursuant to the authority provided by the California Streets and Highways Code (section
36500 et seq.), the District collects assessments from the member hotel properties in the District
and uses those annual assessments to fund its successful and wide-ranging hotel-business
promotional activities. At the end of each year, the Advisory Board of the District files with the
City an annual report stating the past year’s activities and accomplishments. In addition, the
Advisory Board also recommends the assessment for the coming year. Attached for the City
Council’s review and approval is the San Mateo County Tourism District Advisory Board’s annual
report for 2018, and listing of officials and members for 2019. The list of proposed assessments
for the 2019 calendar year is attached to the resolution of intent. There will be no changes to the
methodology in computing the amounts of the assessments for 2019.
DISCUSSION
The City Council should adopt the Resolution of Intention 1) receiving and approving the 2018
Annual Report, and 2) scheduling a public hearing for Monday, December 3, 2018. At the hearing,
the City Council will determine if a majority protest has been made and, if not, will levy the 2019
assessments. Notices to the cities and members of the District will be provided by the City Clerk
and the District staff. The assessments requested by the District are consistent with the original
authority for assessments enacted in 2001 at the time of District formation as amended.
Intent to Levy 2019 Assessments – SMC Tourism Business Improvement District November 5, 2018
2
FISCAL IMPACT
Assessment revenues provide funding for operations and activities of the San Mateo County
Tourism Business Improvement District. The City’s annual fee for the billing and collection
activities performed on behalf of the District (other than those activities pertaining to Burlingame
hotels) is $9,300. Other than the administrative fee revenue, there is no impact to the City’s
budget.
Exhibits:
• Resolution Approving 2018 Annual Report and Noticing Intent to Levy Assessments for 2019
• SMCVCB 2018 Annual Report
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
BURLINGAME APPROVING AND ACCEPTING THE 2018 ANNUAL
REPORT OF, AND DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO LEVY THE
ASSESSMENTS FOR THE SAN MATEO COUNTY TOURISM BUSINESS
IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
WHEREAS, pursuant to California Streets and Highways Code Section 36500 et seq.,
the San Mateo County Tourism Business Improvement District was established for the purpose of
promoting tourism in the District through promotion of scenic, recreational, cultural, hospitality, and
other attractions in the San Mateo County region: and
WHEREAS, the San Mateo County Tourism Business Improvement District Advisory Board
has filed its 2018 annual report and requested the Burlingame City Council to set the assessments for
the 2019 calendar year; and
WHEREAS, the San Mateo County Tourism Business Improvement District through the
City’s agreement with the San Mateo County Convention and Visitors Bureau has established a basic
foundation to promote tourism in the District; and
WHEREAS, the enumerated programs proposed by the District for the coming year should
significantly assist the hospitality industry continue its economic recovery throughout the geographical
area of the District; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to California Streets and Highways Code sections 36533 and 36534,
the City Council shall receive and approve the District Advisory Board’s annual report and shall
adopt a Resolution establishing assessments for the coming year;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE, AND FIND AS FOLLOWS:
1.The 2018 annual report of the San Mateo County Tourism Business Improvement District
Advisory Board filed with the City Clerk is received and approved.
2.The Burlingame City Council intends to levy an assessment for the 2019 year on hotels
in the District, as the District is described in Ordinance Nos. 1648, 1678, 1774, 1848 and 1851
for the purpose of funding programs and activities of the District.
3.The types of programs and activities proposed to be funded by the levy of assessments on
hotels in the District are set forth in Exhibit “A”, incorporated herein by reference. These
programs and activities are without substantial change from those previously established for
the District.
4.The method and basis for levying the assessments on all hotels within the District are set
forth in Exhibit “B”, incorporated herein by reference. The method and basis remain
unchanged from the previous year.
5. New hotels shall not be exempt from assessment.
6. A public hearing on the proposed assessments and programs for the year 2019 is hereby set
for December 3, 2018 at 7:00 p.m., before the City Council of the City of Burlingame, in the
Council Chambers, 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA. At the public hearing, the City
Council will receive testimony and evidence; and interested persons may submit written
comments before or at the public hearing, or they may be sent by mail or delivered to the City
Clerk, 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA 94010.
7. Oral or written protests may be made at the hearing. To count in a majority protest against
the proposed assessment for the 2019 year, a protest must be in writing and submitted to the
City Clerk at or before the close of the public hearing on December 3, 2018. A written protest
may be withdrawn in writing at any time before the conclusion of that public hearing. Each
written protest shall identify the hotel and its address. If the person signing the protest is not
shown on the official records of the City of Burlingame as the owner of the hotel, then the
protest shall contain or be accompanied by written evidence that the person is the owner of the
hotel. Any written protest as to the regularity or sufficiency of the proceeding shall be in
writing and clearly state the irregularity or defect to which objection is made.
8.If at the conclusion of the public hearing, there are of record written protests by the owners
of hotels within the District which will pay fifty percent (50%) or more of the total assessments
of the entire District, as to the proposed assessments for the 2019 year, no assessment for the
2019 year shall occur. If at the conclusion of the public hearing there are of record written
protests by the owners of hotels within the District which will pay fifty percent (50%) or more
of the total assessments of the entire District only as to a program or activity proposed, then
that type of improvement or activity shall not be included in the District for the 2019 year.
9.Further information regarding the proposed assessments and procedures for filing a written
protest may be obtained from the City Clerk, City Hall, 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame,
California, phone 650-558-7203. The annual report of the San Mateo County Tourism
Business Improvement District is on file and available at the Office of the City Clerk at 501
Primrose, Burlingame, California.
10. The City Clerk is instructed to provide notice of the public hearing by publishing this
Resolution in a newspaper of General circulation in the City of Burlingame in accordance with
the requirements of the Government and Streets & Highways Codes and mailing in accordance
with those requirements and Ordinance No. 1648 and 1678.
_______________________
Michael Brownrigg, Mayor
I, Meaghan Hassel-Shearer, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame do hereby certify that the
foregoing Resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 5th day
of November, 2018, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers:
NOES: Councilmembers:
ABSENT: Councilmembers:
EXHIBITA
SANMATEOCOUNTYTOURISMBUSINESSIMPROVEMENTDISTRICT
SANMATEOCOUNTY/SILICONVALLEYCONVENTION&VISITORSBUREAU
PLANNEDACTIVITIESFOR2019
Forthecalendaryear2019,theBureauplanstocontinueallofitsnormalactivities,including
butnotlimitedto:
* Exhibitingintradeshows;
* Conductingindividualfamiliarization(FAM)andsitetoursforplanners;
* ConductingFAMtoursforinternationaltravelagentsfromoverseas;
* ConductingFAMtoursformembersofthefoodandtravelmediafromaroundtheU.S.;
* ConductingindividualFAMtoursfortravelmedia;
*Usingmultiplesocialmediachannelstopushoutstoriesonthearea;
* ConductingamajorGoogleadscampaign;
* Advertisinginmeetingplannerpublications;
* Advertisinginleisurepublications;
* Promotingtheareatointernationalanddomesticmediawithregularreleasesofeditorial;
* Creatingmultipleblogseverymonthtopromotevariousaspectsofthearea;
* WorkingwithGoogletoexpandtheircoverageofourareapartners,nowthatwehaveofficially
beendesignatedasthetourismrepresentativeofthearea;
* Creatingupdatedvisitorguides,electronicmapsandspecialtybrochures,suchasourDog
FriendlyGuide;
* Doingsalesoutreachtorecruitconferences,specialevents,tourandtravelgroupstothearea;
* Sponsoringjobfairsforareacommunitycollegestudentstohelpemployersinthehospitality
industryfindteammembers;
* ContinuingtopromoteourAsFreshasitGetscampaign;
*Activelyrecruitingfilming;
* WorkingwithBARTonapilotproject,usingourwebsitetoallowfuturevisitorstobuyBART
ticketsinadvanceoftheirvisits.
CATEGORY ZONE A - ASSESSMENT FOR YEAR 2019 ZONE B - ASSESSMENT FOR YEAR 2019 ZONE C - ASSESSMENT FOR YEAR 2019Hotel with full serviceand more than 20 sleeping rooms$360 per sleeping room x 69.5% X (District months in 2019)12$360 per sleeping room X 55% X (District months in 2019)12$360 per sleeping room x 68% X (District months in 2019)12Hotel with limited serviceand more than 1,000 squarefeet of meeting spaceand more than 20 sleeping rooms$180 per sleeping room X 60% X (District months in 2019)12$180 per sleeping room X 40% X (District months in 2019)12$180 per sleeping room X 60% X (District months in 2019)12Hotel with limited serviceand some meeting spacebut less than 1,000 squarefeet and more than 20sleeping rooms$90 per sleeping room X 60% X (District months in 2019)12$90 per sleeping room X 40% X (District months in 2019)12$90 per sleeping room X 60% X (District months in 2019)12Hotel with standard serviceand more than 20 sleepingrooms$54 per sleeping room X 60% X (District months in 2019)12$54 per sleeping room X 40% X (District months in 2019)12$54 per sleeping room X 60% X (District months in 2019)12Hotel with full service,limited service, or standardservice, and 20 sleepingrooms or less$54 per sleeping room X 30% X (District months in 2019)12$54 per sleeping room X 25% X (District months in 2019)12$54 per sleeping room X 30% X (District months in 2019)12ZONE A - Includes all cities in the District except Half Moon Bay, Pacifica, Palo Alto and the unincorporated County.ZONE B - Includes Half Moon Bay, Pacifica and the unincorporated County.ZONE C - Palo AltoASSESSMENT FORMULA CHARTSAN MATEO COUNTY TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT y,//d
Ove
pro
asn
This
pro
Acc
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
L
erall:Inthe
perties,with
numerousban
stotaldoes
motion,grou
complishme
Escortednum
Participated
Heldrecepti
Tucson,Mor
Conducteds
Conducteds
Conductedjo
CoͲsponsore
Continuedo
assistareap
Conductedn
CoͲsponsore
Continuedo
Bucklin,Glob
ExpressMee
Participated
PlannersInt
accesstopla
Continuedo
meetingplan
Remainedac
England,an
Convention
Executives,A
SanMateo
LeadAgency
Activitie
last12mon
apotentiale
nquets.
NOTinclud
psrebooking
ntsinConve
merousindivi
inover50in
ionsformee
rristown&Pri
alesmissions
ales“blitzes”
ointsalescal
edeventswit
urhotdates/
ropertieswit
numeroustar
edclienteven
outreachto
balCynergies,
etings&Event
asmember
ternationalN
anners.
utreachthro
nnersandspo
ctivelyinvolv
dWashingto
Managemen
AmericanSoc
County/Silic
yfortheSan
es/Accompl
ths,theBure
conomicimp
deindividual
gdirectlywith
entionSales
idualmeeting
dustrytrade
etingplanner
incetonNJ,an
swithSanFra
”inSacramen
lswithhotel
hpartnersat
/hotratesno
hfilling“need
rgetedmeetin
ntswitharea
thirdparty
,Experient,H
tsandAMC,a
roftheCal
NorthernCalif
ughouttheU
ortseventorg
vedinlocal(
on,DC)indu
ntAssociatio
cietyAssociat
111 Anz
info@s
conValleyC
Burlingam
nMateoCou
Octo
lishmentsfro
eauhasgene
actof$95,74
corporateo
hourhotels,o
s&Sports
gplannerson
showsande
rsinDallas,
ndNewYork.
anciscoTrave
nto,multiple
partnerreps
tCalSAE,MPI
otificationpro
d”dates.
ngplannerou
CVBrepsinC
meetingpla
HelmsBriscoe
aswellastoa
iforniaSocie
fornia(MPIN
U.S.,building
ganizers.
(SanFrancisc
ustrygroupc
on,Societyo
tionExecutiv
Conventi
za Boulevard
650-348-
F
mccvb.com
Convention&
forthe
meCityCou
untyTourism
ober17,201
omOctober
erated447m
41,952.Web
orleisuretr
oradditional
nsitevisitsto
events.
Denver,Was
.
elinWashing
Midwesternc
sinSacramen
NCC,MPISac
ogram,sendi
utreachcamp
Chicago,Nort
annersandm
e,Conference
anumberofi
etyofAssoc
NCC)andMP
relationships
co,Sacramen
chaptersof
ofGovernme
ves,andCalSA
ion and Visit
d, Suite 410,
-7600 ƒ 1-80
ax 650-348-7
ƒ www.visit
&VisitorsBu
uncilas
mBusinessI
18
2017throug
meetingleads
bookedatota
ravelernight
nonͲroomloc
ogeneratele
shington,DC
gton,DC,Chic
citiesandthe
nto.
cramento/Sie
inglastminut
paignstoallm
theast,Wash
meetingman
eDirect,Hosp
independent
ciationExecu
PISacramento
swithassocia
nto/SierraNe
MeetingsPr
entMeeting
AEBayArear
tors Bureau
Burlingame,
00-288-4748
7687
tsanmateoco
ureauAnnu
Improvemen
ghSeptembe
sforSanMa
lof38,768de
sgenerated
calrevenueg
adsfor/close
,Chicago,Au
cago,NewYo
eBayArea.
erraNVandN
tedealsoutt
marketsegme
ingtonDC,Sa
nagementco
pitalityPerfor
thirdpartyp
utives(CalSA
o/SierraNev
ation,corpora
evada,Chicag
rofessionalIn
Planners,C
region.
CA 94010
ounty.com
alReport
ntDistrict
er2018
ateoCounty
efiniteroom
throughad
generatedby
egroupbusine
ustin,Phoeni
rkandPhilad
NorCalPCMA.
tokeymeetin
ents.
acramentoan
ompanies,inc
rmanceNetw
planners.
AE)committ
vadacommitt
ate,thirdͲpar
go/GreaterM
nternational,
CASocietyo
andPaloAlt
nights,aswe
dvertisingan
filming.
ess.
ix,Scottsdale
delphia.
.
ngplannerst
ndBayArea.
cludingSmit
ork,America
ees,Meetin
tees,allowin
rtyandSMER
Midwest,New
,Professiona
ofAssociatio
o
ll
d
e,
o
h
n
g
g
F
w
al
n
2
•Conductedindividualsitetoursforsportsplannersandexecutivestoshowcasecolleges,universities
andsportingvenuesthroughoutSanMateoCountyandPaloAlto/Stanfordarea.
•FeaturedineditorialinSmartMeetingsandSuccessfulMeetings.
•Advertisedinpublicationsdirectedatmeetingplannersandsportsmanagement,including:Connect,
IPEC,NorthAmericaTour&Travel,SuccessfulMeetings,MPINCCMembershipDirectory,Cvent,
Collaborate,NTAandToursLimited,CAMeeting+Events,CreativeIndustryHandbook,andTheReel
Directory.
•Createdpromotionalflyersandvideoforbookedclientstoenhanceattendance.
•Created“ExtendYourStay”PDFsforconferencegroupstoincludeontheirwebsites.
•SponsoredthePeninsulaSportsHallofFameAwards/dinnerinanefforttopromoteourareaasthe
perfectspottoholdsportingevents.
•InvestedinanewEconomicImpactcalculatorlatefirstquarter,allowingextremelyaccuratetrackingof
bookingresults.
•TrainedhotelpartnersonhowtomostefficientlyrespondtobookingleadsinthenewCRMsystem.
AccomplishmentsinLeisureandInternationalPromotion
•ParticipatedintheIPWshowinDenver,CO,doublingournumberofoneͲonͲonemeetingswith
internationaltravelbuyersandjournalists.
•ParticipatedinSouthKoreanUnitedAirlinesfamtourfollowingIPW.
•AttendedandconductedoneͲonͲonebusinessappointmentsattheGoWestSummit.
•ParticipatedinVisitCaliforniainternationalfamtoursfortravelbuyersandtravelmedia.
•ParticipatedinSalesMissionstofivecountriesinEurope,plusAustralia,meetingwithtouroperators,
meetingincentivetravelbuyersandtraveljournalists.
•Metwithtouroperators,meetingincentivebuyersandtraveljournalistsinOrlando,LosAngeles,Las
VegasandNewYork.
•ParticipatedinBritishAirwaysUK/IrelandSuperFam.
•Conductedfamtoursfortopproducingreceptivetouroperator,thelargestglobal“hotelbank”,plustravel
media.
•HadourareaincludedinmajorIndianandGermantouroperatorbrochuresandmagazineswitha
dedicatedsectionforjustourarea,listingcities,restaurants,hotels,majorattractions,sightseeinghighlights
andsuggesteditineraries.
•SecuredmajortravelmagazinecoverageofourareainCanada.
•Continuedtofamiliarizeinternationaltourcompanieswithourarea,successfullyaddingitinerariesinour
areatotheirvacationbrochures.
•WorkedwithVisitCalifornia’soverseasofficesintheUK,Australia/NZ,Germany,Japan,France,Mexico,
China,India,Brazil,Scandinavia,Korea,andAustraliaonanongoingbasis,providinginformationfor
distributionabroadandparticipatinginpromotionalopportunities.
•ShowcasedourareaonamajormarqueeinTimesSquareduringthebusytouristseason.
•Websitevisitsincreased9.84%,withuniquevisitorvisitsup9.88%.
•DroveincreasedwebtrafficfromtheUnitedStates,Mexico,UK,Canada,Brazil,FranceandPeru.
•Increasedprospectivevisitors’useofourmobilesite,withmobileusersupby38%andtabletusersby
5.89%.
•Producedanddistributed70,000visitorguideswithmapinsert.
•Placedadsaimedatindividual/leisuretravelersintheOfficialCaliforniaVisitorGuide,VIA,National
GeographicTraveler,HotSpotTravelandFacebook.
•ProvidedlinksandadditionalphotosandprofilesforpartnersonCVBwebsite.
•InitiatedayearͲlongGoogleadscampaign(October).
•DisplayedareavisitorinformationattheHillerAviationMuseuminSanCarlos.
•ContinuedtoprovideinformationtoavisitorcenterindowntownPaloAltoaswellasStanfordUniversity’s
VisitorCenter.
•Filledthousandsofvisitorinforequestsgeneratedbyouradsandarticlesonourarea.
3
•SentmonthlyeͲbulletinstothousandsofprospectivevisitorsinourdatabase,listingsspecialevents
andspecialratestoencouragevisits.
•Continuedtomarketourareaasatopculinarydestination.
•BuiltuponpartnershipswithSanMateoCountyFarmBureau,CountyAgricultureCommissionand
SanMateoCountyHarborDistricttoencourageSMCrestaurants,hotelsandcatererstobuyandserve
thefreshestlocalproduce,seafood,wine,beeranddairyproducts.
•Conductedafarmtourforareachefs.
•ImplementedanewCRMsystemandcreatedanewwebsiteallowingmoreexposureforareabusinesses.
•CreateddogͲfriendlyguide,blogsandwebsitesection(October2018).
•Reachedouttopetpublicationsregardingtheabove(October2018).
FilmCommissionEfforts
•Successfullyrecruitedindie/shortfilmsandcommercials,plusadvertising,musicandvideoproductions.
•Assistedwithanactioncomedy(movie)withlocationshotsinDalyCityandSouthSanFrancisco.
•Assistedwithmultiplestudentfilms.
•Recruited/assistedwithAlcatraz:GreatEscape,NationalGeographicExplorerwithDavidLangandother
documentaries.
•RecruitedTVshowsthatincludedTheDA(Netflix),StriptheCosmos,andWheelerDealers,plusthereality
TVshowRIDEwithNormanReedus.
•WorkedonwebandTVcommercialsthatincludedDodgeRam,Fitbit,Google,Lincoln,NFLInterviews,OnͲ
StarandSubaru.
•Recruitedandassistedwithfashion,stillandcatalogshoots,suchasLifestyleShootforAAAandNational
Geographic/T.RowePrice.
•Targetedprofessionallocationscoutsandmanagers,sendingoutmonthlyemailupdatesof
new/interestingfilminglocations.
•Providedongoingscriptbreakdowns/shotlistsforproposedfilmprojects,matchingthemwithavailable
SanMateoCounty/SiliconValleylocationsandsendingappropriateimages.
•Handledaverageof10Ͳ15requestsperweekforfilming/permittingassistancetomakeproductioneasier
forfilmcrews.
•ParticipatedinfilmindustryeventssuchasFLICS(FilmLiaisonsofCalifornia)industrymeetings,andCOLA
Awards(CaliforniaonLocationsAwards),wherewedistributedanewlydevelopedfilmcommission
brochureandpostcard.
•ShowcasedSanMateoCountyintheLocation2018magazine,TheReelDirectory,ProductionvilleSF,
CaliforniaLocationsConferencemagazine,andBAWIF(BayAreaWomeninFilm&Media),allindustry
publicationsdistributedtofilmindustryprofessionals.
MediaOutreach
•AttendedVisitCaliforniaMediaReceptionandIPWMediaDay,pitchingstoriestoover250travelwriters.
•AttendedNorthAmericanTravelJournalists/Associationconference(NATJA).
•Conductedmultipleindividualfamtoursfortravelwritersfromthroughoutthecountry.
•AttendedtheNewYorkmediaeventsponsoredbyVisitCalifornia.
•Customizedstoriestofitneedsofextensivemediacalendarswehavepurchased,sendingnumerous
“madetofit”piecesoutonamonthlybasis.
•Followeduponhundredsofrequestsfromtravelwritersforinformationforspecificstories.
•WorkedcloselywiththeVisitCaliforniateam,respondingtoallpublicityleadsthatcameintothestate.
•Continuedtobuildourmediadatabase,sendingeditorialideastoseveralhundredtraveleditors.
•Continuedpromotionoftheareaondailybasisviainteractivesocialmedia.
•MaintainedsocialmediasitesfortheCVB:Facebook,Twitter,Instagram,LinkedInandPinterest.
•MaintainedtheSanMateoCounty/SiliconValleyblogonourwebsite,highlightingourhotelsand
otherpartners.
4
•Wroteandpublishednumerousblogsondifferentaspectsofthearea.
•ImplementedanewLibrisphotosystemallowingtravelwritersandfilmscoutstoseenumerousphotosof
ourarea.
•Enhancedcalendarofevents.
•Created/updatednumerousspecialtybrochures.
MediaCoverage
•“HalfMoonBay:California’sHiddenTreasure”http://americanroads.net/off_beaten_path_fall2017.htm
•“TheLastMileHouseStanding—7MileHouse'sMoreThan160YearsofService”
https://www.kcet.org/shows/theͲmigrantͲkitchen/theͲlastͲmileͲhouseͲstandingͲ7ͲmileͲhousesͲmoreͲthanͲ160ͲyearsͲ
ofͲservice
•ArticleͲOnOblikon–“VoyagedegeekenCalifornie(GeekTravelinCalifornia)”Ͳ
https://lifestyle.oblikon.net/voyageͲdeͲgeekͲbaieͲdeͲsanͲfrancisco(FromXLAirwaysfam)
•“SanMateoCounty/NorthernSiliconValley,”SmartMeetings,January2018
•“UniqueCaliforniaVenuesinSanMateoCounty”,byJenniferPrince,January24,2018,HillCityBrideblog
www.hillcitybride.com/2018/01/uniqueͲcaliforniaͲvenuesͲinͲsanͲmateoͲcounty
•“8for’18–2018WeddingTrends,”byJenniferPrince,January21,2018,HillCityBrideblog:
www.hillcitybride.com/2018/01/2018ͲweddingͲtrends
•“ExclusiveHotelinPaloAlto”,ExploreMarketingemailblast,IssueNo.14:January2018
•“VisittheGoogleheadoffice!FeaturedSiliconValleyTourismandRecommendedHotels,”
www.travel.co.jp/guide/article/30060(fromJapanesemediafam)
•“IwanttoexperiencetheoutskirtsofSanFrancisco,kayaking,craftbeerforhorsebackriding!”
www.travel.co.jp/guide/article/29490(fromJapanesemediafam)
•“InPacifica,JulieCoxCreatedaSurfer’sOasis,”April12,2018
https://blogs.gonomad.com/readuponit/2018/04/inͲpacificaͲjulieͲcoxͲcreatedͲaͲsurfersͲoasis.html
•“GoatsMakeLifeBetteratHarleyFarms,”April14,2018
https://blogs.gonomad.com/readuponit/2018/04/goatsͲmakeͲlifeͲbetterͲatͲharleyͲfarms.html
•“SanMateoCounty:MorethanSiliconforVisitors,”April15,2018
https://blogs.gonomad.com/readuponit/2018/04/sanͲmateoͲcountyͲmoreͲthanͲjustͲsiliconͲforͲvisitors.html
•“11SpotstoDineOutwithDogsandKids,”byKathyChouteau,redtri.com,February13,2018
http://redtri.com/sanͲfrancisco/dogͲfriendlyͲrestaurants/slide/5
•“Lovin’Spoonfuls:TheBayArea’sBestSpotsforTastySoup,”byKathyChouteau,redtri.com,February27,2018
http://redtri.com/sanͲfrancisco/theͲbayͲareasͲbestͲspotsͲforͲtastyͲsoup/
•“SouthernSanMateoCounty:Museums,Gardens&Wine,OhMy!”byFranMiller,LuxuryTravelMagazine,
March22,2018
https://www.luxurytravelmagazine.com/newsͲarticles/southernͲsanͲmateoͲcountyͲmuseumsͲgardensͲandͲwineͲohͲmy
•“CoastalCaliforniaWeddingVenues(FeaturingSMCCVB)”byJenniferPrince,hillcitybride.com,March26,2018
http://www.hillcitybride.com/2018/03/coastalͲcaliforniaͲweddingͲvenues
•“ExploringSanMateoCounty,”byDoreenPendgracs,https://chocolatour.net/exploringͲsanͲmateoͲcounty
•“5ReasonsSanMateoCountyMakesthePerfectGirlsGetaway”,byJenniferPrince
https://www.dametraveler.com/5ͲreasonsͲsanͲmateoͲcountyͲmakesͲtheͲperfectͲgirlsͲgetaway
•“SanMateoCounty,California:ComefortheTech,StayfortheFun”,byMaxHartshorne
https://www.gonomad.com/111430ͲsanͲmateoͲcountyͲcaliforniaͲcomeͲforͲtheͲtechͲstayͲforͲtheͲfun
•“Filoli–ThePlaceIFellinLove(with){SMCCVB}”,byJenniferPrince,May23,2018
http://www.travellikeaprince.com/2018/05/filoli
•“TopsmalltownsinAmericayettobediscovered”namedRedwoodCityoneofthetopcitiesduetotravel
writerJenniferPrince.https://parenthoodandpassports.com/topͲsmallͲtownsͲinͲamerica
•“ExploringFiloliGardenandHistoricHouse”,byDoreenPendgracs
https://chocolatour.net/exploringͲfiloliͲgardenͲandͲhistoricͲhouse
•“StayandPlayAroundPaloAlto,California,”byMaryLansingͲFarah,June4,2018
http://fwtmagazine.com/stayͲandͲplayͲaroundͲpaloͲaltoͲcalifornia
•“HillerAviationMuseumOffersSomethingforEveryone”,byDoreenPendgracs,June14,2018
https://chocolatour.net/hillerͲaviationͲmuseumͲoffersͲsomethingͲforͲeveryone
5
•“ReleaseYourInnerGeekwithaSummerBreakinPaloAlto,SiliconValley,”byTanveerMann,
metro.co.uk,June19,2018
https://metro.co.uk/2018/06/19/releaseͲyourͲinnerͲgeekͲwithͲaͲsummerͲbreakͲinͲpaloͲaltoͲsiliconͲvalleyͲ7475367
•“ALuxuryHotelontheHarbor(OceanoHotel&Spa)”byJenniferPrince,July13,2018
http://www.travellikeaprince.com/2018/07/oceanoͲhotel
•“GreatTastesofSanMateoCounty,”byDoreenPendgracs,https://chocolatour.net/greatͲtastesͲofͲsanͲmateoͲcounty
•“APerfectDayinBurlingame,”byJenniferPrince,August21,2018
https://www.smccvb.com/blog/post/aͲperfectͲdayͲinͲburlingame
•“Surprising,InformativeandFunTimeattheComputerHistoryMuseuminMountainView,CA”byCathy
Welch,August26,2018https://utcwithapaddle.com/2018/08/26/surprisingͲinformativeͲandͲfunͲtimeͲatͲtheͲ
computerͲhistoryͲmuseumͲinͲmountainͲviewͲca/
•“5PlacestoTemptYourPalateinBurlingame,CA”,byJenniferPrince,September4,2018
https://www.travellikeaprince.com/2018/09/burlingameͲca/
•VideoonFacebookhasmorethan5,000views,forareachofabout20,000,sofar.(fromXLAirwaysFam)
www.facebook.com/TourMondefr/videos/vb.426924197414833/1393225277451382/?type=3&Theater
•VideoonYouTube:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VOBoC7aG56A(fromXLAirwaysFam)
•VideoonpopularinformationwebsiteforJapanesepeoplewholiveandworkintheU.S.,aswellas
JapaneseinterestedinvisitingtheU.S.FeaturedHalfMoonBayandSiliconValley.PV:330,000/month,
MediaValue:$22,000/story(fromJapaneseMediaFam)http://usfl.com/2017/10/post/112473
AdditionalOutreach
•ContinuedtoworkcloselywiththeteamatSFO,welcomingnewairlinestoourarea.
•Attendednewairline/newflightserviceceremoniesatSFO,creatingstrongvisibilityforSanMateo
CountyandPaloAltowithnewcarriers.
•GavenumerousspeechesandpresentationsinBayAreainefforttogetlocalassistancewith
meetingrecruitment.
•ContinuedtobuildrelationshipswiththeCowPalace,SanMateoCountyEventCenterandSouth
SanFranciscoConferenceCenter,workingtobringleadstotheirsalesteamsandassistinclosingbusiness.
•WorkedwithSFOandCaltraintopromoteourareaaseasilyaccessible.
•Continuedoutreachtochambersandcitiesinourcountyinordertoincludekeyareaeventsinourevents
calendarsandtomaximizeoursearchesforfilmingvenues.
SanMateoCounty/SiliconValleyConvention&VisitorsBureau
OfficersandBoardMembersfor2019
BoardOfficersfor2019:
Chair:MartyCerles,LighthouseHotel,Pacifica
ChairͲElect:MitchPostel,SanMateoCountyHistoryMuseum,TourismͲRelated
ImmediatePastChair:DanaDahl,BeachHouseHotel,HalfMoonBay
Secretary:JohnHutar,Dinah’sGardenHotel,TourismͲRelated
Treasurer:JeffBass,HillerAviationMuseum,TourismͲRelated
ViceChair:BillDixon,HotelFocusSFO,SouthSanFrancisco
ViceChair:IrbyMorvant,HyattRegencySanFranciscoAirport,Burlingame
ViceChair:TrevorBridge,CostanoaLodgeandResort,Pescadero
ͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲͲ
2017through2019Term:
MartyCerles,LighthouseHotel,Pacifica
NickDell’Ergo,ResidenceInn,SanCarlos
ReggieKumar,ACHotelSFO,SouthSanFrancisco
LindaLarson,TheShopsatTanforan,TourismͲRelated
BarryOngerth,TheDylanatSFO,Millbrae
RicardoRamirez,TheWestinSFOandAloftSFO,Millbrae
JimRebosio,SheratonPaloAltoHotel,PaloAlto
FlorianRiedel,FourSeasonsSiliconValley,EastPaloAlto
YakubYakubi,CourtyardbyMarriott,FosterCity
2018through2020Term
FettahAydin,EmbassySuitesSFOͲWaterfront,Burlingame
JeffBass,HillerAviationMuseum,TourismͲRelated
DerekHudson,HiltonGardenInn,SanMateo
LisaKershner,SFOMarriottWaterfront,Burlingame
ChristineKupczak,HillsdaleShoppingCenter,TourismͲRelated
DaisyLi,MoonstarBuffet,TourismͲRelated
BenLy,EmbassySuitesSFO,SouthSanFrancisco
IrbyMorvant,HyattRegencySanFranciscoAirport,Burlingame
MitchPostel,SanMateoCountyHistoryMuseum,TourismͲRelated
RichardUribe,PullmanSFBay,RedwoodCity
2019through2021Term:
JonBallesteros,SFO,TourismͲRelated
TrevorBridge,CostanoaResort,UnincorporatedCounty
DanaDahl,BeachHouseHotel,HalfMoonBay
BillDixon,HotelFocusSFO,SouthSanFrancisco
DanHerbst,EnterpriseRentͲaͲCar,TourismͲRelated
ChrisHolbrook,SanMateoMarriott,SanMateo
JohnHutar,Dinah’sGardenHotel,TourismͲRelated
MikeMcKee,DoubletreeSFO,Burlingame
J.D.Smith,DoubletreeSFONorth,Brisbane
1
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA NO: 8i
MEETING DATE: November 5, 2018
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Date: November 5, 2018
From: Syed Murtuza, Public Works Director – (650) 558-7230
Margaret Glomstad, Parks & Recreation Director – (650) 558-7307
Subject: Approval of Out-of-State Travel for City Staff
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the out-of-state travel for five staff members
attending the 2019 Cartegraph National Conference in Denver, Colorado, for the purposes of
training in the Cartegraph Computerized Infrastructure Asset Management System.
BACKGROUND
The Public Works Department has been using the Operations Management System (OMS)
software from Cartegraph LLC since 2014, and the Parks & Recreation Department started
using the software in 2018. This software is used to manage operational activities such as
scheduling routine preventative maintenance tasks, managing and processing work orders,
responding to customer service requests, reporting monthly data, and tracking costs and
services for operations and management of the City’s water system, storm drain system,
sanitary sewer system, streets, sidewalks, street lights, traffic system, and parks infrastructure.
Additionally, the software communicates directly with the City’s accessBurlingame citizen
engagement software, and will be integrated with planned implementation of the ERP
(Enterprise Resource Planning) software in the near future. The Public Works and Parks &
Recreation Management Analysts are the administrators for this software program in the
respective departments for the overall management of the system and implementation.
DISCUSSION
Burlingame residents expect the City to provide high quality public services to the community in
a safe, sustainable, and efficient manner. The residents expect City staff to use City resources
wisely, deliver a high level of service, and ensure the community continues to thrive well into the
future. For this reason, and to provide training to staff members that utilize the Cartegraph
Computerized Infrastructure Asset Management System to improve delivery of City services
with high level of efficiencies, staff requests that the City Council approve out-of-state travel for
staff to attend the Cartegraph National Conference, which will take place from April 29 to May 3,
2019, in Denver, Colorado. The conference is a valuable opportunity for staff to grow
Approval of Out-of-State Travel for City Staff November 5, 2018
2
professionally and will help bring knowledge of new operations and asset management
strategies, improve technical skills, and provide knowledge of individual case studies and
industry best practices back to Burlingame, ultimately helping the City team deliver the best
possible outcome for Burlingame residents and businesses.
Apart from one-on-one consulting with industry experts, the conference offers over 60 sessions
tailored to the City’s challenges and opportunities, plus daily opportunities to exchange ideas
with colleagues facing the same challenges as Burlingame, along with the ability to network with
hundreds of other government professionals from across the country.
The total cost for five staff members to attend the conference is approximately $12,684. This
includes early-bird registration fees, lodging, meals and transportation costs. Please refer to the
attached Cost Estimate Summary Exhibit for details.
The OMS administrators will attend the conference for five days in order to participate in the
pre-conference certification training and testing. The pre-conference Cartegraph certification
training will save the City five percent off Cartegraph software services through April 30, 2020,
after the Management Analysts pass the test. Other staff members will attend the conference for
three days. Staff believes the Cartegraph National Conference is a wise investment for the City
and will benefit the organization and citizens for years to come.
The f ollowing staff members are designated to attend the conference:
Staff Department Title Funding Source
1 Kevin Dawdy Public Works Management Analyst Sewer Enterprise
2 Karen Hager Parks & Rec Management Analyst General Fund
3 Rich Holtz Parks & Rec Parks Supervisor General Fund
4 Mike Heathcote Public Works
Streets, Storm Drains,
and Sewer Division
Manager
Sewer Enterprise
5 Mike Brown Public Works Water Ops Supervisor Water Enterprise
FISCAL IMPACT
The total estimated cost of the conference including training, certification, transportation, and
hotel accommodations, is $12,684, which will be covered by a combination of Water and Sewer
Utilities Enterprise Funds in the amount of $7,356; and General Fund in the amount of $5,328.
Sufficient funds are available in the current Public Works and Parks & Recreation Departments’
operating budgets to cover the costs.
Exhibit:
• Cost Estimate Summary
PW Management
Analyst
Parks & Rec
Management
Analyst
PW Division
Manager PW Supervisor Parks & Rec
Supervisor
Hotel 1,400.00$ 1,400.00$ 840.00$ 840.00$ 840.00$
Airfare 300.00$ 300.00$ 300.00$ 300.00$ 300.00$
Registration 1,395.00$ 1,395.00$ 795.00$ 795.00$ 795.00$
Food 155.00$ 155.00$ 93.00$ 93.00$ 93.00$
Transportation 50.00$ 50.00$ 50.00$ 50.00$ 50.00$
Totals 3,300.00$ 3,300.00$ 2,028.00$ 2,028.00$ 2,028.00$
7,356.00$ 5,328.00$
12,684.00$ Estimated Grand Total:
Cartegraph National Conference | Denver, Colorado
April 29 - May 3, 2019
Cost Estimate
Department Subtotals:
1
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA NO: 8j
MEETING DATE: November 5, 2018
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Date: November 5, 2018
From: Meaghan Hassel-Shearer, City Clerk – (650) 558-7203
Subject: Acceptance of a Proclamation Honoring Anson Burlingame and the 150th
Anniversary of the Burlingame Treaty on US-China Relations
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council accept the attached Proclamation honoring Anson
Burlingame and the 150th Anniversary of the Burlingame Treaty on US-China Relations.
BACKGROUND
On Friday, November 16, 2018, the City will be unveiling a bust of Anson Burlingame at the
Burlingame Public Library from 6:00 p.m. to 8:30 p.m.
The bust of Anson Burlingame was made to honor the 150th anniversary of the Burlingame
Treaty. The Treaty was the first to recognize the equal rights of Chinese citizens and to grant
China most favored nation status. Anson Burlingame is one of America’s finest human rights
leaders and defenders of social justice, a man well ahead of his own time and very relevant to
ours.
The bust was sculpted by renowned artist Zhou Limin in China especially for the City of
Burlingame.
Exhibit:
• Proclamation
PROCLAMATION
Honoring Anson Burlingame and the r5oth Anniversary of the
Burlingame Treaty on US-China Relations
'l,l)fiereas, Anson Gurfingame (1s20-1s70) was afierce oryoflent of sfaaery, a fory campaigrcrfor an[
a[visor to flirafiam Lincotn, co-creator of Linco[n's fupu1tican ?arQ, anf a fulember of
Qongress wfro hetievef [eepty infreedom, toterance, an[ respectfor aff peopfe; anl
lilficreas, Sresi[ent Lincofn appointe[ Eurtingame to 6e tfre first OS nmfidssd[or to Cfrina in 1861,
d post fre freffwitfi [istinction untif 1867; an[
'Wficreas, Wfrite in Cfiina, Gurfingamc 6uitt strong [ipbmatic ties \ase[onmutuafrespect an[mutuat
interests, tfiere61 persua[ing Cfrina to suryort tfie 'Union $'forth) in tfre lJS Cfui['|,/ar an[
fretping open up tfie Cfrina marfut to 'US enterprises of tfre [ay an[
l,lfiereas, ffie Cfrinese gcvernfiwnt so respectef {Burfingame's intetfrgence, fairness, an[ eaen-
fianfe[ncss tfrat, upon fiis [epanurefrom Eeijing fu 1867, tfie lEmperor asfrg[Aurfinganu
to 6e Cfrina's ambassa[or to tfre 'USA an[ to lEurope, a unique eaent in mo[ern [iptomacl;
an[
,|4)frereas,In 1868, $ur[ingame negotiatettfieJirst evergvlost lFavore[9,fation treaty (tfie$urfingame-
Sewart'Treatl) fietween Cfrira an[ a major power, tfie Onite[ States, usfieing Cfiina into
tfre mo[ernworff, anf2018 marfu tfre 15Tfr anniversary of tfris groun[|reafrjng tredt); an[
ilpon vMting '|,/ittkm Q,gtston at fiis Eehnont lEstate in 1866, $urtingamefeffin fove witfi
tfie ?enircufa, witing to a frien[ tfiat fre was cfranging fris resilence to Qatifonia anl
acquiing 1100 acres, a portion of wfiicfi wouff fater 6ecom.e tfie Qitl of <Burfingame; an[
At fi* untima\ [eatfi, fie was given a fiero's |uriaf in Eoston, fris coffk [rapefin \otfi tfie
Stars an[ Stripes an[ tfie Imperiat aragon fkg of Cfiina, fris obituary pennef, $ tuLar{
twain, wfro wrote in part tfrat Anson Eurtingame wds "d goo[ man an"[ a r.,ery very gredt
man. America fost a son, an[ aff tfre worff, a seradflt, wfren fre [ie[.'
ilfiereas,
'Wficreas,
Nwttficrefore I, tul-icfraefeBrownrigg, tul-ayrof tfre Qity of $urtingameintfreState of Cafrfornia, [o fiere61
[eckre T'fwember 14 to 5e Anson $urtingame [a1 in tfie Qity of cBurfrngame.
In witness wfrereof, I fiave fiereunto set nry fianf, and cause[ tfre seaf of tfie
Qitl of Eurfrnganu to 6e affi4g[tfiis, tfie 5tn (Day of 9'[wem6er, 2018.
1
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA NO: 10a
MEETING DATE: November 5, 2018
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Date: November 5, 2018
From: Ana Maria Silva, Executive Assistant – (650) 558-7204
Subject: Consideration of Appointments to the Traffic, Safety & Parking Commission
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council make appointments to fill two impending vacancies on the
Traffic, Safety & Parking Commission or take other action.
BACKGROUND
The vacancies are due to the expiring terms of Commissioners Christopher Bush and Howard
Wettan. The vacancies were publicized, and notification letters were sent to past Commission
applicants. The City received two applications as of the deadline of October 12, 2018. The
following two applicants were interviewed by the full Council on October 22, 2018: Howard
Wettan and Christopher Bush.
The appointee terms will be for three years, ending November 6, 2021.
1
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA NO: 10b
MEETING DATE: November 5, 2018
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Date: November 5, 2018
From: Ana Maria Silva, Executive Assistant – (650) 558-7204
Subject: Consideration of Appointments to the Beautification Commission
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council make appointments to fill three impending vacancies on
the Beautification Commission or take other action.
BACKGROUND
The vacancies are due to the expired terms of Commissioners Mary Hunt, Mary Ellen Kearney,
and Richard Kirchner. The vacancies were publicized, and notification letters were sent to past
Commission applicants. The City received five applications as of the deadline of September 21,
2018. One applicant was unavailable for the interview. The following four applicants were
interviewed by the full Council on October 22, 2018: Mary Hunt, Mary Ellen Kearney, Richard
Kirchner, and Shaeda Urbani.
The appointee terms will be for three years, ending October 7, 2021.
1
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA NO: 10c
MEETING DATE: November 5, 2018
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Date: November 5, 2018
From: Ana Maria Silva, Executive Assistant – (650) 558-7204
Subject: Consideration of Appointments to the Parks & Recreation Commission
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council make appointments to fill two impending vacancies on the
Parks and Recreation Commission or take other action.
BACKGROUND
The vacancies are due to the expired terms of Commissioners Claire Schissler and Karen
Malekos-Smith. Commissioner Schissler elected not to reapply. The vacancies were publicized,
and notification letters were sent to past Commission applicants. The City received four
applications as of the extended deadline of October 5, 2018. One applicant was unavailable for
the interview. The following three applicants were interviewed by the full Council on October 22,
2018: Stephanie Lee, Leslie Holzman, and Shaeda Urbani.
The appointee terms will be for three years, ending October 7, 2021.
1
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA NO: 10d
MEETING DATE: November 5, 2018
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Date: November 5, 2018
From: Margaret Glomstad, Parks and Recreation Director – (650) 558-7307
Subject: Approval of the Schematic Design and Phasing Plan for the New
Community Center
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the schematic design and phasing plan for the
new community center.
BACKGROUND
Since 2012, City staff, in collaboration with Group 4 Architecture, the Citizens’ Advisory
Committee (CAC), and community members, has been working on developing plans for a new
community center in Washington Park. The work includes development of a Master Plan for the
active areas of the park and identifies the site locations of the park amenities (Community Center
Master Plan) and conceptual designs of the proposed building within the Master Plan. The City
Council approved the Community Center Master Plan on July 7, 2014.
Since that time, the City Council has held study sessions, and the City has gathered input through
an Advisory Committee, at Planning Commission and Parks and Recreation Commission
meetings, as well as at community meetings and public events. Information about the process
and public outreach plan can be found at
https://www.burlingame.org/parksandrec/facilities/projects/community_center_conceptual
_plan.php
At the July 2, 2018 Council meeting, the City Council chose to move forward with the pavilions
style building, a 35,700 square foot community center with parking under and adjacent to the new
center. The project also includes a new relocated playground, picnic area, and basketball court,
and an indoor and outdoor stage. The tennis courts, Lions Club building, ballfields, and Parking
Lot X will remain unchanged.
At the September 17, 2018 City Council study session, staff and Group 4 presented a Schematic
Design progress update and received input and direction on the project scope and budget,
including add alternates, selection of the underground parking option, approval of the early site
package, and approval of the exterior material palette. At the September 20, 2018 Parks &
Recreation Commission meeting and the September 24, 2018 Planning Commission meeting,
Approval of the Schematic Design for the New Community Center November 5, 2018
2
City staff and Group 4 presented a schematic design progress update, including relaying the input
that the Council provided at its study session.
DISCUSSION
Project Updates
Early Site Package
With the goal of providing uninterrupted community access to the playground during the building
construction, an early site package is being developed that will include the design and
construction of the relocated children’s playground and basketball court.
As the playground is a well-utilized community amenity, staff issued a community survey soliciting
input for playground equipment priorities. Staff also solicited volunteers to sit on a Washington
Park Playground Committee for the playground equipment selection and design. On October 1,
2018, the Washington Park Playground Committee had its first meeting to review the project
scope, timeline, and the community survey results.
The community survey results indicated the public’s priority to include a “variety” of playground
equipment. The survey results also indicated that slides and climbing opportunities are always
popular. Additional interests include strap swings and imaginative play spaces. Thematically, the
public preferred nature elements in the design, although the Committee also values the train
component of the current playground. The Committee has identified a list of specific wants and
needs for the new playground, which will be used in generating the design concepts. The
Committee will be meeting again on November 13, 2018 to review design options from two
vendors, Landscape Structures and BCI Burke. During the playground development, staff and
the consultants determined that swapping the locations of the playground and basketball court
made more sense for the overall design of the park for the following reasons:
1. The size of the new play structure will not need to be reduced from the current play
structure’s size.
2. There is a reduced chance of baseballs being hit into the playground.
3. The new basketball court will not have a slope like the current basketball court has.
4. The noise from the playground will be farther away from the new stage and the
indoor/outdoor area of the community hall.
5. The new playground will be closer to the Washington Park restrooms.
The environmental consultant, LSA, has determined that the switch will not result in any new or
more significant impacts than those already identified in the IS/MND (Exhibit A).
The children’s playground and basketball court site package will be completed independent of the
construction of the building and remaining site work. One of the parameters for the building
construction package will be a requirement that the contractor provide safe access for the
community to the new playground and basketball court during construction of the building and its
associated site work. The work plan for the playground and basketball project anticipates
construction documents being completed in the winter of 2019, bid in late spring 2019, and
Approval of the Schematic Design for the New Community Center November 5, 2018
3
construction completed by the end of December 2019, prior to construction commencing on the
building, underground parking, and remaining site work.
Parking
The new surface parking lot with vegetated landscape and trees will take the place of the existing
facility location, while the new building will be located immediately to the west of the new lot,
closer to the greater Washington Park and other civic amenities. The surface lot will provide a
transitional buffer between the new building’s activities and the single-family residences along the
eastern edge of the park. A vegetated sound wall between the parking lot and residential homes
will be built to mitigate vehicular noise impact from the surface lot. The parking lot will also include
a designated pick-up and drop-off zone immediately adjacent to the entry plaza. To
accommodate tour bus trips associated with recreation programming, the section of Burlingame
Avenue directly in front of the community center may be zoned for bus loading and unloading
during specific timeframes.
The underground parking is located partially under the building and partially under the surface lot.
There will be a lobby at the underground parking level that will allow visitors access from the
parking garage up to the street level of the surface lot and into the community center lobby when
the center is open. There are two options regarding the number of parking spaces that can be
included in the garage: the first option provides 43 spaces (41 are needed in the garage), while
the second option provides an additional 10 spaces, for a total of 53 spaces. The costs of the two
options are included in the project budget section of this report. At the September study session,
the Council expressed their preference for a total of 53 spaces.
Exterior Building Design
To ensure the design adheres to the City Council’s direction and is sensitive to the community’s
vision, an Advisory Committee was formed to provide additional input into the development of the
exterior and interior building design. On August 22, 2018, staff and Group 4 met with the Advisory
Committee to review the exterior envelope design, focusing on the building’s exterior materials,
exterior elevations, and massing.
The Advisory Committee reviewed several exterior material options. Each option included the
primary exterior cladding material of EIFS (Exterior Insulation and Finish System), which has the
look of stucco but is an integrated exterior envelope system that has high insulation performance.
The EIFS is planned to be painted several colors: two neutral shades and one accent color for
vibrancy. The Advisory Committee selected three accent materials: metal panels for the vertical
pavilion elements, stone planks for a grounding base finish, and wood (phenolic panel) for the
parapeted volumes that connect the three pavilions. The three pavilion butterfly roofs are planned
to be standing seam metal, while the parapeted flat roofs are planned to be TPO roofing. An add
alternate is being included in the project budget for a green roof on the Kids Town portion of the
building, which is the one-story highly visible portion of the building on Burlingame Avenue in front
of the first pavilion; the green roof would be visible from the street, the park, and the second-floor
dance room. Wood and steel trellises will accent the building entry and outdoor program spaces.
At the September 17, 2018 study session, staff and Group 4 presented the exterior envelope
design and material palette, which were refined per input and direction provided by the Advisory
Approval of the Schematic Design for the New Community Center November 5, 2018
4
Committee during its first meeting held August 22, 2018. The City Council expressed support for
the exterior materials selection, which was carefully curated with consideration to the project’s
unique park setting, desired project aesthetic, performance, and maintenance requirements. The
development of the exterior envelope on the park-side view was well received by all
Councilmembers. Councilmembers expressed the desire to continue refinement of the
parapet/secondary volumes between the pavilions on the Burlingame Avenue façade to allow the
pavilions to be expressed more prominently, with the parapet/secondary volumes playing a
supporting role.
The second Advisory Committee meeting on September 19, 2018 focused on site design and
landscape features, as well as interior feature elements for the lobby and Kids Town. The
landscape consultant, RHAA, presented the overall site design concept including site features
such as outdoor rooms, seat walls, trellises, and fire pits, and hardscape, softscape, and planting
palettes. The committee recommended a focal tree as the centerpiece of the outdoor space that
would be on-axis with the building entry and highly visible from the lobby. The Committee
concurred with the landscape consultant’s recommendation for primarily native and climate-
appropriate low-water and low-maintenance plantings and requested that the landscape look
lively and beautiful through all seasons. In this meeting, Group 4 also presented several thematic
design concepts that inspired the overall architecture of the building and requested that the
Committee select one of these themes to inspire special design features, including the lobby
staircase, a feature wall in the Kids Town, interior finishes, lighting, and the reception desk. The
Committee selected the theme “grow|rooted” as it harkened to both the natural beauty of the
trees in Washington Park, the primary inspiration for the building design, and the role of the
community center as a vibrant and enriching place for gathering, learning, and branching out for
all ages. The Committee also selected the primary paint colors for the building – two neutral tones
and a blue accent color.
During the third Advisory Committee meeting on October 10, 2018, the Committee reviewed
updates to the building exterior, preliminary floor and ceiling finishes, interior and exterior lighting,
and preliminary concepts for both the lobby stair design feature and the Kids Town feature wall.
The Committee confirmed direction for the overall lighting design concepts and selected luminaire
types for many of the spaces, both interior and exterior. The Committee also made
recommendations for refinements to the lobby stair design feature, which will help activate the
lobby with opportunities to gather, interact, and reflect with informal tiered seating next to and
“under” the grand staircase. The Committee also reviewed the Kids Town feature wall, which will
be an interactive focal point for the room. The designs for both the lobby and Kids Town features
were directly inspired by and support the theme of “grow|rooted” selected in the previous
meeting.
City staff and Group 4 met with the Advisory Committee for a fourth session on October 22, 2018
to review the refined concept designs for the lobby and Kids Town feature elements as well as
draft renderings of these interior spaces. In the lobby, the stair feature was refined to create
improved seating opportunities both individuals and groups, and was re-shaped so as not to
hinder circulation in and through the lobby. In addition, the seating element was revised to
reinforce indoor-outdoor connections via a seat wall that continues from the interior to the outdoor
landscape. In the Kids Town, the feature element was revised to include child-sized window
Approval of the Schematic Design for the New Community Center November 5, 2018
5
seats in and between “tree” elements and interactive play opportunities. The committee also
reviewed refined lighting concepts based on input received from the previous meeting.
Floor Plan and Building Systems
The Integrated Design Workshop for the schematic design phase was held on Monday, August
27, 2018 with City staff, Group 4, and the subconsultant design team.
Group 4 presented a project overview of the building, a refined floor plan, exterior materials, and
initial interior floor finishes. The floor plan is currently being refined in conjunction with building
systems, as well as staff area requirements. Staff has requested that an additional elevator be
included as an add alternate in the project budget to provide additional access and flexibility for
operations.
The structural engineer gave an overview of the selected structural system, steel, its integration
with the building floor plan, and lateral and seismic considerations. In addition, the recommended
roof system is a concealed steel roof, and the second floor is concrete on metal deck.
The food service consultant reviewed the layout, appliances, and flow for the commercial kitchen
adjacent to the community room. While there is a desire to have the kitchen function as a
demonstration kitchen, the primary purpose of the kitchen is to support the community room for
catered rental events and community events.
The mechanical, electrical, and plumbing engineers reviewed sustainable strategies for
maximizing energy efficiency, including: operable windows, daylight and glare control, ceiling
fans, heat recovery, and a decoupled and highly efficient HVAC system (variant refrigerant flow).
City staff supported each of these sustainable strategies. Plumbing system options and f ixture
locations were also presented. The electrical engineer reviewed the building’s power
requirements, including electric vehicle charging, which is in high demand in Burlingame, and the
request for an emergency generator or battery-supported microgrid (this will require additional
study to determine feasibility) to provide support for limited operations during a power outage.
The project budget currently breaks out the costs for the emergency generator/battery back up as
a separate add alternate. The planned rooftop photovoltaic system is included as an add
alternate in the project budget section because there are other options for procurement that the
City may prefer, such as a low-interest loan from the State Energy Commission or a power
purchase agreement. Interior and exterior lighting strategies, including sensitivity to neighbors at
night, sensors, dimming controls, and emergency lighting were also discussed. The lighting
fixtures for the project are planned to be LED.
The civil engineer and landscape architect reviewed the site plan, access and egress, and
vehicular circulation. It was determined that underground parking that is partially located under
the building is preferred in order to leverage the slab and structure of the building above; this
scheme is less costly than a detached underground parking scheme. The civil engineer
presented utility locations and preliminary stormwater treatment strategies (required by California
code) via bioswales located in key planting areas around the building. The landscape engineer
reviewed the site features, including the entry plazas, outdoor rooms, pathways, basketball/multi-
use court, playground, picnic area, and hardscape and planting strategies.
Approval of the Schematic Design for the New Community Center November 5, 2018
6
Environmental Review
An Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) has been prepared to evaluate the
potential environmental impacts of the proposed project. The draft IS/MND has determined that
there would be no environmental impacts identified that could not be mitigated to less than
significant levels. As mandated by State Law, the minimum public review comment period for this
document is 20 days. During this public review period for the IS/MND (September 13, 2018 to
October 3, 2018), no public comments were received. Since the community center is a municipal
facility rather than a development project, City staff will be requesting that City Council take action
to adopt the IS/MND and the Mitigated Monitoring Report Program (MMRP) at the November 19,
2018 City Council meeting.
Project Budget
At the March 19, 2018 Council meeting, staff and Group 4 presented the City Council with an
estimated project budget of $38-$41.7M in March 2018 dollars (not including escalation). To
accommodate the full-size basketball court that the City Council requested, the site plan needed
to be expanded to relocate the playground to the picnic area to the east of the softball field.
The following table summarizes the current project budget, which is broken down into the
following categories: hard cost, soft cost, project contingency, and escalation. The project hard
costs include local prevailing wage construction costs based on a design-bid-build procurement
process with competitive bidding for all sub-trades of the construction work, general contractor’s
jobsite management costs, general contractor’s insurance and bonding costs, and general
contractor’s profit. The project soft costs include allowances for engineering and design fees,
construction management, permit fees, inspections, and testing. The project contingency
allowance is calculated at 10% of the project hard cost and 5% of the project soft cost, and the
escalation allowance is calculated at 5% per annum on the project hard cost estimated to the
midpoint of construction. Construction is anticipated to be January 2020 to December 2022.
Project Budget October 2018
Hard Cost Soft Cost
Hard + Soft
Cost Subtotal
Project
Contingency Escalation
Contingency
+ Escalation
Subtotal Total
PACKAGE 1:
Playground, Multi-
Court, Picnic Area $1,974,351 $189,000 $2,163,351 $184,519 $98,718 $283,236 $2,446,587
PACKAGE 2:
Building, Associated
Sitework, Parking $34,096,039 $8,892,000 $42,988,039 $3,186,546 $3,693,738 $6,880,283 $49,868,322
Building $22,991,783 $6,327,000 $29,318,783 $2,148,765 $2,490,776 $4,639,541 $33,958,324
Sitework $3,683,778 $849,000 $4,532,778 $344,278 $399,076 $743,354 $5,276,132
Underground Parking* $7,420,479 $1,716,000 $9,136,479 $693,503 $803,885 $1,497,388 $10,633,867
OTHER PACKAGES:
Furniture, Equipment,
Technology $1,376,000 $362,000 $1,738,000 $128,600 $154,938 $283,538 $2,021,538
FF&E $955,000 $252,000 $1,207,000 $89,300 $107,533 $196,833 $1,403,833
Technology $268,000 $70,100 $338,100 $25,000 $30,177 $55,177 $393,277
Signage $153,000 $39,900 $192,900 $14,300 $17,228 $31,528 $224,428
*Underground Parking= 41 spaces
ADD ALTERNATES (incl. contingencies,
escalation, soft costs):
Photovoltaic Panel System (on building)
$1,794,600
Green Roof on Kid's Town
$170,200
Approval of the Schematic Design for the New Community Center November 5, 2018
7
Emergency Generator or Battery
$292,000
Elevator #2
$471,400
Garage Parking- Additional 10 Spaces
$674,251
BMS System and Energy Dashboard
$442,115
Sprung Wood Floor in Community Room $106,900
FISCAL IMPACT
In November 2017, the voters of Burlingame approved Measure I, a ¼ cent sales tax measure
that will generate an estimated $1.75 million to $2 million annually. At the January 27, 2018 goal-
setting session, the City Council discussed the City Manager’s recommended expenditure plan
for the Measure I funds, which included an annual pledge of $1 million toward debt service on the
issuance of lease revenue bonds. The City Council approved the recommendation on February
20, 2018. An additional $1 million annual General Fund transfer was approved in the 2018-19
fiscal year budget, also intended to fund the debt service, to allow for a lease revenue bond
issuance of approximately $30 million for the Community Center project.
Staff will return with a recommendation for funding for construction of Package 1 (the playground,
multi-court, and picnic area) as part of the mid-year budget review process.
As the total costs of the entire project are expected to exceed $50 million, the City will need to
rely on an additional combination of Measure I revenues plus ongoing General Fund revenues
and/or monies from the Capital Investment Reserve.
Exhibits:
• LSA Memorandum
• Community Center Renderings
CARLSBAD
FRESNO
IRVINE
LOS ANGELES
PALM SPRINGS
POINT RICHMOND
RIVERSIDE
ROSEVILLE
SAN LUIS OBISPO
157 Park Place, Pt. Richmond, California 94801 510.236.6810 www.lsa.net
MEMORANDUM
DATE: October 25, 2018
TO: Teresa Rom, Group 4 Architecture, Research + Planning, Inc.
FROM: Theresa Wallace, AICP, Principal-in-Charge
Matthew Wiswell, Project Manager
SUBJECT: Minor Changes to the Burlingame Community Center Master Plan Project Initial
Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Ms. Rom:
The purpose of this Memorandum is to evaluate the potential effects related to minor modifications
to the Burlingame Community Center Master Plan Project (proposed project). An Initial
Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND)1 for the proposed project was made available for
public review on September 13, 2018. The public review period closed on October 3, 2018. The
proposed project and IS/MND are scheduled to be heard and considered for approval and adoption
by the Burlingame City Council on November 19, 2018.
LSA understands that in the time after the public review period closed and prior to the adoption of
the IS/MND, the City of Burlingame (City) has requested that Group 4 Architecture, Planning +
Research, Inc. (Group 4) consider swapping the locations of the proposed basketball court and
playground (refer to Figure 2-6 in the IS/MND). Aside from these different locations, all other
aspects of the proposed project would remain the same.
It is LSA’s professional opinion that swapping the locations of the basketball court and playground
would not result in any new or more significant impacts compared to those already analyzed in the
IS/MND. Mitigation Measure BIO-1, which requires a pre-construction nesting bird survey to be
completed prior to vegetation removal if it occurs between February 1 and October 31, would still
be required. Additionally, while the total number of protected trees removed from the project site
may be different than what was identified and analyzed in the IS/MND, the City would still be
required to provide replacement plantings as part of the proposed project.
1 LSA Associates, Inc., 2018. Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Burlingame Community
Center Master Plan Project. September.
10/25/18 (\\BRK10\Projects\GRP1802 Burlingame Community Ctr IS MND\PRODUCTS\Memo\10-25-18 Burlingame CC Memo.docx) 2
All other mitigation measures included in the IS/MND would still be required. Therefore, the IS/MND
adequately addresses the impacts of the minor revisions to the proposed project, and no further
environmental review would be required.
Sincerely,
LSA Associates, Inc.
Theresa Wallace, AICP
Principal-in-Charge
Matthew Wiswell
Project Manager
1
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA ITEM NO:
10e
MEETING DATE:
November 5, 2018
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Date: November 5, 2018
From: Kevin Gardiner, Community Development Director – (650) 558-7253
Subject: General Plan Update and Environmental Impact Report (EIR)
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that Council provide feedback on the update to the City’s General Plan and
Environmental Impact Report (EIR).
BACKGROUND
In March 2015, the City of Burlingame initiated a multi-year process focused on a community-
led effort to update the City’s General Plan and Zoning Ordinance, called “Envision Burlingame.”
The General Plan and Zoning Ordinance are the City’s two documents that regulate all land
use, environmental, and transportation decisions made by City leaders.
The Envision Burlingame process will result in goals and strategies for desired change in the
City by answering the question: “How do we want Burlingame to look, function, and feel 25
years from now?” To answer this question, residents, business owners and other community
members have been engaged in a comprehensive discussion regarding mobility, urban design,
recreation and parks, health, natural resources, and economic development opportunities.
Envision Burlingame has three broad objectives:
1. Develop a vision for Burlingame, with particular attention paid to the topics of stability
and opportunities for desired change.
2. Update policies and regulations to ensure they address current regional, state, and
federal requirements.
3. Create an updated and fully digital General Plan and Zoning Ordinance that are easily
accessed, understood, and applied by the community, property and business owners,
and decision makers.
Below is a summary of the overall project schedule based on major project phases, each of
which includes a variety of community outreach and public engagement activities and events.
General Plan Update and EIR November 5, 2018
2
Phase Status
1. Existing Conditions and Opportunities ...........................................Completed Fall 2015
2. Vision and Transformative Strategies Framework .................... Completed Spring 2016
3. Concept Alternatives ................................................................ Completed Spring 2016
4. Draft General Plan ................................................................ Completed Summer 2017
5. Environmental Review ............................................................................ Summer 2018
6. General Plan Hearings and Adoption ............................................. Summer - Fall 2018
7. Zoning Ordinance Update ................................................ Spring 2018 – Summer 2019
The Public Review Draft of the General Plan was released in August 2017. The draft plan is
available on the Envision Burlingame website at www.envisionburlingame.org, and on the City
of Burlingame website at www.burlingame.org/generalplan.
The Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) was released on June 28, 2018. The Draft EIR
analyzes the potential impacts related to the implementation of the General Plan at a
"programmatic" level, as authorized by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The
Draft EIR is intended to serve as an informational document for use by Planning Commission,
City Council, other public agencies, and the community in their consideration of the proposed
General Plan.
The Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) has been prepared with responses to comments
on the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR). The City published a Notice of Availability
and circulated the DEIR for public review and comment from July 3, 2018 through August 20,
2018. The FEIR provides responses to comments received during the public review and
comment period.
The Draft and Final EIR are available on the Envision Burlingame website at
www.envisionburlingame.org, and on the City of Burlingame website at
www.burlingame.org/generalplan.
City Council Review. The City Council has reviewed the General Plan at various key intervals
through the process, including:
• Review of Draft Concept Alternatives as part of the annual joint meeting with the
Planning Commission on March 19, 2016;
• Review of the preliminary Land Use Plan on September 7, 2016;
• Discussion of a build-out analysis on December 2, 2016;
• Discussion of employment projections on September 18, 2017; and
• Project updates as part of the annual joint meetings with the Planning Commission on
April 15, 2017 and May 2, 2018.
General Plan Update and EIR November 5, 2018
3
Planning Commission Review and Recommendation. The Planning Commission has
reviewed the General Plan at various key intervals through the process, including:
• Joint meetings with the City Council;
• Review of the preliminary Land Use Plan at a study session on July 13, 2016;
• Overview and public comment session on the Draft General Plan and Draft EIR on July
11, 2018;
• Discussion of historic resource approaches and policies on August 10, 2018.
At its meeting on October 22, 2018, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the
General Plan and EIR to the City Council, with the following changes and clarifications:
• Acceptance of staff and consultant suggestions for public comment follow-up actions as
presented with the staff report (attached as Exhibits A and B);
• Further discussion of historic resource approaches and policies.
The Planning Commission supported the goals, policies, and programs outlined in the Draft
General Plan, with the exception of the approach to the review of potential historic resources.
Policy CC-3.2 in the Community Character Element would require that applicants for any
discretionary permits (i.e., those requiring Planning Commission approval) involving remodeling,
removing, or substantially altering any structure older than 50 years prepare a Historic
Resources Analysis consistent with State CEQA requirements to identify the potential historical
significance of the property. Commissioners were concerned that the vast majority of homes in
Burlingame are older than 50 years old, that relatively few would be eligible for historic status,
and that requiring evaluations to be undertaken would be onerous to applicants in instances
where there is a low likelihood the property would be potentially eligible for historic status
(October 22, 2018 Planning Commission meeting minutes attached). This matter is further
discussed below.
Community Advisory Committee (CAC). A Community Advisory Committee (CAC) was
established by the City Council early in the process to advise the project team throughout the
development of the updated General Plan. Members included representatives from a variety of
organizations and perspectives, including neighborhood groups, business groups, transportation
and housing advocacy groups, and environmental organizations, as well as residents
representing a range of perspectives, including youth, renters, and seniors. The role of the CAC
has been to connect with the various communities and stakeholders of Burlingame for the
purpose of advising and making recommendations to the Planning Commission and City
Council. The CAC held a total of 18 meetings between July 22, 2015, and August 30, 2017.
Community Engagement. The General Plan Update has included a range of community
engagement activities including four City Council study sessions, three community workshops,
numerous stakeholder interviews and intercept surveys, focus groups, an online survey, and
collaborations with students from Burlingame High School and local universities.
General Plan Update and EIR November 5, 2018
4
DISCUSSION
In this meeting, the consultant team will provide an overview of both the Draft General Plan and
Draft EIR. The City Council will have the opportunity to ask questions, receive public input, and
provide direction in anticipation of the General Plan returning for adoption on November 19th.
Draft Environmental Impact Report / Distribution of New Development. The Draft
Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) evaluated the build-out scenario presented to the City
Council on December 2, 2016 and again on September 18, 2017. The growth projections for the
General Plan through build-out are summarized in Table CX-1 in the Draft General Plan, shown
below:
One of the first community engagement activities conducted for the General Plan was to identify
“areas of stability” and “areas of change.” Areas of stability were defined as neighborhoods or
districts in which the community would anticipate little change over the next ten to 20 years,
while areas of change were places where the community desires new uses or redevelopment of
existing uses to occur. Community members expressed a strong desire to preserve
Burlingame’s residential neighborhoods and public parks, while the Bayfront, Rollins Road,
North Burlingame, Downtown, the Broadway commercial district, and portions of California Drive
were all identified as areas of potential change. El Camino Real was viewed as having the
potential for some change and some stability.
Through this strategy organized around “areas of change,” new employment uses are
particularly emphasized in the Bayfront, but also Rollins Road, North Burlingame, and
Downtown. New residential uses are emphasized in Downtown, North Burlingame, Broadway,
and California Drive. New live/work and residential uses are emphasized in the northern portion
of Rollins Road.
The build-out evaluated in the EIR includes up to 2,951 new residential units. Most of this
growth is targeted in the Downtown, North Burlingame, and North Rollins Road areas, providing
opportunities for higher-density housing close to transit (Caltrain and BART), services, and the
Burlingame Avenue and Broadway commercial districts. To a lesser extent, units are also
projected as infill in the Broadway commercial area, and along the California Drive and El
Camino Real corridors.
General Plan Update and EIR November 5, 2018
5
The General Plan process included confirmation of the existing Downtown Specific Plan, with
consensus that the land use and development framework provided in the Downtown Specific
Plan would be maintained in the updated General Plan. The environmental review conducted for
the Downtown Specific Plan projected up to 1,232 new residential units over the duration of the
plan; this projection was integrated into the General Plan EIR accordingly.
Projections for the North Burlingame Mixed Use and North Rollins Road Live/Work areas in the
EIR are based on the residential densities assigned to each respective land use. The North
Burlingame Mixed Use designation specifies a residential density ranging from 20 to 120 units
per acre (or 140 units per acre in a higher-density EIR alternative). The North Rollins Road
Live/Work designation specifies a residential density up to 70 units per acre. For reference,
these density ranges generally correspond to these types of housing:
• 20 units per acre – 2 to 3 story townhouses and rowhouses
• 70 units per acre – 3 to 7 story apartments/condominiums and live/work “lofts”
• 120 units per acre – 4 to 8 story apartments/condominiums
Based on these residential density ranges, the EIR evaluated up to 1,095 residential units in the
North Burlingame Mixed Use and North Rollins Road Live/Work areas combined (or up to 1,181
residential units in the higher-density EIR alternative). More specifically, the EIR evaluated 615
units in the North Burlingame Mixed Use area (701 units in the higher-density EIR alternative),
and 480 units in the North Rollins Road Live/Work area. Given the geographical proximity of
these two areas, presumably there would be flexibility in allocating units between North
Burlingame and North Rollins Road, with a total 1,095 units between the two areas (or 1,181
units in the higher-density EIR alternative).
The remaining residential units projected in the build-out scenario would be anticipated as infill
development in the Broadway and California Drive areas, as well as incremental infill along the
El Camino Real corridor. Up to 624 residential units would be anticipated in these areas over
the course of the General Plan.
Figure 1 (next page) illustrates the distribution of residential units evaluated in the General Plan
EIR. Should there be a desire to adjust the geographical allocation of residential growth over
time, this could be evaluated through subsequent planning efforts such as specific plans, or the
update to the 2015-2023 Housing Element (which was not included in the General Plan Update,
but will be required to be updated by 2024.) Alternatively, direction could be provided to make
adjustments at the present time, with corresponding revisions of the environmental analysis.
General Plan Update and EIR November 5, 2018
6
FIGURE 1:
EIR EVALUATION OF RESIDENTIAL GROWTH
Historic Resource Policies. The Draft General Plan includes policies intended to promote
preservation of historic resources. This includes policies providing flexible land use standards to
allow the adaptive reuse of identified historical buildings, promotion of the use of the State
Historic Building Code to facilitate the reuse and conversion of historical buildings to alternative
uses, and promotion of financial incentives for preservation of historic resources such as the
Mills Act, Federal Historic Tax Incentives, and the Federal Historic Preservation Tax Credit
program.
The Draft General Plan also includes a policy intended to ensure that historic resources are
adequately evaluated through the development and environmental review process:
CC-3.2: Comprehensive Historic Surveys
Require applicants for any discretionary permits that involve remodeling, removing, or
substantially altering any structure older than 50 years (at the time of the application) to
prepare a Historic Resources Analysis consistent with State CEQA requirements to identify
the historical significance of the property.
The policy would require historic evaluations for discretionary permits, which involve projects
subject to Planning Commission review, but would not include ministerial permits such as
building permits not subject to Planning Commission review. Discretionary permits subject to
Planning Commission review include design review applications (both residential and
General Plan Update and EIR November 5, 2018
7
commercial), second-story additions to single family homes, and demolition and rebuilds of
single family homes. Ministerial permits not typically subject to Planning Commission review
include most single-story additions to single family homes, improvements to commercial
buildings involving alterations of less than 50 percent of a façade, and permits for routine
building maintenance.
The approach to historic resources provided in the Draft General Plan was proposed by the
Community Advisory Committee (CAC) over the course of several meetings, after reviewing
historic evaluation approaches in other communities. The approach emphasizes equity, in that
only properties undergoing significant development would be subject to historic review, and the
cost of review would be the responsibility of the applicant.
However, over the course of the review of the Draft General Plan, members of the community
and the Planning Commission have raised concerns with this approach, as it would require
evaluations to be undertaken for any property greater than 50 years old. This threshold
encompasses the vast majority of homes in Burlingame. The concern is that such evaluations
would be onerous to applicants in instances where there is a low likelihood the property would
be potentially eligible for historic status.
Historical resources are considered part of the environment and are subject to review under
CEQA. A project that may cause a substantial adverse effect on the significance of a historical
resource is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment. As such, a project
involving a historic resource would require environmental review, and would not qualify for a
Categorical Exemption under CEQA.
The 50-year threshold is an environmental review criterion that originates from 36 Code of
Federal Regulations 60.4, which pertains to the National Register. However, this threshold in
itself does not provide an absolute determination. Resources less than 50 years old may qualify
as significant historical resources if deemed “exceptionally important” through the events or
individuals associated with the resource. Conversely an age of 50 years or greater does not in
itself convey historic status.
As the Draft General Plan has been undergoing review and there has been further discussion of
this matter, staff has consulted with the General Plan team to identify other potential
approaches to the review of potential historic resources. Staff has also consulted with
representatives of Page & Turbull, which is the consulting firm commissioned to prepare historic
evaluations in the Burlingame Park neighborhood, for their perspective on other approaches
that could be considered. Other possibilities suggested include historic resource surveys or
“Historic Context Statements” that could provide more particular guidance on identifying historic
resources.
Should the City Council choose to further evaluate this matter, Policy CC-3.2 could be revised to
allow further study. Further study could allow consideration of other approaches such as
surveys and context statements, or possibilities for streamlining individual evaluations.
General Plan Update and EIR November 5, 2018
8
Final EIR. The Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) was circulated for a 45-day public
review and comment period beginning July 3, 2018 and ending August 20, 2018. The City
published a Notice of Availability and circulated a DEIR for public review and comment from July
3, 2018 through August 20, 2018.
The City received ten comment letters during the review period, including seven letters from
public agencies and three letters from individuals. The Final EIR provides responses to each
comment. Responses include a summary to identify if the response will introduce “new
significant information” under any of the four categories identified in Section 15088 et seq. of the
CEQA Guidelines or if it does not introduce “new significant information.”
Draft General Plan Public Comments. To date, the City has received 23 comment letters and
emails on the Public Review Draft of the General Plan. To facilitate review, staff and the
consultant team have prepared responses and suggestions for follow-up action to consider.
Suggested actions range from text edits, to inclusion of additional new policies.
A summary of each correspondence and suggested follow-up action is provided in Exhibit A,
followed by the original correspondence provided in Exhibit B.
Draft General Plan Errata/Edits. Staff and the consultant team have identified two items in the
Public Review Draft needing to be corrected or further clarified:
Implementation Programs. Chapter XI (Implementation Programs) in the Public Review
Draft inadvertently omitted text for programs IP-51, IP-52, IP-59, IP-60, IP-61, and IP-62.
Exhibit C provides Chapter XI in its entirety, with the omitted text indicated with tracked
changes.
75 CNEL Noise Contour. Figure CS-2 in Chapter VIII (Community Safety Element)
indicates residential uses in the noise contour 75 CNEL or greater to be “Clearly
Unacceptable.” However, Figures 15-2 (Existing (2017) Transportation Noise Contours)
and Figure 15-3 (Future (2040) Transportation Noise Contours) in the Draft EIR indicate
existing and proposed residential uses within the 75 CNEL noise contours aligning with
Highway 101 and Interstate 280. Existing residential uses within the 75 CNEL contour
include multifamily and single family uses in the vicinity of Rollins Road from Cadillac
Way to Larkspur Drive, and multifamily and single family uses in the vicinity of Interstate
280. Proposed residential uses within the 75 CNEL contour include a portion of the
proposed Live/Work land use area at the north end of Rollins Road.
Policy CS-4.2 (Residential Noise Standards) addresses residential uses within the 70
CNEL noise and greater noise contours with requirements that new residential units
shall have a maximum acceptable interior noise level of 45 dB with windows closed.
Furthermore, for project locations that are primarily exposed to noise from transportation
operations, the maximum instantaneous noise level in bedrooms shall not exceed
50dB(A) at night (10:00 P.M. to 7:00 A.M.) and 55 dB(A) during the day with windows
closed. These standards can be achieved by incorporating buffers and noise control
General Plan Update and EIR November 5, 2018
9
features into a development project such as setbacks, landscaping, building transitions,
site design/building orientation, and building construction approaches.
Exhibit D outlines suggested edits to the General Plan and EIR to address this matter,
consistent with the performance standards in Policy CS-4.2.
Interim Zoning. “Envision Burlingame” is the combined update of the Burlingame General Plan
and Zoning Ordinance. The next phase of work will be the Zoning Ordinance Update. Ultimately,
the entire zoning code will be rewritten, and it is anticipated to take approximately one year.
State Law requires zoning ordinances to be consistent with the respective general plan. Given
the amount of time that will be required to prepare the complete Zoning Ordinance Update, staff
has directed the consultant team to initially focus on interim regulations applicable to the most
significant “change areas” identified in the Draft General Plan. These include:
• North Burlingame Mixed Use Zone
• North Rollins Road Mixed Use Zone (Live/Work Zone)
The approach will allow interim zoning for these two areas to be adopted concurrently with the
General Plan, so that consistent zoning would be in place for the areas with the most significant
changes to land use and building form. State Law allows interim zoning to be extended for up to
two years, which can be effective when a general plan revision or major rezoning is underway in
order to achieve general plan consistency. New or updated specific plans for the respective
areas could also be developed while the interim zoning is in place.
A subcommittee of the Planning Commission consisting of Commissioners Kelly, Loftis, and
Terrones has been formed to evaluate the interim chapters, as well as the full zoning code as it
is developed. The subcommittee has met twice to review drafts of the North Burlingame and
North Rollins Road chapters, and the full Planning Commission will review the chapters at its
November 13, 2018 meeting. The chapters will then be included with the General Plan for the
City Council to review on November 19th.
While the North Burlingame Mixed Use and North Rollins Road chapters have been developed
to be adopted on an interim basis, much thought has been given to the approach and
standards. This includes an innovative “tiered” approach to development, in which the highest
residential densities and commercial floor areas would require provision of community benefits
such as affordable housing, open space, and enhanced streetscapes. As currently drafted,
affordable units would be a requirement to achieve the highest residential densities. The
regulations also provide streetscape standards with sidewalk and street tree specifications that
would be aligned with the hierarchy of street types provided in the General Plan.
FISCAL IMPACT
None.
General Plan Update and EIR November 5, 2018
10
Exhibits:
Draft General Plan – Public Review Draft (August 2017)
Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR)
Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR)
Exhibit A: Responses and suggested actions to Draft General Plan public comments
Exhibit B: Draft General Plan public comments – original correspondence
Exhibit C: Implementation Programs errata/edits
Exhibit D: 75 CNEL Noise Contour errata/edits
October 22, 2018 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
Draft General Plan
Public Review Draft | August 2017
Consultant to the City
City of Burlingame
ENVISION BURLINGAME
General Plan
Public Review Draft
August 2017
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | i
Table of Contents
Chapter I. Introduction ......................................... ITO-1
About Envision Burlingame ................................................................ ITO-2
Using the Plan ...................................................................................... ITO-3
Plan Chapters................................................................................... ITO-5
Key Terms ........................................................................................ ITO-6
Implementation Categories ............................................................ ITO-6
User Groups ................................................................................... ITO-10
Chapter II. Community Context ............................. CX-1
Historical Context .................................................................................. CX-1
Burlingame Development................................................................. CX-1
Historic Resources ............................................................................. CX-2
Context and Community Profile .......................................................... CX-3
Geographic Context ......................................................................... CX-3
Economic and Demographic Context ................................................. CX-5
Regional Issues .................................................................................. CX-6
Population Trends ............................................................................. CX-6
Age ..................................................................................................... CX-6
Income ................................................................................................ CX-7
Tenure and Housing Stock ............................................................... CX-7
Employment ....................................................................................... CX-7
Environmental Conditions .................................................................... CX-7
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions .................................... CX-8
Biological Resources ......................................................................... CX-8
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ii | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Water Resources ................................................................................ CX-9
Visual and Scenic Resources ............................................................. CX-9
Sea Level Rise .................................................................................. CX-10
The Community Process ..................................................................... CX-10
Stakeholder Interviews and Meetings............................................ CX-10
Neighborhood Intercept Surveys ................................................... CX-11
Community Advisory Committee Meetings .................................. CX-11
Community Workshop #1 ............................................................... CX-11
UC Berkeley Graduate Students .................................................... CX-12
Burlingame High School Students ................................................. CX-12
Community Workshop #2 and Online Survey ............................... CX-12
San Francisco State University Students ........................................ CX-13
Planning Commission Study Sessions ........................................... CX-13
City Council Study Sessions ............................................................ CX-13
Study Areas .......................................................................................... CX-13
Areas of Stability and Change ........................................................ CX-13
Study Area Refinement and Direction ........................................... CX-14
Projected and Desired Growth for Burlingame ................................ CX-15
Envision Burlingame Growth Scenario .............................................. CX-15
Chapter 3. General Plan Principles ...................... GPP-1
Introduction ........................................................................................ GPP-1
Principle 1: Balanced and Smart Growth .......................................... GPP-1
Principle 2: Community Character/Urban Forest ............................. GPP-2
Principle 3: Connectivity .................................................................... GPP-2
Principle 4: Economic Diversity and Vitality ..................................... GPP-3
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | iii
Principle 5: Healthy People, Healthy Places ..................................... GPP-3
Principle 6: Education ........................................................................ GPP-4
Principle 7: Civic Engagement .......................................................... GPP-4
Chapter IV. Community Character ......................... CC-1
Introduction .......................................................................................... CC-1
Land Use Plan ....................................................................................... CC-3
Land Use Designations ........................................................................ CC-4
Residential Land Uses ...................................................................... CC-4
Commercial Land Uses .................................................................... CC-7
Mixed Use Land Uses ....................................................................... CC-9
Industrial Land Uses ....................................................................... CC-14
Open Space and Recreation Land Uses ....................................... CC-15
Public and Quasi-Public Land Uses ............................................... CC-17
Sphere of Influence Land Uses ...................................................... CC-19
Managed Growth ............................................................................... CC-20
Sustainable Development ................................................................. CC-20
Urban Forest and Streetscapes ......................................................... CC-24
Historic Resources .............................................................................. CC-26
Neighborhoods .................................................................................. CC-30
Bayfront ........................................................................................... CC-32
Broadway ........................................................................................ CC-45
Downtown ....................................................................................... CC-49
California Drive ............................................................................... CC-53
El Camino Real ............................................................................... CC-56
North Burlingame ........................................................................... CC-59
TABLE OF CONTENTS
iv | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Rollins Road .................................................................................... CC-62
Chapter V. Economic Development Element ........ ED-1
Introduction ........................................................................................... ED-1
Economic Base ...................................................................................... ED-1
Business Retention and Attraction ....................................................... ED-4
Chapter VI. Mobility ................................................. M-1
Introduction ............................................................................................ M-1
Multimodal Transportation Network .................................................... M-2
Street Classifications .............................................................................. M-3
Safe and Convenient Pedestrian Facilities ......................................... M-10
Bicycle Facilities.................................................................................... M-12
Transit Access and Amenities ............................................................. M-14
Transportation Demand Management ............................................... M-17
Integration of Transportation and Land Use ...................................... M-18
Parking .................................................................................................. M-19
Natural Resources and Sustainability ................................................. M-21
Performance Measures and Guidelines ............................................. M-22
Corridors and Area Plans ..................................................................... M-24
California Drive ................................................................................. M-24
El Camino Real ................................................................................. M-26
Broadway .......................................................................................... M-27
Rollins Road ...................................................................................... M-28
Bayfront ............................................................................................. M-29
Neighborhood Streets ..................................................................... M-30
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | v
Chapter VII. Infrastructure ......................................... I -1
Introduction ............................................................................................... I-1
Efficient and Sustainable Municipal Operations ..................................... I-2
Water Delivery and Supply ....................................................................... I-3
Wastewater ................................................................................................ I-7
Stormwater Drainage and Flood Control ................................................ I-8
Solid Waste and Recycling ..................................................................... I-11
Energy ...................................................................................................... I-14
Telecommunications ............................................................................... I-16
Chapter VIII. Community Safety Element ............... CS-1
Introduction ........................................................................................... CS-1
Police Protection ................................................................................... CS-1
Fire Prevention and Protection Services and Emergency Medical
Response ............................................................................................... CS-2
Emergency Preparedness, Disaster Response and Community
Resilience ............................................................................................... CS-5
Noise ...................................................................................................... CS-9
Sea Level Rise ...................................................................................... CS-16
Hazardous Materials ........................................................................... CS-18
Seismic and Geologic Hazards........................................................... CS-20
Airport and Heliport Hazards ............................................................. CS-21
Chapter IX. Healthy People and Healthy Places .... HP-1
Introduction ........................................................................................... HP-1
Public Health ......................................................................................... HP-2
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Reduction ....................................... HP-5
TABLE OF CONTENTS
vi | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Parks, Open Space, and Recreation .................................................. HP-11
Biological Resources ........................................................................... HP-16
Water Resources ................................................................................. HP-20
Scenic Resources ................................................................................. HP-23
Chapter X: Engagement and Enrichment ...............EE-1
Introduction ........................................................................................... EE-1
Education and Lifelong Learning ......................................................... EE-1
Arts and Culture .................................................................................... EE-4
Civic Engagement ................................................................................. EE-6
Chapter XI: Implementation Programs .................... IP-1
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | vii
Figures
Chapter II. Context
Figure CX-1: Regional Context ............................................................ CX-4
Figure CX-2: Planning Area Boundary .............................................. CX-17
Figure CX-3: Scenic Roadways ........................................................... CX-18
Chapter IV. Community Character
Figure CC-1: Land Use Plan .............................................................. CC-63
Figure CC-2: Designated Historical Structures and Places ............ CC-64
Figure CC-3: Neighborhood Context Map ...................................... CC-65
Chapter VI. Mobility
Figure M-1: Multimodal Circulation Network ................................... M-33
Figure M-2: Pedestrian Network ....................................................... M-34
Figure M-3: Bicycle Network .............................................................. M-34
Figure M-4: Cross Section for Bicycle Classes ................................. M-36
Figure M-5: Transit Priority Network .................................................. M-37
Figure M-6: Conceptual Street Cross-Sections for CA Drive .......... M-38
Chapter VII. Infrastructure
Figure IF-1: Potable Water System ..................................................... IF-19
Figure IF-2: Sewer System ................................................................... IF-20
Figure IF-3: Storm Drainage System ................................................... IF-21
Figure IF-4: FEMA 100 Year and 200 Year Flood Zones .................... IF-22
Chapter VIII. Community Safety
Figure CS-1: Existing Noise Contours ............................................. CS-23
TABLE OF CONTENTS
viii | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Figure CS-2: Noise and Land Use Compatibility Criteria ................. CS-12
Figure CS-3: Future Noise Contours Diagram ................................ CS-24
Figure CS-4: Anticipated Sea Level Rise .......................................... CS-25
Figure CS-5: Fault Zones ................................................................... CS-26
Figure CS-6: Liquefaction Zones ....................................................... CS-27
Figure CS-7: Area with Steep Slopes ................................................. CS-28
Figure CS-8: Noise Contours and building height limitations based on
ALUPs ................................................................................................... CS-29
Chapter IX. Healthy People
Figure HP-1: Neighborhood Distances to Parks .............................. HP-27
Figure HP-2: Existing and Planned Parks, Recreation, and Open Spaces
Areas ................................................................................................... HP-28
Figure HP-3: Biological Resources ..................................................... HP-29
Tables
Chapter I. Introduction
Table INT-1: General Plan Chapters .................................................. INT-4
Chapter II. Context
Table CX-1: Burlingame General Plan Growth Projections Through
Build-out ............................................................................................. CX-15
Chapter VI. Mobility
Table M-1: Relationship between Street Types and Existing FHWA
Classifications ........................................................................................ M-4
Table M-2: Description of Street Classifications ................................. M-4
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | INT-1
Chapter I. Introduction
THE BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN articulates the shared community
vision for preservation and change in our community. This General Plan is
a long-range policy document that guides decision-making and
establishes the “ground rules” for the design and development of new
projects, conservation of resources, economic development, mobility and
infrastructure improvements, expansion of public services, and
community amenities. As the blueprint for our future, this General Plan
directs how Burlingame will look, and how residents, business owners,
and visitors will experience our City today and in the future. This Plan
defines our future, and is intended to provide direction through the year
2040.
State law requires that every city and county prepare and adopt a
comprehensive and long-range general plan (California Government
Code Section 65300) and that the plan inform the content and application
of the various programs and ordinances that are used to govern. The
Burlingame General Plan and its maps, diagrams, and policies are
reflected, for example, in the Zoning Ordinance, the Capital
Improvement Program, and economic development strategies. Also,
under California law, all specific plans, area plans, community plans,
zoning ordinances, subdivision maps, and public works projects must be
consistent with the General Plan.
While a general plan can cover a variety of topics based on a community’s
specific needs, each one is required by State law to address these seven
topics, or elements: Land Use, Circulation/Transportation, Housing,
Conservation, Open Space, Noise, and Safety. These seven elements
must establish policy direction relating to:
The use and development of properties citywide
Accommodation of all modes of transportation
The provision of parks and other open spaces to meet community
needs
I. INTRODUCTION
INT-2 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
The types of housing available in the community
Use and protection of natural resources
The provision of public safety services and protection against
natural and human-caused hazards (including noise) in the city
Preparation of a general plan is also subject to the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), which means that local jurisdictions
must analyze and mitigate (where necessary) the plan’s significant
environmental impacts.
About Envision Burlingame
Envision Burlingame is the community-led planning process that guided
development of the Burlingame General Plan. When the City initiated the
Envision Burlingame process in 2015, it had not comprehensively updated
the General Plan in over 30 years. Envision Burlingame presented the
unique opportunity to engage the entire Burlingame community and ask:
“How do we want Burlingame to look, function, and feel 25 years from
now?” The process had three broad objectives:
1. Develop a vision for Burlingame, with particular attention paid
to the topics of stability and opportunities for desired change.
2. Update policies and regulations to ensure they address all
applicable regional, State, and federal requirements.
3. Create an updated and digital General Plan that is easily
accessed, understood, and applied by residents, property and
business owners, and decision makers.
Envision Burlingame was a robust community-driven process that
included multiple community workshops and surveys, a Community
Advisory Committee (CAC) that met 18 times over the two-plus-year
process, and extensive input from the Burlingame Planning Commission
and City Council. The effort also made a priority of engaging the “next
generation” with involvement from local Burlingame high school
students, as well as students from area universities. A summary of the
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | INT-3
Envision Burlingame community engagement process is included in
Chapter 2: Community Context.
The community process resulted in a series of Guiding Principles that
helped structure policy objectives throughout the General Plan. These
Guiding Principles, outlined below and presented in detail Chapter 3:
Plan Principles, were shared at Community Workshop #2 in May of 2016
and were refined throughout the process:
Balanced and Smart Growth
Community Character
Connectivity
Economic Diversity and Vitality
Healthy People and Healthy Places
Education
Civic Engagement
Using the Plan
The Burlingame General Plan is structured around topics that emerged
through community conversations. General plans are required to contain
a minimum of seven (7) state-mandated elements, but municipalities have
flexibility in the organization of the elements to reflect local sensibilities.
Table INT-1 indicates how the General Plan chapters and themes relate
to the State-required General Plan elements.
I. INTRODUCTION
INT-4 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Table INT-1
General Plan Chapters
Burlingame General Plan
Chapters Land Use Circulation Housing Conservation Open Space Noise Safety Optional Chapter 1
Introduction ●
Chapter 2
Community Context ●
Chapter 3
General Plan Principles ●
Chapter 4
Community Character ●
Chapter 5
Economic Development ●
Chapter 6
Mobility ●
Chapter 7
Infrastructure ●
Chapter 8
Community Safety ● ●
Chapter 9
Healthy People and Healthy Places ● ● ●
Chapter 10
Engagement and Enrichment ●
Chapter 11
Implementation ●
Glossary ●
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | INT-5
Plan Chapters
Community Character
The Community Character chapter fulfills State requirements for the Land
Use Element, and identifies policies to focus growth in targeted areas to
preserve Burlingame’s historic and single-family neighborhoods, the
character of El Camino Real, the jobs base along the Bayfront and Rollins
Road, and commercial districts of Burlingame Avenue and Broadway. This
chapter is organized around areas of stability and areas of change,
highlighting the unique characteristics, land uses, and design aesthetics
of each Burlingame district.
Economic Development
The Economic Development chapter addresses a topic emphasized by
community members, but is not required by law. This chapter provides
policies to diversify the economic base and expand employment
opportunities by attracting new and retaining existing businesses.
Mobility
The Mobility chapter fulfills State requirements for the Circulation
Element, and outlines policies to improve all modes of travel throughout
Burlingame, with an increased emphasis on improvement for cyclists and
pedestrians. Particular attention is focused on California Drive, with the
aim of better accommodating pedestrians and bicyclists. Attention is also
given to the importance of better connections across Highway 101 for all
travel modes.
Infrastructure
The Infrastructure chapter addresses topics required for the Circulation
Element: water supply storage and delivery, wastewater collection and
treatment, flood control, solid waste management, and
telecommunications.
Community Safety
The Community Safety chapter meets State requirements for the Safety
and Noise Elements. This chapter establishes goals and policies
I. INTRODUCTION
INT-6 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
regarding adequate emergency services and response systems,
encompassing both preventative and proactive practices. It also outlines
policies to protect the community from noise hazards, sea level rise, and
storm surge events.
Healthy People and Healthy Places
The Healthy People and Healthy Places Chapter fulfills California
requirements for the Conservation and Open Space Elements, which
focus on resource preservation, park space, and recreation resources.
Optional topics important to community members included in the
discussion are public health and scenic resources.
Engagement and Enrichment
The Engagement and Enrichment Chapter provides optional content that
supports Burlingame’s aim to embrace education, arts, culture, and civic
engagement in all aspects of community life.
Key Terms
Each chapter contains goals, policies, and implementation programs
crafted to achieve the community’s vision.
A goal is an overall statement of community desires and consists
of a broad statement of purpose or direction. For each goal in this
General Plan, associated and more definitive policy statements
follow.
A policy provides more specific guidance to the City Council,
Planning Commission, other City commissions and boards, and
City staff in their review of development proposals and other
actions taken.
Implementation programs provide further articulation regarding
how the City will achieve its goals and policies.
Implementation Categories
An implementation plan is included in Part III, establishing processes,
timelines, and tools to monitor progress. Each policy and program
throughout the General Plan includes one or more of the following
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | INT-7
abbreviations that correspond to the specific implementation categories
utilized in Part III:
Development Review [DR]
Many General Plan policies are implemented through regulations based
on the City’s “police power” to protect public health, safety, and welfare.
City ordinances also create a development review process that provides
for review of individual project proposals and authorizes the City to
approve, conditionally approve, or deny projects based on their
consistency with the General Plan. The following lists plans, ordinances,
and procedures commonly used by the City of Burlingame to implement
the General Plan:
Specific Plans
Zoning Code
Design guidelines
Subdivision Code
Building code and other codes
Development review process
Master Plans [MP]
The City has adopted master plans, strategies, and programs for various
City services and facilities, types of development, or geographic areas.
These are prepared to provide more specific direction for decision
makers, staff, and the public about how the General Plan will be
implemented. They are not elements or components of the General Plan;
rather they are tools that implement the General Plan. Specific General
Plan implementation programs call for the annual or periodic review of
many of these master plans, strategies, and programs, in addition to
adoption of new master ones.
Financing and Budgeting [FB]
The development, maintenance, and operation of public facilities such as
parks and libraries require financial resources derived from various
sources. Programming of City capital projects and their funding over time
I. INTRODUCTION
INT-8 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
is outlined in the Capital Improvement Projects list, which is updated
annually. The following revenue sources used by or available to the City
will continue to support the development, maintenance, and operation of
public facilities and services:
Property tax revenue
Sales tax revenue
User fees
Development impact and linkage fees
Community facilities and special assessment districts
Municipal bonds
Special taxes
Regional agency, State and federal grants
Other State and federal funding
Studies and Reports [SR]
The City conducts studies and produces reports to collect and evaluate
information related to specific issues. These studies and reports are
undertaken at the direction of the City Council as needed or are prepared
annually to report on the status and implementation of the General Plan.
Services and Operations [SO]
The City provides a broad range of services to its residents, businesses,
and visitors, and manages and operates its facilities to meet community
needs. How the City provides services and carries out its operations
influences the effectiveness of General Plan implementation.
Agency Coordination [AC]
The City must coordinate with numerous local, regional, State, and
federal agencies to implement the General Plan. These agencies provide
services, facilities, or funding, and administer regulations that directly or
indirectly affect many issues addressed in the General Plan. The following
is a partial list of public agencies that may play a role in implementing the
General Plan:
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | INT-9
Adjacent cities such as Millbrae, San Mateo, and Hillsborough
Local water and wastewater providers
Regional agencies such as the Association of Bay Area
Government, Metropolitan Transportation Commission, and San
Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission
State agencies such as Caltrans, General Services, State Parks, Bay
Conservation and Development Commission, California
Department of Fish and Wildlife, and the California Environmental
Protection Agency
Federal agencies such as U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services, U.S. Park
Service, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and Federal Emergency
Management Agency
Partnerships with the Private Sector [PA]
The City may coordinate its activities with private sector efforts to
improve public service delivery, manage public sector assets, or leverage
private sector investment. By exploring new partnerships with the private
sector, the City can use its technical, management, and financial
resources in creative ways to achieve the goals of the General Plan.
Public Information and Education [PI]
A critical City function is providing information to residents and the
business community about the policies and programs being carried out
to achieve community goals.
Health and Sustainability [H] and [S]
Health and sustainability are two topics that deserve particular attention
in the Burlingame General Plan. Because health and sustainability are
cross-cutting issues, the policies and programs relating to health and
sustainability are woven throughout the entire General Plan. An [H] is
used to indicate that a policy or program specifically relates to
community health, and an [S] is used to indicate that a policy or program
relates to sustainability. Policies tagged with an [S] will be used to guide
the update of Burlingame’s Climate Action Plan.
I. INTRODUCTION
INT-10 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
User Groups
The Burlingame General Plan is intended for use by a variety of
individuals and organizations, including residents, businesses,
developers, City staff, the City Council, and appointed boards and
commissions. Below is a brief summary of how various individuals and
groups can use the General Plan.
Residents
For Burlingame residents, the General Plan indicates the overall uses that
are permitted in various Burlingame neighborhoods and districts, the
long-range plans and changes that may affect different areas of the City,
the programs and services the City will develop or enhance to improve
quality of life, and the policies the City will use to evaluate future
development applications. Sections of the General Plan that are likely to
be of most interest to residents include the Plan Principles (Chapter 3)
and the following General Plan Elements (Part II): Community Character,
Mobility, Community Safety, Healthy People and Healthy Places, and
Engagement and Enrichment.
Businesses
For Burlingame businesses, the General Plan outlines the actions that the
City will take to help support local business and expand and diversify the
local economy. Sections of the General Plan of most interest to
businesses include the Plan Principles (Chapter 3) and the following
General Plan Elements (Part II): Community Character, Economic
Development, Mobility, Community Safety, and Engagement and
Enrichment.
Developers
For developers looking to build in and contribute in a positive manner to
Burlingame, the General Plan provides an overview of the Burlingame
community, summarizes its vision for the future, and outlines the
overarching policies and expectations for development. Developers
should review all elements of the General Plan to gain an understanding
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | INT-11
of challenges and opportunities related to land use and economic
development. Other applicable documents, such as specific plans and
the Zoning Ordinance, should also be reviewed to gain a complete
perspective on the City’s regulatory documents and processes.
City Staff
The General Plan is a tool to help City staff make decisions related to
programs and services, capital improvement projects, and land use and
development applications. It also provides the goal and policy framework
for City staff to make land use recommendations to the City Council,
Planning Commission, and other boards and commissions. In addition,
the General Plan provides a detailed implementation program that
identifies actions to be completed by City staff. The implementation
programs can be used as a guide to establish annual work programs and
budgets.
City Council, Boards, and Commissions
For the City Council and appointed boards and commissions, the General
Plan guides policy and development decisions and actions on capital
improvement projects. Future land use and development decisions and
infrastructure improvements must be consistent with the General Plan. As
a result, the General Plan provides the policy framework to be considered
by the City Council, Planning Commission, and other appointed boards
and commissions.
Partnering and Supporting Agencies
The City of Burlingame will rely on partnerships with outside agencies to
implement the General Plan, including CalTrain, SamTrans, the
Burlingame School District, San Mateo Union High School District, San
Mateo County Parks Department, the Association of Bay Area
Governments (ABAG), Mills-Peninsula Medical Center, Mercy Center
Burlingame, and San Francisco International Airport. The success of the
General Plan will also rely on coordination with the neighboring cities of
Hillsborough, Millbrae, and San Mateo, and other peninsula jurisdictions.
I. INTRODUCTION
INT-12 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
The General Plan is intended to help these agencies and jurisdictions as
they contemplate actions that affect the Burlingame community, and help
the City form partnerships to achieve the community’s vision within a
regional context.
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CX-1
Chapter II. Community Context
Historical Context
Burlingame Development
SITUATED ON SAN FRANCISCO BAY and framed by the Santa Cruz
Mountains, Burlingame has benefitted from the scenic beauty of its
surroundings and a location central to the Bay Area. It is a city with the
charm and community spirit of a small town, combined with an urban
culture and the amenities of a metropolitan area. These assets are what
made Burlingame a popular destination from its earliest days in the mid-
1800s. With the opening of the Burlingame train station in 1894, the route
from San Francisco became convenient and easy. By the turn of the
century, the area featured many estates owned by San Francisco families
drawn by the close proximity to that city and who looked to escape San
Francisco’s fog-bound summers.
In its early decades, Burlingame developed as a quintessential commuter
suburb, with neighborhoods organized along compact grids of tree-lined
streets. Most of Burlingame’s housing stock was developed between the
1890s and 1960s. Residential growth occurred as a result of new
subdivisions, with large estates divided into smaller lots and developed
over time. The older neighborhoods are characterized by homes built by
individual developers, while later subdivisions have homes built in mass
by merchant builders. As a result, the City has a unique character created
by the diversity of architectural styles found within its neighborhoods.
In the latter half of the 20th century, growth was spurred by proximity to
San Francisco International Airport, with business and industry
developing along the Bayfront, and residential neighborhoods
developing in the hills of the Mills Estate. Since the completion of the
Mills Estate neighborhoods in the 1960s, the City’s population growth has
been relatively modest. New development over the decades between
1960 and the 1990s consisted largely of commercial development, or
II. COMMUNITY CONTEXT
CX-2 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
relatively small-scale residential infill projects. The land use policies of the
1968 General Plan guided this development and creation of several
specific plans to implement General Plan land use directives.
Historic Resources
Much of Burlingame’s charm comes from its historic character, which
includes historic buildings and entire neighborhoods, as well as its
distinguishing eucalyptus tree groves. As of 2017, Burlingame had five
officially designated and historically significant resources. Burlingame
Station, the original center of Burlingame, continues to serve train
customers for commute trips. In its early days, it was home to the post
office, the offices of Wells Fargo Express, Western Union, and meetings
of the Burlingame’s Woman’s Club. In 1971, the station was listed on the
National Register of Historic Place (NRHP) as the first permanent example
of the Mission Revival architecture style. In 1978, the station was listed on
the California Register of Historic Resources.
The Kohl Mansion was added to the National Register in 1982. Built
between 1912 and 1914, Kohl Mansion was originally the home of
Fredrick and Bessie Kohl. The house was used as a convent, and in 1931,
a high school was also opened on the property.
In 2012, the Howard-Ralston Eucalyptus Tree Rows along El Camino Real
and the Francard Grove Eucalyptus Tree Rows along the Caltrain tracks
were added to the National Historic Register. The Howard-Ralston row
spans 2.2 miles along El Camino Real between Peninsula Avenue and Ray
Drive, and is within the State Highway 82 right-of-way belonging to
Caltrans. The Francard Grove tree row is aligned with the Caltrain tracks
between North Lane and Larkspur Drive, and is within the right-of-way
belonging to the Joint Powers Board. The trees were originally planted
between 1873 and 1876 by horticulturalist John McLaren, intended as an
ornamental windbreak along the major route.
The Severn Lodge Dairy Wall Advertisement is listed on the California
Register of Historic Resources as a State Point of Historical Interest. It
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CX-3
dates to 1917, when the Hillsborough-based Severn Lodge Dairy opened
a distribution plant at 220 California Drive. The wall was restored by the
Burlingame Historical Society and listed a point of interest on the
California Register in 2004.
In addition to specifically designated historic sites, Burlingame is home to
entire neighborhoods that provide a cohesive historic fabric that is
important to preserve. The Burlingame General Plan includes policies to
preserve and enhance designated historic sites, and to identify additional
buildings, landscapes, and districts to be includes as designated
resources.
Context and Community Profile
Geographic Context
The City of Burlingame is located on the San Francisco Peninsula, about
10 miles south of San Francisco. The corporate city limits encompass
approximately 5.8 square miles, of which 76 percent (4.4 square miles)
consists of developable land and the remaining 24 percent waters of San
Francisco Bay (approximately 1.3 square miles) and the Mills Canyon
Preserve (0.15 square miles). See Figure CX-1.
Sphere of Influence
A city’s sphere of influence refers to adjacent unincorporated areas that
receive or may in the future receive services from the city and may
become part of the city. The San Mateo County Local Agency Formation
Commission (LAFCO) identifies the unincorporated residential
neighborhood of Burlingame Hills as within Burlingame’s sphere of
influence (see Figure CX-2).
Burlingame Planning Area
A general plan, pursuant to State law, must address all areas within the
jurisdiction’s planning area. The planning area for the Burlingame
General Plan includes all properties within the incorporated city limits and
II. COMMUNITY CONTEXT
CX-4 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
the sphere of influence. Figure CX-2 shows the boundaries of the
Burlingame Planning Area.
Figure CX-1
Regional Context
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CX-5
Economic and Demographic Context
Burlingame supports a strong economy and thriving community, and the
City is committed to providing a welcoming environment for a diversity of
businesses. The business mix includes a healthy supply of retail, office-
based and hospitality enterprises, as well as light-industrial operations.
With the completion of significant streetscape improvements to
Burlingame Avenue in 2015, the strength of this retail/restaurant/office
destination grew.
Historically, Burlingame has had a very balanced distribution of owner
and rental households and multifamily/single-family housing stock.
However, high housing prices create barriers for many people who want
to work and live locally, which is a challenge to achieving the City’s goal
to remain an inclusive and accessible community. The General Plan
includes goals, policies, and programs to bolster and diversify
Burlingame’s economic base and promote a variety of housing types to
accommodate changing demographics.
Office-based
17%
Hospitality
15%
Transportation
14%
Production and Repair
8%
Retail
7%
Other Sectors
39%
TOTAL JOBS -2102
II. COMMUNITY CONTEXT
CX-6 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Regional Issues
The San Francisco Bay area is expected to experience continued
economic and population growth through 2040, fueled by the innovation
economy and its reputation as desirous place to live and work. With its
location on the Peninsula, Burlingame is amidst some of the strongest
economic growth in the region. This growth has resulted in a sizable
increase in new jobs, but communities throughout the area have had
difficulty providing additional housing to keep pace with job growth. In
this context, Peninsula communities, including Burlingame, have wrestled
with how this regional growth dynamic relates to their local communities.
Population Trends
In 2016, the California Department of Finance reported Burlingame’s
population at 29,724 residents. The City’s population generally has grown
at a slower pace than in surrounding Peninsula cities, some of which have
had vacant land or more urban-focused land use policies to
accommodate new development. Burlingame grew by approximately 7.5
percent between 1990 and 2010, while the surrounding area grew by over
10 percent.
Although Burlingame’s population grew slightly from 1990 to 2010, the
number of households remained nearly flat during this period. This can
be attributed to the average household size having increased, partly
explained by the growth in family households with children. The
percentage of Burlingame households made up of families with children
increased from 25 percent to 29 percent between 2000 to 2013.
Age
The age distribution of Burlingame residents suggests a demographic
shift toward more families with children and also, similar to shifting
demographics nationwide, a higher percentage of senior residents. The
increase in families can be explained by the high quality of local schools
and home sizes that can accommodate more people). The aging
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CX-7
population reflects the fact that people are living longer and prefer, when
they can, to stay in Burlingame during their retirement years.
Income
Median household income in Burlingame is similar to the surrounding
cities and county; however, the City has higher shares of households in
the highest and lowest income brackets. This may be due to the diversity
in the housing stock (an almost 50/50 split in multifamily versus single-
family and renter versus owner).
Tenure and Housing Stock
Burlingame has a higher share of renter households and multifamily
housing units than San Mateo County as a whole, providing more diverse
housing options. Nearly half (49.7%) of Burlingame’s housing units are in
multifamily structures, which is higher than in San Mateo County as a
whole (42 percent). Fully 53 percent of units in Burlingame are renter-
occupied, compared to 41 percent in the county.1
Employment
More than half of Burlingame residents who work drive to employment
locations in San Francisco and nearby Peninsula communities.
Burlingame has a relatively high ratio of jobs to employed residents
compared to San Mateo County as a whole. According to the U.S. Census
Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics, as of 2011 there were
approximately 2.5 jobs in Burlingame for each employed resident.
Countywide, this ratio is 1.00.
Environmental Conditions
Although Burlingame is predominantly urbanized, a variety of
environmental and scenic resources contribute to the community’s
1 2015 American Community Survey
II. COMMUNITY CONTEXT
CX-8 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
character. An important role of the General Plan is to ensure that growth
and change do not negatively impact environmental resources and
health.
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Burlingame is located in the Peninsula Subregion air basin, which extends
from northwest of San Jose to the Golden Gate Bridge. According to the
California Air Resources Board emissions inventory for San Mateo County,
mobile pollution sources such as cars and trucks are the largest
contributor to the estimated annual average for air pollutant levels,
accounting for much of total emissions in the county. Several chapters
throughout the General Plan include policies and programs to promote
alternative modes of transportation, reduce vehicle miles traveled, and
thus contribute to improvements in regional air quality and reduced
greenhouse gas emissions.
Biological Resources
Burlingame’s varied terrain, from the foothills to the Bay, supports
habitats for many plant and animal species, including special status
species (rare plants and animals that require special consideration and/or
protection under State or federal law). While certain plant and animal
species have adapted to living within the developed areas of Burlingame,
native vegetation and creeks within the urbanized areas have been
modified to a degree that severely limits their value as habitat for special
status plant and animal species. However, the shoreline and hillsides of
Burlingame provide forest and wetland habitats that are important for
several special status species. Chapter 9: Healthy People and Healthy
Places specifies policies and programs to restore creek beds and habitats
where possible, and preserve wildlife areas.
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CX-9
Water Resources
Burlingame lies within the Santa Clara Valley Groundwater Basin and
contains multiple creeks that flow into San Francisco Bay. The health and
function of the Bay Area’s surface and groundwater resources are critical
for habitat preservation and essential ecosystem services such as flood
protection and clean water resources for multiple community uses.
In addition to water quality, overall water availability is constant regional
concern. Periods of abundant rainfall and severe drought have led to
fluctuations in water supply, highlighting the need for consistent water
conservation measures. Chapter 9: Healthy People and Healthy Places
outlines policies to improve water quality in Burlingame and promote
water conservation during all times, not just during droughts.
Visual and Scenic Resources
The natural features most associated with Burlingame are its trees, and
Burlingame has been designated as a "Tree City USA" since the 1980s.2
California Drive and El Camino Real have groves of large, mature trees. In
addition to Mills Canyon Park and the many tree-lined streets, other
scenic resources include views of marshlands and San Francisco Bay,
visible from the hills and Old Bayshore Highway.
Highways with scenic corridors can create enjoyable travel experiences,
link urban areas with open space areas, and provide access to
recreational areas. Interstate 280, located just west of Burlingame, is an
officially designated State Scenic Highway. Scenic roadways in and
around Burlingame are shown in Figure CX-3. Development patterns and
land use activities can block vistas or views of local landmarks and reduce
scenic qualities, and the exterior appearance of structures (e.g., bulk,
2 Tree City USA is a national program established by the
Arbor Day Foundation that provides the framework for
community forestry management for cities and towns in the
United States.
II. COMMUNITY CONTEXT
CX-10 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
height, color) can detract from the natural surroundings. Chapter 4:
Community Character provides land use and development policies
intended to protect Burlingame’s visual and scenic resources.
Sea Level Rise
Water levels in the San Francisco Bay have risen eight inches over the
past century, with rates expected to accelerate in the next century as the
pace of climate change accelerates. Burlingame’s Bayfront is particularly
vulnerable to sea level rise because it is not protected by natural
wetlands, but instead has a hard-edge seawall along the waterfront. If sea
level rise reaches projections by the San Francisco Bay Conservation and
Development Commission and no actions are taken to protect or
mitigate the impacts, most the Bayfront Area and parts of Rollins Road
could be under water by 2070. Chapter 8: Community Safety provides
policies specifically intended to protect vulnerable areas and
infrastructure from rising water levels in the Bay. Sustainability policies
woven throughout the plan also target climate change and sea level rise
issues.
The Community Process
Envision Burlingame was a robust, community-driven process that
included multiple community workshops and surveys, engagement with
local high schools and colleges, a Community Advisory Committee (CAC)
that met almost 20 times over the two-year process, and extensive input
from the Burlingame Planning Commission and City Council. The
following summarizes the meetings, interviews, surveys, and other events
that took place between March 2015 and September 2017.
Stakeholder Interviews and Meetings
At the outset of Envision Burlingame, the project team conducted
stakeholder interviews with members of the City Council, Planning
Commissioners, business owners, residents, and others interested in
Burlingame’s plans for the future. This important step in the General Plan
process provided an opportunity to understand the Burlingame
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CX-11
community, identify desired project outcomes, and gain insight into
issues, assets, and opportunities. Stakeholder sessions continued
throughout the process to gather feedback as different policies and
concepts emerged.
Neighborhood Intercept Surveys
The project team held a series of neighborhood intercept surveys in June
2015 at Burlingame’s most popular commercial areas to gather
information and spread awareness about the process. Members of the
project team invited people to participate in an interactive exercise that
asked them questions about Burlingame using printed poster boards and
“voting” stickers. This approach engaged all age groups—especially
families with young children—and allowed for informal and educational
discussions.
Community Advisory Committee Meetings
The Community Advisory Committee (CAC) was established by the City
Council early in the process to advise the project team throughout
development of the General Plan. Members included representatives
from a variety of organizations and perspectives, including neighborhood
groups, business groups, transportation and housing advocacy groups,
and environmental organizations, as well as residents representing a
range of perspectives and ages.
The CAC acted as a liaison to various Burlingame stakeholders, made
recommendations to the Planning Commission and City Council, and
reviewed draft General Plan chapters.
Community Workshop #1
On October 24, 2015, the City hosted the first community workshop for
Envision Burlingame. The workshop was held at the Burlingame
Recreation Center as an open house in which members of the community
were free to drop in anytime during the four-hour event. The workshop
provided an opportunity to learn about the community-driven planning
process and discuss Burlingame’s assets, issues, and opportunities. Over
II. COMMUNITY CONTEXT
CX-12 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
70 members of the community shared their ideas and vision for
Burlingame’s future. The static information from the workshop was put on
the Envision Burlingame website to allow people to participate virtually
after the workshop date.
UC Berkeley Graduate Students
In February 2016, a group of UC Berkeley graduate students learning
about community and stakeholder engagement held an outreach event
at the Burlingame Caltrain station. The focus of this event was to engage
commuters and young professionals about their thoughts and
perspectives related to the future vision for the city. The students
produced a video of their interviews and a summary of their findings.
Burlingame High School Students
Between January and May 2016, students in a Burlingame High School
architecture class identified planning and design ideas for new uses along
Burlingame’s Bayfront. The process included a walking tour of the
Bayfront area, as well as mapping and designing potential development
projects along the waterfront. Students had an opportunity to present
their ideas at Community Workshop #2.
Community Workshop #2 and Online Survey
In May 2016, the City hosted the second community workshop for
Envision Burlingame. It was structured similarly to Community Workshop
#1, as an open house event in which community members could drop in
to review and comment on potential land use and circulation alternatives
for key study areas. Participants were given a workbook with specific
questions to provide feedback. Burlingame High School students also
had an opportunity to showcase their ideas for the Bayfront. For
community members who were unable to attend the workshop, an online
survey was available which corresponded directly to the workshop
materials and workbook. In total, over 240 people participated in the
workshop and online survey.
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CX-13
San Francisco State University Students
During the Spring 2017 semester, students in an Urban Studies and
Planning senior seminar at San Francisco State University (SFSU) worked
on a project for the North Burlingame/Rollins Road area, which had been
identified by the community as an area for an arts and innovation district
including live/work. The students provided a range of ideas for housing,
commercial, and arts uses in the area, and presented their projects to the
CAC in May 2017.
Planning Commission Study Sessions
The Planning Commission held a study session on July 13, 2016, to
discuss the emerging land use concept, population and employment
projections, and community engagement input. Input and direction from
the Planning Commission was used to refine key policies and concepts
for the draft plan.
City Council Study Sessions
The City Council held study sessions on September 7, 2016 and
December 7, 2016 to discuss land use alternatives, population and
employment projections, housing, and community engagement input.
The outcomes of these study sessions were direction to the project team
on the preferred land use alternative and growth scenario.
Study Areas
Areas of Stability and Change
One of the first community engagement activities conducted for Envision
Burlingame was to identify “areas of stability” and “areas of change.”
Areas of stability were defined as neighborhoods or districts in which the
community would anticipate little change over the next 10 to 20 years,
while areas of change were places where the community desires new uses
or redevelopment of existing uses to occur. During this exploratory
phase, community members expressed a strong desire to preserve
Burlingame’s residential neighborhoods and public parks. The Bayfront,
Rollins Road, North Burlingame, Downtown, and Broadway commercial
II. COMMUNITY CONTEXT
CX-14 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
district were all identified as areas of potential change, and El Camino
Real was viewed as having potential for some change and some stability.
Based on this feedback, the project team identified seven key study areas
around which to structure the General Plan:
Bayfront
Rollins Road
North Burlingame
Downtown
California Drive
El Camino Real
Residential Neighborhoods (area of stability)
Study Area Refinement and Direction
The seven study areas were used to generate ideas about Burlingame’s
assets, issues, and opportunities at Community Workshop #1, which
included a visioning station for each study area, and a large interactive
map. The input from the first workshop helped the City and the CAC
identify ways to capitalize on each study area’s assets and opportunities,
and address or improve each area’s issues.
During Spring 2016, CAC members participated in walking tours of the
seven study areas, and discussed land use and development ideas for
each area. This extensive iterative process was used to generate land use
alternatives for each area, which were presented at Community Workshop
#2 and in the online survey. Feedback gathered through these forums
was then presented to the Planning Commission and City Council for
further refinement, eventually leading to the preferred land use
alternative illustrated in Chapter 4: Community Character and refined
through the public hearing process. The Community Character chapter
not only discusses the land use goals and policies for each study area, it
also describes the vision for each area.
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CX-15
Projected and Desired Growth for Burlingame
The Envision Burlingame community process and study area framework
helped guide growth discussions for the General Plan. Important local
considerations driving the discussion of growth included infrastructure
capacity, public facilities (particularly school capacity in Burlingame),
transportation, and community character. The goal of this General Plan is
to identify an appropriate level of growth that responds to Burlingame’s
commitment to accommodate new residents and housing units, while
also ensuring adequate services and infrastructure to support that
growth. Community members have expressed a desire to accommodate
growth in targeted areas well-served by transit, to provide more
affordable housing, and to maintain Burlingame’s charm and small-town
character.
Envision Burlingame Growth Scenario
The Envision Burlingame process evaluated several growth scenarios that
responded to the community’s strong desire to target areas for higher-
density, more affordable housing. This General Plan accommodates an
estimated 23 percent increase in the population over 2016 conditions, to
a build-out population of 36,600 residents. This includes 2,951 new
housing units and 1,547 new jobs (see Table CX-1). As is discussed in
Chapter 4: Community Character, most of this growth will be targeted in
the North Burlingame area, North Rollins Road, and Downtown, providing
opportunities for higher-density housing close to transit (BART and
CalTrain), services, and the Burlingame Avenue and Broadway
commercial districts.
II. COMMUNITY CONTEXT
CX-16 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Table CX-1
Burlingame General Plan Growth Projections through Build-out
Housing Units Population Jobs
2016 13,144 29,724 29,879
Build-out 16,065 36,600 39,610
Net New 2,951 6,876 9,731
T r o usdale D r.E. Poplar Ave.Old Baysh
o
re
H
ig
h
wa
y
Millbrae
Ave.Hillcrest Blvd.Cal
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
D
r
.
Airport Blvd.Peninsula Dr.Burlingame Ave.
S
a
n
M
a
t
e
o
D
r
.
El
C
a
m
i
n
o
R
e
a
l
R
o
l
l
i
n
s
R
d
.BroadwayHillside Dr.R alston Ave.
City of
San Mateo
City of
Hillsborough
City of
Millbrae
San Francisco Bay
San Francisco
International
Airport
280
101US
Burlingame General Plan
Figure CX-2 Planning Area Boundary
1,500750 3,000 FT 0NCity Limits
SOI
Ba
l
b
o
a
HowardPal
o
m
a
Dr
a
k
e
M
a
g
n
o
l
i
a
Be
r
n
a
l
Co
r
t
e
z
EastonLag
u
n
aBroderick
BayswaterAdelineSummi
t
Se
q
u
o
i
a DavisAnza
CarmelitaShermanEastonLoy
o
l
a
To
y
o
n
D
w
i
g
h
t
H
u
n
t
Va
n
c
o
u
v
e
r
Se
b
a
s
t
i
a
n
Oak
Grove
VernonPlymouth ConcordCa
p
u
c
h
i
n
o
P
a
r
kHaleChapin
P
e
p
p
e
rCh
a
p
i
n
Arguello
L
o
r
t
o
n
B
l
o
om
fi
e
l
d
A
r
u
n
d
e
l
D
w
i
g
h
t
Gi
l
b
r
e
t
h
Co
l
u
m
b
u
s
W
a
l
n
u
t
Be
n
i
t
o
Cr
e
s
c
e
n
t
P
r
im
r
o
s
e
Occidenta
lRivera H
i
g
h
l
a
n
d
Poppy
C
a
s
t
e
n
a
d
a
S
t
a
n
l
e
y
Maripos
a
Edgehill
C
h
a
n
n
i
n
g
Ac
a
c
i
a
Atwater
Alcazar
Vi
c
t
o
r
i
a
De
S
o
t
o
Qu
e
s
a
d
a
C
l
a
r
e
n
d
o
nMillsChu
l
a
V
i
s
t
a
LexingtonMitten
Ca
r
l
o
s Mar
i
n
MartinezB
a
n
c
r
o
f
t
Sanc
hez SanchezGroveCowanEas
t Myr
t
l
e
Al
v
a
r
a
d
o
Ma
r
c
o
P
o
l
o
E
s
c
a
l
a
n
t
e StantonAviadorAl
b
e
m
a
r
l
e
Lang
MorrellLarkspur
F
a
i
r
fi
e
l
d
Cro
s
s
w
a
yMahlerWe
s
t
m
o
o
r HinckleyCa
s
t
i
l
l
oValdiviaM
o
n
t
e
r
oDevereuxO
g
d
e
n BurlwayDavidRay
La
s
s
e
n
La
M
e
s
a
Al
t
u
r
a
s
Lo
s
M
o
n
t
e
s
Newlandsh Lin
d
e
n
Lau
r
e
l
L
o
s
A
l
t
o
s
Beach
Ma
r
s
t
e
n
H
a
t
c
hOxfordAr
c
AlmerCambridgeDolores
Ho
o
v
e
r
S
k
y
v
i
e
w DufferinDonnellyCorbittEl QuanitoLas Piedr
a
s
MajillaKenmarEdwardsMc
d
o
n
a
l
d
Ea
s
t
w
o
o
d
Caro
l
Ans
e
l
Aza
l
e
a
Margarita
Cos
ta
R
i
c
aIngoldJuanitaGuittardCadillac C
um
b
e
r
l
a
n
dRhinetteMe
a
d
o
w
Mo
n
t
e
c
i
t
o SummerBa
y
V
i
e
wKillarney
Whi
t
e
h
o
r
n
Ne
u
c
h
a
t
e
l
BelvedereMarquitaBellev
u
eRiveraTiberonLincoln
A
n
i
t
aPalm
Car
o
l
a
n
Lin
d
e
n
ParkCa
b
r
i
l
l
o
T rousdale D r.E. Poplar Ave.Old Baysh
o
re
H
ig
h
w
a
y
Millbrae
Ave.
Cal
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
D
r
.
Car
o
l
a
n
A
v
e
.
Airport Blvd.Peninsula Dr.Burlingame Ave.
S
a
n
M
a
t
e
o
D
r
.
El
C
a
m
i
n
o
R
e
a
l
R
o
l
l
i
n
s
R
d
.BroadwayHillside Dr.Ralston Ave.City of
San Mateo
City of
Hillsborough
City of
Millbrae
San Francisco
International
Airport
San Francisco Bay
280
101US
City Limits
SOI
Scenic Roadway
State Designated Scenic Highway
Burlingame General Plan
Figure CX-3 Scenic Corridors and Roadways
1,500750 3,000 FT 0N
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | GPP-1
Chapter III. General Plan
Principles
Introduction
These General Plan Principles establish the foundation for the entire Plan.
They apply across all topical areas and describe the future envisioned by
the community. The goals, policies, measures, and actions in Chapters 4
through 10 support these Principles.
Principle 1: Balanced and Smart Growth
The Burlingame community recognizes the need to grow in a manner that
supports inclusivity and access while protecting established
neighborhoods and community assets. General Plan policies guide future
development and investments in a manner that is thoughtful, sustainable,
and reflective of local values. The following are the tenets of this Plan
Principle.
Allow growth to occur in targeted areas where supportive physical
and community infrastructure are available or can readily be
provided, and where such growth contributes to the positive
qualities and characteristics that define Burlingame.
Maintain a balance of ownership and rental housing, with
opportunities for people of all income ranges to live in
Burlingame.
Base land use decisions on the ability of the multimodal
transportation network to support growth.
Ensure that new commercial, office, and industrial development
can accommodate the evolving nature of how buildings are used
and business is conducted.
III. GENERAL PLAN PRINCIPLES
GPP-2 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Principle 2: Community Character/Urban Forest
Burlingame’s physical character is defined by its cherished tree groves
and urban forest, distinct neighborhoods and business districts, and
historic structures and resources. The City should ensure that these
features are respected and enhanced, with streetscape and architectural
styles sensitive to long-established forms and features.
Ensure that trees continue to be an integral character-defining
feature of our streetscapes, neighborhoods, and business districts.
Recognize the distinct qualities of Burlingame’s many and varied
neighborhoods and business districts, and require that new
development respond to and respect the desired character-
defining features of these places.
Protect the character and quality of Burlingame’s historical
buildings, neighborhoods, districts, and landscapes.
Be receptive to modern design approaches that complement the
Burlingame aesthetic and are harmonious with their surroundings.
Protect and expand the City’s urban forest and tree groves as
aesthetic, historical, and environmental resources.
Principle 3: Connectivity
For Burlingame residents and visitors to access the full range of services
and amenities the City offers, meaningful connections must be provided
that can be safely navigated by all modes of travel. The mobility
concepts, goals and policies in this General Plan seek to improve
connectivity and access by realizing the following.
Ensure provision of a well-defined multimodal transportation
network that accommodates a range of travel choices and
connects Burlingame to the region.
Provide safe, convenient, and comfortable vehicular and
pedestrian connections across Highway 101, linking the Bayfront
with the rest of the City.
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | GPP-3
Develop and maintain safe and easy-to-use bicycle and pedestrian
travelways citywide, with an emphasis on providing connections
from neighborhoods to local schools, parks, shopping, and
entertainment.
Ensure the provision of “first-mile” and “last-mile” connections to
and from transit stations, providing safe and effective access
between transit and destinations.
Principle 4: Economic Diversity and Vitality
The City of Burlingame recognizes the importance of a diverse economic
base to providing sustainable, reliable revenue to the City and access to
economic opportunity for residents. A combination of small, local “mom-
and-pop” businesses should co-exist alongside larger regional and
national enterprises. The goals and policies of the General Plan ensure
the City accommodates and supports a mix of commercial activity while
providing the flexibility to adapt to a dynamic economic environment.
Support and encourage the operations of local, independent
businesses equally to businesses that are regionally and nationally
owned.
Accommodate a mix of businesses that collectively works to
maintain a stable tax base and revenue stream for the City.
Principle 5: Healthy People, Healthy Places
The health and safety of the City’s residents and its natural environment
are fundamental to the many goals of this General Plan. Burlingame
continues to plan for community resilience and the physical and social
health through all policies, guided by the following Plan Principles.
Provide unique recreation experiences in parks, open spaces, and
public plazas citywide.
Promote development approaches that emphasize nonmotorized
and pedestrian access.
III. GENERAL PLAN PRINCIPLES
GPP-4 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Incorporate high-quality, energy-efficient, and sustainable design
into all new development.
Preserve and enhance open spaces, natural resources, and
environmentally sensitive areas, including the Bay and the local
creek system.
Maintain and enhance public safety through community and
environmental designs that promote secure, active, and safe
streets and neighborhoods.
Celebrate and accommodate arts, culture, and diversity.
Principle 6: Education
Residents value Burlingame for the opportunities it offers, including
access to high-caliber education for all ages. Burlingame is committed to
fostering educational opportunity for all residents, while promoting high-
quality education for K-12 students.
Promote productive partnerships with local schools and other
educational institutions, and recognize that high-quality education
contributes to overall community success and health.
Support programs that provide enrichment and life-long learning.
Principle 7: Civic Engagement
Envision Burlingame is built on the foundation of community
engagement, and the City is committed to building on this legacy to
implement the General Plan and foster healthy civic dialogue for all issue
of public interest. The following statement illustrates this Principle.
Maintain an environment that always welcomes and encourages
productive public discourse on issues shaping Burlingame’s
future.
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CC-1
Chapter IV. Community
Character
Introduction
A combination of physical, cultural, natural landscape, and urban
development features shape Burlingame’s character. Framed by San
Francisco Bay and the Santa Cruz Mountains, the city has both hillside
and flatland environments that have defined development patterns and
approaches. Early development that focused around the two train
stations built in the 1890s and 1920s established a traditional grid street
pattern for the residential neighborhoods and commercial districts. The
character of many of Burlingame’s earliest neighborhoods—Easton
Addition and Burlingame Park, to name a few—can be seen today in the
well-preserved homes along tree-lined streets. In fact, treasured tree
plantings and groves contribute significantly to the city’s “feel.” In
Downtown, development patterns reflecting a pre-automobile era have
been embraced anew as a mixed use, pedestrian-oriented district that
projects a European village charm, where neighbors meet at the library
and restaurants along Burlingame Avenue and its intersecting Downtown
streets. Burlingame High School and Washington Park provide a
community focal point for neighborhoods east of Downtown. The
northern portion of the community benefits from the presence of
Broadway commercial district, which functions as a neighborhood retail
and service center for that area.
In the hillsides, tracts of 1960s-era ranch-style houses, with a sprinkling of
Eichler-style homes, exemplify a period of a robust American economy,
when home ownership represented a goal for many American families.
Residents have shown their commitment to the community by investing
significant improvements in these homes, and City staff anticipates that
over the life of this General Plan, pressures to remodel and expand will
IV. COMMUNITY CHARACTER
CC-2 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
be great, given the scarce housing resources in the Bay Area and
Burlingame’s strategic location to employment centers north in San
Francisco and south in Silicon Valley.
Along San Francisco Bay, land use patterns reflect the dividing line
created by Highway 101 and the proximity to San Francisco International
Airport (SFO). The Bayfront district historically has supported higher-
intensity nonresidential uses and is distinctively different than
Burlingame’s neighborhoods, Downtown, and the Broadway commercial
district (for example, the Bayfront features hotels serving travelers in and
out of SFO, industrial uses, and utility uses such as the wastewater
treatment facility). The location of properties directly on the Bay offers
opportunities for vibrant new uses that provide jobs for all income levels
and recreation amenities for locals and visitors to enjoy. Similarly, the
Rollins Road district, while built up as an industrial area, can be
reinvented as a more diverse mixed use neighborhood, particularly
where properties have ready access to the multimodal BART station in
Millbrae.
Residents of Burlingame are proud of their community, its balanced land
uses, and its small-town character. Throughout the process of crafting this
General Plan and looking toward the year 2040, residents and the
business community consistently expressed their desires to preserve the
physical qualities that define Burlingame: the diverse neighborhoods that
offer housing of many scales and styles, the urban forest character
citywide, a lively Downtown, the Broadway district with local-serving
businesses, great parks, and business districts on Rollins Road and along
the Bay that provide jobs across the economic spectrum. But the
community and City leaders also have recognized a responsibility to
carefully plan for and accommodate changes brought about by economic
growth throughout the Bay area, the tremendous regional demand for
new housing, and the evolving nature of retail commerce, leisure
activities, and living choices. This Community Character Element balances
these values and objectives. This element also defines policies to guide
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CC-3
targeted growth, sustainable development practices, preservation of
historical resources, maintenance of urban forests, and continued
enhancement of streetscapes.
Land Use Plan
Figure CC-1 illustrates the planned distribution of land uses throughout
Burlingame and the sphere of influence. During the extensive community
engagement process of 2015-2016, the community identified areas of
change and areas of stability. The land use plan focuses growth in the
areas of change and preserves the existing fabric in areas of stability. The
following land use designation descriptions correspond to Figure CC-1
and define allowable uses and permitted density and intensity ranges.
The extent to which properties may be developed or redeveloped over
time are expressed in this General Plan in terms of density for residential
uses and intensity for nonresidential development. Density reflects how
many units may be built per acre of land (units per acre) but does not
control building height, setbacks, required open space area, or other
development parameters; the details as to how density is implemented
are contained in the Zoning Code (Title 25 of the Municipal Code),
guided by the vision statements contained in this element. Intensity is
expressed using the floor-area ratio (FAR) metric, which measures the
total allowable building square footage on a property relative to the size
of that property. FAR does not dictate building height or other
development
standards; again, those
regulations are set forth
in the Zoning Code.
The FAR allows for
flexibility in design
approaches, as the
graphic here illustrates.
IV. COMMUNITY CHARACTER
CC-4 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Land Use Designations
Residential Land Uses
Four residential land use designations are established to preserve and
maintain the long-established residential fabric of Burlingame, while
allowing targeted growth in existing higher density areas and providing
housing opportunities for all income ranges. While residential uses are
the primary permitted uses, other compatible uses—such as public and
private places of assembly and places of worship—may be allowed, as
zoning regulations permit.
Low Density Residential (LDR)
The Low Density Residential (LDR) designation permits detached housing
units on individual lots with private yards and private parking. This
designation also allows accessory dwelling units and ancillary structures.
Development Standards
Density: 1.0 – 8.0 units/acre
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CC-5
Medium Density Residential (MDR)
The Medium Density Residential (MDR) designation permits detached
and attached housing units, with no more than two separate residential
units in a structure. Ancillary structures are also permitted.
Development Standards
Density: 8.1 – 20.0 units/acre
Medium/High Density Residential (M/HDR)
The Medium/High Density Residential (M/HDR) designation permits a mix
of multi-family housing types and ancillary structures. Preferred locations
for Medium/High Density Residential uses are along or with immediate
access to arterial streets and/or near major activity centers. Development
types may include row houses, townhouses, condominiums, and
apartments.
Development Standards
Density: 20.1 – 50.0 units/acre
IV. COMMUNITY CHARACTER
CC-6 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
High Density Residential (HDR)
The High Density Residential (HDR) designation permits a mix of high
density multi-family housing types in targeted locations near transit or
with immediate access to arterial streets and/or near major activity
centers. Development types are characterized by multi-story structures.
Development Standards
Density: 50.1 – 80.0 units/acre
Multi-Family Residential Overlay
The Multi-Family Residential Overlay designation is established to
provide options for development of multi-family residential uses on
properties that historically have supported commercial uses but which,
due to evolving consumer preferences and practices, may no longer be
able to attract viable retail or service users. The overlay indicates areas
where a change of zoning from commercial to residential can be applied
without an amendment to the General Plan land use policy map. The
residential zoning district applied will be based upon compatibility with
surrounding land uses, property access, and availability of services,
among other relevant considerations.
Development Standards
Density: 8.0 – 80.0 units/acre
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CC-7
Commercial Land Uses
Two commercial land use designations are established to provide
opportunities for a variety of commercial business types, including retail
uses, restaurants, and services for residents, as well as larger commercial
attractions and hotels for visitors. These designations also support auto-
related businesses, while still ensuring minimal impacts on nearby
residential neighborhoods. Commercial areas also provide places for
office spaces that accommodate a diversity of business types and sizes.
General Commercial (GC)
The General Commercial (GC) land use designation establishes areas for
lower-intensity commercial uses intended to meet the needs of nearby
residents and employees. Permitted uses include retail, service
commercial, restaurants and cafes, offices, and limited low-intensity auto-
related uses. General Commercial uses are in targeted locations where
higher-intensity uses and development are not appropriate and where
low-intensity commercial businesses have minimal impact on adjacent
residential areas. The design of buildings in General Commercial districts
should encourage pedestrian access and be compatible with surrounding
uses in terms of scale and appearance.
Development Standards
Maximum Intensity: 1.0 FAR
IV. COMMUNITY CHARACTER
CC-8 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Bayfront Commercial (BFC)
The Bayfront Commercial (BFC) designation provides opportunities for
both local and tourist commercial uses. Permitted uses include
entertainment establishments, restaurants, hotels and motels, retail, and
higher-intensity office uses. Development in this area should prioritize
public access to the waterfront; thus, the designation allows public open
space and includes open space easements to implement local and
regional trail plans, recreation, and habitat preservation objectives. The
Bayfront Commercial designation provides a mix of uses, creating a
welcoming environment for Burlingame residents and tourists alike to
visit, shop, eat, bike and walk, and enjoy nature.
Development Standards
Maximum Intensity: 3.0 FAR
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CC-9
Mixed Use Land Uses
Several areas in Burlingame provide opportunities for a mixture of
residential and commercial development to create vibrant activity nodes,
dynamic commercial corridors, and housing opportunities for all income
levels. Each mixed use designation meets the needs of the specific area
in which it is located. Districts close to transit are suitable for higher-
density housing combined with commercial uses and services that enable
residents to minimize auto use. Mixed use designations in established
commercial areas provide opportunities for medium-density residential
development that enhances the vibrancy of the commercial corridor while
maintaining the scale of surrounding neighborhoods. The term “mixed
use” applies to a compatible array of varied uses in a single building or
comprehensive development, as well as a mix of uses within a district.
California Mixed Use (CMU)
The California Mixed Use (CMU) designation allows for an eclectic mix of
uses along California Drive, reflective of long-established use patterns, a
pedestrian scale, locally owned retail and service commercial businesses,
and upper-story residential units. Permitted commercial uses are limited
to those that do not involve late-night hours and do not have any
operating characteristics that would adversely impact residential uses.
This area will remain a medium-density corridor that transitions
seamlessly to the abutting residential districts. Stand-alone residential
structures can be accommodated via a zoning overlay.
Development Standards
Density: 0 – 20.0 units/acre
Maximum Intensity: 0.6 FAR
IV. COMMUNITY CHARACTER
CC-10 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
North Burlingame Mixed Use (NBMU)
The North Burlingame Mixed Use (NBMU) designation creates a high-
intensity development node within walking distance of the Millbrae
multimodal transit station. Permitted uses include retail, service
commercial, dining establishments, offices, and high-density residential.
Development may occur as mixed use projects or single-purpose
buildings, provided the node, as a whole, includes a mix of uses. Housing
development should provide housing options for all income levels.
Development approaches must emphasize a pedestrian-friendly
environment, with active ground-floor treatments and no parking levels
that front directly on El Camino Real or Trousdale Drive. The design,
scale, and massing of new buildings should be sensitive to adjacent
lower-intensity residential neighborhoods.
Development Standards
Density: 20.1 – 120.0 units/acre
Maximum Intensity:
- Office: 2.0 FAR
- Commercial: 1.0 FAR
Broadway Mixed Use (BMU)
The Broadway Mixed Use (BMU) designation establishes a mixed use
corridor that maintains commercial uses along the Broadway frontage,
with an emphasis on independently owned businesses. The goal is to
maintain a commercial district that is active seven days a week, with
restaurants and shops lining the Broadway corridor at a pedestrian scale.
Permitted uses along the Broadway frontage are limited to retail and
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CC-11
service, with only ancillary office space. Residential uses are allowed only
on upper floors. Ground-floor office uses are only allowed on side streets
(exclusive of El Camino Real) on properties that do not have frontage on
Broadway.
The scale of development shall not exceed three stories, and step-back
or step-down building approaches may be required where buildings
border lower-scale residential development in adjacent districts.
Development Standards
Density: 40.0 units/acre
Maximum Intensity: 2.0 FAR
IV. COMMUNITY CHARACTER
CC-12 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Downtown Specific Plan (DSP)
The Downtown Specific Plan (DSP) designation applies to properties
within the Downtown Specific Plan area. Downtown Burlingame has a
village character, with a complete, complementary mix of uses all within
easy walking distance of one another. From civic uses to residential
development to shops and restaurants and office space, Downtown offers
a neighborhood where people can easily live without owning a car. The
Specific Plan defines permitted uses and development intensities. Overall
parameters for development are included in Table CC-1.
Development Standards
Density: As set forth in the DSP
Maximum Intensity: As set forth in the DSP
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CC-13
Live/Work (L/W)
The Live/Work (L/W) designation applies to the northerly one-third of the
Rollins Road corridor, located within easy walking distance of the Millbrae
multimodal transit station, and is intended to promote a creative mix of
medium-density residential buildings and workspaces. The City envisions
creation of a complete new neighborhood, where residents and creative
businesses have ready access to transit and commercial and open space
amenities. Live/work spaces that combine residential units with
commercial spaces, typically in which the resident uses the workspace for
his or her own business, are envisioned as the primary residential type,
but stand-alone, moderate-scale residential development may be
permitted, provided the development includes or contributes to district-
wide functional open space amenities. Long-established industrial
buildings and uses may remain, provided any new use proposed in an
existing industrial building is deemed compatible with live/work uses, as
defined in the Zoning Code. In addition to light industrial and warehouse,
commercial uses that serve the neighborhood, creative industry
businesses, design businesses, indoor sports and recreation, and
wholesale uses are allowed.
Development Standards
Density: up to 70.0 units/acre
Maximum Intensity: 1.0 FAR
IV. COMMUNITY CHARACTER
CC-14 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Industrial Land Uses
Burlingame is home to a variety of important industrial uses that provide
products, services, and jobs for the region. The City’s strategic location
near the San Francisco International Airport creates opportunities for
airport-related enterprises and logistics/operations businesses. Because
they provide an economic base for Burlingame and jobs for the region,
industrial areas will be maintained and enhanced while also allowing new,
creative industrial uses to emerge.
Innovation Industrial (I/I)
The Innovation Industrial (I/I) designation applies to two areas: the
southern two-thirds of the Rollins Road corridor and the Inner Bayshore
area. These districts function well as light industrial and logistics centers,
with complementary commercial businesses. Establishment of indoor
recreation facilities should be minimized to maintain properties for more
jobs-intense enterprises and to avoid land use conflicts. Creative and
design-related businesses are encouraged to diversify the mix. Permitted
uses include commercial and light industrial uses, creative industry
businesses, design businesses, limited indoor sports and recreation, and
wholesale uses.
In the Inner Bayshore area, additional permitted uses include hospitality
uses accommodated within the Bayfront Commercial designation.
Development Standards
Maximum Intensity: 0.75 FAR for industrial and commercial uses;
3.0 FAR for hospitality uses
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CC-15
Open Space and Recreation Land Uses
Open spaces serve a multitude of functions for Burlingame residents and
visitors: for recreation, as wildlife habitat, flood control, and as quiet
places to enjoy nature and scenery. Burlingame’s open spaces are critical
to ensuring a healthy and active population and facilitating access to
nature. The open space land use designations are established to preserve
and maintain open space amenities.
Open Space (OS)
The Open Space (OS) designation applies to natural habitat areas and
other properties supporting environmental resources protected via
easements or other means. Areas with the Open Space designation are
located in hillsides. Development is not permitted except for facilities
such as restrooms, interpretive exhibits, and other improvements that
support open space uses.
IV. COMMUNITY CHARACTER
CC-16 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Parks and Recreation (PR)
The Parks and Recreation (PR) designation applies to regional parks,
community and neighborhood parks, and special use facilities such as
community centers, golf courses, and trails that accommodate active
recreation activities. Burlingame has a diverse set of parks and recreation
facilities that meet a variety of needs for both residents and visitors, and
this land use designation preserves these spaces throughout the City.
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CC-17
Badlands (BAY)
The Badlands (BAY) designation applies to waters in the San Francisco
Bay and other waters subject to bay tidal influences. No development is
permitted except as authorized by State law.
Public and Quasi-Public Land Uses
Public and Quasi-Public land use designations refer to spaces and
buildings operated for public benefit. This includes a variety of use types:
city facilities, hospitals, schools, and infrastructure.
Public/Institutional (P/I)
The Public/Institutional (P/I) designation applies to government buildings,
educational and cultural facilities, health care uses and hospitals, and
unique private institutional uses. This designation also applies to utilities
infrastructure and easements. Public and institutional uses are dispersed
throughout the city, and any expansion or development of such facilities
should be sensitive to the surrounding uses, particularly when
development is adjacent to residential neighborhoods.
IV. COMMUNITY CHARACTER
CC-18 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Development Standards
Maximum Intensity:
- Government, education, cultural facilities: 1.5 FAR
- Hospitals: 3.0 FAR
Rail Corridor (RC)
The Rail Corridor (RC) designation applies to properties including and
supporting rail lines and ancillary functions. These parcels include the
public right-of-way, as well as parking lots and other spaces associated
with commuter service.
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CC-19
Sphere of Influence Land Uses
Burlingame’s sphere of influence includes the Burlingame Hills
neighborhood and two small parcels of unincorporated land along
Interstate 280. Established development consists of large-lot single-family
homes and natural hillside open space. As a matter of City policy, these
areas will not be annexed by the City of Burlingame unless annexation is
initiated by property owners.
Open Space–Sphere of Influence (OS-SOI)
The Open Space–Sphere of Influence (OS-SOI) land use designation
refers to the unincorporated open space areas within the City’s
designated sphere of influence. These areas provide scenic and natural
amenities for both Burlingame residents and Burlingame Hills residents.
No development is permitted in these areas.
Low Density Residential–Sphere of Influence (LDR–SOI)
The Low Density Residential–Sphere of Influence (LDR–SOI) land use
designation applies to the unincorporated low-density residential
neighborhoods within the sphere of influence. Permitted uses include
detached housing units on individual lots, accessory units, and related
ancillary structures.
IV. COMMUNITY CHARACTER
CC-20 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Development Standards
Density: 1.0 – 8.0 du/acre
Managed Growth
Given Burlingame’s built-out character, capacity for growth is limited.
However, the City is committed to accommodating and managing
targeted growth to respond to regional demand for housing—and
housing affordable to a broader range of income levels in particular—and
to allow for new commercial and industrial development adapting to an
evolving economy over time. The three areas targeted for change and
growth are the Badlands (all properties east of Highway 101), the North
Rollins Road district (Innovation Industrial), and the north end of El
Camino Real (North Burlingame Mixed Use). Proposals for more intensive
development will require detailed analysis of infrastructure conditions
and plans for any required upgrades/improvements.
Sustainable Development
Climate scientists have identified clear relationships between land use
patterns, development types, and greenhouse gas emissions. The
creation of walkable and bike-friendly neighborhoods with higher-density,
mixed use, infill development around transit stations can reduce vehicle
trips and associated pollutant emissions. Use of energy-efficient building
materials, green construction practices, and the reduction of impervious
surfaces can also contribute locally to reductions in greenhouse gas
emissions, and improvement in water quality. The City of Burlingame is
committed to reducing its carbon footprint by promoting sustainable
development through a variety of means.
Burlingame’s Climate Action Plan (CAP), first adopted in 2009, set the
framework for City policies relating to greenhouse gas reduction. Given
the ties between land use policy practices and climate change affects, the
City has incorporated CAP considerations and policies into this General
Plan; see the Healthy People Healthy Places Element. The sustainable
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CC-21
development policies move Burlingame forward in reducing the
community’s carbon footprint, protecting local environmental resources,
and creating healthy people and healthy places.
As discussed in the Community Safety Element, Burlingame’s Bayfront
location exposes properties and the populace to the adverse effects of
sea level rise and flooding. Strategies to combat climate change and
prepare for the impacts of sea level rise through resilience are integrated
throughout this General Plan. The following goal and policies reflect the
City’s approach to promoting sustainable practices in future development
and protecting existing development from elevated sea levels and
flooding. Additional policies relating to sustainability are incorporated
throughout the other elements, and in the Healthy People Healthy Places
Element in particular.
Goal CC-1: Incorporate sustainable practices in all development
decisions.
CC-1.1: Climate Action Plan
Maintain up-to-date Climate Action Plan policies and continue to provide
annual sustainability reports. [SR]
CC-1.2: Mixed Use, Transit-Oriented Infill Development
Promote higher-density infill development with a mix of uses on
underutilized parcels, particularly near transit stations and stops. [DR]
CC-1.3: Walkable Streets and Neighborhoods
Promote walkable neighborhoods and encourage pedestrian activity by
designing safe, welcoming streets and sidewalks that incorporate
signalized crosswalks, attractive lighting and landscaping, curb
extensions, and traffic-calming measures at appropriate locations. [DR]
IV. COMMUNITY CHARACTER
CC-22 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
CC-1.4: Parking Requirements
Study options for reduced residential parking requirements in areas that
are well served by public transportation, such as the North Burlingame
and North Rollins Road areas. Implement preferred options. [SR, SO]
CC-1.5: Transportation Demand Management
Require that all major development projects include a Transportation
Demand Management program to reduce single-occupancy car trips.
[DR]
CC-1.6: Water Conservation
Promote water conservation by encouraging and incentivizing property
owners to incorporate drought-tolerant landscaping, “smart” irrigation
systems, water efficient appliances, and recycled water systems. Continue
to enforce the water-efficiency landscaping ordinance. Encourage
recycling and reuse of graywater in new buildings. [DR]
CC-1.7: Solar Energy
Incentivize solar panel installation on existing buildings and new
developments. [DR]
CC-1.8: Green Infrastructure
Encourage green infrastructure systems that rely on natural processes for
stormwater drainage, groundwater recharge, and flood management.
[DR, SO]
Continue to implement storm drainage fee programs that discourage
broad applications of impervious surface coverage. [DR]
Require that new development minimize impervious surfaces by
establishing a maximum percentage of allowable impervious surface per
property. [DR]
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CC-23
CC-1.9: Green Building Practice and Standards
Support the use of sustainable building elements such as green roofs,
cisterns, and permeable pavement.
Continue to enforce the California Green Building Standards Code
(CALGreen). Periodically revisit the minimum standards required for
permit approval. Adopt zero-net-energy building goals for municipal
buildings. [DR]
CC-1.10: Site Design
Establish sustainable site design standards that maintain and protect
valuable stands of vegetation, minimize impacts of runoff to San
Francisco Bay and local creeks, reduce water consumption, optimize
buildings solar orientation, and minimize the impact of new structures on
wind movement. [DR]
CC-1.11: Urban Agriculture
Identify opportunities for additional community gardens and urban
agriculture locations in Burlingame, and partner with community groups
to establish these sites. Review code requirements for chicken and bee
keeping, and revise to better support urban agriculture. [SO, PA]
CC-1.12: Public Education and Outreach
Continue to educate Burlingame community members about sustainable
development strategies, programs, and opportunities. [PI]
CC-1.13: Electric Vehicle Network
Support the electric vehicle network by incentivizing use of electric
vehicles and installations of charging stations. [DR]
IV. COMMUNITY CHARACTER
CC-24 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Urban Forest and Streetscapes
Burlingame literally is a “green” community, with canopies of expansive,
mature, and diverse “urban forests” created by many tree varieties along
public streets, on private property, and within natural areas. The trees
contribute significantly to the walkable nature of the city and
neighborhood/district character. Trees also provide important health and
economic benefits: they reduce pollutants in the air and water, provide
shade and wind breaks, and can enhance property values. Trees provide
connections to nature, offering habitat and refuge for wildlife. The
following goal and policies focus on maintaining and enhancing
Burlingame’s valuable public and private trees so they remain a
prominent part of the community’s identity, culture, and history, while
also providing shade, habitat, and beauty.
Goal CC-2: Ensure that public and private trees are beautiful,
healthy, and safe, and that they remain an integral feature of the
community.
CC-2.1: Public Street Trees
Recognize street trees for their ability to help achieve targeted
environmental and public health benefits, and identify specific species
that perform best to maximize the environmental, economic, and social
benefits of Burlingame’s street trees. [SR, SO, AC, PA]
CC-2.2: Increase the Public Street Tree Population
Identify ways to increase the overall population of street trees in
Burlingame to stem the natural decline of the urban forest and create a
more equitable distribution of tree canopy. [MP, FP]
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CC-25
CC-2.3: Street Tree Maintenance Program
Maintain a citywide street tree maintenance program tied to a long-term
funding mechanism to ensure adequate maintenance of all public street
trees. [MP, FP, SO, SR]
CC-2.4: Invasive Vegetation Reduction
Discourage the planting of invasive non-native vegetation, and
encourage the removal of existing invasive non-native vegetation through
the development review process or through capital improvement
projects, except for any trees listed or eligible for listing on historic
registries. Examine all proposed removals on a case-by-case basis to
ensure desired resource are not removed. [DR, SO, AC, PI]
CC-2.5: Development Review
Preserve protected, historical, and other significant trees as part of the
development review process through the following measures:
Limit the adverse effect on the health and longevity of protected
or other significant trees through appropriate design measures
and construction practices.
Encourage the preservation of native Oak trees.
Require appropriate tree replacement when tree preservation is
not feasible.
As a condition of new development, require, where appropriate,
the planting and maintenance of both street trees and trees on
private property.
Protect trees during construction projects.
Manage infrastructure to ensure that the placement and
maintenance of street trees, streetlights, signs, and other
infrastructure assets are integrated.
Where urban development occurs adjacent to natural plant
communities (e.g., Oak woodland, riparian forest), ensure
landscape plantings incorporate native tree species.
IV. COMMUNITY CHARACTER
CC-26 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Limit the number of new curb cuts for development projects to
provide adequate space for protection of tree roots and for
planting of new trees. [DR]
CC-2.6: Interagency Coordination
Collaborate with other local, regional, state, and federal agencies to
leverage resources to achieve the City’s urban forest goal. [AC]
CC-2.7: Volunteer Efforts
Support volunteer urban forestry programs that encourage the
participation of residents and business owners in tree planting and
maintenance in neighborhoods and parks throughout the city. [PA, PI]
Historic Resources
Burlingame has a rich history as one of the earliest complete communities
on the Peninsula. San Francisco residents of the late 1800s wishing to
escape the city’s cold, foggy summers built grand estates in Burlingame,
where they enjoyed sunny weather and beautiful wooded landscapes.
Development proceeded in earnest in the 1890s with establishment of
the Burlingame Country Club, construction of a train station, and opening
of a U.S. Post Office (all existing in 2017, although the country club is in
the neighboring town of Hillsborough and the post office has been
closed). The station was constructed in 1893-94 on a route that extended
from San Francisco to San Jose and is the first permanent structure in the
United States built in the Mission Revival architecture style. By the turn of
the century, the area featured many estates owned by families drawn by
the proximity of San Francisco and the Burlingame Country Club. The first
residential subdivision in the area, the “Town of Burlingame,” was
completed in 1896, consisting of hundreds of parcels generally 50 feet
wide and 150 feet deep. The settlement grew slowly until 1906, when the
San Francisco earthquake and fires forced many people to leave San
Francisco in search of new homes. By then, a handful of modest
businesses had been established around the train station and Burlingame
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CC-27
Square, clearing defining the center of this growing community. By 1908,
over a dozen additional subdivisions had been recorded in Burlingame.
Figure CC-2 identifies the four officially designated and historically
significant resources in the community (as of 2017): Burlingame Train
Station, the Kohl Mansion, Howard-Ralston Eucalyptus Tree Rows (along
El Camino Real), and Severn Lodge Dairy Wallscape. In addition to the
four officially designated and historically significant resources, Burlingame
has a wealth of older building stock, neighborhoods, and tree groves that
form the basis of the community’s character. For example, the Francard
Tree Groves along the Caltrain tracks are eligible for listing on the
National Register of Historic Places. The following goal and policies
ensure that buildings, neighborhoods, districts, and natural areas with
historical significance to the Burlingame community are protected and
celebrated so they can remain defining community features that preserve
a community character for future generations to enjoy and appreciate.
A comprehensive survey was prepared for Downtown, and the
information and findings in the survey, as it may be updated periodically,
will inform historic preservation strategies within Downtown.
Goal CC-3: Protect the character and quality of Burlingame’s
historical buildings, tree groves, open spaces, neighborhoods,
and districts.
CC-3.1: Comprehensive Historic Surveys
Maintain up-to-date comprehensive surveys for historic districts and
neighborhoods in Burlingame. [MP]
CC-3.2: Comprehensive Historic Surveys
Require applicants for any discretionary permits that involve remodeling,
removing, or substantially altering any structure older than 50 years (at
the time of the application) to prepare a Historic Resources Analysis
consistent with State CEQA requirements to identify the historical
IV. COMMUNITY CHARACTER
CC-28 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
significance of the property. The analysis shall be prepared by a qualified
historic preservation specialist pre-qualified by the Community
Development Department and should include sufficient information on
the structure’s history, architecture, and/or association with people or
events significant to Burlingame’s or California’s history, or representative
of significant architects. [DR]
CC-3.3: Historic Preservation Standards and Guidelines
When a structure is deemed to have historic significance, use the
Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic
Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and
Reconstructing Historic Buildings when evaluating development
applications and City projects, or development applications that may
affect scenic views or the historic context of nearby historic resources.
[DR, MP]
CC-3.4: Flexible Land Use Standards
Maintain flexible land use standards to allow the adaptive reuse of
identified historical buildings with a variety of economically viable uses
while minimizing impacts to the historical value and character of sites and
structures. [DR, MP]
CC-3.5: Historic Districts
Identify opportunities to establish National Park Service Certified Historic
Districts to encourage the preservation of Burlingame’s historical
neighborhoods and districts, and to qualify property owners for the
Federal Preservation Tax Incentives Program. [AC, PA, PI]
CC-3.6: State Historic Building Code
Promote the use of the State Historic Building Code to facilitate the reuse
and conversion of historical buildings to alternative uses. [MP, SO]
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CC-29
CC-3.7: Mills Act
Participate in the California Mills Act Property Tax Abatement Program to
provide property owners of historical resources an economic incentive
(property tax relief) to restore, preserve, and maintain qualified historic
properties. [MP, AC, PA]
CC-3.8: Federal Historic Preservation Tax Incentives
Promote the use of the Federal Historic Preservation Tax Incentives
Program to encourage the rehabilitation of income-producing historical
structures in Burlingame. [PI]
CC-3.9: Federal Historic Preservation Tax Credit Program
Promote the Federal Historic Preservation Tax Credit Program to
encourage the charitable contribution of historical resources and the
establishment of conservation easements for historic preservation
purposes. [PI]
CC-3.10: Demolition of Historical Resources
Prohibit the demolition of historical resources unless one of the following
findings can be made:
The rehabilitation and reuse of the resource is not structurally or
economically feasible.
The demolition is necessary to protect the health, safety, and
welfare of the public.
The public benefits of demolition outweigh the loss of the
historical resource. [DR]
CC-3.11: Heritage Trees
Protect and maintain Burlingame’s historic eucalyptus groves and other
heritage trees in a healthy, safe, and efficient manner so they remain an
important part of the community. [MP]
IV. COMMUNITY CHARACTER
CC-30 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Neighborhoods
Burlingame is a mature and built-out community with well-established
residential neighborhoods. Many residential neighborhoods display
architectural styles representing different eras of development, including
the earliest periods of Burlingame’s history, and homeowners take great
pride in home maintenance and neighborhood preservation.
Each of Burlingame’s neighborhoods reflects the building styles that were
popular during the time of their construction. Older neighborhoods have
an abundance of Craftsman and vernacular-style homes originally built in
the 1910s and 1920s. These were typically made of wood shingles, wood
siding, stucco, or a combination of these materials. By the early to mid-
1920s, Tudor and Mediterranean-style homes gained popularity, creating
an eclectic mix that generally is the hallmark of pre-1940s neighborhoods.
Ranch-style and Eichler homes became popular between the 1940s and
1960s, and are particularly prevalent in post-WWII neighborhoods that
developed following the subdivision of the Mills Estate on the north end
of Burlingame.
The consistent neighborhood styles contribute to home values and
neighborhood cohesion. However, evolving household compositions and
increased disposable income among Burlingame residents has created
tensions between homeowners’ desires to build larger homes and
broader community interest in maintaining established neighborhood
character. The following goal and policies aim to provide for new and
substantially remodeled homes to be well integrated into existing
neighborhood fabrics and landscapes. Also, long-established institutional
uses such as churches, synagogues, convents, and private schools are
integrated into several neighborhoods. Over time, the mission of these
institutions may change, with the owners desiring to repurpose the
properties. Such reuse will require careful consideration of their
neighborhood context. Neighborhoods are shown in Figure CC-3.
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CC-31
Goal CC-4: Ensure high-quality, integrated, and appropriately
scaled residential development within Burlingame’s
neighborhoods.
CC-4.1: Residential Character and Design
Encourage a diverse housing stock while also ensuring that new
development and substantially remodeled homes maintain the
architectural and massing character of each unique residential
neighborhood in Burlingame. [DR]
CC-4.2: Attractive Design
Emphasize attractive building and site design by paying careful attention
to building scale, mass, placement, architecture, materials, landscaping,
screening of equipment, loading areas, signage, and other design
considerations. Allow below-grade design approaches where such can be
used to maintain consistent scale and massing with surrounding
development. [DR]
CC-4.3: Mass and Scale
Ensure that the scale and interrelationships of new and old residential
development complement each other. [DR]
CC-4.4: Density Compatibility
Ensure that the bulk and scale of multifamily residential developments are
compatible with homes and buildings in the surrounding area. [DR]
CC-4.5: Neighborhood Guidelines
Identify neighborhoods that have a unique architectural style, historical
background, or location, and develop plans that preserve and enhance
their character. [SR]
IV. COMMUNITY CHARACTER
CC-32 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
CC-4.6: Ridgeline Development
Discourage the placement of homes and structures near ridgelines to
maintain natural open space and preserve views. If ridgeline development
cannot be avoided, require grading, building, and landscaping designs
that mitigate visual impacts and blend the development with the natural
features of the hillside. [DR]
CC-4.7: Hillside Residential Design Standards
Regulate the design of streets, sidewalks, cluster home development,
architecture, site design, grading, landscaping, and utilities in hillside
areas to protect aesthetics, natural topography, and views of surrounding
open space and distant landscapes. [DR, MP]
CC-4.8: Sisters of Mercy Campus and Similar Institutions
Require development of a master plan or similar comprehensive planning
tool for any proposed reuse/repurposing of the Sisters of Mercy campus
(including Sisters Residences, Mercy Center, and Mercy High School) to
accommodate its continuing mission, while ensuring that any new land
uses and development scenarios integrate well with surrounding
residential development and preserve the overall character of the campus
as a community asset. Also require a master plan or similar tool for any
large institution located within a residential neighborhood. [MP]
CC-4.9: Preservation of Older Residences
Consider protection of older single-family and multifamily residences
that, although they may not have historical significance, define and
contribute to the character of a neighborhood. Provide incentives to
encourage their preservation. [DR, SO]
Bayfront
Planning Context
Burlingame’s Bayfront area covers approximately 2.5 linear miles of
frontage along San Francisco Bay. The Bayfront is characterized by the
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CC-33
open waters of the bay, important recreation and open space resources,
and office buildings, hotels, and destination restaurants that benefit from
their proximity to San Francisco International Airport. These commercial
uses provide an important economic base for the City. Within the
Bayfront Area, the Inner Bayshore district between Old Bayshore Highway
and Highway 101 has long provided space for warehouses, industrial and
logistic businesses, and office space that largely support uses at the
airport.
Largely due to limited access across Highway 101, the Bayfront has
developed somewhat independently from the rest of Burlingame, on
properties that were once tidal lands and marshlands. The area is
composed primarily of fill materials imported to development sites. The
low-lying properties are exposed to flood risks and sea level rise hazards.
The regional Bay Trail runs along the Bayfront, providing a pedestrian
and bicycle connection between recreation opportunities and services
along the Bay. While the trail is substantially complete, gaps occur where
the trail route crosses private lands (see Bayfront Diagram on next page.)
Bayfront Vision
The Bayfront will be a regional recreation and business destination.
Enhanced parks, natural open spaces, and recreational amenities will
offer places that residents and visitors can enjoy, with enhanced access
for pedestrian, cyclists, and watercraft, including commercial ferry service.
The area will be an environment where hotels and airport-related services
continue to thrive, and where new commercial uses create a well-rounded
district that serves a variety of needs. Industrial and office uses within the
Inner Bayshore district will continue as preferred land uses, and
compatible creative industries will be accommodated and encouraged.
Long-term parking uses that serve operations at the airport will only be
considered in conjunction with office and hospitality development, and
only as a secondary or ancillary use. All development will be undertaken
IV. COMMUNITY CHARACTER
CC-34 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
in a manner that protects people and property from flood hazards and
sea level rise.
Bayfront Neighborhood Diagram.
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CC-35
Goal CC-5: Maintain and promote the Bayfront Area as a premier
destination along San Francisco Bay for land- and water-based
recreation, hospitality uses, creative industries, logistics support,
water-based transit service, and local businesses that benefit from
proximity to San Francisco International Airport.
CC-5.1: Commercial Destinations
Support and encourage commercial uses along the waterfront that
enliven the area and serve as destinations for residents and visitors,
including hotels, restaurants, and entertainment venues. [MP, DR]
CC-5.2: Diverse Industrial Uses
Continue to accommodate diverse industrial functions, and support
emerging creative businesses through flexible zoning regulations. [DR]
CC-5.3: Airport Support Uses
Maintain the Bayfront’s industrial and airport support functions, and
establish adaptable regulations that respond to the evolving nature of
those industries. [DR]
CC-5.4: Parks and Open Space
Preserve and enhance Bayfront parks and open spaces, and identify
strategies to increase usage of recreational amenities. [FB, SO]
CC-5.5: Trail Connectivity
Coordinate with partner agencies to connect gaps in the Bay Trail, and
require new waterfront development to improve and maintain trail
segments along property lines. [AC, PA]
IV. COMMUNITY CHARACTER
CC-36 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Goal CC-6: Establish a cohesive design character for the Bayfront
Area that protects views to the waterfront, encourages walking
and biking, accommodates water-based recreation and ferry
service, and addresses sea level rise.
CC-6.1: View Preservation
Ensure that new development preserves public views to the waterfront.
Consider sightlines and viewsheds from Bayfront open spaces when
planning future projects. [DR, SO]
CC-6.2: Reuse of Building Stock
Promote the reuse of existing buildings for creative commercial uses in
the Innovation/Industrial District, and encourage aesthetic and façade
improvements. [DR]
CC-6.3: Infill Development
Encourage increased intensity via high-quality infill development on
surface parking lots, and support the conversion of surface parking lots
into active commercial and hospitality uses. [DR]
CC-6.4: Design Character
Establish design standards that facilitate attractive interfaces between use
types, enhance the public realm, and activate commercial districts.
Prioritize pedestrian improvements and waterfront access. [MP, DR]
CC-6.5: Pedestrian and Bicycle Access
Improve pedestrian and bicycle access to the Bayfront across Highway
101 and along the Bay Trail, and identify opportunities for new bicycle
and walking connections to key waterfront destinations. [MP]
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CC-37
CC-6.6: Water-based Activities
Accommodate access to the Bay for water-based recreation and transit
uses. [DR, MP]
CC-6.7: Sea Level Rise
Require that new and existing development along the Bayfront address
sea level rise and flood risks via attractive and effective shoreline barriers.
Enforce a minimum 75-foot waterfront setback requirement, with setback
areas used for active and passive open space to minimize structural
damage during flood and storm events. Design new buildings with
habitable areas elevated to minimize potential damage from exceptional
storm events. [DR]
Burlingame Shoreline
IV. COMMUNITY CHARACTER
CC-38 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Burlingame Point
Burlingame Point
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CC-39
Sea Level Rise Approaches (Protect, Accommodate, Retreat, Hybrid,
Adaptation)
Sea Level Rise Resilience Strategies
IV. COMMUNITY CHARACTER
CC-40 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Sea level rise resilient developments, Hafen City, Germany
PROTECT – ENGINEERED, Coastal armoring, seawalls and levees,
Burlingame
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CC-41
PROTECT – NATURAL, Baylands restoration, Oro Loma marsh
ACCOMMODATE, Flood proof infrastructure
IV. COMMUNITY CHARACTER
CC-42 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
ACCOMMODATE, Floodable development, Tasinge Plads, Copenhagen
ADAPTATION, Flood resilient ferry wharf, Brisbane Australia
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CC-43
RETREAT, Surfer’s Point, Ventura
ADAPTATION, Living shoreline, oyster and estuarine restoration, San
Rafael
IV. COMMUNITY CHARACTER
CC-44 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
HYBRID, Multifunctional infrastructure, Hafen City
HYBRID, Sustainable waterfront redevelopments, Seattle Waterfront
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CC-45
Broadway
Planning Context
Broadway is one of two primary commercial destinations in the City and is
known for its distinct, small-town main street character. Whereas
Downtown supports a diverse mix of shops, restaurants, and professional
offices with a regional emphasis—including a healthy distribution of
national brand businesses—Broadway has a local, home-grown feel. The
surrounding residential neighborhoods support these businesses with
foot traffic. And although Broadway is a primary connection for vehicles
traveling between Highway 101 and El Camino Real, the roadway’s
narrow width and tree canopy work to maintain lower traffic speeds that
support the pedestrian environment. Broadway’s charm is in its scale,
focus on an active street front and in its mixture of neighborhood and
community-serving rather than regional-serving businesses. See
Broadway Area Context Diagram.
Broadway Vision
Broadway will continue to be a commercial corridor, with a requirement
for ground-floor uses and development approaches that encourage and
support pedestrian activity. Public realm improvements and ongoing
maintenance will create a distinctive look for the corridor. Increasing foot
traffic, creating gathering places, and improving the façades will
strengthen Broadway as a neighborhood district and preserve its distinct
character and function. Residential development on upper floors along
the Broadway frontage will bring additional people and vitality to the
district. An emphasis will be placed on reuse and rehabilitation of
character-defining structures. Infill development projects will respect and
respond to the pedestrian scale and simple architectural styles.
IV. COMMUNITY CHARACTER
CC-46 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Goal CC-7: Ensure that Broadway maintains its character as a
vibrant, pedestrian-friendly, mixed use district that supports and
encourages local businesses and local investment, and that serves
as a gathering place for Burlingame residents and a quaint
destination for visitors.
CC-7.1: Mix of Uses and Activities
Encourage a diverse mix of commercial, office, and residential uses that
support both daytime and evening activity, increase foot traffic, and
attract visitors. [DR]
CC-7.2: Pedestrian-Friendly District
Ensure active and transparent ground-floor uses by restricting businesses
fronting Broadway to retail, service, dining, and entertainment
businesses. [DR]
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CC-47
CC-7.3: Supporting Uses
Encourage second- and third-story office and residential uses along
Broadway, and allow ground-floor office and residential (including lofts
and live/work units) on side streets. Accommodate additional office space
on ground floors of mixed use development on side streets. [DR]
CC-7.4: Scale of Development
Maintain the scale of development along Broadway generally to two
stories, with more intensity at California Drive and El Camino Real. Ensure
that residential and mixed use development along side streets are
designed and scaled to create a transition to lower-density residential
neighborhoods. [DR]
CC-7.5: Design Character
Establish design standards for commercial and mixed use development
that reflect Broadway’s historical scale and character. Emphasize design
elements that create an active ground-floor public realm and maintain the
“rhythm” of storefront widths present in the district. [MP, DR]
CC-7.6: Gateways
Enhance the gateways to the Broadway commercial district by protecting
the sign at Broadway and California Drive, enhancing the use and design
of the California Drive and El Camino Real intersections, and allowing
more prominent development at those intersections as gateway
signifiers. [DR]
IV. COMMUNITY CHARACTER
CC-48 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
CC-7.7 Pedestrian Safety
Ensure pedestrian safety with intersection improvements and traffic-
calming measures at key intersections along Broadway. [SO]
CC-7.8: Streetscape Improvements
Maintain streetscape and sidewalk improvements along Broadway that
encourage walking, improve accessibility, and create gathering spaces.
[SO]
CC-7.9: Broadway BID
Continue to collaborate with the Broadway Business Improvement District
(BID) to support and implement projects consistent with the goals of this
General Plan. Facilitate two-way communication between business
owners and the City. [PA]
CC-7.10: Connectivity
Support and encourage efforts to better connect Broadway to
surrounding neighborhoods and destinations via walking, bicycling, and
public and private transit. [MP, SO]
CC-7.11: Parking
Improve parking in the Broadway district by providing wayfinding signage
and modern methods for collecting parking fares. Consider
improvements to existing surface lots and/or incorporate public parking
into a new structure. [MP, SO, PA]
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CC-49
Downtown
Planning Context
In 2010, the City Council adopted the Burlingame Downtown Specific
Plan. This Specific Plan established direction for continuing the
complementary mix of uses that allow Downtown to be a truly pedestrian
place, anchored by the library and other civic uses, residential
neighborhoods that offer a range of housing types, and restaurants and
shops that locals frequent and visitors to Burlingame enjoy. The extensive
streetscape improvements along Burlingame Avenue, completed in 2015,
catalyzed private reinvestment along Downtown’s key artery and inspired
interest and investment throughout the district. Given the proximity of
Downtown to the Burlingame rail station, the Specific Plan creates
opportunities for carefully located, more intense development projects
that take advantage of easy transit access, and that responds to the
desire of existing and prospective new residents to live in a charming,
walkable environment that many compare to a European village. See
Downtown Area Context Diagram.
IV. COMMUNITY CHARACTER
CC-50 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Downtown Vision
As stated in the Burlingame Downtown Specific Plan, Downtown
Burlingame will be an economically, socially, and culturally vibrant local
and regional destination, with a diverse and balanced mix of activities,
pedestrian-friendly streets, historical buildings, and inviting gathering
places. Burlingame Avenue will continue to be an active commercial
venue, with restaurants, shops, and entertainment venues for locals and
visitors. Over time, the mix of uses along other Downtown streets may
shift in response to market conditions, with office uses, creative work
spaces, and emerging business types occupying spaces traditionally
devoted to commercial enterprises. New housing will be provided to
meet all income levels and housing choices for people at all stages in
their lives. Emphasis will continue to be placed on preserving historical
structures and ensuring that new development projects blend with the
aesthetic quality of their surroundings. And while walking will be the
primary way to get around Downtown, the City will ensure that public
parking facilities are well located, easy to find, demand priced, and
attractive.
Goal CC-8: Ensure that Downtown maintains its character and
function as a vibrant, pedestrian-scaled, mixed use district that
supports and encourages a diversity of commercial businesses,
treasured civic uses, activated office space, and housing for all
income levels and people of all ages.
CC-8.1: Mix of Uses and Activities
Encourage throughout Downtown a diverse mix of commercial, office,
and residential uses that support both daytime and evening activity, take
advantage of easy transit access, and distinguish Burlingame from other
downtowns along the Peninsula. [MP, DR]
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CC-51
CC-8.2: Burlingame Avenue
Maintain Burlingame Avenue as an active commercial venue of regional
importance and interest, with restaurants, shops, and entertainment
venues for locals and visitors. [MP, DR]
CC-8.3: Pedestrian-Scaled District
Maintain the scale of buildings throughout Downtown with pedestrians in
mind, with new building emphasizing human-scale massing and
architectural details. Require active storefronts and building fronts. [DR]
CC-8.4: Residential Development
Ensure that the Burlingame Downtown Specific Plan maintains use
regulations and standards that accommodate a diversity of housing types
and affordability. Provide realistic incentives for affordable housing that is
well integrated into development projects and throughout Downtown.
[DR, PA]
CC-8.5: Evolving Business Types
Ensure that the land use regulations in the Burlingame Downtown
Specific Plan accommodate evolving markets for commercial and office
space and do not constrain uses within particular subdistricts, provided
that the diversity of uses throughout Downtown is retained. This includes
flexibility of street frontage space along Howard Avenue, California Drive,
Park Road, Lorton Avenue, and Highland Avenue. [DR, MP]
CC-8.6: Pedestrian Accommodations
Provide sidewalks, street furniture, street trees, and other streetscape and
public realm amenities that preserve and enhance the comfortable
pedestrian environment throughout Downtown. [MP, FB, SO]
CC-8.7: Auto Dealerships
IV. COMMUNITY CHARACTER
CC-52 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Accommodate the continued presence of auto dealerships along
California Drive, but also support the desire of property owners to
reconfigure or redevelop properties along California Drive with other
compatible uses consistent with the Burlingame Downtown Specific Plan.
[MP, DR, PA]
CC-8.8: City Hall Site
Explore options for relocation of City Hall to another location within
Downtown convenient for residents and the business community, and
consider reuse of the City Hall site for other beneficial uses, including
housing and open space. [MP, PA]
CC-8.9: Civic Uses and Community Gathering Places
Keep important civic uses in Downtown, and create new public gathering
places through City efforts and public/private partnerships. [MP, PA, SO]
CC-8.10: Historical Buildings and Features
Establish regulations that protect historical buildings and features in
Downtown from neglect, misuse, or destruction. Encourage adaptive
reuse of historical buildings. [DR, PI]
CC-8.11: Public Parking
Develop and implement a comprehensive public parking program
for Downtown that utilizes surface lots and parking structures to
accommodate demand associated with visitor traffic.
Allow property owners and businesses to purchase credits in
public parking facilities in lieu of providing private on-site parking.
Create an intuitive signage program for Downtown parking.
Price public parking based on distance from uses and other
demand factors.
Utilize modern approaches for collecting parking fees. [PA, SO]
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CC-53
CC-8.12: Private Parking
Establish parking regulations for private development projects in
Downtown that recognize the pedestrian nature of the district, shared use
of buildings, and proximity to transit. Allow for innovate parking
approaches. [MP, DR, PA]
CC-8.13: Wayfinding
Design, implement, and maintain a wayfinding signage program
throughout Downtown. [MP, SO, FB]
CC-8.14: Event Programming
Program a variety of publicly sponsored events in Downtown year-round,
and encourage private efforts to host events. [PA, SO, FB]
California Drive
Planning Context
California Drive, from just north of Broadway to Oak Grove Avenue (the
northern boundary of the Downtown district), has an eclectic character.
The Caltrain right-of-way to the east forms a hard boundary, with an
intermittent landscaped buffer between the tracks and California Drive.
Low-scale commercial buildings—largely occupied by local businesses in
buildings built to the front property line—are interspersed with residential
uses either fronting California Drive or above and behind the commercial
buildings. Despite the wide right-of-way of California Drive and traffic
speeds of an arterial roadway, the street has characteristics of a
pedestrian boulevard: a mix of complementary uses, buildings close to
the street, and businesses focused on local needs. The right-of-way is
wider than what is needed to accommodate anticipated traffic volumes
through 2040, and pursuing a “road diet” (see the Mobility Element) for
California Drive will create a slower, more pedestrian-friendly corridor that
will influence land uses over the long term. The moderate-density
residential neighborhoods behind the California Drive frontage define a
IV. COMMUNITY CHARACTER
CC-54 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
building scale and sensitivity for uses along the street. See California
Drive Area Context Diagram.
California Drive Vision
California Drive between Juanita Avenue and Oak Grove Avenue will
remain a medium-density mixed use corridor that transitions seamlessly
to the abutting residential districts to the west. An eclectic mix of uses
reflective of long-established use patterns, a pedestrian scale, locally
owned retail and service commercial businesses, and upper-story
residential units will continue. Prototypical commercial uses are those that
serve Burlingame residents and nearby communities, do not involve late-
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CC-55
night hours, and do not have any operating characteristics that adversely
impact residential uses. Stand-alone residential developments will
accommodate local and regional demand for innovative and interesting
housing types. California Drive will be reinvented as a fully multi-modal
corridor, with a separate bike lane and improved pedestrian connections
along the west side of and across the road.
Goal CC-9: Preserve the California Drive district as an
unconventional, eclectic place, where locally serving commercial
businesses and varying types of residential development interact
along a multimodal corridor, and the uses along California
transition and interface quietly to neighborhoods behind the
corridor.
CC-9.1: Mix of Low-scale Uses
Accommodate a diverse mix of low-scale, locally serving commercial
businesses and creative residential development along the corridor. In
the zoning regulations, limit commercial uses to those that can clearly be
considered compatible with established residential neighborhoods
immediately adjacent. [DR]
CC-9.2: Stand-alone Residential
Allow stand-alone residential development to remain at locations where
historically established. [MP, DR]
CC-9.3: Development Approaches
Encourage new development to be built to the California Drive
frontage.
Require step-down building setbacks and buffer treatments where
commercial uses and higher-intensity residential development
abuts established residential neighborhoods to the immediate
west. [DR]
IV. COMMUNITY CHARACTER
CC-56 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
El Camino Real
Planning Context
El Camino Real extends approximately 52 miles along the peninsula,
connecting San Jose to San Francisco. Along most of its route, El Camino
Real is known as State Route 82, a roadway maintained by Caltrans. In
most communities, land uses developed along the route over time to
respond to the road’s function as a commuter route, with motels and
auto-oriented commercial businesses typifying the uses. Much of El
Camino Real in Burlingame is an exception, however, with majestic
eucalyptus trees lining the roadway and multifamily residential to each
side. The apartments, townhomes, and condominiums along El Camino
Real represent almost every era of architectural style from the 1920s
forward, providing a diverse array of housing. Virtually absent along the
stretch through Burlingame are the commercial uses that predominate in
other communities (with the exception of the segment extending from
Dufferin Avenue north to Millbrae, which is included within the North
Burlingame planning area).
Nineteen cities, counties, and agencies are coordinating to reinvent El
Camino Real through the “Grand Boulevard Initiative,” which aims to
have the route “realize its full potential as a place for residents to work,
live, shop, and play, creating links between communities that promote
walking and transit and an improved and meaningful way of life.”1 From
Burlingame’s perspective, El Camino Real’s unique character through the
City represents a window into the past and is a defining feature of
Burlingame. From an urban character perspective, very little needs to
change—and indeed, the eucalyptus grove itself is protected as an
officially designated landmark so will endure into the future. The City has
designated El Camino Real as a scenic roadway. From a street function
1 www.grandboulevard.net/about/grand-boulevard
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CC-57
perspective, the there are opportunities for operational and safety
enhancements, as discussed in the Mobility Element. See El Camino Real
Area Context Diagram.
El Camino Real Vision
El Camino Real will continue to be an iconic roadway through
Burlingame. Development along the densely tree-lined boulevard will
consist of distinctive multifamily housing, with commercial development
limited to properties that are within Downtown, at the intersection with
Broadway, and at a small node at Adeline Drive. The City, in conjunction
with Caltrans, will develop a plan to preserve the tree groves through
management and a defined replanting plan for older trees. Traffic
IV. COMMUNITY CHARACTER
CC-58 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
management and safety will be addressed as outlined in the Mobility
Element, with clear direction to make El Camino Real pedestrian friendly
through Burlingame.
CC-10.1: Residential Character
Maintain El Camino Real as a finely scaled, medium/high-density
residential corridor, with supportive institutional uses. [DR]
CC-10.2: Commercial Uses
Allow a limited amount of commercial and/or mixed use development at
key intersections along the corridor and consistent with the Downtown
Specific Plan. Ensure the scale of development is compatible with
established and adjacent uses along the corridor. [DR]
CC-10.3: Design Character
Establish design and landscape standards that maintain and strengthen
the unique aesthetics of El Camino Real, and ensure compatibility with
surrounding structures, including adjacent low-density residential. [DR]
CC-10.4: Gateway
Enhance and celebrate the entry to Burlingame on El Camino Real with
context-sensitive gateway design elements, including signage.
CC-10.5: Tree Groves
Balance the preservation and maintenance of the iconic tree groves along
El Camino Real with public safety and consistent with the City’s Tree
Preservation Ordinance. [DR]
Goal CC-10: Preserve the character of El Camino Real as a
distinctive tree-lined corridor in Burlingame, clearly different than
sections through other communities, with development consisting
of multifamily housing of all types.
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CC-59
CC-10.6: Collaboration with Transportation Agencies
Continue to partner with Caltrans, VTA, the Grand Boulevard Initiative,
and other partners to improve multi-modal safety and mobility along the
corridor in a manner that reflects local priorities. [AC]
CC-10.7: Infrastructure
Provide for roadway improvements along the El Camino Real corridor as
outlined in the Mobility Element. [SO, AC]
North Burlingame
Planning Context
The North Burlingame area represents a primary gateway as motorists
travel south on El Camino Real. At this gateway, El Camino Real is a wide
boulevard, with frontage roads providing access to the suburban-scale
and character Burlingame Plaza commercial center and office buildings
between the boulevard and railroad tracks. Significantly, this north end of
the City has easy pedestrian access to the Millbrae multimodal transit
station. Properties in Burlingame could support much more intense
development due to the proximity to the multimodal transit station and
to respond to housing needs for more diverse housing types. And while
El Camino Real is under the jurisdiction of the California Department of
Transportation (Caltrans), opportunities exist to make more efficient use
of the street right-of-way. See North Burlingame Area Context
Diagram.
North Burlingame Vision
North Burlingame will be a distinct, defining area of Burlingame, with
streetscape enhancements and new housing and complementary
commercial uses at urban-level intensities. This transit-oriented
development node will provide housing for all income levels, connect
with surrounding commercial and institutional uses with improved
pedestrian accommodations, and welcome visitors to Burlingame with
distinguishing and historically sensitive gateway features.
IV. COMMUNITY CHARACTER
CC-60 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Goal CC-11: Establish a high-intensity mixed use development
node at the north end of El Camino Real to take advantage of the
proximity to the Millbrae multimodal transit station and SamTrans
commuter routes.
CC-11.1: Mix of Uses and Activities
Promote a mix of residential and commercial uses, including a range of
housing types and a mix of office, service, and retail uses that serve
residents and complement the adjacent medical center. [DR]
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CC-61
CC-11.2: Transit-Oriented Development
Allow and encourage higher-density, transit-oriented development along
El Camino Real and Trousdale Drive to provide housing, employment,
and retail opportunities easily accessible from the Millbrae multimodal
transit station and SamTrans commuter routes. [DR]
CC-11.3 Housing
Encourage and support the development of new housing in North
Burlingame. Ensure that new residential development provides a range of
housing types available to different income levels and meets or exceeds
minimum requirements for affordable housing. [PA, DR]
CC-11.4 Design Character
Establish design and landscape standards and strategies to improve the
streetscape, create a distinct development character, and create activity
nodes while respecting the scale of nearby lower-density neighborhoods.
Consider the following design strategies:
Require parking lots and structures to locate behind buildings and
within the interior of a site.
Ensure pedestrian connections and access routes connect
building entrances to adjacent sidewalks and transit stops.
Encourage pedestrian-friendly sidewalks and outdoor gathering
spaces along ground-floor building frontages
Encourage buildings to step back from the street and step down
to adjacent uses to ensure compatibility with adjacent uses.
Ensure street setbacks offer ample space for substantial setbacks
along El Camino Real. [DR]
CC-11.5 Gateway Treatment
Develop and implement a defining gateway treatment on El Camino Real
at the entrances to Burlingame. Use monuments, landscaping, and other
streetscape elements as part of the design treatment. (AC, MP]
IV. COMMUNITY CHARACTER
CC-62 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
CC-11.6 Access Lanes
Maintain and enhance frontage lanes along the east side of El Camino
Real, with improvements such as wide sidewalks and generous
landscaping to support pedestrian activity and serve as an amenity for
adjacent buildings. [MP, DR]
CC-11.7 Connectivity
Ensure safe, comfortable crosswalks and intersections to support
pedestrian and bicycle access to transit stops and across El Camino Real.
[AC, SO]
CC-11.8 Access to Burlingame Businesses
Encourage residents and employees in the North Burlingame to shop,
dine, and visit businesses along Broadway and in Downtown Burlingame.
[PA, PI]
Rollins Road
Planning Context
The Rollins Road industrial corridor is a major employment base in
Burlingame. Dating to the middle of the last century, the area largely has
supported light manufacturing businesses, warehousing, auto repairs
shops, and wholesale sales activities. In the early 2000s, new uses setting
up business in the district included commercial recreation businesses
such as tennis clubs and indoor soccer. Given the presence of the
Millbrae multimodal transit station less than one-half mile from the north
end of Rollins Road, the district presents opportunities for further
evolution and particularly, to support housing development. However,
with the diminishing availability of well-situated industrial properties in
the Bay Area, balancing the need to preserve industrial land and
businesses with the ability to accommodate emerging and desirable new
uses will be a key challenge.
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CC-63
Rollins Road itself is a wide, four-lane thoroughfare with parking on both
sides. Service and delivery trucks utilize the parking (and sometimes
traffic) lanes during certain hours, and traffic on the street is relatively
light. The corridor is not pedestrian friendly, as sidewalks are relatively
narrow, buildings are set far back, and few pedestrian crossings are
provided, but it functions well for the long-established industrial and
commercial purposes. See Rollins Area Context Diagram.
Rollins Road Vision
IV. COMMUNITY CHARACTER
CC-64 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Rollins Road will primarily be an industrial district, particularly along the
southern portion of the street within the Innovation/Industrial district.
Traditional light industrial uses and auto service businesses will continue
to represent key land uses since these provide vital services and jobs
within the community, but allowing a cluster of creative and design
industry activities to flourish will create synergies and a regional
destination for wholesalers and consumers.
The northern portion of the corridor, within easy walking distance to the
Millbrae multimodal transit station, presents an opportunity for
establishment of a new neighborhood of medium-density creative
live/work units and support uses. The City envisions creation of a
complete new neighborhood, where residents and creative businesses
have ready access to transit, supportive commercial businesses, and
public and private open space amenities. Such housing will provide
workforce housing, thus meeting the needs of all income levels in
Burlingame. Streetscape improvements within the new neighborhood will
emphasize a pedestrian focus, while still accommodating industrial-
related traffic through to Millbrae Avenue.
Goal CC-12: Recreate Rollins Road as two distinct but
complementary districts, with the southern two-thirds of the
corridor supporting industrial and creative business enterprises
and the northerly one-third of the corridor reimagined as a
live/work residential neighborhood that connects to the Millbrae
multimodal transit station.
CC-12.1: Industrial Base
Continue to support and accommodate the industrial and commercial
uses throughout the Innovation/Industrial and Live/Work districts. [DR]
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CC-65
CC-12.2: Creative Commercial and Industrial Uses
Support emerging businesses by establishing flexible zoning regulations
that allow creative art and design-oriented and green-tech commercial
and industrial uses. [DR]
CC-12.3: Live/Work District
Establish a creative Live/Work district at the north end of the Rollins Road
corridor within approximately one-half mile of the Millbrae multimodal
transit station; accommodate medium-density residential uses either as
stand-alone development or as integrated live/work environments. [DR]
CC-12.4: Alternative Transportation
Require new residential development in the Live/Work district to support
alternative modes of transportation, including high-quality bicycle
facilities and public transit incentives. Establish reduced parking
requirements for residential buildings in this area, and study options for
protected bike lanes along Rollins Road and improved connections from
the Millbrae multimodal transit station. [MP, SR, DR]
CC-12.5: Reuse of Existing Buildings
Promote reuse of the existing building stock for creative commercial and
industrial uses—and where feasible and desired, as residential and
live/work places. Require aesthetic and façade improvements as part of
redevelopment projects and property improvements. [DR]
CC-12.6: Views from Highway 101
Require development along the Highway 101 frontage to include
attractive design elements, landscaping, and signage that create a
positive aesthetic condition, as viewed from the highway corridor. [MP,
DR]
IV. COMMUNITY CHARACTER
CC-66 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
CC-12.7: Design Aesthetic
Establish an eclectic but cohesive design aesthetic for the Live/Work
district, and require new development to utilize contemporary
architectural treatments and materials that are compatible with the
industrial nature of the area. Ground-floor workspaces should use
transparent materials to activate sidewalks and support work functions.
[DR]
CC-12.8: Open Space
Develop a vibrant public realm with attractive public spaces along the
Rollins Road corridor by requiring new development to include publicly
accessible plazas and pocket parks in appropriate locations. [DR, PA]
CC-12.9: Streetscape Enhancements
Promote a pedestrian-friendly environment, particularly in the Live/Work
district. Require new development to create active street frontages, with
workspaces or commercial uses on the ground floor, attractive
landscaping and street trees, and other streetscape enhancements as
appropriate. [DR, PA]
CC-12.10: Pedestrian Connectivity
Study opportunities for signalized pedestrian crossings along Rollins
Road, and identify pedestrian connectivity improvements between the
Live/Work district and the Millbrae Multimodal BART station. [SR, AC]
Trousdale Dr.E. Poplar Ave.Old Baysh
ore
H
ig
h
w
a
y
Millbrae
Ave.
Cali
f
o
r
n
i
a
D
r
.
Airport Blvd.Peninsula Dr.Burlingame Ave.Howard Ave.P
r
im
r
o
s
e
R
d
.
S
a
n
M
a
t
e
o
D
r
.
El
C
a
m
i
n
o
R
e
a
l
Ro
l
l
i
n
s
R
d
.BroadwayHillside Dr.Ralston Ave.Ba
l
b
o
a
Palo
m
a
Dr
a
k
e
M
a
g
n
o
l
i
a
Be
r
n
a
l
Co
r
t
e
z
EastonLag
u
n
a
BayswaterAdelineSummi
t
Se
q
u
o
i
a DavisAnza
CarmelitaShermanEastonLo
y
o
l
a
Toy
o
n
D
w
i
g
h
t
H
u
n
t
Va
n
c
o
u
v
e
r
Se
b
a
s
t
i
a
n
Oak
Grove
VernonPlymouth ConcordCa
p
u
c
h
i
n
o
P
a
r
kHaleChapin
P
e
p
p
e
rChapin
Arguello
L
o
r
t
o
n
Bl
o
om
fi
e
l
d
A
r
u
n
d
e
l
D
w
i
g
h
t
Gi
l
b
r
e
t
h
Co
l
u
m
b
u
s
W
a
l
n
u
t
Be
n
i
t
o
Cr
e
s
c
e
n
t
P
r
im
r
o
s
e
Occidenta
lRivera H
i
g
h
l
a
n
d
Poppy
Ca
s
t
e
n
a
d
a
S
t
a
n
l
e
y
Mariposa
Edgehill
C
h
a
n
n
i
n
g
Aca
c
i
a
Atwater
Alcazar
Vi
c
t
o
r
i
a
De
S
o
t
o
Qu
e
s
a
d
a
C
l
a
r
e
n
d
o
nMillsChu
l
a
V
i
s
t
a
LexingtonMitten
Ca
r
l
o
s Mar
i
n
MartinezB
a
n
c
r
o
f
t
SanchezSanchezGroveCowanEas
tMyr
t
l
e
Al
v
a
r
a
d
o
Ma
r
c
o
P
o
l
o
E
s
c
a
l
a
n
t
e StantonAviadorAl
b
e
m
a
r
l
e
Lang
MorrellLarkspur
F
a
i
r
fi
e
l
d
Cro
s
s
w
a
yMahlerW
e
s
t
m
o
o
r HinckleyCa
s
t
i
l
l
oValdiviaM
o
n
t
e
r
oDevereuxO
g
d
e
n BurlwayDavidRay
Las
s
e
n
La
M
e
s
a
Al
t
u
r
a
s
Lo
s
M
o
n
t
e
s
Newlandsh Lin
d
e
n
Lau
r
e
l
L
o
s
A
l
t
o
s
Beach
Ma
r
s
t
e
n
OxfordAr
c
AlmerCambridgeDolores
S
k
y
v
i
e
w DufferinDonnellyCorbittEl QuanitoLas Piedr
a
s
MajillaKenmarEdwardsMc
d
o
n
a
l
d
Ea
s
t
w
o
o
d
Caro
l
Ans
e
l
Aza
l
e
a
Margarita
Cos
t
a
R
i
caJuanitaCadillac C
um
b
e
r
l
a
n
dRhinetteMe
a
d
o
w
Mo
n
t
e
c
i
t
o SummerKillarneyWhit
e
h
o
r
n
Ne
u
c
h
a
t
e
l
BelvedereMarquitaBellevueRiveraTiberonLincolnA
n
i
t
aPalmCar
o
l
a
n
Lin
d
e
n
ParkCa
b
r
i
l
l
oBroderickIngoldGuittard
280
101US
City of
San Mateo
City of
Hillsborough
City of
Millbrae
San Francisco Bay
1,500750 3,000 FT 0
N
Broadway Mixed Use
Downtown Specific PlanHigh Density Residential
General Commercial
California Mixed UseLow Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
Medium/high Density Res.
Live/Work
Innovation IndustrialBayfront Commercial
BaylandsNorth Burlingame Mixed Use
Parks and Recreation Low Density Residential-SOI
Open Space Easement
Rail Corridor Open Space Easement-SOI
City
SOI
Multi-family Residential Overlay
Burlingame General Plan
Figure CC-1 Land Use Plan
Public/Institutional
T r o usdale D r.E. Poplar Ave.Old Baysh
o
re
H
ig
h
wa
y
Millbrae
Ave.Hillcrest Blvd.Cal
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
D
r
.
Airport Blvd.Peninsula Dr.Burlingame Ave.
S
a
n
M
a
t
e
o
D
r
.
El
C
a
m
i
n
o
R
e
a
l
R
o
l
l
i
n
s
R
d
.BroadwayHillside Dr.R alston Ave.
Ho
w
a
r
d
-
R
a
l
s
t
o
n
E
u
c
a
l
y
p
t
u
s
T
r
e
e
R
o
w
City of
San Mateo
City of
Hillsborough
City of
Millbrae
San Francisco Bay
San Francisco
International
Airport
280
101US
City Limits Eucalyptus Tree Row
SOI Kohl Mansion
Burlingame Railroad Station
Severn Lodge Dairy Wallscape
1,500750 3,000 FT 0NBurlingame General Plan
Figure CC-2 Designated Historical Structures and Places
T r o usdale D r.E. Poplar Ave.Old Baysh
o
re
H
ig
h
wa
y
Millbrae
Ave.Hillcrest Blvd.Cal
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
D
r
.
Airport Blvd.Peninsula Dr.Burlingame Ave.
S
a
n
M
a
t
e
o
D
r
.
El
C
a
m
i
n
o
R
e
a
l
R
o
l
l
i
n
s
R
d
.BroadwayHillside Dr.Ralston Ave.
City of
San Mateo
City of
Hillsborough
City of
Millbrae
San Francisco Bay
San Francisco
International
Airport
Bayfront
Broadway
Downtown
California Dr.
El
C
a
m
i
n
o
R
e
a
l
North
Burlingame
North
Burlingame
Bayfront
Broadway
Downtown
California Dr.
El
C
a
m
i
n
o
R
e
a
l
Rollins RoadRollins Road
280
101US
City Limits Bayfront
Rollins Road North Burlingame
California Drive El Camino Real
BroadwaySOI
1,500750 3,000 FT 0NBurlingame General Plan
Figure CC-3 Neighborhoods Context Map
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | ED-1
Chapter V. Economic
Development Element
Introduction
Burlingame has a diverse local economy, with strengths in hotel, tourism,
retail, and airport-related industries. Burlingame’s proximity to San
Francisco International Airport has been key to attracting hotels, logistics,
air transportation, and business services companies. Burlingame also has
a variety of retail centers that serve unique market niches, including
regional-serving retail in Downtown Burlingame, local independent
retailers and restaurants in the Broadway district and Burlingame Plaza,
and automobile dealerships along California Drive and adjacent to
Highway 101 near the Broadway interchange. While the city historically
has not been a primary regional office location, the potential for
attracting office-based technology and business services firms is strong as
businesses look to take advantage of Burlingame’s convenient transit and
freeway access that connects the city to north to San Francisco and along
the Peninsula.
This Economic Development Element establishes goals and policies
focused on protecting and growing Burlingame’s economic assets, and
leveraging new business retention and attraction opportunities created
by Burlingame’s competitive advantages within the evolving and dynamic
San Francisco Bay Area economy.
Economic Base
A healthy and diverse business mix allows Burlingame to weather
economic cycles and provides a range of job opportunities for residents.
The revenues generated by businesses—such as hotel taxes (transient
occupancy taxes), sales and use taxes, and business license fees—allow
the City to provide high-quality services for residents, employees, and
V. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT
ED-2 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
visitors. These amenities and services further reinforce Burlingame’s
reputation as a highly desirable location for businesses, creating a
virtuous cycle that benefits the entire community.
Opportunities to expand the business mix in Burlingame are provided
through flexible land use policies in all business districts, with the
implementing zoning regulations able to accommodate evolving
business practices. Whereas the Rollins Road and North Bayshore districts
historically have been centers for industrial and airport support activities,
this General Plan applies the Innovation Industrial designation to these
areas to accommodate creative industry businesses as well. The Bayfront
Commercial designation allows for greater development intensities for
office and hospitality uses to encourage recycling of underutilized
properties. And in Downtown, commercial properties along Howard
Avenue can support either retail or office uses over time, based on
market shifts.
These goal and policies focus on maintaining a diversified economic base
by accommodating a variety of business types, supporting major
revenue-generating activities that support municipal services, and
maintaining Burlingame’s competitive advantages.
Goal ED-1: Maintain a diversified economic base that provides a
wide range of business and employment opportunities capable of
ensuring a healthy and prosperous economy for generations to
come.
ED-1.1: Diverse Building Types and Sizes
Encourage development of new office, research, and technology spaces
to diversify the types of businesses in Burlingame, specifically focusing on
the Rollins Road, Bayfront, and Downtown areas. [DR, MP, SO]
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | ED-3
ED-1.2: Flexible Building Use
Provide opportunities for flexible building uses, such as live-work uses or
conversion between types of space, as appropriate in the Rollins Road,
Bayfront, and Downtown areas consistent with land use policy. [DR, MP]
ED-1.3: Automobile Dealerships
Support the continued presence of automobile dealerships in Burlingame
at appropriate locations where they benefit most from clustering and
regional exposure, and where impacts on surrounding uses can be
minimized. Recognize and respond to the evolving nature of automobile
sales in a manner that continues to benefit dealerships and the
contribution of such businesses to the local economy. [DR, MP, SO, PA]
ED-1.5: Hotel Base
Protect and grow hotel businesses by supporting such uses and ancillary
activities on properties located along the Bayfront and, as appropriate, as
boutique operations in Downtown. [DR, FB, SO, PA]
ED-1.6: Community Benefits of Development
Ensure that major commercial development projects contribute toward
desired community benefits of urban design, land use, sustainability,
resiliency, affordable housing, and community health while also
expanding the economic base of the city. [DR, FB, SO, PA]
ED-1.7: Coordination with Local Schools
Work with the Burlingame School District, San Mateo Union High School
District, and local private schools to support commercial businesses in
Burlingame through purchasing practices and promotions that encourage
shopping and eating locally. [AC, PI]
V. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT
ED-4 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
ED-1.8: Sharing Economy
Track trends in the “sharing economy” (for example, private home rental
and car sharing) to assess their impact on businesses in Burlingame, and
implement appropriate responses to ensure that identified
trends/practices do not adversely impact local businesses and residential
neighborhoods and do contribute revenues as appropriate. [SR, SO, PI]
Business Retention and Attraction
Burlingame is located within a competitive and dynamic environment for
businesses, entrepreneurs, and worker talent. The City’s ability to attract
and retain businesses is influenced by Burlingame’s land use and
economic development policies, infrastructure and place-making
investments, and ongoing operations.
Burlingame’s economic development policies must be responsive to
larger economic trends in the Bay Area region. Increasing demand for
high-quality office and research and development space on the
Peninsula—driven by the computer technology and biotechnology
industries, as well as emerging businesses resulting from a strong
presence of venture capital—has generated interest in large-scale
development in the Bayfront area and smaller increments of space in the
Downtown area. The North Bayfront and Rollins Road areas are
anticipated to attract private redevelopment interest and pressures for
turnover of long-established industrial operations in favor of higher-
intensity uses. At the same time, Burlingame’s retail districts and
automobile dealerships must adapt to rapidly changing retail patterns
and competition.
The following goal and policies support Burlingame’s desire to retain and
attract businesses and remain economically resilient in the longer term
through careful planning and investments.
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | ED-5
Goal ED-2: Cultivate a business environment that supports long-
established enterprises, attracts new and emerging businesses,
and provides support for synergistic business relationships and
partnerships.
ED-2.1: Land Use Compatibility
Address potential land use compatibility issues and roadway/truck access
conflicts between office, industrial, retail, and residential uses in areas of
transitioning land uses, such as the Bayfront and North Rollins Road
areas. [DR, MP, PA]
ED-2.2: Commercial Uses
Provide appropriate zoning in the north El Camino Real, California Drive,
Broadway, Bayfront, and Downtown areas to ensure that established
businesses can remain and continue to meet community needs. [DR, MP]
ED-2.3: Transportation Access
Work with businesses citywide to develop local transit and bicycle
connections and first mile/last mile strategies from the Caltrain stations to
Burlingame’s employment and retail destinations. [AC, PA]
ED-2.4: Streetscape Maintenance
Maintain attractive streetscapes citywide as a means of encouraging
business investment, particularly in areas of high pedestrian activity, as
identified in the Community Character Element. [SO]
ED-2.5: Household-supporting Retail
Promote growth of neighborhood-serving retail uses—such as grocery
stores, dry cleaners, and convenience stores—at locations within easy
walking distance of residential neighborhoods. [DR]
V. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT
ED-6 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
ED-2.6: Broadway District Streetscape
Implement improvements to the Broadway district streetscape and
pedestrian environment to enhance the experience for visitors.
Minimizing any potential negative impacts to businesses and residents
during construction periods. [M, SO, PA]
ED-2.7: Broadway Business Mix
Position the Broadway district as a destination for locally owned and
operated businesses and restaurants. [MP, PA]
ED-2.8: Regional Shopping Destination
Support Downtown businesses, and encourage the branding and
marketing of specific activities that increase the district’s recognition and
competitiveness as a regional shopping destination. [DR, FB, SO, PA]
ED-2.9: Shopping Districts
Collaborate with business and property owners in the Burlingame Plaza
and Broadway areas to strengthen the economic performance of smaller
retail stores and restaurants. [DR, MP, PA]
ED-2.10: Bayfront Office and Research and Development
Position the Bayfront area as a location for larger office-based and
research and development businesses as a complement to the hospitality
businesses. [SO, MP, PA]
ED-2.11: Economic Development Services
Provide economic development services—such as grants and loans for
expansion, expedited development review, and relocation assistance—to
support businesses of all sizes. [SO, PA, PI]
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | ED-7
ED-2.12: Business Organization Partnerships
Collaborate and coordinate with business associations and districts for
marketing, branding, and promotion activities. [SO, PA, PI]
ED-2.13: Small Business Assistance
Collaborate with local organizations to provide technical and permitting
assistance to small businesses. [SO, AC, PA, PI]
ED-2.14: Commercial Data Tracking
Monitor occupancies and vacancies and track trends in major industries
through collaboration with brokers, property owners, and business
owners. Use the data to develop and pursue business attraction and
retention strategies. [SR, SO, PA, PI]
ED-2.15: Marketing Available Business Spaces
Promote efforts to market and fill spaces in commercial and industrial
buildings, especially smaller creative and technology firms in Downtown
and larger firms attracted to the North Rollins Road and Bayfront districts.
[SO, PA, PI]
ED-2.16: Permitting Processes
Provide efficient and transparent permitting and approvals processes for
businesses permits and land use development/improvement projects.
[DR, SO, PA, PI]
ED-2.17: Hospitality Industry
Support the needs of the well-established and new hospitality businesses
to attract and serve visitors from around the globe, and to adapt to
emerging consumer preferences and industry practices. [DR, PA]
V. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT
ED-8 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
ED-2.18: Entertainment Businesses
Implement strategies to attract desirable entertainment-related
businesses to Burlingame that are regional destinations and that
complement other local business sectors. [SO, PA]
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | M-1
Chapter VI. Mobility
Introduction
The many mobility, access, and transportation choices available to
residents, visitors, and employees of businesses in the City contribute to
Burlingame’s vibrant economy and community health. When people can
make easy choices to forego driving their cars and instead take the train
or the bus, bike, or walk to local destinations and to places more distant,
everyone benefits.
The City is committed to providing a convenient and inviting multimodal
network that connects all of Burlingame internally, and that integrates
well with regional networks. To continue improving mobility and
preparing for transportation demands of the future, the City will focus on
working within established roadway infrastructure to fully support transit,
bicycle, and pedestrian mobility, as well as travel modes that may emerge
during the life of this plan, such as self-driving cars and electrified rail.
These initiatives will include programmatic changes, such as updating
how the City evaluates traffic impacts. Physical improvements will include
improved street designs that encourage environmentally friendly travel
habits. Altogether, these changes will result in improved connections for
everyone who lives in, works in, and visits Burlingame.
This Mobility Element includes goals and policies that address:
Multi-Modal Transportation Network
Safe and Convenient Pedestrian Facilities
Bicycle Facilities
Transit Access and Amenities
Transportation Demand Management
Integration of Transportation and Land Use
Parking
Natural Resources and Sustainability
Performance Measures and Guidelines
Corridor and Area Plans
VI. MOBILITY
M-2 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Multimodal Transportation Network
An efficient, accessible, and safe multimodal transportation network
moves people and goods through the community. In addition to their
utilitarian function of moving vehicles, streets can also provide spaces for
people to exercise, gather, and conduct business. Burlingame’s streets
serve many functions, including:
Allowing people to move about town
Providing access to businesses, homes, schools, and public spaces
Supporting adjacent land uses and developments
Providing safe, attractive areas that encourage personal
interactions
Promoting human and environmental health by making it easier
and safer to travel by transit, by bicycle, or on foot
Public rights-of-way (roadways, sidewalks, trails, paths) cover a significant
part of any community, generally occupying 20 to 30 percent of a
community’s total land area. The layout and use of these areas influence
many aspects of the physical environment, including how people move,
how people and goods get to homes and businesses, and how frequently
people walk, bike, and exercise outdoors. Street and pathway designs
also affect the safety of people in the community, especially vulnerable
populations such as children, persons with disabilities, and the elderly. A
well-planned and well-design mobility network is a means to realize the
community’s goals for improved health, economic growth, quality of life,
and fiscal soundness.
With these goals in mind, Burlingame aims to develop a complete
multimodal transportation network (Complete Streets network). This
network will be designed to encourage people to use non-automobile
modes for as many trips as possible, as high use of these alternative
modes enables the system to move more people with less delay, cost,
and environmental impacts. However, tradeoffs need to be made within
each mode to allow safe access for all other modes. Streets are where
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | M-3
walking, bicycling, transit, private vehicles, and freight come together to
provide mobility to their respective users.
Street Classifications
Streets and sidewalks are public spaces that serve many functions:
mobility corridors, connections to businesses, places for interaction
among neighbors, and even facilities for managing stormwater control.
Above all, the primary function is mobility, and different street types
accommodate different means of moving about. The City of Burlingame’s
Street Classification system is shown in Figure M-1, and provides a
framework for street design and mobility that supports all of these
functions and meets the City’s needs for 21st century transportation
options.
The street classification system establishes and promotes the suitability of
streets to accommodate various travel modes and land uses. In particular,
this system is sensitive to local context, land use, built form, and mobility
priorities. Each of the classifications align with Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) categories, as shown in Table M-1. However, they
encompass a more dynamic range of uses than those identified by
FHWA. A detailed description of Burlingame’s street classifications and
their corresponding FHWA category are shown in Table M-2.
Street uses are independent of their normal form and function, such as
routes for emergency vehicles, streets adjacent to major transit stations or
school zones, and bicycle priority streets. These uses do not necessarily
dictate the specific design of a street but instead encourage design
flexibility to better serve the specific purposes. For example, the local
access streets that can best serve bicycles should be clearly identified so
their roadway and intersection design emphasizes bicycle priority and
comfortable access. Similarly, emergency routes may require width and
design exceptions to accommodate movements of emergency vehicles;
for example, where a roundabout is appropriate for a particular
VI. MOBILITY
M-4 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
intersection, its edges may need to be rounded so that large fire trucks
can roll over rather than have to swerve around them.
Table M-1
Relationship between Street Types and Existing FHWA Classifications
Classification Arterial Collector Local
El Camino ●
Major Connector ● ●
Minor Connector ●
Access ●
Table M-2
Description of Street Classifications
Classification Description Example
FHWA
Category
Commercial
Arterial
Street with commercial
frontages with capacity to
serve as a main route for
multiple modes
Distributes trips to commercial
areas and provides a balanced
level of service for vehicles,
transit, bicycles, and
pedestrians, wherever
possible. Pedestrian
improvements are comfortable
to walk along and provide safe
crossings at designated
locations.
Howard Ave
(west of
California
Drive)
Arterial
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | M-5
Table M-2
Description of Street Classifications
Classification Description Example
FHWA
Category
Commercial
Collector
Street with commercial
frontages with capacity to
serve as a minor route for
multiple modes
Prioritizes walking and
bicycling and accommodates
intra-city trips while also
distributing local traffic to
other streets and areas.
Burlingame
Avenue
Collector
Commercial
Access
Low-volume commercial street
serving local traffic
Provides access primarily to
adjacent streets and nearby
uses. These streets should
offer safe and inviting places
to walk and bike.
Highland
Avenue
Local
VI. MOBILITY
M-6 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Table M-2
Description of Street Classifications
Classification Description Example
FHWA
Category
Mixed Use
Arterial,
El Camino Real
El Camino Real, regional
access corridor with mixed
residential and commercial
frontages and capacity to
serve as a main route for
multiple modes
Provides local and regional
access, distributes trips to
residential and commercial
areas, and provides a
balanced level of service for
vehicles, transit, and
pedestrians, where possible.
Pedestrian improvements are
comfortable to walk along and
provide safe crossings at
designated locations.
Accommodating vehicle traffic
while ensuring a high-quality
experience for visitors and
residents is a key design
challenge.
El Camino
Real (north
of Rosedale
Avenue)
Arterial
Mixed Use
Arterial
Street with mixed use
frontages with capacity to
serve as a main route for
multiple modes
Distributes trips for mixed use
and connecting residential
areas, and provides a
balanced level of service for
vehicles, transit, bicycles, and
pedestrians, wherever
possible. Pedestrian
improvements are comfortable
to walk along and provide safe
crossings at designated
locations.
Rollins Road Arterial
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | M-7
Table M-2
Description of Street Classifications
Classification Description Example
FHWA
Category
Mixed Use
Collector
Street with mixed use
frontages with capacity to
serve as a minor route for
multiple modes
Prioritizes walking and
bicycling and accommodates
intra-city trips while also
distributing local traffic to
other streets and areas.
Adrian
Boulevard
Collector
Mixed Use
Access
Low-volume mixed use
through street serving local
traffic
Provides access primarily to
adjacent streets and nearby
uses. These streets should
offer safe and inviting places
to walk bike.
Malcom
Road
Local
Neighborhood
Arterial, El
Camino Real
El Camino Real, regional
access corridor with residential
frontages and capacity to
serve as a main route for
multiple modes
Provides local and regional
access, distributes trips to
residential and commercial
areas, and provides a
balanced level of service for
vehicles, transit, and
pedestrians, where possible.
Pedestrian improvements are
comfortable to walk along and
provide safe crossings at
designated locations.
Accommodating vehicle traffic
while ensuring a high quality of
life for residents is a key
design challenge.
El Camino
Real (south
of Rosedale
Avenue)
Arterial
VI. MOBILITY
M-8 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Table M-2
Description of Street Classifications
Classification Description Example
FHWA
Category
Neighborhood
Arterial
Primarily residential streets
with capacity to serve as a
main route for multiple modes
Distributes trips for residential
areas and provides a balanced
level of service for vehicles,
transit, bicycles, and
pedestrians, wherever
possible. Pedestrian
improvements are comfortable
to walk along and provide safe
crossings at designated
locations.
Trousdale
Drive (West
of Ogden
Drive)
Arterial
Neighborhood
Collector
Primarily residential streets
with capacity to serve as a
minor route for multiple
modes
Prioritizes walking and
bicycling and accommodates
intra-city trips while also
distributing local traffic to
other streets and areas.
Accommodating vehicle traffic
while ensuring a high quality of
life for residents is a key
design challenge.
Hillside
Drive
Collector
Neighborhood
Access
Low-volume residential street
serving mostly local traffic
Provides access primarily to
adjacent streets and nearby
uses. These streets should
offer safe and inviting places
to walk and bike.
Paloma
Avenue
Local
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | M-9
These goal and policies provide a framework for ensuring that network
changes and improvements over time are accomplished in such a way
that reduces conflicts and congestion and promotes community health
and sustainability.
Goal M-1: Achieve and maintain a citywide circulation network
that provides safe, efficient, and convenient mobility for all users
and modes of transportation.
M-1.1: Complete Streets
Define and develop a well-connected network of Complete Streets that
can move all modes safely, efficiently, and comfortably to promote
efficient circulation while also improving public health and safety. [MP,
AC]
M-1.2: Connectivity to Destinations
Connect commercial districts, centers of employment, civic uses, parks,
schools, and other destinations with high-quality options for all travel
modes. Ensure the system accommodates the needs of all users,
including youth, the elderly, and people with disabilities. [MP, SO]
M-1.3: Travel Time Reliability
Develop a transportation system that provides travel time reliability for all
modes of travel, with solutions that support transit and active
transportation. [MP, FB, SO, AC]
M-1.4: Focus on Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety
Ensure that pedestrian and bicyclist safety at intersections and on
roadways is given priority over motor vehicles. [MP, SO]
VI. MOBILITY
M-10 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Safe and Convenient Pedestrian Facilities
Walking is the lowest-cost form of transportation and fundamental to the
entire circulation network, as even motorized vehicle trips start with a walk
to a bus or car. Walking should be safe and pleasurable for everyone, on
all streets and at all times of day. Special attention should be given to the
needs of children, the elderly, and people with disabilities. Maintaining
and developing enhanced and continuous sidewalks, paths, and
intersection crossings reinforce access to commercial districts and transit
stations, and establish safe routes to schools. The costs of these
investments are minor compared to the ongoing expense of maintaining
roadways designed for high-speed vehicle travel, paying for accidents
that result in pedestrian injury or death, and dedicating space to vehicle
storage rather than high-quality public spaces and development projects.
Walking also contributes substantially to creating a healthier and more
active community. Convenient active transportation opportunities benefit
individuals through the addition of physical activity to their daily routine,
improving health and reducing risk of chronic diseases. A community that
embraces alternatives to driving is also better connected. This
connectivity can foster small business development and social interaction
among Burlingame residents. For example, residents in neighborhoods
surrounding the Broadway and Burlingame Avenue commercial districts
can easily walk to these areas and meet neighbors to socialize. Safe and
well-connected pedestrian routes allow the elderly, mobility-challenged
individuals, people on limited incomes, and youth to fully participate in
their community.
Figure M-2 identifies the planned citywide pedestrian network, and the
following goal and policies support safe, convenient, and pleasing
walking environments throughout Burlingame.
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | M-11
Goal M-2: Ensure Burlingame’s streets are comfortable, safe, and
attractive for people of all ages and abilities to walk.
M-2.1: Pedestrian Amenities and Access
Expand pedestrian access by eliminating gaps in sidewalk and path
networks, improving safety, and requiring safe and comfortable
pedestrian facilities. [DR/MP]
M-2.2: Walkable Infrastructure and Access to Destinations
Ensure that schools, commercial districts, employment destinations,
parks, civic facilities, and transit stops have safe and convenient
pedestrian access, including connections across Highway 101 and trails
through parks and regional networks. Explore improving access across
Highway 101 exclusively for pedestrians and cyclists. [DR/MP]
M-2.3: Pedestrian Priority
Promote and prioritize pedestrian improvements and safety where
conflicts or problems exist between pedestrians and other travel modes.
[DR/MP]
M-2.4: Circulation around Downtown Library
Improve pedestrian circulation around the Downtown library to minimize
potential automobile/pedestrian conflicts. [MP]
M-2.5: Assessment and Maintenance
Ensure the ongoing assessment and maintenance of sidewalks, pavement
markings, pedestrian crossing signals, and lighting. [MP/FB]
VI. MOBILITY
M-12 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Bicycle Facilities
Oftentimes the approach to addressing traffic congestion is to expand
and redesign roadways to better accommodate cars and trucks. However,
these improvements can be costly, eliminate or impinge upon businesses,
and cause environmental damage. Promoting and providing facilities that
encourage bicycling and other forms of active transportation can present
cost-effective solutions to address these challenges while providing
additional community benefits.
Convenient and safe bicycling is a way of life in cities throughout the
world. In addition to getting from here to there cheaply, cyclists are able
to introduce healthful physical activity into their daily routines. Any trip
made by bicycle supports environmental goals related to air quality
improvements and greenhouse gas emission reductions.
In Burlingame, bike trips can be relatively easy on the flatlands, provided
the infrastructure is in place to encourage riders will skills ranging from
those of the casual user to the enthusiast. This may consist of a simple
striped and signed lane. In the hillside neighborhoods, biking can be
more of a challenge due to terrain, but bike facilities nonetheless can be
provided to link homes to parks and schools. Burlingame is committed to
establishing and maintaining a citywide bicycle network that provides
convenient internal circulation and links to regional facilities. Bike facilities
will be installed as shown on Figure M-3, and the planned physical
changes to the circulation system will be coupled with policies and
programs that support biking, including requirements for secure bicycle
parking and bicycle safety education.
The bicycle facilities shown on Figure M-3 consist of four classes that are
used throughout the U.S. Figure M-4 illustrates typical cross sections for
each class.
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | M-13
Goal M-3: Develop a network of high-quality, convenient, safe,
and easy-to-use bicycle facilities to increase the number of people
who use bicycles for everyday transportation.
M-3.1: Uninterrupted Bicycle Network
Develop a safe, convenient, and integrated bicycle network that connects
residential neighborhoods to employment, education, recreation, and
commercial destinations throughout Burlingame, as illustrated in Figure
M-3. [MP/DR/SO]
M-3.2: Safe and Functional Network
Ensure that roadway intersections, crossings, on-street bicycle lanes
(Class II), separated bicycle paths (Class I), and other bicycle network
facilities provide safe and comfortable connections to support continuous
bicycle routes. [MP/DR]
M-3.3: California Drive Bikeway
Establish a separated bikeway on California Drive that allows cyclists to
move easily through Burlingame to connections north and south of the
City, and that allows for interaction with businesses along California Drive
(see detail under California Drive discussion). [MP, SO]
M-3.4: Bicycle-Transit Integration
Design and construct bicycle and transit facilities so they reduce conflicts
between cyclists and buses along transit corridors, while also ensuring
these new facilities improve access to transit and support intermodal trips
(e.g., bicycle to bus connections). [MP, SO]
M-3.5: Bicycle Wayfinding Signage and Marked Routes
Encourage bicycling by providing wayfinding signage that directs
bicyclists to designated bike routes and to civic places, cultural amenities,
and visitor and recreational destinations. Along bike routes, provide clear
VI. MOBILITY
M-14 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
and unambiguous signage that alerts drivers to the presence of cyclists.
[MP, SO]
M-3.6: Support Facilities for Cyclists
Provide standards in the Zoning Code that address required bicycle
parking, including provisions for secured facilities, as well as other
development features and incentives that encourage bicycle use (e.g.,
changing rooms at places of business). [DR]
M-3.7: Bicycle Facility Maintenance
Ensure that the City maintains an adequate capital improvement budget
for ongoing assessment and maintenance of bicycle facilities, including
pavement markings, wayfinding signage, and bicycle parking/storage.
[FB, SO]
M-3.8: Bicycle Education
Work with Caltrans, the local school districts, and bicycle user groups to
conduct programs and training focused on bicycle safety education. [SO,
AC, PI]
M-3.9: Bicycle Commission
Establish a Bicycle Commission community advisory board to review and
provide comments as appropriate on streetscape projects, development
projects, and City-initiated bicycle programs. [SO. DR]
Transit Access and Amenities
In Burlingame, local Caltrain service and Samtrans bus routes link
destinations up and down the Peninsula, providing Burlingame residents
with viable alternatives to car use. These transit modes also bring people
into Burlingame to work and shop. Certainly, the frequency and reliability
of transit service are the two most critical factors that affect a person’s
decision to take the train or bus, but providing safe and easy access to
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | M-15
transit for all potential users can encourage a casual or timid rider to take
trips more frequently. Having this access establishes confidence in
commuters who may want to take advantage of transit but are unsure
how they would get themselves to a transit stop or station. By extending
a seamless and safe multimodal environment outward from transit stops
along existing streets, across barriers, and into nearby destinations or
residential areas, the number of residents and employees using transit
can be expanded proportionally. The community benefits of well-
designed, accessible transit stations can extend more than one mile from
a station or stop.
These connections also have significant health and economic benefits. By
providing residents with better biking and walking infrastructure around
transit stops and stations, the City is simultaneously encouraging more
active lifestyles among its residents. Additionally, by making these areas
more walkable and bikeable, the areas become more desirable places to
live and work.
Figure M-5 identifies the citywide transit priority network, and the
following goal and policies promote ways to expand and enhance transit
services in Burlingame.
Goal M-4: Improve transit access, frequency, connectivity, and
amenities to increase transit ridership and convivence.
M-4.1: Interagency Collaboration
Collaborate with regional and local transit service providers to support
improved transit service frequency and connections between routes
operated by different agencies. [AC]
VI. MOBILITY
M-16 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
M-4.2: Caltrain Electrification
Support efforts to electrify Caltrain to improve regional transit services to
Burlingame, if these improvements do not result in unacceptable safety
or noise impacts on the community. [AC, SO]
M-4.3: California High Speed Rail
Review, comment, and participate in regional discussions related to
California High Speed Rail on the Peninsula. Work with the California
High Speed Rail Authority to consider plans for high speed rail
development and access to high speed rail hubs if these improvements
do not result in locally-unacceptable safety, environmental, traffic, visual,
or noise impacts on the community. [AC, SO]
M-4.4: Access to Transit
Ensure roadways and sidewalks near transit stops are designed to protect
pedestrians and bicyclists and are well connected to provide seamless
access to/from transit. [MP, SO]
M-4.5: Transit Priority
Establish a network of transit-serving corridors to accommodate local and
regional transit routes, supporting high-frequency service on regional
transit streets to make transit service more time competitive with personal
vehicle trips. [MP, PI]
M-4.6: Broadway Station
Work with Caltrans to identify opportunities to expand train transit
services at the Broadway Station, including adding more frequent
community and weekend stops at this station. [AC, SO]
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | M-17
Transportation Demand Management
Managing travel demand became popular in the 1970s as a means to
encourage people to consume less oil during the energy crisis. Today, it
is more closely associated with goals to reduce air pollutants, reduce
congestion from single-driver vehicle trips, and encourage more
sustainable travel practices. For years, transportation and land use
decisions around the country encouraged single-occupancy vehicle use
through on-site parking requirements, tax incentives, and commute
reimbursement programs.
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) is a set of strategies used to
mitigate traffic congestion, provide more options to get around, and
reduce dependence on single-occupancy vehicles. Often these strategies
are explicitly designed to improve community health and the
environment. TDM strategies aim to reverse historical trends and expand
choices for commutes and local trips, while also reducing the total
number of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in the community. The following
goal and policies identify the City’s TDM strategies that will be
incorporated into new projects and public improvement projects.
Goal M-5: Implement TDM strategies that reduce overall vehicle
trips and encourage the use of transportation modes that reduce
VMT and greenhouse gas emissions.
M-5.1: TDM Guidelines and Programs
Establish specific TDM guidelines and requirements within the Zoning
Ordinance that encourage travel by a variety of modes for both
individuals and employees, focusing different strategies in different parts
of the community as appropriate to promote sustainability and economic
development. [DR, MP]
VI. MOBILITY
M-18 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
M-5.2: Targeted Outreach
Develop outreach materials for specific neighborhoods in the city that are
suitable for increased transit ridership given their proximity to bus stops
or train stations as a way to reduce drive-alone automobile trips. [MP, SR,
PI]
Integration of Transportation and Land Use
Streets support the places and neighborhoods they serve and balance
the needs of everyone who travels along them. While often thought of as
serving specifically the needs for movement, streets also provide spaces
for people to come together to socialize and exercise. Street designs and
retrofits should be based on how to serve the modal priorities and to
support existing or desired land uses located along the frontage.
Commercial streets, for example, need to attract and accommodate
visitors by providing for slow and steady vehicle traffic and available on-
street parking to support retail. The busiest areas, such as downtown,
need to prioritize transit and pedestrian movement. Local residential
streets need to have speeds slow enough to enable motorists to stop for
a child chasing a ball. The goal and policies below identify ways the City
will most closely integrate land use planning and street use by enhancing
transportation modes and thereby creating attractive and active street
corridors.
Goal M-6: Create an integrated transportation program that
reduces peak-period vehicle trips and vehicle miles traveled.
M-6.1: Transit Supportive Land Use
Plan for and accommodate land uses that facilitate development of
compact, mixed use development with the density, diversity of use, and
local accessibility supportive of transit use. [MP, DR]
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | M-19
M-6.2: Mixed Use Areas
Promote residential, employment, recreation, and commercial uses within
designated mixed use areas to reduce walking distances between
destinations and to create an active street environment throughout the
day. [DR]
M-6.3: Building Access and Site Design
Establish site design guidelines that require entrances facing the street to
provide convenient and direct access to pedestrians and transit users.
[DR]
Parking
A well-managed parking system achieves many objectives, such as fewer
vehicles circulating on streets, easy access on foot from the car to one’s
ultimate destination, and enhanced commerce. Commercial parking
spaces should be easy to find, priced according to demand, and
complemented by programs and features that facilitate getting to stores,
restaurants, and places of employment. When an effective parking
management system is in place, the experience of visiting popular areas
within Burlingame is perceived as comfortable and convenient, and
people are encouraged to return again and again.
Active parking management leads to multiple favorable outcomes by
incentivizing sustainable habits that reduce the reliance on driving for
every trip. These outcomes include reducing development costs,
cultivating multimodal communities, improving public space design, and
reducing impervious surfaces. When all aspects of parking management
are appropriately applied, a smaller parking inventory may still provide a
higher level of service to customers. The following goal and polices
identify ways the City will more effectively and efficiently manage both
public parking and private parking for individual development projects.
VI. MOBILITY
M-20 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Goal M-7: Use parking management strategies that promote
parking availability, housing affordability, congestion management,
and improved air quality.
M-7.1: Parking Pricing
Manage public parking facilities effectively by using dynamic pricing
strategies that allow all parking facilities to achieve desired occupancy
rates in business and retail districts. [DR, FB, SO]
M-7.2: Public Parking Management
Manage public parking areas to support economic development and
accessibility, and ensure that parking is available for commercial and
office uses so that parking does not spill over into adjacent residential
neighborhoods. [DR, SO]
M-7.3: Parking Requirements
Reduce or eliminate minimum parking requirements and/or implement
parking maximums for housing, commercial, office, and other land uses in
mixed use areas and in proximity to frequent transit services.
Comprehensively examine parking requirements in the Zoning Code and
adjust as needed to respond to evolving vehicle ownership patterns and
parking practices. [DR, SR]
M-7.4: Parking Facility Design
Require that the design of parking lots and structures meets applicable
urban design goals and policies, and minimizes negative impacts on
people walking and biking, on transit users, and on the built environment.
[DR]
M-7.5: Creative Parking Approaches
Promote and support creative approaches to parking, including but not
limited to use of parking lifts and shared parking, particularly in mixed use
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | M-21
and retail areas. In Downtown and the Live/Work designation, include
consideration of “unbundling” parking from residential development
projects, whereby parking is provided as an amenity paid for separately
from a lease. [DR, SO]
M-7.6: Parking Demand Reductions
Reduce parking demand through travel options programs such as parking
cash-out and other TDM strategies. [DR]
M-7.7: Parking Supply
Evaluate incremental increases in parking Downtown and in the Broadway
business district through the provision of parking structures that could
support a range of uses, and/or arrangements with property owners to
utilize private parking facilities at off-hours for public parking. [DR]
Natural Resources and Sustainability
The transportation sector is one of the largest sources of air pollutants
and the most significant user of energy resources. Reducing use of
transportation modes that rely solely on fossil fuels or emit greenhouse
gases supports the community’s goal for improved environmental
conditions and more sustainable mobility practices. Burlingame’s planned
multimodal approach encourages the use of multiple transportation
options. These goal and policies identify ways the City can reduce
congestion and provide more opportunities to reallocate right-of-way for
green space and alternative modes of transportation.
VI. MOBILITY
M-22 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Goal M-8: Achieve air quality, sustainability, and greenhouse gas
emission reduction objectives through technology upgrades and
improved management of Burlingame’s streets.
M-8.1: Electric Vehicle Infrastructure
Identify electric vehicle charging priority locations and opportunities to
integrate emerging technology into public parking infrastructure to
encourage and expand the use of zero-emissions vehicles. [MP, PI]
M-8.2: Vehicle Trip Reduction
Support vehicle trip reduction strategies, including building safer and
more inviting active transportation networks, supporting connections to
high frequency and regional transit, implementing TDM programs, and
integrating land use and transportation decisions. [DR, MP]
Performance Measures and Guidelines
Performance measures and guidelines for transportation projects in
California historically have been guided by the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA). If a project exceeds a significance threshold for a
given metric, it will often trigger the need to prepare an Environmental
Impact Report (EIR). In Burlingame, consistent with long-established
practices, transportation projects have been analyzed based primarily on
their potential impact on local traffic operations. Traffic impacts are
measured using the Transportation Research Board’s Highway Capacity
Manual level of service (LOS) methodology for signalized intersections,
which are graded A through F based on performance (with F representing
a failing grade). A project triggers a traffic-related threshold if calculations
indicate an unacceptable degradation in LOS—in other words, if the
average intersection delay is expected to increase to unacceptable levels
(often LOS E or F). This typically leads to vehicle-centric traffic impact
mitigations that dedicate right-of-way to vehicle storage and throughput,
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | M-23
such as road widening or turn pockets, that can improve traffic flow but
erode the safety and efficiency of other transportation modes.
Guidelines from the California Office of Planning and Research
recommend that cities replace LOS standards with multimodal vehicle
miles traveled (VMT) standards. This approach has changed the way
municipalities measure transportation impacts. By using VMT, the project
evaluation process may prioritize more sustainable transportation modes
over high-capacity intersections. This can generate far-reaching impacts,
leading to safer, more efficient, and more sustainable local street design,
and encouraging development in locations well served by multimodal
infrastructure, rather than those characterized by low vehicle volumes.
The following goal and policies establish a VMT standard for Burlingame
and outline specific actions and programs the City will undertake to
ensure a multimodal approach to traffic impact analysis.
Goal M-9: Achieve an improved paradigm for measuring the
traffic impacts of development projects.
M-9.1: Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Transportation Performance
Measures
Update the City’s transportation performance measures to use vehicle
miles traveled (VMT) standards instead of level of service (LOS) standards.
[MP, AC]
M-9.2: Multimodal Transportation Impact Fee
Establish a transportation impact fee for new development that generates
funds for improving all modes of transportation. Recognize that this ties
into the update of performance measures, as developer fees and
improvements will no longer be tied to intersection operations. [FB]
VI. MOBILITY
M-24 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Corridors and Area Plans
In addition to the citywide goals and policies, initiatives specific to
Burlingame’s corridors and districts will allow mobility challenges and
objectives to be addressed.
California Drive
California Drive, a local north-south corridor through Burlingame, has a
distinct character, with uses that transition from single-family residential at
the north end to neighborhood-serving commercial in the middle to auto
dealerships at the south end. Running parallel to El Camino Real and the
Caltrain right-of-way, California Drive provides local connections between
Millbrae and San Mateo, supports a local SamTrans bus route, and is a
designated bike route. This corridor is also a significant connection
between the Broadway and Downtown commercial districts.
California Drive has long been a vehicle-dominated street, with narrow
sidewalks, infrequent pedestrian crossings, and bicycle facilities
consisting of “sharrows” to alert motorists that bicycles may share the
outside travel lane. With low vehicle volumes relative to the roadway’s
capacity (based on standard traffic engineering practices), this corridor
will benefit from an updated design that reallocates excess right-of-way
for enhanced pedestrian, bicycle, and transit use. The following goal and
policies identify how California Drive will be improved and will enhance
connections to local commercial districts and transit hubs.
Figure M-6 identifies conceptual street cross sections for California Drive
that will be implemented to better accommodate pedestrians, cyclists,
and transit while also allowing efficient movement of cars and on-street
parking.
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | M-25
Goal M-10: California Drive will be redesigned to support
multimodal access, with facilities that encourage active
transportation and improved linkages to commercial and
residential areas.
M-10.1: California Drive Roadway Redesign
Implement a redesign of California Drive consisting of a “road diet” south
of Broadway and installation of continuous bicycle facilities to establish a
north-south bicycle corridor through Burlingame, connecting to bike
facilities in Millbrae and San Mateo. Concepts for sections north of
Broadway and between Broadway and Burlingame Avenue focus on
traffic calming, providing a continuous bicycle facility, and improving
pedestrian connections. These include:
North of Broadway: Narrow vehicle lanes in each direction, install
a buffered two-way off-street bike path on the east side, narrow
parking lanes, and develop a new right-of-way of 42 feet from the
west curb to east edge of cycle track, with additional four-and-
one-half feet of width from the Southern Pacific easement (see
Figure M-6).
South of Broadway: Create one through vehicle lane in each
direction and one center-running left-turn pocket, install a
buffered two-way bike route on the east side with a wide buffer
(which could be planted or separated by a curb or other vertical
barrier), allow parking on the west side only adjacent to the active
space, provide a buffer between pedestrians on the sidewalk and
moving vehicles in the street, and maintain the 63 feet of right-of-
way from the west curb to the east edge of the cycle track (see
Figure M-6). This configuration will keep bicyclists separated from
motor vehicles and will connect seamlessly to a planned two-way
bicycle path north of Broadway, providing an inviting continuous
north-south bike route for all skill levels.
VI. MOBILITY
M-26 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
El Camino Real
El Camino Real, Spanish for the Royal Road, is a historic travel corridor,
having served as the route connecting the 21 Spanish missions in
California. Today, El Camino Real continues its function as a critical
regional north-south corridor along the Peninsula, connecting cities and
providing an alternative commute route to Highway 101 and Interstate
280 (although usually for shorter commute trips). Through Burlingame, El
Camino Real has a character clearly distinct from that in cities to the north
and south. The eucalyptus trees planted in the early twentieth century
survive today, providing a distinctive canopy; collectively, the trees are
listed on the National Register of Historic Places as the “Howard-Ralston
Eucalyptus Tree Rows.” Land uses in Burlingame largely consist of
multifamily housing set back from the street, whereas El Camino Real
frontage properties in most other cities has been developed with
commercial uses oriented toward motorists.
El Camino Real is owned and managed by the California Department of
Transportation (Caltrans) and is designated State Route 82. As of 2017, El
Camino Real maintained its original design as regional connector, with
two lanes in each direction, narrow and sometimes discontinuous
sidewalks, no dedicated right-of-way to accommodate bus
loading/unloading, no turning or passing lanes, and long distances
between marked pedestrian crossing facilities. El Camino Real presents
an east-west barrier for pedestrian connections to residential
neighborhoods on both sides of the corridor, and to commercial and
employment destinations on the east side. Consistent with its function as
a regional route, the roadway supports multiple SamTrans bus routes.
The City has considered options for improving El Camino Real to provide
safer crossings for pedestrians and bicycles. The objective is to work with
Caltrans to improve safety while retaining the character of the roadway.
Refer to the Community Character Element for additional discussion of
land use and urban design goals for El Camino Real.
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | M-27
Goal M-11: Ensure that El Camino Real retains its distinct
character as a residential street lined with a historic tree grove,
with its function as a regional commute corridor secondary to
Burlingame’s vision of the corridor as a lower-speed tree-lined
thoroughfare.
M-11.1: El Camino Real Design Enhancements
Identify high priority locations to improve access, east-west connections,
and pedestrian safety along El Camino Real. Coordinate with Caltrans
and regional Grand Boulevard Initiative partners (including SamTrans) to
update intersection treatments and lane configurations to improve safety
while retaining the distinctive character of the roadway. [SR, AC]
Broadway
Broadway traverses east-west across the center of Burlingame,
connecting residential neighborhoods west of El Camino Real to
California Drive, then extending across the commuter rail line and east to
Highway 101. The Broadway/Highway 101 interchange is the only full
interchange directly serving Burlingame.
The at-grade crossing at the rail tracks, combined with short distances
between intersections along Broadway to Highway 101, has long
challenged roadway operations. Also, Broadway serves a dual purpose
between California Drive and El Camino Real: as the frontage street for
this local commercial district and the key connection to neighborhoods
west of El Camino Real. The City looks to Broadway to retain its many
functions and to do them all well. Creating a grade separation at the rail
line will allow intersection operations to improve and vehicles to move
more easily to California Drive. This in turn will provide opportunities to
enhance the Broadway commercial district as a local-serving, pedestrian-
oriented place, with on-street parking and easily accessible public
parking facilities.
VI. MOBILITY
M-28 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Goal M-12: Allow Broadway to function for dual purposes: as a
slow-speed roadway through the Broadway commercial district
and as a connector to Highway 101.
M-12.1: Neighborhood Connections
Maintain traffic-calming designs between California Drive and El Camino
Real, and provide improved pedestrian and bicycle connections to
surrounding neighborhoods. [MP]
M-12.2: Regional Connections
Coordinate with Caltrain and Caltrans to design and construct a grade-
separated intersection at Broadway and the rail tracks to improve
operations at California Drive and to create a safer and more complete
multimodal network. [MP, AC]
Rollins Road
Rollins Road provides north-south access between Millbrae Avenue to the
north (in the city of Millbrae) and Broadway to the south. Historically,
Rollins Road’s function has been to serve an industrial district. Four lanes
within a 75- to 84-foot right-of-way provide ample space for trucks to
maneuver and access Highway 101 from either Millbrae Avenue or
Broadway. Land use policy provides for the north end of Rollins Road to
transition from its historically industrial function to a complete live/work
neighborhood, with moderate density residential and mixed use
development. With this evolution, Rollins Road will need to serve more
travel modes, particularly since employees in businesses in the district
and new residents can be expected to use the BART station in Millbrae.
The following goals and policies identify ways to enhance the Rollins
Road corridor to accommodate a more diverse mix of uses while
continuing to meet the needs of important industrial businesses.
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | M-29
Goal M-13: Ensure that Rollins Road meets the needs of all uses
and users within the Rollins Road district.
M-13.1: Support Transit Access
Investigate and implement improvements to the north end of Rollins
Road that will provide complete streets treatments that allow convenient
and safe bike and pedestrian access across Millbrae Avenue to the BART
station, as well as within the Live/Work land use district. [SR]
M-13.2: Accommodate the Needs of Industrial Businesses
Ensure that the design of Rollins Road accommodates the mobility and
access needs of businesses in the Industrial/Innovation land use district.
[SO]
Bayfront
The Bayfront area will experience increased investment and more intense
uses on underutilized properties. The vision of creating a much more
vibrant hospitality and business district requires that multimodal
infrastructure improvements be provided to better connect uses and
provide travel options for visitors. Old Bayshore Highway and Airport
Boulevard will both be improved to accommodate users looking to
access the recreation amenities along the Bayfront and to visit the mix of
uses in the area. In addition to their new multimodal functions, the streets
will have attractive urban design treatments that create a distinct identity
for the Bayfront. Critically, the City will investigate options for crossing
Highway 101, such as establishing a bicycle/pedestrian crossing as
described in the overarching policies for this element.
VI. MOBILITY
M-30 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Goal M-14: Reinvent Old Bayshore Highway and Airport
Boulevard as multimodal streets, and enhance connections
between the Bayfront and the balance of the City.
M-14.1: Old Bayshore Highway and Airport Boulevard
Design and apply complete streets improvements to the Old Bayshore
Highway and Airport Boulevard corridors. [MP]
M-14.2: Bay Trail
Identify and construct multimodal paths to complete all gaps in the Bay
Trail. [MP, AC]
M-14.3: Improved Connections
Define approaches to improving the Anza Boulevard interchange with
Highway 101 to reduce driver confusion and create an easier transition to
Bayfront businesses and attractions. [SR, AC, FB]
M-14.4: Wayfinding Signage
Develop and implement a comprehensive wayfinding program for the
Bayfront area. [MP]
Neighborhood Streets
Neighborhood streets throughout Burlingame are the primary trip origins
for residents and provide the essential connections to local destinations
such as schools. The following goal and policies identify ways to improve
the functionality of neighborhood streets.
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | M-31
Goal M-17: Ensure that neighborhood streets are safe and
provide efficient vehicular access to residential neighborhoods
and schools.
M-17.1: Safe Routes to Schools
Identify essential pedestrian crossings and gaps in the multimodal
network around schools, and establish and implement Safe Routes to
Schools programs to improve access for children walking and biking to
school. [MP, AC]
M-17.2: Active Transportation Infrastructure
Develop neighborhood traffic-calming programs that support
construction of intersection treatments and completion of multimodal
networks, with a focus on pedestrian crossings and gaps in bicycle routes
to encourage more active transportation trips. [MP, FB, SO]
VI. MOBILITY
M-32 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
This page intentionally left blank.
Bal
b
o
a
Howard
Palo
m
a
Dr
a
k
e
M
a
g
n
o
l
i
a
Be
r
n
a
l
Co
r
t
e
z
EastonLag
u
n
a
BayswaterAdelineSummi
t
Se
q
u
o
i
a DavisAnza
CarmelitaShermanEastonLo
y
o
l
a
Toy
o
n
D
w
i
g
h
t
H
u
n
t
Va
n
c
o
u
v
e
r
Se
b
a
s
t
i
a
n
Oak
Grove
VernonPlymouth ConcordCap
u
c
h
i
n
o
P
a
r
kHaleChapin
P
e
p
p
e
rCh
a
p
i
n
Arguello
L
o
r
t
o
n
B
l
o
om
fi
e
l
d
A
r
u
n
d
e
l
D
w
i
g
h
t
Gi
l
b
r
e
t
h
Co
l
u
m
b
u
s
W
a
l
n
u
t
Be
n
i
t
o
C
r
e
s
c
e
n
t
P
r
im
r
o
s
e
Occidenta
lRivera H
i
g
h
l
a
n
d
Poppy
C
a
s
t
e
n
a
d
a
S
t
a
n
l
e
y
Mariposa
Edgehill
C
h
a
n
n
i
n
g
Ac
a
c
i
a
Atwater
Alcazar
Vi
c
t
o
r
i
a
De
S
o
t
o
Qu
e
s
a
d
a
C
l
a
r
e
n
d
o
nMillsChu
l
a
V
i
s
t
a
LexingtonMitten
Ca
r
l
o
s Mar
i
n
MartinezB
a
n
c
r
o
f
t
Sanchez SanchezGroveCowanEas
tMyr
t
l
e
Al
v
a
r
a
d
o
Ma
r
c
o
P
o
l
o
E
s
c
a
l
a
n
t
e StantonAviadorAl
b
e
m
a
r
l
e
Lang
MorrellLarkspur
F
a
i
r
fi
e
l
d
Cro
s
s
w
a
yMahlerW
e
s
t
m
o
o
r HinckleyCa
s
t
i
l
l
oValdiviaM
o
n
t
e
r
oDevereuxO
g
d
e
n BurlwayDavidLas
s
e
n
La
M
e
s
a
Al
t
u
r
a
s
L
o
s
M
o
n
t
e
s
Newlandsh Lin
d
e
n
Lau
r
e
l
L
o
s
A
l
t
o
s
Beach
Ma
r
s
t
e
n
OxfordAr
c
AlmerCambridgeDolores
S
k
y
v
i
e
w DufferinDonnellyCorbitt
El QuanitoLas Piedr
a
s
MajillaKenmarEdwardsMc
d
o
n
a
l
d
Ea
s
t
w
o
o
d
Caro
l
Ans
e
l
Aza
l
e
a
Margarita
Cos
ta
R
i
c
aJuanitaCadillac C
um
b
e
r
l
a
n
dRhinetteM
e
a
d
o
w
M
o
n
t
e
c
i
t
o SummerBa
y
V
i
e
wKillarney
Whi
t
e
h
o
r
n
Ne
u
c
h
a
t
e
l
BelvedereMarquitaBellevueRiveraTiberonLincolnA
n
i
t
aPalm
Car
o
l
a
n
Lin
d
e
n
ParkCa
b
r
i
l
l
oBroderickIngoldGuittard
T r ousdale D r.E. Poplar Ave.Old Baysh
o
re
H
ig
h
w
a
y
Millbrae
Ave.Hillcrest Blvd.Cal
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
D
r
.
Car
o
l
a
n
A
v
e
.
Airport Blvd.Peninsula Dr.Burlingame Ave.
S
a
n
M
a
t
e
o
D
r
.
El
C
a
m
i
n
o
R
e
a
l
R
o
l
l
i
n
s
R
d
.BroadwayHillside Dr.Ralston Ave.City of
San Mateo
City of
Hillsborough
City of
Millbrae
San Francisco Bay
San Francisco
International
Airport
280
101US
Burlingame General Plan
Figure M-1 Multimodal
Circulation Network
City Limits
SOI
Commercial Arterial
Commercial Collector
Commercial Access
Mixed-Use El Camino Real
Mixed-Use Arterial
Mixed-Use Collector
Mixed-Use Access
Neighborhood Arterial, El Camino Real
Neighborhood Arterial
Neighborhood Collector
Neighborhood Access
(All unmarked streets)
1,500750 3,000 FT 0N
VI. MOBILITY
M-34 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Figure M-2
Placeholder
Bal
b
o
a
Howard
Palo
m
a
Dr
a
k
e
M
a
g
n
o
l
i
a
Be
r
n
a
l
Co
r
t
e
z
EastonLag
u
n
a
BayswaterAdelineSummi
t
Se
q
u
o
i
a DavisAnza
CarmelitaShermanEastonLo
y
o
l
a
Toy
o
n
D
w
i
g
h
t
H
u
n
t
Va
n
c
o
u
v
e
r
Se
b
a
s
t
i
a
n
Oak
Grove
VernonPlymouth ConcordCap
u
c
h
i
n
o
P
a
r
kHaleChapin
P
e
p
p
e
rCh
a
p
i
n
Arguello
L
o
r
t
o
n
B
l
o
om
fi
e
l
d
A
r
u
n
d
e
l
D
w
i
g
h
t
Gi
l
b
r
e
t
h
Co
l
u
m
b
u
s
W
a
l
n
u
t
Be
n
i
t
o
C
r
e
s
c
e
n
t
P
r
im
r
o
s
e
Occidenta
lRivera H
i
g
h
l
a
n
d
Poppy
C
a
s
t
e
n
a
d
a
S
t
a
n
l
e
y
Mariposa
Edgehill
C
h
a
n
n
i
n
g
Ac
a
c
i
a
Atwater
Alcazar
Vi
c
t
o
r
i
a
De
S
o
t
o
Qu
e
s
a
d
a
C
l
a
r
e
n
d
o
nMillsChu
l
a
V
i
s
t
a
LexingtonMitten
Ca
r
l
o
s Mar
i
n
MartinezB
a
n
c
r
o
f
t
Sanchez SanchezGroveCowanEas
tMyr
t
l
e
Al
v
a
r
a
d
o
Ma
r
c
o
P
o
l
o
E
s
c
a
l
a
n
t
e StantonAviadorAl
b
e
m
a
r
l
e
Lang
MorrellLarkspur
F
a
i
r
fi
e
l
d
Cro
s
s
w
a
yMahlerW
e
s
t
m
o
o
r HinckleyCa
s
t
i
l
l
oValdiviaM
o
n
t
e
r
oDevereuxO
g
d
e
n BurlwayDavidLas
s
e
n
La
M
e
s
a
Al
t
u
r
a
s
L
o
s
M
o
n
t
e
s
Newlandsh Lin
d
e
n
Lau
r
e
l
L
o
s
A
l
t
o
s
Beach
Ma
r
s
t
e
n
OxfordAr
c
AlmerCambridgeDolores
S
k
y
v
i
e
w DufferinDonnellyCorbitt
El QuanitoLas Piedr
a
s
MajillaKenmarEdwardsMc
d
o
n
a
l
d
Ea
s
t
w
o
o
d
Caro
l
Ans
e
l
Aza
l
e
a
Margarita
Cos
ta
R
i
c
aJuanitaCadillac C
um
b
e
r
l
a
n
dRhinetteM
e
a
d
o
w
M
o
n
t
e
c
i
t
o SummerBa
y
V
i
e
wKillarney
Whi
t
e
h
o
r
n
Ne
u
c
h
a
t
e
l
BelvedereMarquitaBellevueRiveraTiberonLincolnA
n
i
t
aPalm
Car
o
l
a
n
Lin
d
e
n
ParkCa
b
r
i
l
l
oBroderickIngoldGuittard
T r ousdale D r.E. Poplar Ave.Old Baysh
o
re
H
ig
h
w
a
y
Millbrae
Ave.Hillcrest Blvd.Cal
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
D
r
.
Car
o
l
a
n
A
v
e
.
Airport Blvd.Peninsula Dr.Burlingame Ave.
S
a
n
M
a
t
e
o
D
r
.
El
C
a
m
i
n
o
R
e
a
l
R
o
l
l
i
n
s
R
d
.BroadwayHillside Dr.Ralston Ave.Poplar Creek
Golf Course
Mills Canyon
Wildlife Refuge
Curenvauaca
Park
Village
Park
Laguna
ParkRay
Park
Bayfront
Park
Bayside Dog
Exercise Park
Bayside
Fields Community
Garden
Burlingame Soccer
Complex (Murray Field)
Burlingame
Golf Center
Washington
Park
Recreation
Center
“J” Lot
Playground
Trenton
Park
Paloma
Playground
Burlingame
Country Club
Victoria
Park
Alpine
Playground
Pershing
Park
Heritage
Park
Coyote Point
Recreation AreaFranklin
Elementary
Mercy High
School
Hoover
Elementary
Our Lady of
Angels Elementary
Roosevelt
Elementary
Burlingame
High School
Aquatic
Center
Mckinley
Elementary
Washington
Elementary
St. Catherine of
Siena Elementary
Lincoln
ElementaryBurlingame
Intermediate
School
City of
San Mateo
City of
Hillsborough
City of
Millbrae
San Francisco Bay
San Francisco
International
Airport
280
101US
1,500750 3,000 FT 0NBurlingame General Plan
Figure M-3 Bicycle Network
City Limits
SOI
Trail (existing)
Trail (planned)
Bike Path (Class I)Bike Path (Class III/Sharrows)
Bike Path (Class II)
VI. MOBILITY
M-36 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Figure M-4
Placeholder
Bal
b
o
a
Howard
Palo
m
a
Dr
a
k
e
M
a
g
n
o
l
i
a
Be
r
n
a
l
Co
r
t
e
z
EastonLag
u
n
a
BayswaterAdelineSummi
t
Se
q
u
o
i
a DavisAnza
CarmelitaShermanEastonLo
y
o
l
a
Toy
o
n
D
w
i
g
h
t
H
u
n
t
Va
n
c
o
u
v
e
r
Se
b
a
s
t
i
a
n
Oak
Grove
VernonPlymouth ConcordCap
u
c
h
i
n
o
P
a
r
kHaleChapin
P
e
p
p
e
rCh
a
p
i
n
Arguello
L
o
r
t
o
n
B
l
o
om
fi
e
l
d
A
r
u
n
d
e
l
D
w
i
g
h
t
Gi
l
b
r
e
t
h
Co
l
u
m
b
u
s
W
a
l
n
u
t
Be
n
i
t
o
C
r
e
s
c
e
n
t
P
r
im
r
o
s
e
Occidenta
lRivera H
i
g
h
l
a
n
d
Poppy
C
a
s
t
e
n
a
d
a
S
t
a
n
l
e
y
Mariposa
Edgehill
C
h
a
n
n
i
n
g
Ac
a
c
i
a
Atwater
Alcazar
Vi
c
t
o
r
i
a
De
S
o
t
o
Qu
e
s
a
d
a
C
l
a
r
e
n
d
o
nMillsChu
l
a
V
i
s
t
a
LexingtonMitten
Ca
r
l
o
s Mar
i
n
MartinezB
a
n
c
r
o
f
t
Sanchez SanchezGroveCowanEas
tMyr
t
l
e
Al
v
a
r
a
d
o
Ma
r
c
o
P
o
l
o
E
s
c
a
l
a
n
t
e StantonAviadorAl
b
e
m
a
r
l
e
Lang
MorrellLarkspur
F
a
i
r
fi
e
l
d
Cro
s
s
w
a
yMahlerW
e
s
t
m
o
o
r HinckleyCa
s
t
i
l
l
oValdiviaM
o
n
t
e
r
oDevereuxO
g
d
e
n BurlwayDavidLas
s
e
n
La
M
e
s
a
Al
t
u
r
a
s
L
o
s
M
o
n
t
e
s
Newlandsh Lin
d
e
n
Lau
r
e
l
L
o
s
A
l
t
o
s
Beach
Ma
r
s
t
e
n
OxfordAr
c
AlmerCambridgeDolores
S
k
y
v
i
e
w DufferinDonnellyCorbitt
El QuanitoLas Piedr
a
s
MajillaKenmarEdwardsMc
d
o
n
a
l
d
Ea
s
t
w
o
o
d
Caro
l
Ans
e
l
Aza
l
e
a
Margarita
Cos
ta
R
i
c
aJuanitaCadillac C
um
b
e
r
l
a
n
dRhinetteM
e
a
d
o
w
M
o
n
t
e
c
i
t
o SummerBa
y
V
i
e
wKillarney
Whi
t
e
h
o
r
n
Ne
u
c
h
a
t
e
l
BelvedereMarquitaBellevueRiveraTiberonLincolnA
n
i
t
aPalm
Car
o
l
a
n
Lin
d
e
n
ParkCa
b
r
i
l
l
oBroderickIngoldGuittard
T r ousdale D r.E. Poplar Ave.Old Baysh
o
re
H
ig
h
w
a
y
Millbrae
Ave.Hillcrest Blvd.Cal
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
D
r
.
Car
o
l
a
n
A
v
e
.
Airport Blvd.Peninsula Dr.Burlingame Ave.
S
a
n
M
a
t
e
o
D
r
.
El
C
a
m
i
n
o
R
e
a
l
R
o
l
l
i
n
s
R
d
.BroadwayHillside Dr.Ralston Ave.Franklin
Elementary
Mercy High
School
Hoover
Elementary
Our Lady of
Angels Elementary
Roosevelt
Elementary
Burlingame
High School
Aquatic
Center
Mckinley
Elementary
Washington
Elementary
St. Catherine Of
Siena Elementary
Lincoln
ElementaryBurlingame
Intermediate
School
City of
San Mateo
City of
Hillsborough
City of
Millbrae
San Francisco Bay
San Francisco
International
Airport
280
101US
1,500750 3,000 FT 0N
Burlingame General Plan
Figure M-5 Transit Priority
Network
City Limits
SOI
Samtrans Route 292Samtrans Route ECR
Samtrans Route 46
Burlingame Trolley
North Burlingame Shuttle
Burlingame Bayside Shuttle
Proposed High Speed RailSamtrans Route 397
VI. MOBILITY
M-38 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Figure M-6
Placeholder
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | IF-1
Chapter VII. Infrastructure
Introduction
City residents, institutions, and the business community depend upon
reliable, flexible, and cost-effective infrastructure to ensure that existing
homes and businesses have efficient utility services and that desired
growth can be accommodated. Several public, quasi-public, and private
infrastructure service providers maintain the systems that support urban
uses: the water supply system that provides high quality and reliable
drinking water from the Hetch Hetchy Regional Water System, the sewer
system that collects and treats sewage from homes and businesses in the
wastewater treatment facility, the storm drain system that reduces urban
flooding by moving stormwater runoff to waterways, the natural gas and
electric lines that heat and cool our homes, and the telecommunications
infrastructure that keeps us connected. We expect these systems to
function without interruption, and the only time we really notice them at
all is when they do not work, which is rare. This can be attributed to the
attention paid to keep infrastructure in Burlingame up to date and to
improve systems so that local businesses remain cutting edge and
competitive.
This Infrastructure Element establishes goals and policies focused on the
efficient and reliable provision of utilities and infrastructure throughout
Burlingame sufficient to support the planned level of growth and
economic development goals. This element addresses:
Efficient and Sustainable Municipal Operations
Water Delivery and Supply
Wastewater
Stormwater Drainage and Flood Control
Solid Waste and Recycling
Energy
Telecommunications
VII. I NFRASTRUCTURE
IF-2 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Efficient and Sustainable Municipal Operations
The City of Burlingame Public Works Department maintains systems for
water supply and delivery, wastewater collection and treatment, and
stormwater drainage and flood control. The City contracts for solid waste
and recycling services, with agreements with services providers revisited
on a regular basis to ensure community needs and objectives are being
met. The City is committed to providing high service levels through its
own operations and for contract services.
Goal IF-1: Ensure the provision of adequate, efficient, and
sustainable municipal operations to ensure long-term, high-
quality utility services for Burlingame residents, institutions, and
businesses.
IF-1.1: Infrastructure Priority
Prioritize capital improvement funding to rehabilitate or replace critical
infrastructure that has reached the end of its useful life or has capacity
constraints. [MP, SO]
IF-1.2: Development Fair Share
Ensure, through a combination of improvement fees and other funding
mechanisms, that new development pays its fair share of providing new
public facilities and services and/or the costs of expanding/upgrading
existing facilities and services impacted by new development. [DR, FB]
IF-1.3: Neighborhood Compatibility
Ensure that public facilities and infrastructure are located, designed, and
maintained so that noise, light, glare, or odors associated with these
facilities will not adversely affect nearby land uses, particularly residential
areas. Require these facilities to use building and landscaping materials
that are compatible with or screen them from neighboring properties.
[DR]
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | IF-3
IF-1.4: Sustainable Practices
Make purchasing decisions that minimize packaging and avoid
waste.
Implement recycling programs that reduce waste beyond State-
mandated requirements.
Implement municipal energy efficiency and conservation practices
that reduce water, electricity and natural gas use.
Run fleet operations in a manner that reduces the consumption of
non-renewable energy sources. [DR, SO, PI]
IF-1.5: Sustainable Contracting
When awarding contracts, professional service agreements, and grants to
businesses and non-profit agency partners, request proposals or
applications to include information about the sustainability practices of
the organization. [SO, PA]
IF-1.6: Design Capacity
Ensure that public infrastructure is designed to meet planned needs
consistent with the General Plan growth capacity to avoid the need for
future upsizing. Maintain a balance between meeting future growth
needs and over-sizing of infrastructure to avoid fiscal impacts or impacts
on other goals. [MP, SO]
IF-1.7: Coordination
Require coordination of construction activity between various providers,
particularly in City facilities and rights-of-way, to ensure that the
community is not unnecessarily inconvenienced. Require that providers
maintain adequate space for all utilities when planning and constructing
their infrastructure. [AC, PA, PI]
Water Delivery and Supply
The City operates an extensive water distribution system using water
largely supplied by the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC)
via the Hetch Hetchy Regional Water System. The local storage and
distribution system, shown in Figure IF-1, serves all portions of the
VII. I NFRASTRUCTURE
IF-4 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
community. In 2004, the City prepared a Water System Master Plan that
identified deficiencies within the water system and prioritized
improvement projects to ensure the long-term integrity of the water
system. Due to aging water system infrastructure, long-term projections
for completion of improvements and annual upkeep and replacement of
the system are constant necessities.
Given California’s history of severe droughts and projected increases in
the Bay Area population through 2040 and beyond, water conservation is
critical for ensuring that future demands can be met sustainability. Prior to
the drought of 2011-2016, Burlingame water users consumed
approximately 3.0 to 5.5 million gallons per day of potable water. As of
July 2015, that level had dropped significantly, to approximately 2.4 to 4.6
million gallons per day. The conservation achievement was spurred both
by a statewide mandate imposed by Governor Jerry Brown and collective
voluntary water conservation efforts by community members. However,
water use in the city is projected to rise to approximately 5.22 million
gallons per day by 2040(accounting for both residential and
nonresidential users). As of 2016, the City had a water supply assurance
agreement from the SFPUC to receive an allotment of 5.23 million gallons
per day on an annual average. While the allotments are negotiated on a
scheduled basis, with Burlingame having the ability to request an
increased supply, rising water costs and the almost finite water supply
means that increased future conservation measures will be needed to
ensure supplies remain available.
The following goal and policies aim to improve the overall function and
reliability of the water system and to encourage water conservation by all
users.
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | IF-5
Goal IF-2: Ensure the long-term availability of water through
conservation methods and regular maintenance and
improvements to the overall water supply delivery system.
IF-2.1: Water System Reliability
Improve water system reliability by replacing and repairing water lines
that are leaking or otherwise meet the City’s criteria for replacement. [MP,
DR, SO]
IF-2.2: Seismic Upgrades
Continue to improve the seismic safety of the water system, including
seismic retrofits of water storage facilities and improvements to pipes
near fault lines and/or subject to severe groundshaking. [MP, SO]
IF-2.3: New Development
Ensure long-term water supply capacity prior to granting building permits
for new development. Require that new development projects fund the
full cost of upgrading water storage and supply infrastructure to meet
their specific needs. [DR, SO]
IF-2.4: Water Agency Participation
Continue to participate in the Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation
Agency and purchase water from the San Francisco Public Utilities
Commission. [AC]
IF-2.5: Urban Water Management Plan
Prepare, maintain, and implement an Urban Water Management Plan,
including water conservation strategies and programs, as required by the
State’s Water Management Planning Act. [MP, SO]
IF-2.6: Water Treatment Capacity and Infrastructure
If the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission is unable to provide water
that meets drinking water standards, the City will plan, secure funding for,
VII. I NFRASTRUCTURE
IF-6 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
and procure sufficient water treatment capacity and infrastructure to meet
projected water demands. [SO, AC]
IF-2.7: Water Shortage Allocation Plan
Prepare, maintain, and implement a Water Shortage Allocation Plan that
distributes available water from the regional water system among San
Francisco Public Utilities Commission and wholesale customers in the
event of a system-wide shortage of up to 20 percent. [SO, AC]
IF-2.8: Water Supply During Emergencies
Maintain emergency water connections in the event of disruption of
delivery from the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission. Maintain
emergency wells for short duration use in an emergency. [SO, AC]
IF-2.9: Water Conservation Standards
Comply with State water conservation standards. Encourage water
conservation practices as a way of life. [SO, AC]
IF-2.10: Water Conservation Programs
Implement cost-effective conservation strategies and programs that
increase water use efficiency, including providing incentives for adoption
of water-efficiency measures. [SO, PI]
IF-2.11: Retrofits
Implement programs that incentivize businesses and private institutions
to replace existing plumbing fixtures with water-efficient plumbing. [SO,
PI]
IF-2.12: Recycled Water
Increase the use of recycled water as available, cost effective, and safe.
This may include allowed use of graywater systems consistent with health
and building codes. [S, SO, PI]
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | IF-7
IF-2.13: Bay-Friendly Landscaping
Promote landscaping approaches that include native and climate-
appropriate plants, sustainable design and maintenance, water-efficient
irrigation systems, and yard clipping reduction practices. Provide
guidance to the community regarding preferred landscaping and
irrigation practices. [DR, PI]
Wastewater
The City of Burlingame owns, operates, and maintains the local sanitary
sewage collection and treatment facilities. The network of pipes that
collect sewage, which covers approximately six square miles and serves
9,000 customers (see Figure IF-2), consists of approximately 100 miles of
gravity sewers, seven pump stations, and 15,800 linear feet of force mains.
The wastewater collected is treated at the Burlingame Wastewater
Treatment Plant (WWTP) on Airport Boulevard, which has a secondary
treatment capacity of 15 million gallons per day (which includes wastewater
treatment for the neighboring town of Hillsborough). The WWTP
underwent upgrades in 1994, 2006, and 2011. Treated effluent from the
plant (that is, the outflow) is transported by intertie pipeline through the
cities of Millbrae and San Bruno to a regional outfall into San Francisco Bay
located off Point San Bruno near South San Francisco.
Goal IF-3: Provide sufficient wastewater collection and disposal
infrastructure to meet current and future community needs.
IF-3.1: Sewage Collection System
Operate and maintain the sewage collection system to minimize the
potential for system malfunction or failure. [MP, SO]
IF-3.2: Wastewater Treatment Plant Operations and Maintenance
Operate and maintain the City’s wastewater treatment plant to ensure
that wastewater discharge meets all applicable federal and regional
permit provisions. [MP, SO]
VII. I NFRASTRUCTURE
IF-8 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
IF-3.3: Innovative and Efficient Operations
Adopt innovative, efficient, and environmentally beneficial wastewater
treatment technologies. [MP, SO]
IF-3.4: Reduce Infiltration and Inflow
Develop and implement a plan to repair or replace underperforming
wastewater facilities to remove excessive infiltration and inflow from
stormwater and other non-sewer sources. This includes effective
enforcement of ordinances applicable to lateral sewer line replacement.
[MP, SO]
IF-3.5: Seismic Upgrades
Continue to improve the seismic safety of the sewage collection and
treatment system, including seismic retrofits of facilities near fault lines
and/or subject to severe groundshaking. [MP, SO]
IF-3.6: Service to New Development
Ensure that adequate wastewater collection and treatment services for all
new development are available before developments are approved.
Require new development projects to fund the full cost of upgrading
sewage collection and treatment infrastructure to meet their specific
needs. [DR, SO]
Stormwater Drainage and Flood Control
Most of Burlingame’s storm drainage infrastructure was constructed in
the early twentieth century. The City has constructed and maintains a
network of open ditches and subsurface drainage pipes that supplement
the natural streams, carrying urban runoff and stormwater flows into San
Francisco Bay. The drainage infrastructure also includes pump stations in
low-lying areas to move water toward the Bay. To address the age and
condition of drainage and flood control infrastructure, in 2008 the City
prepared a Storm Drain Improvements Report to highlight high-priority
projects and guide upgrade investments within five watersheds: Easton,
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | IF-9
Burlingame/Ralston, Sanchez/Terrace, Mills and El Portal/Trousdale.
Annual storm drain fees assessed to all properties fund the $39 million in
bonds sold to finance identified improvements through 2039 (see Figure
IF-3). The improvement program is specifically designed to help increase
storm drainage capacity, replace aging pipes and pumps, improve public
safety, and reduce local flooding.
According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the
agency responsible for preparing Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs),
Burlingame is located primarily within Zone X 0.2, which means there is a
0.2 percent annual chance of flood hazard (referred to as a 500-year storm
event), and partially within Zone X - Area of Minimal Flood Hazard.
Properties along certain creeks and on the Bayside of Highway 101 lie
within Zone A, Zone AE, Zone AH, and Zone VE, all of which have
mandatory flood insurance requirements. Figure IF-4 shows the flood
zones in Burlingame.
Due to the age of the regional system, many of the storm drain systems
have a 10-year design storm capacity, not the standard 30-year capacity
for regional facilities. Some local storm drain systems also have less than
a two-year design storm capacity, where the standard is also 10 years. In
addition to these flood concerns, the City will be subject to flooding over
time due to sea level rise, as outlined in the Safety Element. Flood
protection improvements represent critical infrastructure investments
needed to protect life and property and encourage continued private
economic investment throughout Burlingame.
Goal IF-4: Protect people and property from the adverse effects
of flooding through a stormwater system that adequately moves
runoff from existing and future development, prevents property
damage due to flooding, and improves environmental quality.
IF-4.1: Storm Drain Infrastructure Maintenance
Ensure that local storm drain infrastructure is sufficiently maintained to
minimize flood hazards. [MP, SO]
VII. I NFRASTRUCTURE
IF-10 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
IF-4.2: Localized Flooding
Identify and correct problems of localized flooding. Promote the use of
green infrastructure, whenever feasible, to mimic a natural hydrologic
system that uses stormwater as a resource. [DR, MP, SO]
IF-4.3: Guard against Sea Level Rise
Pursue the policies outlined in the Safety Element related to sea level
rise. [DR, MP, SO]
IF-4.4: Green Stormwater Infrastructure
Encourage Low Impact Development (LID) techniques, such as green
infrastructure which uses vegetation and soil to capture, treat, and retain
stormwater runoff. Promote the use of pervious surfaces, green streets,
and rainwater harvesting to achieve multiple benefits, such as creating
open space, improving stormwater quality, and increasing groundwater
recharge. Avoid or minimize the impact of stormwater discharges on local
receiving waters, including the San Francisco Bay. [DR, SO]
IF-4.5: Improvement to Public Spaces
Design smart improvements to public spaces including streets, parks, and
plazas for stormwater retention and groundwater infiltration by diverting
urban runoff to bioretention systems and implementing LID techniques.
Integrate green infrastructure that restores a natural hydrologic system
such as trees, rain gardens, and vegetated swales into the urban
environment. Encourage stormwater facilities that are designed to be a
functional and attractive element of public spaces. [DR, PI]
IF-4.6: Grading Projects
Impose appropriate conditions on grading projects performed during the
rainy season to ensure that silt is not conveyed to storm drainage
systems. [DR]
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | IF-11
IF-4.7: Diversion
Require new development to be designed to prevent the diversion of
stormwater onto neighboring parcels. [DR, SO]
IF-4.8: Rainwater Harvesting
Encourage the use of rainwater harvesting facilities, techniques, and
improvements where appropriate, cost effective, safe, and
environmentally sustainable as a way to reduce urban runoff and
stormwater flows into the storm drain system. [DR, PI]
IF-4.9: Pollution Prevention
Prevent pollutants from entering the storm drain system by managing
point and non-point pollution sources through public and private
facilities, local regulations, and education.
Solid Waste and Recycling
Burlingame contracts with a private vendor for solid waste and recycling
services. Under California law, the vendor, working in concert with the
City, is required to divert waste from landfills (recycle and reduce) to
achieve State waste reduction and pollution prevention goals.
Burlingame residents, businesses, and local institutions have shown a
clear commitment to reducing the waste stream, having achieved a 60
percent waste diversion rate as of 2016. The City has led by example
through its Environmental Purchasing Policy and sponsorship of zero
waste City events. Even with the tremendous success the City has
achieved, additional waste reduction will be attained through increased
recycling opportunities, new goals and programs for businesses and
institutions, more home composting, and sustainable purchasing
practices that extend to residents and businesses.
For additional policies related to solid waste reduction and recycling,
refer to the Healthy People and Healthy Places Element.
VII. I NFRASTRUCTURE
IF-12 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Goal IF-5: Achieve waste reduction goals in excess of State
mandates.
IF-5.1: Effective Collection Services
Monitor the City’s solid waste and recycling services franchisee to ensure
that services provided meet the needs of the community. [MP, SO]
IF-5.2: Landfill Capacity
Coordinate with the City’s contracted waste hauler/recycler to ensure
adequate landfill capacity in the region exists for the contract duration.
[SO, AC]
IF-5.3: Municipal Waste Reduction
Reduce municipal waste generation by continuing to employ a wide
range of simple and innovative techniques, such as electronic
communications to reduce paper usage and buying products with less
packaging and in bulk. [SO, PI]
IF-5.4: Disposable, Toxic, and Non-Renewable Products
Identify uses of disposable, toxic, and nonrenewable products in City
operations and seek ways to reduce, avoid, or substitute such uses with
less toxic options. [SO]
IF-5.5: Construction Waste Recycling
Require demolition, remodeling, and major new development projects
include salvaging or recycling asphalt and concrete and all other non-
hazardous construction and demolition materials to the maximum extent
practicable. [DR]
IF-5.6: Electronic Waste Disposal
Educate residents and businesses regarding proper and safe means of
electronic waste disposal at permitted facilities, and make it easy for them
to do so. [PI]
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | IF-13
IF-5.7: Composting
Facilitate the ability of all residents to compost both for their own use and
for collection by contract waste haulers. [SO]
IF-5.8: Regional Coordination
Support regional efforts to develop and implement effective waste
management strategies. [PI]
IF-5.9: Outreach
Conduct and enhance programs that promote waste reduction through
partnerships with schools, institutions, businesses, and homes. [PI]
IF-5.10: Hazardous Waste
Work with providers and businesses to provide convenient hazardous and
e-waste facilities for the community. [AC, PA]
IF-5.11: Preferential Purchasing
Maintain and update a City preferential purchasing policy for products
that reduce packaging waste, greenhouse gas emissions, and toxic
contaminants, and that are reusable. [SO]
IF-5.12: Reuse
Encourage reuse of materials and reusable products. Develop a program
for reuse of materials and reusable products in City facilities and outreach
programs for community-wide participation by promoting community-
wide garage sales and online venues. [SO]
IF-5.13: Collaboration
Collaborate with agencies and large businesses or projects to enhance
opportunities for community-wide recycling, reuse and reduction
programs. [PA, PI]
VII. I NFRASTRUCTURE
IF-14 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
IF-5.14: Recycled Materials
Encourage the use of recycled materials and sustainably harvested
materials in City and private projects. [DR, AC]
IF-5.15: Composting
Expand composting programs in coordination with waste vendor to all
residential type and businesses.
IF-5.16: Zero Waste
Participate in negotiations with waste vendor to implement zero waste
supportive contracts and services.
Energy
Two electricity providers service Burlingame, the Pacific Gas and Electric
Company (PG&E) and Peninsula Clean Energy (PCE). PG&E provides
electrical and natural gas service; offers programs and rebates for energy
efficiency; operates and expands transmission lines and gas service based
on projected demands; and ensures that systems are properly maintained
and reliable. PG&E is required to make sure that transmission and
distribution facilities incorporate safety features and the latest
technological advancements.
PCE is San Mateo County’s community choice energy program that
provides cleaner electricity at competitive rates and with a higher
renewable energy content than PG&E. Burlingame joined PCE to provide
a choice for its community, to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and
support renewable energy. PCE offers two rates for customers: ECOplus
is the default rate with at least 50% renewable energy content: and
ECO100 is the opt-up rate with 100% renewable energy. Most of
Burlingame’s electricity customers are enrolled in PCE rather than PG&E
and at the ECOplus rate. PCE plans to offer energy efficiency programs
and rebates in the future.
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | IF-15
Goal IF-6: Ensure the provision of adequate and safe gas and
electric services to Burlingame residents and businesses, and that
energy facilities are constructed in a fashion that minimizes their
impacts on surrounding development and maximizes efficiency.
IF-6.1: Utility Provider Coordination
Coordinate with PCE, PG&E, and other service providers to make sure
that they provide efficient, reliable, affordable, and state-of-the-art
service to Burlingame, and that they promote technological
improvements and upgrading of utility services. Coordinate with
providers in the siting and design of gas and electric facilities to minimize
environmental, aesthetic, and safety impacts. [AC, PA]
IF-6.2: Utility Facility Safety
Work with regulators and energy providers to monitor, evaluate, and
maintain the safety of utility facilities (e.g., gas pipelines and electric lines
and transformers). Where facilities are found to be a potential safety
concern, especially those that could be impacted by seismic events,
support utility provider efforts to repair or replace affected facilities. [AC,
PA]
IF-6.3: Back-up Power Supply
Provide back-up power supplies for critical facilities. [SO]
IF-6.5: Undergrounding Utilities
Encourage the undergrounding of existing overhead facilities, and
require new facilities to be undergrounded when tied to large scale or
multi-block development. [DR, MP]
IF-6.6: Utility Line Maintenance
Encourage energy providers to maintain, regularly inspect, and repair gas
pipelines and electric utility lines, both overhead and underground, to
ensure reliable and safe services with limited disruptions. To this end, the
VII. I NFRASTRUCTURE
IF-16 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
City will inform energy providers of pending public works projects that
provide opportunities to inspect or repair underground utility lines. [SO,
AC, PA]
IF-6.7: Electric Vehicles
Work with energy providers to plan for and provide for the electricity
needs of a growing EV network in Burlingame.
IF-6.8: Joint Use
Work with energy providers to allow for their rights-of-way and easements
to be considered for dual use as public open space, trails, parkland,
community gardens, and other compatible passive recreational uses. [DR,
SO]
Telecommunications
Access to efficient and affordable telecommunications infrastructure—
including broadband, fiber optic, wireless (wi-fi), and emerging
technologies—connects Burlingame to the world and can serve as an
economic development tool, attracting businesses that require high-
speed, reliable service. Burlingame will work to establish a wide range of
innovative telecommunications systems and services to attract and retain
state-of-the-art businesses, provide information and communication
access for all residents, and facilitate public education.
Goal IF-7: Install state-of-the-art technology and
telecommunications infrastructure to support Burlingame
residents, businesses, institutions, and public agencies.
IF-7.1: Access and Availability
Work with service providers to ensure access to and availability of a wide
range of state-of-the-art telecommunications systems and services for
households, businesses, institutions, public spaces, and public agencies
throughout Burlingame. [FB, PA]
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | IF-17
IF-7.2: Infrastructure Co-location
Encourage the co-location of telecommunications facilities, and work with
service providers to site telecommunications facilities on City-owned
property and within public rights-of-way wherever possible. [DR, PA]
IF-7.3: Incorporation into Public Places
Establish requirements for the incorporation and accessibility of state-of-
the-art, attractive telecommunications systems and services for public use
in public buildings and spaces. [DR, PI]
IF-7.4: Incorporation into New Development
Establish requirements for the installation of state-of-the-art internal
telecommunications technologies in new office, commercial, and hotel
developments. [DR]
IF-7.5: Fiber Optic Cable Access
Encourage the expansion of fiber optic cable infrastructure throughout
the city. [DR, PA]
IF-7.6: Public Wireless Hot Spots
Encourage the installation of public wireless network “hot spots”
throughout the city, but prioritized in Downtown, the Bayfront, and along
Broadway. [DR, MP]
IF-7.7: Facility Upgrades
Require service providers to upgrade existing facilities as part of permit
or lease renewals, and encourage the use of newer technologies that
allow the facility components to be reduced in size or improve screening
or camouflaging. [DR, PA]
IF-7.8: CCTV
Consider establishing closed circuit television systems (CCTV) at locations
in Burlingame that would benefit from such technology. [SO]
VII. I NFRASTRUCTURE
IF-18 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
IF-7.9: Antenna Aesthetics
Implement measures that require above-ground telecommunications
infrastructure—and antenna in particular—to be shielded, integrated into
buildings, or otherwise utilize stealth approaches to minimize their
aesthetic impacts. [DR]
IF-7.10: Telecommunications Master Plan
Prepare and regularly update a Telecommunications Master Plan with
regulations and guidelines for wireless and emerging technology
installation. [MP, SO, FB]
Ba
l
b
o
a
HowardPalo
m
a
Dr
a
k
e
M
a
g
n
o
l
i
a
Be
r
n
a
l
Co
r
t
e
z
EastonLag
u
n
aBroderick
BayswaterAdelineSummi
t
Se
q
u
o
i
a DavisAnza
CarmelitaShermanEastonLo
y
o
l
a
To
y
o
n
D
w
i
g
h
t
H
u
n
t
Va
n
c
o
u
v
e
r
Se
b
a
s
t
i
a
n
Oak
Grove
VernonPlymouth ConcordCa
p
u
c
h
i
n
o
P
a
r
kHaleChapin
P
e
p
p
e
rChapinArguello
L
o
r
t
o
n
Bl
o
om
fi
e
l
d
A
r
u
n
d
e
l
D
w
i
g
h
t
Gi
l
b
r
e
t
h
Co
l
u
m
b
u
s
Waln
u
t
Be
n
i
t
o
C
r
e
s
c
e
n
t
P
r
im
r
o
s
e
Occidenta
lRivera H
i
g
h
l
a
n
d
Poppy
Ca
s
t
e
n
a
d
a
St
a
n
l
e
y
Maripos
a
Edge
hill
C
h
a
n
n
i
n
g
Aca
c
ia
Atwater
Alcazar
Vi
c
t
o
r
i
a
De
S
o
t
o
Qu
e
s
a
d
a
C
l
a
r
e
n
d
o
nMillsChu
l
a
V
i
s
t
a
LexingtonMitten
Ca
r
l
o
s Mar
i
n
MartinezB
a
n
c
r
o
f
t
Sanchez SanchezGroveCowanEas
tMyr
t
l
e
Alv
a
r
a
d
o
Ma
r
c
o
P
o
l
o
E
s
c
a
l
a
n
t
e StantonAviadorAl
b
e
m
a
r
l
e
Lang
MorrellLarkspur
F
a
i
r
fi
e
l
d
Cro
s
s
w
a
yMahlerW
e
s
t
m
o
o
r HinckleyCa
s
t
i
l
l
oValdiviaM
o
n
t
e
r
oDevereuxO
g
d
e
n BurlwayDavidLas
s
e
n
La
M
e
s
a
Al
t
u
r
a
s
L
o
s
Mo
n
t
e
s
Newlandsh Lin
d
e
n
Lau
r
e
l
L
o
s
A
l
t
o
s
Beach
Ma
r
s
t
e
n
OxfordAr
c
AlmerCambridgeDolores
S
k
y
v
i
e
w DufferinDonnellyCorbitt
El QuanitoLas Piedra
s
MajillaKenmarEdwardsMc
d
o
n
a
l
d
Ea
s
t
w
o
o
d
Caro
l
Ans
e
l
Aza
l
e
a
Margarita
Cos
t
a
R
i
caIngoldJuanitaGuittardCadillac C
um
b
e
r
l
a
n
dRhinetteMe
a
d
o
w
Mo
n
t
e
c
i
t
o SummerBa
y
V
i
e
wKillarney
Whit
e
h
o
r
n
Ne
u
c
h
a
t
e
l
BelvedereMarquitaBellevueRiveraTiberonLincolnA
n
i
t
aPalm
Car
o
l
a
n
Lin
d
e
n
ParkCa
b
r
i
l
l
o
T r ousdale D r.E. Poplar Ave.Old Baysh
o
re
H
ig
h
w
a
y
Millbrae
Ave.Hillcrest Blvd.Cal
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
D
r
.
Car
o
l
a
n
A
v
e
.
Airport Blvd.Peninsula Dr.Burlingame Ave.
S
a
n
M
a
t
e
o
D
r
.
El
C
a
m
i
n
o
R
e
a
l
R
o
l
l
i
n
s
R
d
.BroadwayHillside Dr.R alston Ave.City of
San Mateo
City of
Hillsborough
City of
Millbrae
San Francisco Bay
San Francisco
International
Airport
280
101US
!
!
!
!!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!!!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!!
! !
!
!
!!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!
!!!!! !!
!!!
!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!!
!!
! !
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!
!!
!
!!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
@
@
@
@ @
@
@ @
@
@
@
@
@
@ @
@
@
@
@
@
@@
@
@
@@
@
@
@
@
@
@@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@@
@ @
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@ @
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@ @
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@ @
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@ @
@
@
@
@ @@
@
@
@
@ @
@
@
@
@
@
@
@ @
@
@@
@
@
@
@
@ @
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@ @
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@ @
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@ @
@
@ @
@
@@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@ @
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@@
@
@
@
@
@
@@
@
@@
@ @
@
@
@ @
@
@
@ @
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@ @
@@
@
@
@
@ @ @
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@@@
@ @ @ @ @ @ @
@@@
@@@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@@
@
@
@
@@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@@
@
@
@
@
@ @
@ @
@ @
@ @
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@ @
@
@
@
@
@@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@@@@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@@
@
@ @
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@ @
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@ @
@
@
@
@
@
@ @
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@@
@
@
@@
@@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@ @
@
@
@
@
@
@ @
@@
@
@
@
@
@
@@@
@@
@
@@
@
@
@ @
@
@
@
@
@ @
@
@
@
@
@@
@
@ @
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@@@@
@
@
@@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@ @
@
@
@
@ @
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@@
@
@
@
@
@@
@@
@@
@@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@ @
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@ @
@
@
@
@
@
@
@@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
10'' CI6'
'
CI6'' CI6''
CI
8'' CI6''PVC6'' PVC
6''
PV
C8''PVC6''
PV
C
6'' CI
6''
PV
C
8''ACP6'' CI
4'
'
C
I
4
'
'
CI8''PVC6''
CI
2'' SS
4'
'
CI
6''
CI 6''
CI10''ACP6''
CI
6'' CI
6''
CI
6''
PV
C
6'
'
CI
6''
AC
P
6''
PV
C
10''
PV
C
6''
CI
6''
PV
C
6''
PV
C 4'' CI
8'' AC
P
4'
'
CI
6''
CI 4'' CI8'' CI
8''
C
I
6''
PV
C
4'' CI
6''
CI
8'' CI
8'' AC
P
6'' AC
P
4'
'
CI
8'' CI
6'
'
CI
12''C I8''
CI
24'' I8''
AC
P4''
CI
6'' CI12'' ACP
6'
'
A
C
P
8''
CI
4''CI4'' CI6'' AC
P
8'' AC
P8'' PVC8'' AC
P 8'' AC
P 6'
'
CI
6''
CI6''
AC
P
8'' PVC
4
'
'
CI
6''
CI
6'
'
CI
4''
CI
6''
CI 14''ACP
4''
CI
6'' PVC
6'
'
CI
12''
CI 12''ACP6''
CI4'' CI
8''
CI
16'' ACP
4'' CI8''
CI
8''ACP
6'' CI 8'' CI4''CI4
'
'CI
6''
CI
4''
CI
8
''
CI 4'' CI8
'
'
CI
4''
CI
8''CI
6'
'
A
C
P
6'' AC
P
4''
CI4'' CI8''
CI
6'' CI
6'' AC
P
4''
CI
6'' CI
2''
CI
4'' CI8'' CI10'' CI6''CI
6 ''CI
6''PVC8''
PV
C
4'
'
CI8'' ACP6'
'
A
C
P
10'' PVC
8''C I6'' CI6''
A
C
P
4'' CI
6
0
'
'
6''
CI10'' ACP10'' AC
P
8'' PVC4'' CI4''CI
6'' CI
60''
6'' CI 8'' ACP4'' CI
8'' AC
P
8'' CI
8''PV
C
4''
CI6'' CI4''
CI
6'' CI4''
CI
4''
CI
4''
CI
8''CI4''
CI
4''
CI
4''
CI
6''CI
6''
CI
12'' ACP
4'' CI6''PVC4''CI
6''
CI
6'
'
P
V
C
6''
CI
''
12
'
'
CI8'' CI1
2
'
'
C
I
10''CI
6''CI4
'
'
C
I6''C I6'' CI6'' CI6'
'
CI 12'' ACP4'' CI
8''CI
6'' CI
6''CI
6'' PV
C
6''
PV
C
4'' CI4'' CI
4''CI6''
CI
6'
'
C
I
4'' CI
6''
CI
6'' CI12'' PVC6''CI8'' CI8''ACP4''CI8''PVC4 ''CI6'' CI
6''CI6'
'
CI
4''CI
10''
CI
8''
PV
C
4
''CI6'' CI6''CI
10''
CI
6''
CI
1
2
'
'
P
V
C
12'' PVC6''CI 4'' CI6'
'
CI 6''CI4'' CI8'' CI
12''
PVC1
2
''PVC6''CI12''CI8 ''C I 4
''CI 4''CI6''CI6''CI4'
'
CI
6''CI6'' CI6''CI6''CI
8''
CI
8''CI
6'' CI
4'' CI
4'' CI
6''CI8'' AC
P
4'' AC
P
6''CI1
2''CI 4'' CI6'
'12''I4''4''6'' CI6''CI8'' CI10'' CI6'
'
C
I6'' CI6''
C
I
8'' CI6''PVC6'' P
V
C
6''
PV
C8''PVC6''
P
V
C
6'' CI
6''
P
V
C
8''ACP6'' CI
4'
'
C
I
4
'
'
CI8''PVC6''
C
I
2'' S
S
4'
'
C
I
6''
C
I
6''
C
I10''ACP6''
CI
6'' CI
6''
C
I
6''
P
V
C
6'
'
C
I
6''
A
C
P
6''
P
V
C
10''
PV
C
6''
C
I
6''
P
V
C
6''
P
V
C
4'' CI
8''
A
C
P
4'
'
C
I
6''
C
I 4'' CI8'' CI
8''
C
I
6''
P
V
C
4'' CI
6''
CI
8'' CI
8''
A
C
P
6''
A
C
P
4'
'
C
I
8'' CI
6'
'
C
I
12''C I8''
C
I
24'' I8''
A
C
P4''
C
I
6'' CI12'' ACP
6'
'
A
C
P
8''
C
I
4''CI4'' CI6'' AC
P
8'' AC
P8'' PVC8'' AC
P
8'' AC
P 6'
'
C
I
6''
CI6''
A
C
P
8'' PVC
4
'
'
C
I
6''
C
I
6'
'
C
I
4''
C
I
6''
C
I 14''ACP
4''
CI
6'' P
V
C
6'
'
C
I
12''
C
I 12''ACP6''
C
I
4'' CI
8''
C
I
16'' ACP
4'' CI8''
C
I
8''ACP
6'' CI 8'' CI4''CI4
'
'CI
6''
C
I
4''
C
I
8
''
CI 4'' CI8
'
'
C
I
4''
C
I
8''CI
6'
'
A
C
P
6''
A
C
P
4''
C
I4'' CI8''
C
I
6'' CI
6''
A
C
P
4''
C
I
6'' CI
2''
CI
4'' CI8'' CI10'' CI6''CI
6 ''CI
6''PVC8''
P
V
C
4'
'
CI8'' ACP6'
'
A
C
P
10'' PVC
8''C I6'' CI6''
A
C
P
4'' CI
6
0
'
'
6''
CI10'' ACP10''
A
C
P
8'' PVC4'' CI4''CI
6'' CI
60''
6'' C
I 8'' ACP4'' CI
8''
A
C
P
8'' C
I
8''PV
C
4''
C
I6'' CI4''
C
I
6'' CI4''
C
I
4''
CI
4''
CI
8''CI4''
C
I
4''
C
I
4''
C
I
6''CI
6''
CI
12'' ACP
4'' CI6''PVC4''CI
6''
C
I
6'
'
P
V
C
6''
C
I
''
12
'
'
C
I8'' CI1
2
'
'
C
I
10''CI
6''CI4
'
'
C
I6''C I6'' CI6'' CI6'
'
CI 12'' ACP4'' CI
8''CI
6'' CI
6''CI
6'' P
V
C
6''
P
V
C
4'' CI4'' CI
4''CI6''
C
I
6'
'
C
I
4'' CI
6''
C
I
6'' CI12'' PVC6''CI8'' CI8''ACP4''CI8''PVC4 ''CI6'' CI
6''CI6'
'
C
I
4''CI
10''
C
I
8''
P
V
C
4
''CI6'' CI6''CI
10''
CI
6''
CI
1
2
'
'
P
V
C
12'' PVC6''CI 4'' CI6'
'
CI 6''CI4'' CI8'' CI
12''
PVC
1
2
''PVC6''CI12''CI8 ''C I 4
''CI 4''CI6''CI6''CI4'
'
C
I
6''CI6'' CI6''CI6''CI
8''
CI
8''CI
6'' CI
4'' CI
4'' CI
6''CI8'' A
C
P
4''
A
C
P
6''CI1
2''CI 4'' CI6'
'12''I4''4''6'' CI6''CI8'' CI1,500750 3,000 FT 0NBurlingame General Plan
Figure IF-1 Potable Water System
City Limits
SOI
Water Hydrant
Water Lines
@
Ba
l
b
o
a
HowardPalo
m
a
Dr
a
k
e
M
a
g
n
o
l
i
a
Be
r
n
a
l
Co
r
t
e
z
EastonLag
u
n
a
BayswaterAdelineSummi
t
Se
q
u
o
i
a DavisAnza
CarmelitaShermanEastonLo
y
o
l
a
To
y
o
n
D
w
i
g
h
t
H
u
n
t
Va
n
c
o
u
v
e
r
Se
b
a
s
t
i
a
n
Oak
Grove
VernonPlymouth ConcordCa
p
u
c
h
i
n
o
P
a
r
kHaleChapin
P
e
p
p
e
rChapinArguello
L
o
r
t
o
n
Bl
o
om
fi
e
l
d
A
r
u
n
d
e
l
D
w
i
g
h
t
Gi
l
b
r
e
t
h
Co
l
u
m
b
u
s
Waln
u
t
Be
n
i
t
o
C
r
e
s
c
e
n
t
P
r
im
r
o
s
e
Occidenta
lRivera H
i
g
h
l
a
n
d
Poppy
Ca
s
t
e
n
a
d
a
St
a
n
l
e
y
Maripos
a
Edge
hill
C
h
a
n
n
i
n
g
Aca
c
ia
Atwater
Alcazar
Vi
c
t
o
r
i
a
De
S
o
t
o
Qu
e
s
a
d
a
C
l
a
r
e
n
d
o
nMillsChu
l
a
V
i
s
t
a
LexingtonMitten
Ca
r
l
o
s Mar
i
n
MartinezB
a
n
c
r
o
f
t
Sanchez SanchezGroveCowanEas
tMyr
t
l
e
Alv
a
r
a
d
o
Ma
r
c
o
P
o
l
o
E
s
c
a
l
a
n
t
e StantonAviadorAl
b
e
m
a
r
l
e
Lang
MorrellLarkspur
F
a
i
r
fi
e
l
d
Cro
s
s
w
a
yMahlerW
e
s
t
m
o
o
r HinckleyCa
s
t
i
l
l
oValdiviaM
o
n
t
e
r
oDevereuxO
g
d
e
n BurlwayDavidLas
s
e
n
La
M
e
s
a
Al
t
u
r
a
s
L
o
s
Mo
n
t
e
s
Newlandsh Lin
d
e
n
Lau
r
e
l
L
o
s
A
l
t
o
s
Beach
Ma
r
s
t
e
n
OxfordAr
c
AlmerCambridgeDolores
S
k
y
v
i
e
w DufferinDonnellyCorbitt
El QuanitoLas Piedra
s
MajillaKenmarEdwardsMc
d
o
n
a
l
d
Ea
s
t
w
o
o
d
Caro
l
Ans
e
l
Aza
l
e
a
Margarita
Cos
t
a
R
i
caJuanitaCadillac C
um
b
e
r
l
a
n
dRhinetteMe
a
d
o
w
Mo
n
t
e
c
i
t
o SummerBa
y
V
i
e
wKillarney
Whit
e
h
o
r
n
Ne
u
c
h
a
t
e
l
BelvedereMarquitaBellevueRiveraTiberonLincolnA
n
i
t
aPalm
Car
o
l
a
n
Lin
d
e
n
ParkCa
b
r
i
l
l
oBroderickIngoldGuittard
T r ousdale D r.E. Poplar Ave.Old Baysh
o
re
H
ig
h
w
a
y
Millbrae
Ave.Hillcrest Blvd.Cal
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
D
r
.
Car
o
l
a
n
A
v
e
.
Airport Blvd.Peninsula Dr.Burlingame Ave.
S
a
n
M
a
t
e
o
D
r
.
El
C
a
m
i
n
o
R
e
a
l
R
o
l
l
i
n
s
R
d
.BroadwayHillside Dr.R alston Ave.City of
San Mateo
City of
Hillsborough
City of
Millbrae
San Francisco Bay
San Francisco
International
Airport
280
101US
!!! !!
!
!!!!!
!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!
!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!
!
!!!!!!!!
!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!
!
!!!!!!!!
!
!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!
!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!
!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!
!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!
!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!!
!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!
!!
!
!!!!!!
!!
!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!
!
!!!!!!!!!!!
!
!
!
!!!!!!!!!
!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!
!!!! !!!
!!!!!!!
!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!
!
!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!
!
!
!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!
!
!
!!
!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!
!
!!!
!!!
!
!
!!!!
!
!
!
!!
!
!!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!!!
!
!
!
!
VC
P
6'' VCP8'
'
V
C
P
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
>>> >>
>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>
>
>>>>>>
>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>> >>>
>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>
>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>
>
>
>>
>
>>
>>
>
>
>>
>
>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>>
>>
>
>
>>>
>>>
>
>
>>>>
>
>
>
>>
>
>>
>
>
>>
>
>
>
>>>
>
>
>
>6''VCP6'
'V
C
P 6''V C P
4'' VC P
6'' VCP
6'' VCP-9'' -96''VCP6'' VCP
6'' VC
P6'' VCP 6''VCP6'
'
V
C
P
' VC
P
6''VCP
6'' VCP6'' CIP-
9
''
-
96''PVC6''V
C
P
6'' VC P
4'' P
V
C4''PV C
6'
'V
C
P
6'' VCP
6
''V C P
6'' CIP
6'' CIP
6''VCP
6'
8''VCP
4'' SS
6'' VC
P
6'' VC
P 6'' VCP6'' VC
P
6'' V
C
P
6''V
C
P
8'' PV
C
6''VC
P6''VCP
6'' VC
P
6'
6'' VC
P
8'' SS
6'' VC
P
6'' PVC
6'' VC
P
8'' PV
C
6'' VC
P
6'' VC
P
6'' VC
P
6''VC
P
6'' VC
P
6'' VC
P
6'' VC
P
8'' V
C
P
6'
'VCP6''VC
P6''VC
P
6'' VC
P
8'' VC
P
6'' VC
P
VC
P
6''
6'' SS
6'' -9
6''PV
C
6'' VC
P
6''VC
6'' PV
6'' VCP
6'' VC
6''VCP
6''VCP6'' VCP
6'' VCP
6'' VCP
6'' VCP6'' VCP
6'' VCP
6'' VCP
6'' VCP
6
'
'
VC
P6''VC8
'
' VCP8''PVCP6'' VCP
6'' VCP8''VCP8'' VC
P
6'' V
C
P6'' VCP6''V
C
P
12''VCP
P
6''VC
P6'' VC
P
6''
6'' VC
P
8'' VC
P
6''
V
C
P
6'' VCP6''VCP6''VCP8''HDPE
6'' VC
P
6'' VC
P6''VCP6'' VCP12''VCP6'' VC
P
6'' HD
PE
1'' VCP
6'' VCP6''VCP6'' VC
P
6'' VC
P6'' VCP6'' HD
PE
6'' VCP
6'' VC
P
C
6'' VC
P
6'
4'' PV
C 6'' VCPVC
P
6'' VC
PVC
6''VCP6''VCP6'' VC
P
' 6'6'' VC
P 'P6''VCP6'' VC
P
6'' VC
P
P
' VC
P
6'' VC
P
6'' VC
P
18'' PE6''VCP8''HDPE
8
'
'
VC
P
6'' VCP
8'
'
H
D
P
E 8'
'
HDPE8''HD
PE
6''HDPE6''HDPE6''
HD PE
8
'
'HDP
E
8''HDPE6'' VCP8''HDPE
6'' V
C
P
6''F
P
V
C
6'6'' VCP6''VCP6''VCP
8''ACP
6''VCP'V
C
P
6'' VCP6'' VCP6'' VCP16
'' P
12
'' PVC
14'' ACP
12'' P
VC
6'' VCP
4'' -9
6'' VCP6''PV C
1 ''
VC
6'' PE8''DIP12'' VCP
6'' VC
P
6'' VC
P
8'' AC
P
6'' VC
P
6'' VC
P
6'' VC
P
6'' VC
P
8''AC
P
12''CIP8'' AC
P 8''A
C
P
14''ACP6'' SS8''AC P6'' SS8'' ACP6''SS
6''CIP''VCP6''VCPP 8'
'VCP8'' VCP8'' VCP24'' VC
P1'' CIPVC
6'' VC
P8''H
D
PE6'' VCP6'' VCP6'' CCF8'' ACP6''PE 8'' PE
6''V C P
6'' VCP
8'' ACP
'' CP''-96'' V
C
P
6'' V
C
P 6''VCP6'' VCP6''V
C
P
6''VCP6''VCP6'
'
V
C
P 6''V C P
4'' VCP
6'' VCP
6'' VCP-9'' -96''VCP6'' VCP
6''
VC
P6'' VCP 6''VCP6'
'
V
C
P
' V
C
P
6''VCP
6'' VCP6'' CIP-
9
''
-
96''PVC6''V
C
P
6'' VCP
4'' P
V
C
4''PVC
6'
'
V
C
P
6'' VCP
6
''V C P
6'' CIP
6'' CIP
6''VCP
6'
8''
VCP
4'' SS
6''
V
C
P
6''
V
C
P 6'' VCP6''
VC
P
6''
V
C
P
6''V
C
P
8''
P
V
C
6''
VC
P6''VCP
6''
V
C
P
6'
6''
V
C
P
8'' SS
6''
V
C
P
6'' PVC
6'' V
C
P
8''
PV
C
6'' V
C
P
6''
V
C
P
6''
V
C
P
6''
VC
P
6''
V
C
P
6''
V
C
P
6''
V
C
P
8''
V
C
P
6'
'VCP6''
VC
P6''
VC
P
6'' VC
P
8''
V
C
P
6'' VC
P
VC
P
6''
6''
S
S
6'' -9
6''PV
C
6'' V
C
P
6''
VC
6''
P
V
6'' V
C
P
6'' VC
6''VCP
6''
VCP6'' VCP
6'' VCP
6'' VCP
6'' VCP6'' VCP
6'' VCP
6'' VCP
6'' V
C
P
6
'
'
VC
P6''VC8
'
' VC
P8''PVCP6'' VCP
6''
V
C
P8''VCP8''
V
C
P
6''
V
C
P6'' VCP6''V
C
P
12''
VCP
P
6''
VC
P
6''
V
C
P
6''
6''
V
C
P
8'' V
C
P
6''
V
C
P
6'' VCP6''VCP6''VCP8''HDPE
6''
V
C
P
6''
V
C
P6''VCP6'' VCP12''VCP6'' VCP
6'' HD
P
E
1'' VC
P
6'' V
C
P6''VCP6'' V
C
P
6''
VC
P6'' VCP6'' HD
PE
6'' VC
P
6''
V
C
P
C
6''
V
C
P
6'
4''
P
V
C 6'' VCPVC
P
6''
V
C
PVC
6''VCP6''VCP6''
V
C
P
' 6'6'' V
C
P 'P6''VCP6'' V
C
P
6'' V
C
P
P
' V
C
P
6''
V
C
P
6'' VC
P
18'' PE6''VCP8''HDPE
8
'
'
VC
P
6'' VCP
8'
'
H
D
P
E 8'
'
HDPE8''HD
PE
6''HDPE6''HDPE6''
HDPE
8
'
'HDP
E
8''HDPE6'' VCP8''HDPE
6'' V
C
P
6''F
P
V
C
6'6'' VCP6''VCP6''VCP
8''ACP
6''VCP'V
C
P
6'' V
C
P6'' VCP6'' VCP16
'
'
P
12
'' PVC
14''
A
C
P
12'
'
P
V
C
6'' VCP
4'' -9
6'' VCP6''PVC
1 ''
VC
6''
P
E8''DIP12'' VCP
6'' VC
P
6'' V
C
P
8''
A
C
P
6''
V
C
P
6'' V
C
P
6'' VC
P
6'' VC
P
8''AC
P
12''CIP8''
A
C
P 8''A
C
P
14''ACP6'' SS8''ACP6'' SS8'' ACP6''SS
6''CIP''VCP6''VCPP 8'
'VCP8'' VCP8'' VCP24'' VC
P1'' CIPVC
6''
V
C
P8''H
D
PE6'' VCP6'' VCP6'' CCF8'' ACP6''PE 8'' PE
6''V C P
6'' VC
P
8'' ACP
'' CP''-96''
V
C
P
6'' V
C
P 6''VCP6'' VCP6''V
C
P
6''VCP1,500750 3,000 FT 0NBurlingame General Plan
Figure IF-2 Sewer System
City Limits
SOI
Access Holes
Sewer Line
@
Ba
l
b
o
a
HowardPalo
m
a
Dr
a
k
e
M
a
g
n
o
l
i
a
Be
r
n
a
l
Co
r
t
e
z
EastonLag
u
n
a
BayswaterAdelineSummi
t
Se
q
u
o
i
a DavisAnza
CarmelitaShermanEastonLo
y
o
l
a
To
y
o
n
D
w
i
g
h
t
H
u
n
t
Va
n
c
o
u
v
e
r
Se
b
a
s
t
i
a
n
Oak
Grove
VernonPlymouth ConcordCa
p
u
c
h
i
n
o
P
a
r
kHaleChapin
P
e
p
p
e
rChapinArguello
L
o
r
t
o
n
Bl
o
om
fi
e
l
d
A
r
u
n
d
e
l
D
w
i
g
h
t
Gi
l
b
r
e
t
h
Co
l
u
m
b
u
s
Waln
u
t
Be
n
i
t
o
C
r
e
s
c
e
n
t
P
r
im
r
o
s
e
Occidenta
lRivera H
i
g
h
l
a
n
d
Poppy
Ca
s
t
e
n
a
d
a
St
a
n
l
e
y
Maripos
a
Edgehill
C
h
a
n
n
i
n
g
Aca
c
ia
Atwater
Alcazar
Vi
c
t
o
r
i
a
De
S
o
t
o
Qu
e
s
a
d
a
C
l
a
r
e
n
d
o
nMillsChu
l
a
V
i
s
t
a
LexingtonMitten
Ca
r
l
o
s Mar
i
n
MartinezB
a
n
c
r
o
f
t
Sanchez SanchezGroveCowanEas
tMyr
t
l
e
Alv
a
r
a
d
o
Ma
r
c
o
P
o
l
o
E
s
c
a
l
a
n
t
e StantonAviadorAl
b
e
m
a
r
l
e
Lang
MorrellLarkspur
F
a
i
r
fi
e
l
d
Cro
s
s
w
a
yMahlerW
e
s
t
m
o
o
r HinckleyCa
s
t
i
l
l
oValdiviaM
o
n
t
e
r
oDevereuxO
g
d
e
n BurlwayDavidLas
s
e
n
La
M
e
s
a
Al
t
u
r
a
s
L
o
s
Mo
n
t
e
s
Newlandsh Lin
d
e
n
Lau
r
e
l
L
o
s
A
l
t
o
s
Beach
Ma
r
s
t
e
n
OxfordAr
c
AlmerCambridgeDolores
S
k
y
v
i
e
w DufferinDonnellyCorbitt
El QuanitoLas Piedra
s
MajillaKenmarEdwardsMc
d
o
n
a
l
d
Ea
s
t
w
o
o
d
Caro
l
Ans
e
l
Aza
l
e
a
Margarita
Cos
t
a
R
i
caJuanitaCadillac C
um
b
e
r
l
a
n
dRhinetteMe
a
d
o
w
Mo
n
t
e
c
i
t
o SummerBa
y
V
i
e
wKillarney
Whit
e
h
o
r
n
Ne
u
c
h
a
t
e
l
BelvedereMarquitaBellevueRiveraTiberonLincolnA
n
i
t
aPalm
Car
o
l
a
n
Lin
d
e
n
ParkCa
b
r
i
l
l
oBroderickIngoldGuittard
T r ousdale D r.E. Poplar Ave.Old Baysh
o
re
H
ig
h
w
a
y
Millbrae
Ave.Hillcrest Blvd.Cal
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
D
r
.
Car
o
l
a
n
A
v
e
.
Airport Blvd.Peninsula Dr.Burlingame Ave.
S
a
n
M
a
t
e
o
D
r
.
El
C
a
m
i
n
o
R
e
a
l
R
o
l
l
i
n
s
R
d
.BroadwayHillside Dr.R alston Ave.Lorem ipsum
City of
San Mateo
City of
Hillsborough
City of
Millbrae
San Francisco Bay
San Francisco
International
Airport
280
101US
!!!
!!
!
!
!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!
!
!
!!!!
!
!
!
!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!
!
!!!!!!
!
!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!
!
!
!!
!
!!!
!!
!!!
!!!!!!
!
!!!!
!
!
!
!!!!!!
!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!
!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!
!!!!!
!
!!!!
!!!!!!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!!!!!!!!
!
!!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!15'
'
RCP21''
RCP
18''
RC
P
1
8
'
'
R
C
P
12''
RCP18'' RCP12'' RCP18'' RCP12'' RCP12'' RCP18'' RCP18'' RCP18'' RCP18'' RCP
15'' RCP1
5
'
'
-9
15'' RCP
48'' RCP12
'
'
R
C
P 27'' RCP15
'
'
R
C
P21'' RCP 12'' RCP15''
RC
P
18''
RC
P12'' RCP12'' RCP33'
'
C
M
P
18'
'
RC
P
15'' RCP12'' RC P
90'' RCP90'' RCP12'' RCP12''
RC
P
1
2
'
'
CMP
6'' CMP
27'' RCP15''
RCP15'' RCP5
4
'
'
RCP72'' RCP15''
CO
NC
48'' RCP18''
RCP
18''
RCP
15''
RCP
18'
'
CM
P
54'' RCP12''
RCP
10''
PV
C
36'' RCP
18'
'
RC
P
39'' RCP 54'' RCP12'
'
RC
P
1
2
'
'
R
C
P
18'' RCP24'' CMP 24'
'
RCP12'' RCP18''
RC
P
4
'
'
-
9
54'' RCP
18'' RCP
12''
RCP
12'' RCP60'' RCP18'' RCP15''
RCP36'' RCP42'
'
C
M
P
10
'
'
RC
P
8'' CMP20'' -918'' -918'' CP12''
RCP
12'' PVC 12
'
'
R
C
P18'' RCP15'' RCP18'
'
PV
C
42'' RCP12'
'
RCP2
4
'
'
R
C
P 21'' RCP12'' RCP30''
RCP
21
'
'
RC
P 15'' RCP12'' RCP15'' RCP1
5
'
'
-918'' CP18''
RCP
12''
RC
P18'' VCP15'' RCP18'' RCP
12''
RCP 15'' RCP15'' RCP15'' RCP24'
'
PV
C
24'
'
PV
C
48'' RCP12'' RC P
66'' -9
24'' RCP24''
RCP
12'' RC P 18'' RCP3'' RCP
18
'
'
R
C
P
8'' CM
P15'
'
RCP21'' RCP18'' RCP12'' RCP54'' RCP15'' RCP18'' RCP45'' RCP24'' RCP
10'' VCP
21''
RC
P
24'' RCP60'' RCP12''
RC
P
33'' RCP
18''
RC
P54'' RCP8''
VC
P
8'' C
36'' RC P
18''
RCP
27''
RCP72'' RCP15'
'
RCP21''
RCP
18''
RC
P
1
8
'
'
R
C
P
12''
R
C
P18'' RCP12'' RCP18'' RCP12'' RCP12'' RCP18'' RCP18'' RCP18'' RCP18'' R
C
P
15'' RCP1
5
'
'
-
9
15'' RCP
48'' RCP12
'
'
R
C
P 27'' RCP15
'
'
R
C
P
21'' RCP 12'' RCP15''
R
C
P
18''
R
C
P12'' RCP12'' RCP33'
'
C
M
P
18'
'
R
C
P
15'' RCP12'' RCP
90'' RCP90'' RCP12'' RCP12''
R
C
P
1
2
'
'
CM
P
6'' C
M
P
27'' RCP15''
RCP15'' RCP5
4
'
'
RCP72'' RCP15''
C
O
N
C
48'' RCP18''
R
C
P
18''
RCP
15''
R
C
P
18'
'
CM
P
54'' RCP12''
R
C
P
10''
P
V
C
36'' RCP
18'
'
RC
P
39'' RCP 54'' RCP12'
'
R
C
P
1
2
'
'
R
C
P
18'' RCP24'' C
M
P 24'
'
RCP12'' RCP18''
R
C
P
4
'
'
-
9
54'' R
C
P
18'' RCP
12''
RCP
12'' RCP60'' RCP18'' RCP15''
RCP36'' RCP42'
'
C
M
P
10
'
'
R
C
P
8'' CMP20'' -918'' -918'' CP12''
RCP
12'' PVC 12
'
'
R
C
P18'' RCP15'' RCP18'
'
P
V
C
42'' RCP12'
'
RCP2
4
'
'
R
C
P 21'' RCP12'' RCP30''
R
C
P
21
'
'
R
C
P 15'' RCP12'' RCP15'' RCP1
5
'
'
-
918'' CP18''
R
C
P
12''
RC
P18'' VCP15'' RCP18'' RCP
12''
R
C
P 15'' RCP15'' RCP15'' RCP24'
'
P
V
C
24'
'
PV
C
48'' RCP12'' RCP
66'' -9
24'' RCP24''
R
C
P
12'' RC P 18'' RCP3'' RCP
18
'
'
R
C
P
8'' C
M
P15'
'
RCP
21'' RCP18'' RCP12'' RCP54'' RCP15'' RCP18'' RCP45'' RCP24'' RCP
10'' VCP
21''
R
C
P
24'' RCP60'' RCP12''
R
C
P
33'' RCP
18''
RC
P54'' RCP8''
V
C
P
8'' C
36'' RC P
18''
R
C
P
27''
RCP72'' RCP@ @@
@ @
@
@
@@ @ @@@
@ @@@@@@@@@
@ @@ @@
@
@
@@@ @
@
@
@
@@
@ @@@@@@ @@@@@@@@@@@
@@@@@
@
@ @@ @ @@
@
@ @ @
@@ @@@@@@@@@@@ @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ @@
@
@
@
@ @
@
@@@
@@
@ @@
@@@ @ @@
@
@@@ @
@
@
@
@@@@@@
@@@ @@
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
@@@
@@@
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
@@@@ @@@@@@@
@@@
@@@@@
@
@@ @@
@ @@@@@@
@@
@
@
@
@
@
@@
@ @ @ @ @ @@@
@
@ @ @
@@
@
@
@
@
@
@@
@
@@
@@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@ @
@
@
@
@
@
@
1,500750 3,000 FT 0NBurlingame General Plan
Figure IF-3 Storm Drain System
City Limits
SOI
Access
Trunk Lines
@ Drainage Access/Trousdale
Mills
Easton
Sanchez/Terrace
Burlingame/Ralston
Ba
l
b
o
a
HowardPalo
m
a
Dr
a
k
e
M
a
g
n
o
l
i
a
Be
r
n
a
l
Co
r
t
e
z
EastonLag
u
n
a
BayswaterAdelineSummi
t
Se
q
u
o
i
a DavisAnza
CarmelitaShermanEastonLo
y
o
l
a
To
y
o
n
D
w
i
g
h
t
H
u
n
t
Va
n
c
o
u
v
e
r
Se
b
a
s
t
i
a
n
Oak
Grove
VernonPlymouth ConcordCa
p
u
c
h
i
n
o
P
a
r
kHaleChapin
P
e
p
p
e
rChapinArguello
L
o
r
t
o
n
Bl
o
om
fi
e
l
d
A
r
u
n
d
e
l
D
w
i
g
h
t
Gi
l
b
r
e
t
h
Co
l
u
m
b
u
s
Waln
u
t
Be
n
i
t
o
C
r
e
s
c
e
n
t
P
r
im
r
o
s
e
Occidenta
lRivera H
i
g
h
l
a
n
d
Poppy
Ca
s
t
e
n
a
d
a
St
a
n
l
e
y
Maripos
a
Edgehill
C
h
a
n
n
i
n
g
Aca
c
ia
Atwater
Alcazar
Vi
c
t
o
r
i
a
De
S
o
t
o
Qu
e
s
a
d
a
C
l
a
r
e
n
d
o
nMillsChu
l
a
V
i
s
t
a
LexingtonMitten
Ca
r
l
o
s Mar
i
n
MartinezB
a
n
c
r
o
f
t
Sanchez SanchezGroveCowanEas
tMyr
t
l
e
Alv
a
r
a
d
o
Ma
r
c
o
P
o
l
o
E
s
c
a
l
a
n
t
e StantonAviadorAl
b
e
m
a
r
l
e
Lang
MorrellLarkspur
F
a
i
r
fi
e
l
d
Cro
s
s
w
a
yMahlerW
e
s
t
m
o
o
r HinckleyCa
s
t
i
l
l
oValdiviaM
o
n
t
e
r
oDevereuxO
g
d
e
n BurlwayDavidLas
s
e
n
La
M
e
s
a
Al
t
u
r
a
s
L
o
s
Mo
n
t
e
s
Newlandsh Lin
d
e
n
Lau
r
e
l
L
o
s
A
l
t
o
s
Beach
Ma
r
s
t
e
n
OxfordAr
c
AlmerCambridgeDolores
S
k
y
v
i
e
w DufferinDonnellyCorbitt
El QuanitoLas Piedra
s
MajillaKenmarEdwardsMc
d
o
n
a
l
d
Ea
s
t
w
o
o
d
Caro
l
Ans
e
l
Aza
l
e
a
Margarita
Cos
t
a
R
i
caJuanitaBroderickIngoldGuittardCadillac C
um
b
e
r
l
a
n
dRhinetteMe
a
d
o
w
Mo
n
t
e
c
i
t
o SummerBa
y
V
i
e
wKillarney
Whit
e
h
o
r
n
Ne
u
c
h
a
t
e
l
BelvedereMarquitaBellevueRiveraTiberonLincolnA
n
i
t
aPalm
Car
o
l
a
n
Lin
d
e
n
ParkCa
b
r
i
l
l
o
T r ousdale D r.E. Poplar Ave.Old Baysh
o
re
H
ig
h
w
a
y
Millbrae
Ave.Hillcrest Blvd.Cal
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
D
r
.
Car
o
l
a
n
A
v
e
.
Airport Blvd.Peninsula Dr.Burlingame Ave.
S
a
n
M
a
t
e
o
D
r
.
El
C
a
m
i
n
o
R
e
a
l
R
o
l
l
i
n
s
R
d
.BroadwayHillside Dr.R alston Ave.Lorem ipsum
City of
San Mateo
City of
Hillsborough
City of
Millbrae
San Francisco Bay
San Francisco
International
Airport
280
101US
1,500750 3,000 FT 0NBurlingame General Plan
Figure IF-4 FEMA 100 Year and 200 Year Flood Zones
City Limits
SOI
Area NotIncluded
Zone A
(Areas subject to inundation by the
1% annual chance flood event)
Zone AE
(Areas subject to inundation by the 1% annual chance flood event, base elevations shown)
Zone AH
(Areas subject to inundation by the 1% annual
chance flood event, shallow flooding)
Zone VE
(Areas subject to inundation by the 1% annual
chance flood event with additional hazards)
Zone X
(0.2% Annual Chance Flood Hazard)
Zone X
(Area of Minimal Flood Hazard)
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CS-1
Chapter VIII. Community Safety
Element
Introduction
Burlingame residents, business owners, and visitors value the safe
environment the City offers. Low crime rates and efficient police, fire, and
emergency medical services all contribute to the collective feeling of
safety. At the same time, the City’s location alongside San Francisco Bay,
the hillside environments, and natural features such as earthquake faults
present risks that are compounded by human-made hazards and the
effects of climate change.
The Community Safety Element establishes goals and policies designed
to protect public health and safety, provide for sound emergency
preparedness planning, and build in resiliency. This Element addresses
these safety planning and response topics:
Police Protection
Fire Protection and Emergency Medical Services
Emergency Preparedness, Disaster Response and Resilience
Noise
Seismic and Geologic Hazards
Airport Hazards
Sea Level Rise
Police Protection
The quality of the City’s Police Department and its relationship with the
community has a direct impact on Burlingame’s overall safety and
security, as well as maintaining the community’s high quality of life. The
following goal and policies aim to enhance the services and operations of
the Burlingame Police Department while strengthening community
partnerships.
VIII. COMMUNITY SAFETY ELEMENT
CS-2 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Goal CS-1: Ensure high-quality, responsive police services
necessary to deter crime and support a safe and secure
community.
CS-1.1: Staffing Levels
Maintain optimal police staffing levels, including sworn officers and
civilian support, necessary to meeting current and projected community
needs. [FB/MP]
CS-1.2: Facilities Planning
Develop, maintain, and implement a Police Department Master Plan that
guides the provision of equipment, facilities, training, and operations
centers. [MP]
CS-1.3: Response Times
Identify, monitor, and achieve appropriate minimum police response
times for all call priority levels. [MP/SO]
CS-1.4: Coordination
Coordinate with local, regional, State, and Federal criminal justice
agencies to promote regional cooperation in the delivery of police
services. [PI]
CS-1.5: Communication
Maintain and encourage two-way communication with the Burlingame
community to facilitate public safety and effective policing. [PI]
Fire Prevention and Protection Services and
Emergency Medical Response
Up-to-date fire prevention and protection services and emergency
medical response benefit the community in many ways. Property values
can remain high when quality services are available. More critically,
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CS-3
however, is that loss of life and property due can be minimized when an
event occurs. In a small city like Burlingame, partnerships are key to the
provision of quick response and coordinated prevention planning. The
Central County Fire Department provides fire and emergency medical
response services to Burlingame, and through its mutual aid agreements
with other fire departments, can dedicate appropriate resources to
safeguard the community. Fire prevention and emergency response
planning are priorities; minimizing fire risks occurs through education,
routine inspections, and requiring building renovations and new
construction to comply with current fire access and building codes.
This goal and the accompanying policies address staffing levels,
emergency response times, training, facilities and equipment, and
coordination with ambulance service providers and local hospitals.
Goal CS-2: Ensure coordinated and effective fire and emergency
medical services to maintain the health, safety, and well-being of
the Burlingame community.
CS-2.1: Contract for Services
Continue to contract and coordinate with the Central County Fire
Department to ensure Burlingame is optimally served through fire
suppression, emergency medical services, incident response, fire
prevention, public education and emergency management and
preparedness. [AC]
CS-2.2: Fire Prevention Education
Maintain and implement a fire prevention and safety education program
for Burlingame residents and businesses. Ensure that the needs of high-
risk population groups, such as seniors, are met with tailored programs.
[PI]
VIII. COMMUNITY SAFETY ELEMENT
CS-4 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
CS-2.3: Development Review
Continue to include the Central County Fire Department in the review of
development proposals to ensure projects adequately address fire access
and building standards. [DR]
CS-2.4: Adequate Water Supply and Infrastructure for Fire
Suppression
Require that new development projects document the availability of
water supplies and infrastructure to meet the fire-suppression needs of
the project without compromising existing fire suppression services to
existing users. [DR]
CS-2.5: Fire Safety Inspections
Maintain the Central County Fire Department’s fire inspection program
for commercial, industrial, and multi-family residential buildings in
compliance with the requirements of State law. [CSO]
CS-2.6: Removal of Fire Hazards
Maintain code enforcement programs that require private and public
property owners to minimize fire risks by:
Maintaining buildings and properties to prevent blighted
conditions
Removing excessive or overgrown vegetation (e.g., trees, shrubs,
weeds) in accordance with wildland-urban interface clearance
requirements.
Removing litter, rubbish and illegally dumped items from
properties [SO]
CS-2.7: Staffing and Timing of Expanded Services
Ensure that the demands of new development for fire protection and
emergency medical response services do not strain the ability of the
Central County Fire Department to provide the staffing and equipment
needed to meet response time goals and other stated service metrics. In
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CS-5
particular, assess the need to provide strategically located and equipped
fire stations within the Bayfront and Rollins Road districts. [MP/SO]
CS-2.8: Coordination with Mills-Peninsula Medical Center
Coordinate with Mills-Peninsula Medical Center regarding the ability of
local and regional hospital, trauma, and acute care facilities to
accommodate increasing service demands. [AC]
CS-2.9: Alley and Emergency Access
Ensure access to City alleys in the downtown area and maintain rear
building exits to be clear and unobstructed in accordance with the
American with Disabilities Act. Ensure alleys that provide egress from rear
exists provide clear and unobstructed access all the way to a public way.
CS-2.10: Distribution of Automatic Emergency Defibrillators
Ensure all City buildings open to the public have an automatic emergency
defibrillator for public use during a medical emergency.
Emergency Preparedness, Disaster Response and
Community Resilience
Burlingame—like all cities in the Bay Area—is exposed to a variety of
natural and human-caused hazards that require consideration in
emergency response planning. The environmental features that
contribute to Burlingame’s scenic qualities and great places to enjoy
nature have been created by earthquake faults, steep slopes, wooded
hillsides, and San Francisco Bay, all of which pose potential hazards.
Catastrophic earthquakes, landslides, flooding, wildland and urban fires,
and liquefaction represent natural hazards that must be addressed in any
planning process. Human-caused hazards include energy instability and
threats of terrorism.
Preparing for potential disasters and having adequate response
strategies in place are not solely the responsibility of our government,
although we place a high degree of reliance upon local, regional,
statewide, and national agencies and systems. We anticipate that proper
VIII. COMMUNITY SAFETY ELEMENT
CS-6 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
emergency preparedness and disaster response from government
agencies means that they will have the necessary equipment and
resources to respond to a disaster and to maintain public health and
welfare without regular services (such as water and electricity) during the
following recovery period.
We also recognize that having a resilient community enables a city to
recover more quickly from a disaster and that private businesses,
individual citizens and volunteer organizations and associations play a
critical role. In the event of a major disaster city emergency responders
and city resources will be focused on the major incidents and
infrastructure and residents will need to be able to support each other
from 24 up to 72 or more hours.
This goal and supporting policies are designed to prepare residents and
businesses for disasters, and to ensure that the City of Burlingame and
other government agencies are ready to respond to protect lives and
property in the event of an emergency, and to build a more resilient
community.
Goal CS-3: Protect Burlingame residents, property and
businesses by ensuring preparedness for and effective response
to natural and human-caused disasters.
CS-3.1: Emergency Management Plan
Maintain a Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan that outlines
the City’s responsibilities and procedures in an emergency. Ensure the
plan integrates needed coordination between the City and
neighborhoods, schools, churches, businesses, and hotels. [SR/PI]
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CS-7
CS-3.2: Emergency Drills
Coordinate with partner agencies—such as neighboring cities, schools
and colleges, businesses, and community organizations—and residents
and neighborhoods to conduct emergency and disaster preparedness
exercises that test emergency response plans. [AC/SO/PI]
CS-3.3: Public Education
Provide public education for individuals, schools, and community groups
to promote citizen awareness and preparedness for self-action in case of
a major disaster or emergency. [PI]
CS-3.4: Emergency Preparedness Kits
Encourage all residents and businesses to prepare and maintain
emergency kits with enough supplies to be self-sufficient for three to
seven days. Support establishing emergency caches at the neighborhood
and business level by partnering with community organizations pursuing
funding. [PI]
CS-3.5: Community Emergency Response Training
Maintain a volunteer-based Community Emergency Response Team
(CERT) and related emergency response training programs, and ongoing
refresher exercises. Establish and maintain a communication and
deployment plan for CERTs during a disaster and align the plan with
neighborhood communication plans. [SO/FB/PI]
CS-3.6: Energy Assurance Plan
Develop, maintain, and implement a citywide Energy Assurance Plan that
documents the energy needs of critical City and community facilities and
functions, establishes goals and actions to increase energy resiliency
during disasters, and prioritizes the use of renewable energy or other
sustainable technologies to reduce dependency on the grid during
power outages. [SO/MP]
VIII. COMMUNITY SAFETY ELEMENT
CS-8 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
CS-3.7: Mutual Aid Agreements
Participate in mutual aid agreements to ensure adequate resources,
facilities, and other support for emergency response. [AC]
CS-3.8: Rail Agency Coordination
Coordinate with the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board (Caltrain) and
the California High Speed Rail Authority to ensure that new train services,
including electrification and higher speeds, do not result in overburdened
safety risks to the community both in terms of infrastructure and access
(e.g., rail street crossing closures). [AC]
CS-3.9: Mass Communications Device
Obtain, maintain, and regularly upgrade a mass communications system
to effectively notify people during disasters and emergencies by using
current communication technologies. [PI]
CS-3.10: Community Resiliency Officer
Create a Community Resiliency Officer position at the City that would be
responsible for:
Leading community engagement and education about safety,
disaster preparation and resilience;
Bringing resources together, such as HAMS, CERT, BNA, CCFD,
BFD, City Manager, and City Council;
Bringing best regional, state and national practices to Burlingame;
and
Developing recommendations to mitigate identified risks. [SO]
CS-3.11: Emergency Preparedness Activities and Communications
Publish and promote emergency preparedness activities and drills. Use
the City social media, and the website to provide safety tips that may
include identifying and correcting household hazards, knowing how and
when to turn off utilities, helping family members protect themselves
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CS-9
during and after an earthquake, recommending neighborhood
preparation activities, and advising residents to maintain an emergency
supply kit containing first-aid supplies, food, drinking water and battery
operated radios and flashlights. [PI]
CS-3.12: Neighborhood Response Groups
Participate in Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) training and
consider training neighborhood groups to care for themselves during
disasters. To this end, actively assist in neighborhood drills and safety
exercises to increase participation and build community support. [FB/PI]
CS-3.13: Dependent Populations
Coordinate with State agencies that oversee facilities for persons with
disabilities, and those with access and functional needs, to ensure that
such facilities conform to all health and safety requirements, including
emergency planning, training, exercises and employee education. [AC]
CS-3.14: Foreign Language Emergency Information
Obtain translated emergency preparedness materials and make them
available to appropriate foreign language populations. [PI]
Noise
Noise typically is defined as unwanted sound. Exposure to excessive
noise can impact the health and quality of life of people who visit, reside
in, or work in Burlingame. While people may not agree as to what
constitutes particularly irksome noise, science does show that defined
noise levels can cause ill health effects. Excessive noise can cause hearing
loss, stress, hypertension, sleep disturbance, and fatigue.
Planning to safeguard the community from unhealthful noise exposure
requires use of specialized noise metrics. Noise is measured on the
logarithmic decibel (dBA) scale, which is used describe short-term noise
events. For the purposes of land use planning, the more specialized
Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) metric has been developed to
account for noise levels over a 24-hour period. These noise levels can be
mapped as contours that illustrate noise exposure zones. Figure CS-1
VIII. COMMUNITY SAFETY ELEMENT
CS-10 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
reports noise conditions in Burlingame as of 2016. Generally, the noise
range of 55 to 65 dBA CNEL represents an acceptable outdoor noise
environment for residential neighborhoods. Figure CS-2 identifies
noise/land use compatibility criteria for Burlingame.
NOISE TERMINOLOGY
dBA: Measurement unit for “a-weighted decibels,” which are commonly
used for measuring environmental and industrial noise and the potential
hearing damage associated noise health effects.
Equivalent Noise Level (Leq): Constant noise level that would deliver the
same acoustic energy to the ear of a listener as the actual time-varying
noise would deliver over the same exposure time. No “penalties” are
added to any noise levels during the exposure time; Leq would be the
same regardless of the time of day during which the noise occurs.
Day-Night Average Noise Level (Ldn): A 24-hour average Leq with a 10
dBA “penalty” added to noise levels during the hours of 10:00 P.M. to
7:00 A.M. to account for increased sensitivity that people tend to have to
nighttime noise. Because of this penalty, the Ldn would always be higher
than its corresponding 24-hour Leq (e.g., a constant 60 dBA noise over 24
hours would have a 60 dBA Leq, but a 66.4 dBA Ldn).
Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL): An Ldn with an additional 5
dBA “penalty” for the evening hours between 7:00 P.M. and 10:00 P.M.
This is essentially a measure of ambient noise.
Sound Exposure Level or Single Event Level (SEL): A descriptor used to
characterize the severity of short-duration sound events. SEL is the time-
averaged, constant intensity, A-weighted sound level over a one-second
reference time that would produce the same sound exposure as the
actual time-varying sound over the actual exposure time. In practice, SEL
is usually applied in situations where there are multiple sound events,
each one having its own characteristic SEL.
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CS-11
The primary noise sources in Burlingame are mobile sources associated
with transportation infrastructure, including aircraft, trains, and motor
vehicles on freeways. Those land uses affected most adversely by
excessive noise—so called “sensitive” land uses—include residential care
facilities, schools, hospitals, and wildlife habitat.
Land use decisions and the development review process can work to
minimize noise impacts on sensitive land uses. Noise compatibility may
be achieved by avoiding the location of conflicting land uses adjacent to
one another using the criteria shown in Figure CS-2. For example, new
residential uses generally should not be built adjacent to the freeways or
rail line. Noise impacts can also be minimized by incorporating buffers
and noise control features into a development project, including
setbacks, landscaping, building transitions, site design/building
orientation, and building construction approaches. Selection of the
appropriate noise control technique will vary depending on the level of
noise that needs to be reduced, as well as the location and intended land
use.
VIII. COMMUNITY SAFETY ELEMENT
CS-12 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
FIGURE CS-2:
NOISE CRITERIA
The northern portion of Burlingame west of Rollins Road and northwest of
Mitten Road lies within the 65 CNEL noise contour, a key area where
excessive noise can be a problem. Figure CS-3 identifies the projected
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CS-13
future noise contours for Burlingame and key areas were noise is
anticipated to be an issue currently or in the future.
Vibration concerns are like noise concerns because excessive or
prolonged exposure to vibration can result in adverse health impacts. In
Burlingame, train operations produce vibrations that affect properties
along the rail line.
The following goal and policies aim to minimize human exposure to
excessive noise by evaluating noise exposure risks, planning placement of
new land uses in consideration of the noise environment, and
incorporating appropriate mitigation measures on a project-by-project
basis.
Goal CS-4: Protect residents and visitors to Burlingame from
excessive noise
and disruptive ground vibration.
CS-4.1: Locating Noise-sensitive Uses
Locate noise-sensitive uses such as homes, schools, hospitals, libraries,
religious institutions and convalescent homes away from major sources of
noise. [DR]
CS-4.2: Residential Noise Standards
Require the design of new residential development to comply with the
following noise standards:
The maximum acceptable interior noise level for all new
residential units (single-family, duplex, mobile home, multi-family,
and mixed use units) shall be an Ldn of 45 dB with windows
closed.
For project locations that are primarily exposed to noise from
aircraft, Caltrain, and BART operations, the maximum
instantaneous noise level in bedrooms shall not exceed 50dB(A) at
night (10:00 P.M. to 7:00 A.M.), and the maximum instantaneous
VIII. COMMUNITY SAFETY ELEMENT
CS-14 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
noise level in all interior rooms shall not exceed 55dB(A) during
the day (7:00 am to 10:00 pm) with windows closed.
CS-4.3: Office Noise Level Standards
Require the design of new office developments and similar uses to
achieve a maximum interior noise standard of 45dBA Leq (peak hour).
[DR]
CS-4.4: Motel, Hotel, Nursing Home and Hospital Noise Standards
Require the design of new motels, hotels, nursing homes, hospitals and
other similar uses to comply with the following noise standards:
The maximum acceptable interior noise level for sleeping areas
shall be an Ldn of 45 dB with windows closed.
For project locations that are primarily exposed to aircraft, Caltrain
and BART noise, the maximum instantaneous noise level in
sleeping areas shall not exceed 50dB(A) at night (10:00 P.M. to
7:00 A.M.) and 55dB(A) during the day (7:00 A.M. to 10:00 P.M.)
with windows closed. [DR]
CS-4.5: Noise Mitigation and Urban Design
Consider the visual impact of noise mitigation measures; require solutions
that do not conflict with urban design goals and policies included in the
General Plan. [DR]
CS-4.6: Freeway Sound Walls
Coordinate with Caltrans to ensure new sound walls and landscaping
strips are attractive along State Route 101 to protect adjacent areas from
excessive freeway noise in conjunction with any new freeway project. [AC]
CS-4.7: Airport and Heliport Noise
Monitor noise impacts from aircraft operations at San Francisco
International Airport and Mills-Peninsula Medical Center, and implement
applicable noise abatement policies and procedures as outlined in the
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CS-15
Airport Noise Ordinance and Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan.
[AC/DR]
CS-4.8: Airport Noise Evaluation and Mitigation
Require project applicants to evaluate potential airport noise impacts if
the project is located within the 60 CNEL contour line of San Francisco
International Airport (as mapped in the Airport Land Use Compatibility
Plan). All projects shall be required to mitigate impacts to comply with
the interior and exterior noise standards established by the Airport Land
Use Compatibility Plan. [AC/DR]
CS-4.9: Airport Disclosure Notices
Require that all new development within an airport-defined over-flight
zone provide deed notices disclosing airport over-flights and noise upon
transfer of title to residents and property owners. [DR]
CS-4.10: Construction Noise Study
Require development projects subject to discretionary approval to assess
potential construction noise impacts on nearby sensitive uses and to
minimize impacts on those uses consistent with Municipal Code
provisions. [DR]
CS-4.11: Train Noise
Require that all new development within 1,000 feet of the rail line to
provide deed notices disclosing noise impacts upon transfer of title to
residents and property owners. [DR]
CS-4.12: Vibration Impact Assessment
Require a vibration impact assessment for proposed projects in which
heavy-duty construction equipment would be used (e.g., pile driving,
bulldozing) within 200 feet of an existing structure or sensitive receptor. If
applicable, require all feasible mitigation measures to be implemented to
ensure that no damage or disturbance to structures or sensitive receptors
would occur. [DR]
VIII. COMMUNITY SAFETY ELEMENT
CS-16 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
CS-4.13: Transportation Vibration
Require new residential and commercial projects located within 200 feet
of existing major freeways and railroad lines to conduct a ground
vibration and vibration noise evaluation consistent with City approved
methodologies. [DR]
Sea Level Rise
Water levels in San Francisco Bay have risen over eight inches since the
early twentieth century and, because of the effects of climate change, are
predicted to continue rising at a faster rate. Based on the best available
data and a baseline year of 2016, the City can anticipate 10 to 17 inches
of sea level rise by the year 2050 and 17 to 32 inches by 2070. The City will
become increasingly vulnerable to water inundation during both normal
high tides and during major storm events. Rising sea levels may inundate
the land along the Bayfront and flood nearby industrial, commercial, and
residential areas. Figure CS-4 indicates projected ranges of sea level rise
and the areas that would be impacted.
Ultimately, sea level rise will have an impact on the community. The City
of Burlingame is committed to being proactive at addressing sea level
rise and will establish specific building and habitable space setback
requirements, shoreline protection measures (in coordination with
regional strategies), and use requirements such as limiting certain
activities on ground floors.
Unlike some other Peninsula and Bay Area communities, the Burlingame
shoreline is not protected by natural wetlands. Ordinarily wetlands create
a natural buffer between the Bay and built environment, and can provide
a cost-effective flood protection strategy. Wetlands also bring other
benefits like filtering pollutants out of the water, sequestering carbon;
providing recreational space; and creating habitat for fish and wildlife.
While most of Burlingame’s Bayfront has a hard edge lacking wetlands,
new development is required to be set back at least 75 feet from the
shoreline. This shoreline setback area presents an opportunity to create a
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CS-17
wetland environment that could mitigate the impacts of Sea Level Rise
and provide a recreation amenity through a continuous Bay Trail.
The following goal and policies reflect the City’s approach to protecting
existing and future urban uses along the Bayfront and other vulnerable
parts of Burlingame from the impacts of rising sea levels.
Goal CS-5: Protect vulnerable areas and infrastructure from
flooding related to rising sea levels in the San Francisco Bay.
CS-5.1: Monitor Rising Sea Level
Regularly coordinate with regional, State, and Federal agencies on rising
sea levels in San Francisco Bay and major tributaries to determine if
additional adaptation strategies should be implemented to address
flooding hazards. This includes monitoring FEMA flood map updates to
identify areas in Burlingame susceptible to sea level rise, addressing
changes to State and regional sea and bay level rise estimates, and
coordinating with adjacent municipalities on flood control improvements.
[AC/SR]
CS-5.2: Vulnerability Assessment
Coordinate with San Mateo County on the county-wide Sea Level Rise
Vulnerability Assessment that will identify regional sea level rise risk
factors and areas, as well as emerging options for response. [AC/SR]
CS-5.3: New Development in Vulnerable Areas
Continue to require appropriate setback and building elevation
requirements for properties located along the Bayshore, lagoons, and in
other low-laying areas that are susceptible to the effects of sea level rise.
Consider other strategies to support resiliency through design. [DR]
VIII.COMMUNITY SAFETY ELEMENT
CS-18 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
CS-5.4: Wetland Buffer
Identify setback areas and parkland suitable for creation of a wetland
buffer, and require new developments in the Bayfront area to assist in
restoring wetlands areas.
CS-5.5: Flood Insurance Rate Maps
Provide to the public, as available, up-to-date Flood Insurance Rate Maps
(FIRM) that identify rising sea levels and changing flood conditions. [PI]
CS-5.6: Regional Hazard Risk Reduction Planning
Coordinate with San Mateo County and other local agencies to
implement the Multi-Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP).
[AC]
CS-5.7: Hazard Mitigation Plan
Continue to support San Mateo County in its role as the lead agency
preparing and regularly updating the countywide Local Hazard Mitigation
Plan. [AC]
Hazardous Materials
Hazardous materials are a part of our everyday life in the form of
batteries, light bulbs, and household chemicals such as pesticides, motor
oil, cleaners, and paints. They are also used in many commercial and
industrial operations. The use, storage, and disposal of hazardous
materials—including management of contaminated soils and
groundwater—are regulated by a myriad of Federal, State, and local laws.
The City’s major industrial and office areas, such as the Bayfront and
Rollins Road neighborhoods, pose a specific challenge due to the
potential for hazardous materials associated with these activities. The
City’s overall land use objective includes increasing the amount of
live/work development in some of these areas, which places housing
within areas that have a higher potential for hazardous materials. As such,
the policies in this section specifically look at ways to minimize impacts to
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CS-19
existing and future residential areas. The following goal and policies
address the location, transport, storage, and disposal of hazardous
materials.
Goal CS-6: Protect residents, workers, and visitors from
hazardous materials through improved regulations, disposal
practices, location and site design requirements, and public
information and education.
CS-6.1: Hazardous Materials Storage and Disposal
Require the proper storage and disposal of hazardous materials to
prevent leakage, potential explosions, fire, or the release of harmful
fumes. Coordinate with the Fire Department to identify and monitor pre-
incident plans associated with hazardous materials storage and use. [DR]
CS-6.2: Hazardous Materials Information
Maintain information channels to the residential and business
communities about the illegal nature and danger of dumping hazardous
material and waste into the storm drain system or in creeks. [PI]
CS-6.3: Hazardous Waste Disposals
Explore efficient, economical, and convenient ways to offer household
hazardous waste collection for residents in partnership with the solid
waste contractors and San Mateo County. [AC/PI]
CS-6.4: Proximity of Residents to Hazardous Materials
Assess future residents’ exposure to hazardous materials when new
residential development or sensitive populations are proposed within the
Live/Work land use designation. Do not allow residential development or
sensitive populations if such hazardous conditions cannot be mitigated to
an acceptable level of risk. [DR]
VIII.COMMUNITY SAFETY ELEMENT
CS-20 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
CS-6.5: Educational Programs
Continue to encourage residents and businesses to use non- and less-
hazardous products, especially less toxic pest control products, to slow
the generation of new reduce hazardous waste requiring disposal
through the county-wide program. [AC/PI]
Seismic and Geologic Hazards
Burlingame lies within a very seismically active zone along the Pacific
Plate, with the most significant manifestations being the San Andreas
Fault and Hayward Fault, both capable of generating strong earthquakes
(magnitude of 6.0+ on the Richter scale). The most recent earthquake (the
Loma Prieta Earthquake) occurred in 1989 and registered magnitude 6.9,
with an epicenter located near Loma Prieta peak in the Santa Cruz
Mountains. The United States Geological Survey (USGS) estimates there
is a 6.4 percent probability of a 6.7-magnitude earthquake on the San
Andreas Fault by 2044. The Hayward Fault is considered more probably
for a significant event, with the USGS stating a 31 percent chance for a 6.8
to 7.0 earthquake by 2042.
Potential seismic hazards in Burlingame include surface rupture, ground
shaking, liquefaction, lateral spreading, and fault creep. The degree of
hazard depends on the location of the seismic epicenter, the magnitude
and duration of ground shaking, topography, groundwater conditions
and type of building construction. Figure CS-5 and Figure CS-6
identifies the location of seismic and geologic hazards in Burlingame,
including fault lines, areas susceptible to liquefaction, and areas with
steep slopes. The following goal and policies aim to minimize the risk of
damage associated with geologic and seismic hazards.
Goal CS-7: Protect people and buildings in Burlingame by
reducing the risks associated with geologic and seismic hazards.
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CS-21
CS-7.1: Geotechnical and Structural Analysis
Require any site with a slope exceeding 10 percent to reference the
Landslide Hazard Potential Zone maps of the State of California for all
required geotechnical and structural analysis. [DR]
CS-7.2: Residential Upgrades
Require that any residential facility that is being increased more than 50
percent assessed value or physical size conform to all provisions of the
current building code throughout the entire structure. Encourage owners
of residential buildings with known structural defects such as unreinforced
garage openings, “soft story” construction, unbolted foundations, and
inadequate sheer walls to take steps to remedy the problem and bring
buildings up to the current building code. Form an ad hoc committee to
investigate, before the end of 2020, and describe the seismic risk posed
by pre-1980 wood frame “soft story” buildings in Burlingame to evaluate
the costs and benefits of potential actions that could be pursued by the
City. [DR]
CS-7.3: Geologic Review
Create and implement a geologic review procedure that requires
geologic reports be prepared as part of the development review process.
[DR]
Airport and Heliport Hazards
Burlingame residents and business have ready access to San Francisco
International Airport (SFO), one of the busiest airports on the western
seaboard. In addition, Mills-Peninsula Medical Center operates an
emergency medical heliport on an elevated platform within the site.
While the airport and heliport provide welcome resources for world travel
and emergency response, they also present unique risks and land use
compatibility issues for Burlingame. Figure CS-6 illustrates the noise
contours and building height limitations associated with SFO and the
Mills-Peninsula Medical Center heliport.
VIII.COMMUNITY SAFETY ELEMENT
CS-22 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
The following goal and policies address airport and heliport safety, land
use compatibility, and interagency coordination related to aircraft
operations.
Goal CS-8: Minimize the community’s exposure to aircraft safety
hazards associated with San Francisco International Airport and
Mills-Peninsula Medical Center,
CS-8.1: Land Use Safety Compatibility and Airspace Protection
Criteria
Consider all applicable Federal statutes (including 49 U.S.C. 47107),
Federal regulations (including 14 Code of Federal Regulations 77 et seq.),
the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Airport Compliance Manual,
FAA Advisory Circulars, other forms of written guidance, and State law
with respect to criteria related to land use safety and airspace protection
when evaluating development applications within the Airport Influence
Area of the San Francisco International Airport and Mill-Peninsula Medical
Center helipad. [DR]
CS-8.2: Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan
Require development projects within the Airport Influence Area
designated in the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan of the San
Francisco International Airport to comply with all applicable Federal
statutes (including 49 U.S.C. 47107), Federal regulations (including 14
Code of Federal Regulations 77 et seq.), the FAA’s Airport Compliance
Manual, FAA Advisory Circulars, other forms of written guidance, and
State law with respect to criteria related to land use safety and airspace
protection. [AC/DR]
CS-8.3: Airport Land Use Commission Review
Ensure all applicable plans, ordinances, and development applications
are reviewed by the City/County Association of Governments for San
Mateo County’s Airport Land Use Commission, as required by State law.
[AC/MP/DR]
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CS-23
Placeholder for Figure CS-1
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CS-25
Placeholder for Figure CS-3
T r o usdale D r.E. Poplar Ave.Old Baysh
o
re
H
ig
h
wa
y
Millbrae
Ave.Hillcrest Blvd.Cal
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
D
r
.
Airport Blvd.Peninsula Dr.Burlingame Ave.
S
a
n
M
a
t
e
o
D
r
.
El
C
a
m
i
n
o
R
e
a
l
R
o
l
l
i
n
s
R
d
.BroadwayHillside Dr.R alston Ave.
City of
San Mateo
City of
Hillsborough
City of
Millbrae
San Francisco Bay
San Francisco
International
Airport
280
101US
City Limits Baseline Sea Level (2017)
1-foot Sea Level Rise Scenario 6-foot Sea Level Rise Scenario
3- Foot Sea Level Rise Scenario
SOI
1,500750 3,000 FT 0NBurlingame General Plan
Figure CS-4 Anticipated Sea Level Rise
Burlingame General Plan
Figure CS-5 Fault Zones Fault Line
City of Burlingame Ha
yw
a
r
d
F
a
u
l
t
Gr
e
e
n
e
v
i
l
l
e
F
a
u
l
t
Dia
b
l
o
F
a
u
l
t
S
a
n
A
n
d
r
e
a
s
F
a
u
l
t
S
a
n
A
n
d
r
e
a
s
F
a
u
l
t
San G
rego
r
io
Fau
l
t
Calave
ras
Fau
l
tVal
ley
Fau
l
tConcord
-g
reen
Mt. BURLINGAME
5 MILES0
N
San And
rea
s
Fau
l
t
Bal
b
o
a
Howard
Palo
m
a
Dr
a
k
e
M
a
g
n
o
l
i
a
Be
r
n
a
l
Co
r
t
e
z
EastonLag
u
n
a
BayswaterAdelineSummi
t
Se
q
u
o
i
a DavisAnza
CarmelitaShermanEastonLo
y
o
l
a
Toy
o
n
D
w
i
g
h
t
H
u
n
t
Va
n
c
o
u
v
e
r
Se
b
a
s
t
i
a
n
Oak
Grove
VernonPlymouth ConcordCap
u
c
h
i
n
o
P
a
r
kHaleChapin
P
e
p
p
e
rCh
a
p
i
n
Arguello
L
o
r
t
o
n
B
l
o
om
fi
e
l
d
A
r
u
n
d
e
l
D
w
i
g
h
t
Gi
l
b
r
e
t
h
Co
l
u
m
b
u
s
W
a
l
n
u
t
Be
n
i
t
o
C
r
e
s
c
e
n
t
P
r
im
r
o
s
e
Occidenta
lRivera H
i
g
h
l
a
n
d
Poppy
C
a
s
t
e
n
a
d
a
S
t
a
n
l
e
y
Mariposa
Edgehill
C
h
a
n
n
i
n
g
Ac
a
c
i
a
Atwater
Alcazar
Vi
c
t
o
r
i
a
De
S
o
t
o
Qu
e
s
a
d
a
C
l
a
r
e
n
d
o
nMillsChu
l
a
V
i
s
t
a
LexingtonMitten
Ca
r
l
o
s Mar
i
n
MartinezB
a
n
c
r
o
f
t
Sanchez SanchezGroveCowanEas
tMyr
t
l
e
Al
v
a
r
a
d
o
Ma
r
c
o
P
o
l
o
E
s
c
a
l
a
n
t
e StantonAviadorAl
b
e
m
a
r
l
e
Lang
MorrellLarkspur
F
a
i
r
fi
e
l
d
Cro
s
s
w
a
yMahlerW
e
s
t
m
o
o
r HinckleyCa
s
t
i
l
l
oValdiviaM
o
n
t
e
r
oDevereuxO
g
d
e
n BurlwayDavidLas
s
e
n
La
M
e
s
a
Al
t
u
r
a
s
L
o
s
M
o
n
t
e
s
Newlandsh Lin
d
e
n
Lau
r
e
l
L
o
s
A
l
t
o
s
Beach
Ma
r
s
t
e
n
OxfordAr
c
AlmerCambridgeDolores
S
k
y
v
i
e
w DufferinDonnellyCorbitt
El QuanitoLas Piedr
a
s
MajillaKenmarEdwardsMc
d
o
n
a
l
d
Ea
s
t
w
o
o
d
Caro
l
Ans
e
l
Aza
l
e
a
Margarita
Cos
ta
R
i
c
aJuanitaCadillac C
um
b
e
r
l
a
n
dRhinetteM
e
a
d
o
w
M
o
n
t
e
c
i
t
o SummerBa
y
V
i
e
wKillarney
Whi
t
e
h
o
r
n
Ne
u
c
h
a
t
e
l
BelvedereMarquitaBellevueRiveraTiberonLincolnA
n
i
t
aPalm
Car
o
l
a
n
Lin
d
e
n
ParkCa
b
r
i
l
l
oBroderickIngoldGuittard
T r ousdale D r.E. Poplar Ave.Old Baysh
o
re
H
ig
h
w
a
y
Millbrae
Ave.Hillcrest Blvd.Cal
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
D
r
.
Car
o
l
a
n
A
v
e
.
Airport Blvd.Peninsula Dr.Burlingame Ave.
S
a
n
M
a
t
e
o
D
r
.
El
C
a
m
i
n
o
R
e
a
l
R
o
l
l
i
n
s
R
d
.BroadwayHillside Dr.Ralston Ave.City of
San Mateo
City of
Hillsborough
City of
Millbrae
San Francisco Bay
San Francisco
International
Airport
280
101US
1,500750 3,000 FT 0NBurlingame General Plan
Figure CS-6 Liquefaction Zones
City Limits
SOI
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone
Very High Liquefaction Risk Low Liquefaction Risk
Moderate Liquefaction Risk Very Low Liquefaction Risk
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CS-29
Placeholder for Figure CS-7
VIII.COMMUNITY SAFETY ELEMENT
CS-30 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Placeholder for Figure CS-8
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | HP-1
Chapter IX. Healthy People and
Healthy Places
Introduction
Land use planning and neighborhood design can contribute to the
overall health and well-being of Burlingame residents. Why is this
important? From a public policy perspective, healthy people and healthy
places practices can benefit the community economically, from reduced
health care costs to savings in transportation expenditures to generating
jobs associated with local food production. Planning and designing
healthy environments encourages social interaction, reduces crime, helps
seniors age in place, and minimizes residents’ exposure to pollution.
Programs that promote the sustainable use of natural resources benefit
the environment and preserve natural places for all to enjoy.
In 2016, health data for Burlingame residents provided by Sustainable San
Mateo County indicated that overall, community members have good
health, but that older residents and youth needed more focused
attention to improve health and activity levels. This Healthy People and
Healthy Places Element focuses on policy initiatives that will address the
most critical health needs in the city, safeguard and improve residents’
personal health, maintain and enhance Burlingame’s parks and open
spaces, and protect local environmental resources within the context of
the following health-related topics:
Public Health
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Reduction
Parks, Open Space, and Recreation
Biological Resources
Water Resources
Scenic Resources
IX. HEALTHY PEOPLE AND HEALTHY PLACES
HP-2 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Public Health
The health of Burlingame community members is affected by land use
policy, project design, and equitable access to health resources. The City
is committed to taking actions that ensure the continued health of the
community, both in terms of preventative measures such as promoting
active lifestyles and healthy foods, access to parks and other areas for
physical activity as well as access to doctors and medical treatment. The
following goal and policies aim to enhance the health and quality of life
of all in the community.
Goal HP-1: Improve the overall health and well-being of all
Burlingame residents through land use and design policies,
equitable access to health care, and opportunities for healthy
lifestyle choices.
HP-1.1: Health in All Policies
Prioritize the health of all Burlingame residents in City strategies, polices,
programs, daily operations, and practices. [SO, PA, PI]
HP-1.2: Healthcare Facilities
Accommodate healthcare facilities of all sizes in Burlingame, and work
with major healthcare institutions to promote appropriate expansion of
services and ensure equitable, affordable, and convenient treatment for
all community members. [PA, MP]
HP-1.3: Recreation, Parks and Open Spaces
Provide convenient access to a variety of recreation opportunities, parks
and open spaces for all community members. [ ]
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | HP-3
HP-1.4: Public Transit Access to Medical Facilities
Partner with public transportation agencies and healthcare providers to
improve connections between Burlingame’s neighborhoods and
healthcare facilities. [AC, H, S]
HP-1.5: Collaboration and Education
Collaborate with local health officials, planners, non-profits, institutions,
businesses, and schools to promote healthy lifestyles and educate
Burlingame residents about healthcare options. [AC, PI, H]
HP-1.6: Community Safety through Design
Improve sidewalks, streetscapes, community centers, parks and open
spaces, and traffic conditions in neighborhoods to encourage walking
and activity on the local streets and public areas. [MP, SO]
HP-1.7: Active Transportation
Create opportunities for Burlingame community members to incorporate
physical activity into everyday activities by promoting walking and biking
as alternatives to automobile use, as outlined in the Mobility Element.
[MP, PI, H, S]
HP-1.8: Safe Routes to School
Support the San Mateo County Safe Routes to School and other similar
programs that promote walking and biking to and from school for
children and parents. Study options to remove potential physical barriers
and improve dangerous intersections near schools. [AC, SR, H, S]
HP-1.9: Sharing the Road
Support local and regional programs that educate and inform motorists
to be aware of non-vehicle roadway users to promote overall safety and
multimodal streets. [AC, PI, H, S]
IX. HEALTHY PEOPLE AND HEALTHY PLACES
HP-4 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
HP-1.10: Aging in Place
Accommodate development projects that incorporate access to services,
transit, recreation, community meeting spaces, amenities, healthcare, and
universal design elements that enable Burlingame residents to remain in
their homes as they age. [DR, H, S]
HP-1.11: Access to Healthy Foods
Craft land use policies that provide for all residents to be within short
distances of fresh and healthy food sources, such as grocery stores,
healthy corner stores, farmers’ markets, and community gardens.
Incentivize healthy food options in existing stores and food venues. [SO,
PA, H, S]
HP-1.12: Community Garden Sites
Identify opportunity sites for additional community gardens throughout
the City. Have the Burlingame Parks and Recreation Department partner
with community groups and non-profit organizations to establish the
gardens. [SR, PA, PI, H, S]
HP-1.13: School Gardens
Work with the Burlingame School District and the San Mateo Union High
School District to implement urban agriculture programs on school and
city sites. [AC, H, S]
HP-1.14: Multi-Family Residential Gardens
Encourage new multi-family housing developments to include designated
community gardens for their residents as part of open space
requirements, particularly in high-density areas such as North Burlingame
and Rollins Road. [DR, H, S]
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | HP-5
HP-1.15: Agriculture in Single-Family Residential Neighborhoods
Allow for the small-scale growing of food products and keeping of bees
and fowl in single-family neighborhoods, both for personal use and sale.
[DR]
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Reduction
Since the 1970s, air quality throughout the Bay Area has improved
significantly as a result of federal clean air regulations and vigorous efforts
of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District to implement air quality
improvement goals. However, the twentieth century brought forward new
concerns about pollutant emissions in the form of greenhouse gases,
which climate scientists indicate are a major source of global climate
change. And while greenhouse gas reduction remains a regional and
global issue, each jurisdiction in the Bay Area (and California) is obligated
to define and implement strategies to reduce localized greenhouse gas
emissions, with the aim to achieve the statewide reductions established
by the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 and related legislation.
Burlingame first addressed greenhouse gas emission in its 2009 Climate
Action Plan (CAP). The CAP set a framework for reducing greenhouse gas
emissions, and the City has made considerable progress over the years in
climate actions and sustainability. This General Plan serves as an
opportunity to assess the City’s greenhouse gas reduction progress and
update the CAP. The General Plan is built upon a strong sustainable
development foundation that will move Burlingame forward in reducing
greenhouse gas emissions and meet updated reduction targets.
Appendix [x] Climate Action Plan Update, compiles all the climate action
related goals and policies found throughout these chapters into a one-
stop climate action plan. The CAP Update also incorporates the climate
change environmental analysis from the General Plan’s environmental
impact report (EIR), including Burlingame’s greenhouse gas emission
inventory and quantified emission reduction measures. For a complete
look at Burlingame’s climate action approach, see Appendix [x] Climate
Action Plan Update.
IX. HEALTHY PEOPLE AND HEALTHY PLACES
HP-6 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
The following goals and the policies will help reduce greenhouse gas
emissions and other air pollutants.
Goal HP-2: Achieve greenhouse gas emissions reductions
consistent with State goals.
HP-2.1: Municipal Greenhouse Gas Inventory
Continue to partner with San Mateo County’s Regionally Integrated
Climate Action Planning Suite (RICAPS) to prepare annual Municipal
Greenhouse Gas inventories. [AC, SR, S, H]
HP-2.2: Community Greenhouse Gas Inventory
Continue the partnership with the San Mateo County RICAPS to prepare
annual community-wide greenhouse gas inventories.
HP-2.3: Greenhouse Gas Reduction Targets
Work to achieve greenhouse gas emissions reductions locally that are
consistent with the targets established by AB 32 (California Global
Warming Solutions Act of 2006) and subsequent supporting legislation.
[AC, S, H]
HP-2.4: Electric Vehicles
Prepare an Electric Vehicle Strategic Plan to support and expand
Burlingame’s electric vehicle network. Establish parking standards that
prioritize electric vehicle spaces. Require new residential developments
to install or be pre-wired for electric vehicle charging stations. [MP, DR, S,
H]
HP 2-5: Municipal Electric Vehicles
Purchase electric vehicles as replacements for gasoline-powered vehicles
in the City’s fleet. Install electric vehicle charging stations to incentivize
City employees to use electric vehicles.
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | HP-7
HP-2.6: Renewable Energy
Pursue the goal of using 100% renewable energy for the City’s municipal
accounts. Encourage residents and businesses to opt up to 100%
renewable purchase for additional community-wide greenhouse gas
reductions. Encourage and support opportunities for developing local
solar power projects.
HP-2.7: Residential Solar Power
Encourage homeowners to install solar power systems. Provide
information to homeowners on the benefits of solar power and funding
opportunities. Promote Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE)
programs that finance renewable energy systems. Offer incentives for
home solar power systems.
HP-2.8: Energy Efficiency
Support energy efficiency improvements in the aging building stock
citywide. Encourage energy efficiency audits and upgrades at the time of
sale for existing homes and buildings. Host energy efficiency workshops,
and distribute information to property owners, tenants, and residences.
Publicize available programs such as PACE financing and San Mateo
Energy Watch programs. Incentivize low-cost retrofits to residents and
businesses.
HP-2.9: Municipal Energy Efficiency
Continue to enhance energy efficiency in City facilities. Conduct periodic
energy audits to assess energy efficiency progress and needed
improvements.
HP-2.10: Municipal Green Building
Aim for new construction and major renovations of City facilities to be
zero net energy.
IX. HEALTHY PEOPLE AND HEALTHY PLACES
HP-8 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
HP-2.11: Innovative Technologies
Encourage the advancement of emerging technologies and innovations
around energy, waste, water, and transportation Support local green
technology businesses. Explore demonstration project opportunities.
HP-2.12: Green Businesses
Attract green technology businesses to Burlingame. Focus outreach on
established and new green technology businesses along Rollins Road.
Encourage existing businesses to integrate green practices by offering an
annual green business award, workshops, and informational materials.
HP-2.13: Composting
Expand composting services to multi-family residential buildings and
commercial buildings.
HP- 2.14: Zero Waste
Encourage the South Bayside Waste Management Authority (SBWMA) to
explore and consider rate plans that support zero waste goals. Identify
opportunities to support and implement zero waste goals and strategies
for the City and community.
HP- 2.15: Alternative Fuel
Purchase electric or hybrid models of lawn and garden and construction
equipment for City maintenance operations, as feasible.
Goal HP-3: Minimize exposure of residents and employees of
local businesses to harmful air pollutants.
HP-3.1: Regional Air Quality Standards
Support regional policies and efforts to improve air quality, and
participate in regional planning efforts with the Bay Area Air Quality
Management District to meet or exceed air quality standards. [AC, S, H]
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | HP-9
HP-3.2: Local Air Quality Standards
Work with local businesses, industries, and developers to reduce the
impact of stationary and mobile sources of pollution. Ensure that new
development does not create cumulative net increases in air pollution,
and require Transportation Demand Management Techniques (TDM)
when air quality impacts are unavoidable. [DR, S, H]
HP-3.3: Indoor Air Quality Standards
Require that developers mitigate impacts on indoor air quality for new
residential and commercial developments, particularly along higher-
density corridors, near industrial uses, along the freeway and rail line,
such as in North Burlingame, along Rollins Road, and in Downtown.
Potential mitigation strategies include installing air filters (MERV 13 or
higher), building sounds walls, and planting vegetation and trees as
pollution buffers. [DR, H, S]
HP-3.4: Air Pollution Reduction
Support regional efforts to improve air quality, reduce auto use, expand
infrastructure for alternative transportation, and reduce traffic congestion.
Focus efforts to reduce truck idling to two minutes or fewer in industrial
and warehouse districts along Rollins Road and the Inner Bayshore. [AC,
PI, SO, S, H]
HP-3.5: Woodstove and Fireplace Replacement
Encourage residents to replace wood-burning fireplaces and stoves with
cleaner electric heat pumps, natural gas, or propane stoves. Educate the
public about financial assistance options through the Bay Area Air Quality
Management District’s fireplace and wood stove replacement incentive
program. [PI, AC, S, H]
HP-3.6: Caltrain Electrification
Encourage the electrification of Caltrain to eliminate emissions from the
rail line. [AC]
IX. HEALTHY PEOPLE AND HEALTHY PLACES
HP-10 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
HP-3.7: Proximity to Sensitive Locations
Avoid locating stationary and mobile sources of air pollution near
sensitive uses such as residences, schools, childcare facilities, healthcare
facilities, and senior living facilities. Where adjacencies exist, include site
planning and building features that minimize potential conflicts and
impacts. [DR, S, H]
HP-3.8: Proximity to Emission Sources
Avoid locating residential developments and other sensitive uses near
significant pollution sources such as freeways and large stationary source
emitters. Require Bay Area Air Quality Management District
recommended procedures for air modeling and health risk assessment
for new sensitive land uses located near sources of toxic air contaminants.
HP-3.9: Building Site Design and Operations
Place sensitive uses within development projects (e.g. residences,
daycares, medical clinics) as far away from emission sources (including
loading docks, busy roads, stationary sources) as possible. Design open
space, commercial buildings, or parking garages between sensitive land
uses and air pollution sources as a buffer. Locate operable windows,
balconies, and building air intakes far away from emission sources.
HP-3.10: Truck Routes
Ensure projects that generate truck traffic and existing truck routes avoid
sensitive land uses such as residences, schools, daycares, senior facilities,
and residences.
HP-3.11: Dust Abatement
Require dust abatement actions for all new construction and
redevelopment projects. [DR, H, S]
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | HP-11
HP-3.12: Construction Best Practices
Require construction projects to implement the Bay Area Air Quality
Management District’s Best Practices for Construction to reduce pollution
from dust and exhaust as feasible.
Parks, Open Space, and Recreation
Parks and recreation facilities provide places where people can be
physically active, gather as a community, recreate, learn and participate in
the greater community. Active park spaces include sports fields, game
courts and playgrounds. Open spaces and natural areas support
biodiversity, allow for the management of water and other natural
resources, and offer opportunities for residents to be in and learn about
nature. Burlingame has a diversity of open spaces, with most
neighborhoods having relatively easy access to a neighborhood park or
playground or the Mills Canyon Wildlife Area. Along the Bayfront, the
Bayside fields, community garden, Bayside Dog Exercise Park, golf
driving range, and Bay Trail offer places that attract not just Burlingame
residents but visitors from other communities. And while the Bayfront
amenities are separated from the rest of Burlingame by Highway 101, the
policies in the Mobility Element include initiatives to improve pedestrian
and bicycle access across the freeway.
Figure HP-1 identifies neighborhoods where residents are not within
one-quarter or one-half mile from a park, distances considered to be
walkable and bikeable. The Easton Addition neighborhood lacks ready
access to park space, with the exception of fields at Roosevelt Elementary
School. Open space in Downtown, where land use policy will allow for
construction of up to1,200 new units (from baseline year 2016), is limited
to a small playground on Primrose Road within Downtown itself;
otherwise, the nearest park is Washington Park to the east. With the
addition of residences at the north end of town—on El Camino Real and
Rollins Road—additional open space amenities will be needed to create
complete communities and respond to new residents’ desires for
gathering and recreation spaces. Because Burlingame has virtually no
IX. HEALTHY PEOPLE AND HEALTHY PLACES
HP-12 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
vacant land, creating new public park and recreation facilities will be a
challenge.
The private sector has responded to active residents’ desires by
establishing indoor recreation facilities in industrial spaces within the
Rollins Road district. While these businesses offer tennis, indoor soccer,
gymnastics, and other activities, participants must pay a fee. The City sees
the value that private recreation facilities bring to the community, but also
is committed to providing public recreation places that meet the needs of
residents of all ages and income levels. This commitment includes
planning creatively to establish public space in Downtown—which could
consist of plazas and outdoor performance spaces—and requiring that
new residential development in north Burlingame incorporate publicly
accessible green space and gathering spots. The overarching goal is to
ensure that every Burlingame resident can easily walk or bike to a public
open space. Figure HP-2 illustrates a conceptual parks, recreation, and
open space master plan.
Goal HP-4: Provide a diversity of City-owned parks, recreation
facilities, natural open spaces, and public gathering places
citywide, and ensure that every Burlingame residents lives within
one-half mile of such a resource.
HP-4.1: Parks, Recreation, and Trail Master Plan
Develop and implement a parks, recreation, and trails master plan to
guide open space investments and ensure a comprehensive and
integrated system of parks, plazas, playgrounds, trails, and open space.
[MP, OS, H, S]
HP-4.2: Equitable Distribution of Open Spaces
Ensure all neighborhoods have easy access to park and recreation
opportunities within comfortable walking distance of homes, schools, and
businesses. [MP, OS, H, S]
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | HP-13
HP-4.3: Existing Open Spaces
Conduct a study to identify the level of use for each park, trail, and open
space in Burlingame, and ensure that existing open spaces meet
residents’ and visitors’ evolving needs, providing unique recreation
experiences in parks, open spaces, trails, and public plazas. Consider
incorporating education with recreation opportunities in the renovation of
existing parks. [SR, H, S]
HP-4.4: Potential New Open Spaces
In concert with development proposals in the North Burlingame and
North Rollins Road districts, require plans for publicly accessible plazas
and open spaces. Develop guidelines so that these spaces to fit within
the overall parks and recreation system in Burlingame. [MP, DR, PA, H, S]
HP-4.5: Central Gathering Space
Explore opportunities to create a new central gathering space in or near
Downtown and on Broadway. [SR, PA H]
HP-4.6: Community Center
Continue to pursue plans for development of a new Burlingame
Community Center that provides a multi-functional, flexible and
complementary space that allows for a variety of community services,
recreational activities, and cultural amenities that are accessible to and
benefit all ages and abilities of the community. Continue to engage
residents and other stakeholders in planning and developing the new
center. [MP, FB, PI, H]
HP-4.7: Recreation Programs and Services
Expand and focus recreational programs and services to meet evolving
and diverse community needs. Establish a regular review of recreational
programs to evaluate capacity and demands. Work with local school
districts to provide programming opportunities. [FB, SO, H]
IX. HEALTHY PEOPLE AND HEALTHY PLACES
HP-14 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
HP-4.8: Recreational and Multi-Purpose Facilities
Provide a range of quality recreational and multi-purpose facilities that
are suited to community needs. Provide space for fitness classes, sports
leagues, continuing education opportunities, community events, and
other functions. Ensure facilities are well maintained and have adequate
lighting, signage, and hours of operations. [FB, SO, H]
HP-4.9: Joint Use Facilities
Work with the school districts, faith-based institutions, private entities,
and community to allow for the joint use of non-City recreational facilities.
[PA, AC, H]
HP-4.10: Trails and Corridors
Establish and maintain an integrated recreational corridor system that
connects regional and local trails to creeks, open spaces, hillside areas,
and City parks. Identify potential recreational linkage opportunities to
better connect Burlingame’s existing trails, and retain publicly owned
corridors for future use. [SO, AC, H, S]
HP-4.11: San Francisco Bay Trail and Bayfront Recreation
Work with the Association of Bay Area Governments, the Coastal
Conservancy, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, the San
Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission, and private
property owners to close gaps in the San Francisco Bay Trail along
Burlingame’s Bayfront. Improve public access and connectivity to the
shoreline, and enhance recreation opportunities in the Bayfront area. [AC,
H, S]
HP-4.12: Access to Natural Areas
Improve access to large-scale natural areas along Burlingame’s Bayfront
and in Mills Canyon Park. Identify areas for limited or restricted
recreational use where natural habitat is particularly sensitive. Pursue
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | HP-15
opportunities for environmental education to encourage habitat
conservation for residents, schools and visitors. [SR, H, S]
HP-4.13: Private Indoor Sports and Recreation
Continue to allow indoor sports and commercial recreation facilities in the
Innovation/Industrial districts within the Bayfront area and along Rollins
Road. [DR, H]
HP-4.14: Private Use of Public Facilities
Limit the use of public facilities by private organizations when such
arrangement works to exclude a substantial base of Burlingame residents
from using the facilities. [SO, H]
HP-4.15: Access for People with Mobility Challenges and Disabilities
Provide parks, recreation, and trail access for people with disabilities.
Identify spaces with limited disability access, and implement plans to
incorporate accessible features, including appropriately graded paths
and trails, firm and stable paving materials, edge protection on trails,
gates and doorways of appropriate widths, accessible drinking fountains
and restrooms, and accessible benches and tables. [SO, H]
HP-4.16: Sustainable Landscaping
Utilize native and/or drought-tolerant landscaping to the maximum
extent practical in all City parks and open spaces, and minimize
impervious surfaces wherever possible. Identify opportunities for
sustainable upgrades within City parks and other planted areas, such as
parkways and roadway medians. [SO, H, S]
HP-4.17: Signage and Wayfinding
Establish consistent signage and wayfinding for the parks and trail system
to indicate distances to different open space and recreational
destinations. [MP, SO, H]
IX. HEALTHY PEOPLE AND HEALTHY PLACES
HP-16 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
HP-4.18: Funding
Pursue funding for parks, recreation, and trail enhancement,
development, and maintenance through a variety of mechanisms,
including developer fees, the general fund, parking funds, special service
districts, user fees, and grants. Include funds in the City’s Capital
Improvement Program for timely community facility and park
improvements. [SO, FB, H, S]
Biological Resources
Before Burlingame was thoroughly urbanized, the Baylands and hillside
environments supported a rich abundance of wildlife in wetland, mixed
forest, and evergreen forest habitats. Although the City is almost
completely urbanized today, remnants of these original environments
remain. Along the Bayfront, marine and estuarine habitats are home to
many common fish, bird, and reptile species, as well as special status
species (meaning those that may be protected by State or federal law)
such as the Ridgeway’s rail and longfin smelt. Coastal wetlands also
support protected plant species. In Mills Canyon and along the creeks
that flow to the Bay, you can find many reptiles, mammals, birds, and
insects, including several species classified as rare, threatened, or
endangered.
These natural habitats and the species they contain contribute to the
overall environmental, ecological, and educational health of the
community and region. The City recognizes the importance of preserving
and protecting the areas shown on Figure HP-3 for the long term.
Goal HP-5: Protect, maintain, and improve biological resources in
Burlingame, including hillside habitats, trees and plants, shoreline
areas, and creeks.
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | HP-17
HP-5.1: Wildlife Habitats
Preserve critical habitat areas and sensitive species within riparian
corridors, hillsides, canyon areas, tree canopies, and wetlands that are
within the City’s control. Consult with the California Department of Fish
and Wildlife to identify and map significant habitat areas, and focus
protection measures on habitats with special status species. Protect
declining or vulnerable habitat areas from disturbance during design and
construction of new development. [AC, DR, S]
HP-5.2: Migratory Birds
Identify and protect habitats that contribute to the healthy propagation of
migratory birds, including trees and natural corridors that serve as
stopovers and nesting places. Avoid construction activities that involve
tree removal between March and June unless a bird survey has been
conducted to determine that the tree is unused during breeding season
by avian species protected under California Fish and Game Codes 3503,
3503.5 and 3511. [AC, DR, S]
HP-5.3: Riparian Corridors
Protect and restore riparian corridors to ensure they function as healthy
biological areas and wildlife habitats. Where appropriate, restore riparian
habitat with native vegetation. [SO, S]
HP-5.4: Urban Creeks
Encourage the restoration and daylighting of Burlingame’s urban creeks
where they have been undergrounded, and where such daylighting is
appropriate for surrounding conditions. Coordinate with property owners
and local interest groups in restoration efforts. Remove culverts and
hardened creek channels where appropriate, and avoid future culverting
or channelization of creeks. [PA, AC, H, S]
IX. HEALTHY PEOPLE AND HEALTHY PLACES
HP-18 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
HP-5.5: Protection and Expansion of Tree Resources
Continue to preserve and protect valuable native trees and introduce
species that contribute to the urban forest, but allow for the gradual
replacement of trees for on-going natural renewal. Consider replacement
with native species. Use zoning and building requirements to ensure that
existing trees are integrated into new developments. [DR, MP, SO, S]
HP-5.6: Tree Preservation Ordinance
Continue to adhere to the Burlingame Tree Preservation Ordinance
(Burlingame Municipal Code Title 11), ensure the preservation of
protected trees as designated by the ordinance and continue to be
acknowledged by the Arbor Day Foundation as a Tree City USA. [SO, S]
HP-5.7: Urban Forest Management Plan
Continue to update and use the Burlingame Urban Forest Management
Plan which integrates the environmental, economic, political, historical
and social values for the community for guidance on best management
practices related to tree planting, removal, and maintenance, including
onsite protection of extant trees and street trees during projects. [MP,
OS, S]
HP-5.8: Invasive Plant Species
Prohibit the use of any invasive plant species in landscaped or natural
areas. Work with the California Invasive Plant Council to identify invasive
plant species within Burlingame, and establish plans for removal. Ensure
that new development obtains appropriate permits and approvals related
to invasive species from the Army Corps of Engineers and other relevant
agencies. [AC, DR, H, S]
HP-5.9: Invasive Aquatic Species
Work with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s Invasive
Species Program to identify invasive aquatic species within Burlingame,
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | HP-19
and meet the Regional Monitoring Program’s regulatory goals to reduce
exotic species that threaten Bay Area water quality. [AC, S]
HP-5.10: Shoreline Protection and Enhancement
Maintain and improve the quality of Burlingame’s shoreline, and support
regulatory programs that protect Bayfront open space. Control shoreline
uses to minimize erosion, and use a combination of human-made and
natural elements to establish flood barriers. [MP, SO, DR, S]
HP-5.11: Canyon and Hillside Protection
Protect Burlingame’s canyon and hillside areas by ensuring that
construction adjacent to these spaces is environmentally sensitive and
preserves natural topography and vegetation. [DR, S]
HP-5.12: Wetlands
Preserve wetland habitat and associated species in compliance with the
federal “no net loss” policy. Where jurisdiction allows, establish buffer
zones at the edge of wetland habitats, and restrict development in these
zones. If development occurs adjacent to a wetlands area, ensure a
qualified biologist has conducted a wetlands delineation in accordance
with federal and State guidelines. [SO, DR, S]
HP-5.13: Regional Coordination
Coordinate efforts with the San Mateo County Flood Control District,
Caltrans, San Francisco Airport, Peninsula Watershed lands, and Coyote
Point Recreation Area to preserve and manage interconnecting wildlife
movement corridors. [AC, S]
HP-5.14: Compliance with Environmental Laws
Through environmental review, ensure that all projects affecting
resources of regional concern satisfy regional, State, and federal laws.
[DR, S]
IX. HEALTHY PEOPLE AND HEALTHY PLACES
HP-20 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
HP-5.15: Access to Natural Areas
Ensure public access to natural resources, particularly along the Bayfront
and in Mills Canyon. Require new development in the Bayfront Area to
provide public access to the waterfront, and work with property owners to
connect gaps in the Bay Trail. [DR, AC, PA, S]
Water Resources
Over the past centuries of urbanization in the Bay Area, the region has
experienced periods of both abundant rainfall and severe drought.
Residential water consumption rises and falls depending on current water
availability, but with the region’s population continuing to grow and water
resources being somewhat finite, consistent water conservation practices
in Burlingame will moderate impacts when the next drought occurs.
Maintaining consistently high water quality also requires constant
attendance to best management practices. Like other Peninsula cities,
Burlingame has many creeks and streams that flow into San Francisco
Bay. Federal and State water quality laws work to protect these resources,
and Burlingame’s responsibility lies in ensuring local practices are state-
of-the-art, particularly with regard to using low-impact development, or
LID, infrastructure improvements to set the example for water resource
protection.
Goal HP-6: Protect local and regional water resources through
conservation, preservation, and sustainable management
practices.
HP-6.1: Waterway Protection
Protect and maintain the water quality of the four creek systems and
watersheds (Burlingame Creek, Easton Creek, Mills Creek, and Sanchez
Creek) that course through the City and drain into San Francisco Bay.
Participate in regional efforts, such as the Bay Area Integrated Regional
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | HP-21
Water Management Plan, to protect Burlingame’s waterways and
maintain water quality. [AC, H, S]
HP-6.2: Water Conservation
Promote best practices for water conservation throughout the City, and
continue to enforce City ordinances requiring high-efficiency indoor
water fixtures in new development. Educate the public about
Burlingame’s water rebate programs, and continue to establish tiered
water rates that promote water conservation. Consider water
consumption when evaluating development projects. Encourage
drought-tolerant landscaping and efficient irrigation systems. [DR, PI, S]
HP-6.3: Water Quality
Regularly measure and monitor water quality in Burlingame’s surface
water to ensure maintenance of high quality water for consumption. [SO,
H, S]
HP-6.4: Water Recycling
Promote recycled water use to the extent such resources are available.
Work to allow graywater and rainwater catchment systems in residential,
commercial, and industrial buildings. Establish a recycled water plan and
implement a recycled water program associated with the Wastewater
Treatment Facility, when financially feasible. [SO, MP, DR, S]
HP-6.5: Local Stormwater Management
Work with public and private property owners to reduce stormwater
runoff in urban areas, manage stormwater as a resource, and protect
water quality in creeks and the Bay. Require implementation of best
management practices to reduce accumulation of non-point source
pollutants in the drainage system originating from streets, parking lots,
residential areas, businesses, and industrial operations. [DR, S, H]
IX. HEALTHY PEOPLE AND HEALTHY PLACES
HP-22 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
HP-6.6: Regional Stormwater Management
Continue to follow requirements for the Municipal Regional Stormwater
and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit to
monitor stormwater activities, reduce pollution from stormwater runoff,
and provide annual reports on compliance activities. [AC, S, H]
HP-6.7: Stormwater Conveyance System
Identify opportunities to upgrade and improve the City’s stormwater
conveyance system (MS4). [SO, S, H]
HP-6.8: Water-Efficient Landscaping
Continue to enforce Burlingame’s Water-Efficient Landscaping
Ordinance, and promote the use of native, drought-tolerant landscaping.
Educate the public about the Bay-Friendly Landscaping Guidelines and
other resources for water-efficient landscaping. [PI, S, H]
HP-6.9: Green Infrastructure
Adopt and implement a Green Infrastructure Plan in accordance with the
Municipal Regional Stormwater National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System Permit. Incorporate green infrastructure into streets and right-of-
ways wherever practicable, including curb extensions, flow-through
planters, and bioswales that slows stormwater runoff by dispersing it to
vegetated areas, harvests and uses runoff, promotes infiltration and
evapotranspiration, and uses bioretention to clean runoff.
HP-6.10: New Development and Construction
Regulate new development and construction to minimize pollutant and
sediment concentrations in receiving waters, and ensure surface water
discharged into the San Francisco Bay meets or exceeds relevant
regulatory water quality standards. Require new development to
incorporate Low Impact Design features that treat and reduce surface
runoff volumes. [DR, S, H]
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | HP-23
HP-6.11: Low Impact Development Infrastructure
Use Low Impact Development approaches as upgrades are made to City-
owned facilities such as streets, parks, and storm drainage infrastructure.
[MP, SO, S]
HP-6.12: Dumping
Educate residents about the environmental effects of dumping
household wastes and motor oil into storm drains that eventually
discharge into San Francisco Bay. [PI, S, H]
Scenic Resources
The dramatic landscape of Burlingame’s hills and the sweeping open
Bayfront create scenic views that merit protection and enhancement.
Burlingame also has several scenic roadways—and El Camino Real in
particular—that may qualify for protection under the California Streets
and Highways Code, Section 260 (see Figure CX-3). These roadways are
considered scenic because they provide visual access to natural features
like bodies of water, mountains, and trees, as well as built features like
historic landmarks, historic districts, and architecturally significant
buildings. Scenic corridors can provide an enjoyable travel experience,
link urban and open space areas, and provide access to recreational
areas. The following goal and policies work to preserve and enhance
Burlingame’s scenic resources, including sightlines of natural features and
views along notable roads.
Goal HP-7: Protect local scenic resources and preserve views of
the natural amenities in the city.
HP-7.1: Hillside Development
Continue to require a Hillside Area Construction Permit for all new
residences or accessory structures, as well as additions to existing
residences or accessory structures, to protect residential viewsheds.
IX. HEALTHY PEOPLE AND HEALTHY PLACES
HP-24 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Consider establishing specific development standards for hillside
residential projects to ensure view preservation in the area. [DR]
HP-7.2: State Scenic Highways
Protect officially designated California State Scenic Interstate 280 by
maintaining open space and low-density residential land uses along the
highway corridor, ensuring roadway signage does not detract from scenic
views, and screening unattractive structures with appropriate
landscaping. Consider establishing tailored protection regulations for El
Camino Real (State Route 82) and portions of the Bayshore Freeway (U.S.
101). [DR, SO]
HP-7.3: City and County Scenic Roadways
Protect local scenic roadways by preserving mature trees wherever
possible, maintaining landscaping along roadways, and ensuring that
development and land uses do not detract from the aesthetics of the
corridor. Consider establishing specific design guidelines for residential
development, commercial development, and roadway signage along
scenic corridors. [DR]
Scenic roadways to be considered for such treatment are:
Airport Boulevard
California Drive between North Lane and Morrell Avenue
Easton Drive between El Camino Real and Summit Drive
Hillside Drive
Skyline Boulevard from the City limit north of Kip Lane to
Trousdale Drive
Ralston Avenue
Trousdale Drive
HP-7.4: Scenic Gateways
Identify locations for gateway treatments along scenic roadways at key
intersections, and establish a cohesive signage aesthetic that enhances
scenic views. [MP]
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | HP-25
HP-7.5: Connectivity to Recreation Amenities
Coordinate and identify connectivity opportunities between scenic routes
and adjacent public recreation areas such as parks, scenic outlooks, and
biking and hiking trails. Prioritize the development of separated bicycle
lanes along scenic routes to connect with recreational trails. [MP, H]
HP-7.6: Utility Lines
Take steps to underground utility lines wherever possible, particularly
along scenic roadways to minimize obstruction of views. [AC]
HP-7.7: Shoreline Views
Protect views to the Bay shoreline by identifying viewsheds to the Bay
from key locations and restricting the height of buildings within these
viewsheds. Ensure that new Bayfront development does not detract from
the scenic qualities of the area, and consider adopting commercial and
hotel design guidelines specific to the Bayfront. [DR, H]
IX. HEALTHY PEOPLE AND HEALTHY PLACES
HP-26 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
This page intentionally left blank.
Bal
b
o
a
HowardPalo
m
a
Dr
a
k
e
M
a
g
n
o
l
i
a
Be
r
n
a
l
Co
r
t
e
z
EastonLag
u
n
a
BayswaterAdelineSummi
t
Se
q
u
o
i
a DavisAnzaCarmelitaShermanEastonLo
y
o
l
a
Toy
o
n
D
w
i
g
h
t
H
u
n
t
Va
n
c
o
u
v
e
r
Se
b
a
s
t
i
a
n
Oak
Grove
VernonPlymouth ConcordCap
u
c
h
i
n
o
P
a
r
kHaleChapin
P
e
p
p
e
rCh
a
p
i
n
Arguello
L
o
r
t
o
n
B
l
o
om
fi
e
l
d
A
r
u
n
d
e
l
D
w
i
g
h
t
Gi
l
b
r
e
t
h
Co
l
u
m
b
u
s
W
a
l
n
u
t
Be
n
i
t
o
C
r
e
s
c
e
n
t
P
r
im
r
o
s
e
Occidenta
lRivera H
i
g
h
l
a
n
d
Poppy
C
a
s
t
e
n
a
d
a
S
t
a
n
l
e
y
Maripos
a
Edge
hill
C
h
a
n
n
i
n
g
Ac
a
c
i
a
Atwater
Vi
c
t
o
r
i
a
De
S
o
t
o
Qu
e
s
a
d
a
C
l
a
r
e
n
d
o
nMillsChu
l
a
V
i
s
t
a
LexingtonMitten
Ca
r
l
o
s Mar
i
n
MartinezB
a
n
c
r
o
f
t
Sanchez SanchezGroveCowanEas
tMyr
t
l
e
Al
v
a
r
a
d
o
Ma
r
c
o
P
o
l
o
E
s
c
a
l
a
n
t
e StantonAviadorAl
b
e
m
a
r
l
e
Lang
MorrellLarkspur
F
a
i
r
fi
e
l
d
Cro
s
s
w
a
yMahlerW
e
s
t
m
o
o
r HinckleyCa
s
t
i
l
l
oValdiviaM
o
n
t
e
r
o
O
g
d
e
n BurlwayDavidLas
s
e
n
La
M
e
s
a
Al
t
u
r
a
s
L
o
s
M
o
n
t
e
s
Newlandsh Lin
d
e
n
Lau
r
e
l
L
o
s
A
l
t
o
s
Beach
Ma
r
s
t
e
n
OxfordAr
c
AlmerCambridgeDolores
S
k
y
v
i
e
w DufferinDonnellyCorbitt
El QuanitoLas Piedr
a
s
MajillaKenmarEdwardsMc
d
o
n
a
l
d
Caro
l
Ans
e
l
Aza
l
e
a
Margarita
Cos
ta
R
i
c
aJuanitaCadillac C
um
b
e
r
l
a
n
dRhinetteM
e
a
d
o
w
M
o
n
t
e
c
i
t
o SummerBa
y
V
i
e
wKillarney
Whi
t
e
h
o
r
n
Ne
u
c
h
a
t
e
l
BelvedereMarquitaBellevueRiveraTiberonLincolnA
n
i
t
aPalm
Car
o
l
a
n
Lin
d
e
n
ParkCa
b
r
i
l
l
oBroderickIngoldGuittard
T r ousdale D r.E. Poplar Ave.Old Baysh
o
re
H
ig
h
w
a
y
Millbrae
Ave.Hillcrest Blvd.Cal
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
D
r
.
Car
o
l
a
n
A
v
e
.
Airport Blvd.Peninsula Dr.Burlingame Ave.
S
a
n
M
a
t
e
o
D
r
.
El
C
a
m
i
n
o
R
e
a
l
R
o
l
l
i
n
s
R
d
.BroadwayHillside Dr.R alston Ave.City of
San Mateo
City of
Hillsborough
City of
Millbrae
San Francisco Bay
San Francisco
International
Airport
Poplar Creek
Golf Course
Sa
n
F
r
a
n
c
i
s
c
o
B
a
y
T
r
a
i
l
Burlingame
Lagoon
Anza Lagoon
Robert E. Woolley
State Park Fisherman’s
Park
Curenvauaca
Park
Village
Park
Laguna
ParkRay
Park
Bayside Dog
Exercise Park
Bayside
Fields
CommunityGarden
Burlingame Soccer
Complex
(Murray Field)
Burlingame
Golf Center
Washington
Park
Trenton
Park
Paloma
Playground
VictoriaPark
Alpine
Playground
Pershing
Park
Heritage
Park
Coyote Point
Recreation Area
Bayfront
Park
1/2 M ile R a d iu s
1/4 M ile R a d i u s
280
101US
1,500750 3,000 FT 0NBurlingame General Plan
Figure HP-1 Neighborhood Distances to Parks
City Limits
SOI
Parks 1/4 Mile Radius
1/2 Mile Radius
Bal
b
o
a
HowardPalo
m
a
Dr
a
k
e
M
a
g
n
o
l
i
a
Be
r
n
a
l
Co
r
t
e
z
EastonLag
u
n
a
BayswaterAdelineSummi
t
Se
q
u
o
i
a DavisAnzaCarmelitaShermanEastonLo
y
o
l
a
Toy
o
n
D
w
i
g
h
t
H
u
n
t
Va
n
c
o
u
v
e
r
Se
b
a
s
t
i
a
n
Oak
Grove
VernonPlymouth ConcordCap
u
c
h
i
n
o
P
a
r
kHaleChapin
P
e
p
p
e
rCh
a
p
i
n
Arguello
L
o
r
t
o
n
B
l
o
om
fi
e
l
d
A
r
u
n
d
e
l
D
w
i
g
h
t
Gi
l
b
r
e
t
h
Co
l
u
m
b
u
s
W
a
l
n
u
t
Be
n
i
t
o
C
r
e
s
c
e
n
t
P
r
im
r
o
s
e
Occidenta
lRivera H
i
g
h
l
a
n
d
Poppy
C
a
s
t
e
n
a
d
a
S
t
a
n
l
e
y
Maripos
a
Edge
hill
C
h
a
n
n
i
n
g
Ac
a
c
i
a
Atwater
Vi
c
t
o
r
i
a
De
S
o
t
o
Qu
e
s
a
d
a
C
l
a
r
e
n
d
o
nMillsChu
l
a
V
i
s
t
a
LexingtonMitten
Ca
r
l
o
s Mar
i
n
MartinezB
a
n
c
r
o
f
t
Sanchez SanchezGroveCowanEas
tMyr
t
l
e
Al
v
a
r
a
d
o
Ma
r
c
o
P
o
l
o
E
s
c
a
l
a
n
t
e StantonAviadorAl
b
e
m
a
r
l
e
Lang
MorrellLarkspur
F
a
i
r
fi
e
l
d
Cro
s
s
w
a
yMahlerW
e
s
t
m
o
o
r HinckleyCa
s
t
i
l
l
oValdiviaM
o
n
t
e
r
o
O
g
d
e
n BurlwayDavidLas
s
e
n
La
M
e
s
a
Al
t
u
r
a
s
L
o
s
M
o
n
t
e
s
Newlandsh Lin
d
e
n
Lau
r
e
l
L
o
s
A
l
t
o
s
Beach
Ma
r
s
t
e
n
OxfordAr
c
AlmerCambridgeDolores
S
k
y
v
i
e
w DufferinDonnellyCorbitt
El QuanitoLas Piedr
a
s
MajillaKenmarEdwardsMc
d
o
n
a
l
d
Caro
l
Ans
e
l
Aza
l
e
a
Margarita
Cos
ta
R
i
c
aJuanitaCadillac C
um
b
e
r
l
a
n
dRhinetteM
e
a
d
o
w
M
o
n
t
e
c
i
t
o SummerBa
y
V
i
e
wKillarney
Whi
t
e
h
o
r
n
Ne
u
c
h
a
t
e
l
BelvedereMarquitaBellevueRiveraTiberonLincolnA
n
i
t
aPalm
Car
o
l
a
n
Lin
d
e
n
ParkCa
b
r
i
l
l
oBroderickIngoldGuittard
T r ousdale D r.E. Poplar Ave.Old Baysh
o
re
H
ig
h
w
a
y
Millbrae
Ave.Hillcrest Blvd.Cal
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
D
r
.
Car
o
l
a
n
A
v
e
.
Airport Blvd.Peninsula Dr.Burlingame Ave.
S
a
n
M
a
t
e
o
D
r
.
El
C
a
m
i
n
o
R
e
a
l
R
o
l
l
i
n
s
R
d
.BroadwayHillside Dr.R alston Ave.City of
San Mateo
City of
Hillsborough
City of
Millbrae
San Francisco Bay
San Francisco
International
Airport
Franklin
Field
Osberg
Field
Franklin
Elementary
Mercy High
School
Hoover
Elementary
Our Lady
of Angels
Elementary
Roosevelt
Elementary
Burlingame
High School
Aquatic
Center
Mckinley
Elementary
Washington
Elementary
St. Catherine of
Siena Elementary
Lincoln
ElementaryBurlingame
Intermediate
School
Poplar Creek
Golf Course
Mills Canyon
Wildlife Refuge
Shorebird
Sanctuary
Sa
n
F
r
a
n
c
i
s
c
o
B
a
y
T
r
a
i
l
Burlingame
Lagoon
Anza Lagoon
Robert E. Woolley
State Park Fisherman’s
Park
Curenvauaca
Park
Village
Park
Laguna
Park
Ray
Park
Bayside Dog
Exercise Park
Bayside
Fields
CommunityGarden
Burlingame Soccer
Complex
(Murray Field)
Burlingame
Golf Center
Washington
Park
“J” Lot
Playground
Trenton
Playground
Paloma
Playground
VictoriaPark
Alpine
Playground
Pershing
Park
Heritage
Park
Coyote Point
Recreation Area
Bayfront
Park
Sanchez CreekMills CreekEaston CreekSanchez Cree
k
CreekMillsCreekEaston280
101US
1,500750 3,000 FT 0N
Burlingame General Plan
Figure HP-2 Existing and Planned Parks,
Recreation, and Open Spaces Areas
City Limits
SOI
Playground
Recreation Facility Creek
Parks Park Opportunity AreaNatural Open Space
Open Space outsideCity of Burlingame Jurisdiction
School
T r o usdale D r.E. Poplar Ave.Old Baysh
o
re
H
ig
h
wa
y
Millbrae
Ave.Hillcrest Blvd.Cal
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
D
r
.
Airport Blvd.Peninsula Dr.Burlingame Ave.
S
a
n
M
a
t
e
o
D
r
.
El
C
a
m
i
n
o
R
e
a
l
R
o
l
l
i
n
s
R
d
.BroadwayHillside Dr.R alston Ave.
City of
San Mateo
City of
Hillsborough
City of
Millbrae
San Francisco Bay
San Francisco
International
Airport
280
101US
City Limits Developed - Open Space
SOI Herbaceous
Mixed - Forest
Evergreen Forest
1,500750 3,000 FT 0NBurlingame General Plan
Figure HP-3 Vegetation Communities
Emergent Herbaceous Wetlands
IX. HEALTHY PEOPLE AND HEALTHY PLACES
HP-30 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
This page intentionally left blank.
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | EE-1
Chapter X: Engagement and
Enrichment
Introduction
Burlingame is an engaged, active community with many educational
resources, cultural amenities, and opportunities to participate in civic life.
These assets contribute to the community’s character, and the City’s
commitment to maintain these qualities will preserve and expand
opportunities for personal and collective growth through education, arts,
and civic engagement. Burlingame strives to be a place where all
community members can learn and develop in a variety of ways: from
participating in educational programs, to seeing public art throughout
the City, to attending community events or joining a City commission or
community organization.
The Education and Enrichment Element establishes goals and policies
aimed at solidifying and enhancing local educational, arts, and public
engagement offerings focused on:
Education and Lifelong Learning
Arts and Culture
Civic Engagement
Education and Lifelong Learning
Education is the foundation of a thriving community. The public and
private schools in Burlingame provide the city’s youth with the skills and
knowledge to succeed in life; support for the K-12 educational system
remains a top priority. The City can also continue to provide learning
opportunities for residents at all stages of life, from early childhood
education to adult courses and professional development.
X. ENGAGEMENT AND ENRICHMENT
EE-2 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Goal EE-1: Provide opportunities for residents of all ages and
backgrounds to access high-quality educational services and
resources.
EE-1.1: Early Childhood Education
Encourage efforts to expand the overall capacity of local childcare and
early childhood development centers in Burlingame. Identify
opportunities for affordable alternatives to pre-school and pre-
kindergarten through partnerships with the Burlingame School District,
the Parks and Recreation Department, libraries, and community
organizations. [AC]
EE-1.2: Childcare Facilities
Integrate childcare facility needs into the City’s planning processes.
Where possible, locate childcare services in or near housing and
transportation and employment centers for convenient access. [DR, PA]
EE-1.3: Public Schools
Support Burlingame’s well-regarded public-school system, working with
the Burlingame School District and the San Mateo Union High School
District as appropriate to ensure program and facility needs are met. [AC]
EE-1.4: School Facilities Master Plan
Support the efforts of the Burlingame School District to implement the
School District Facility Master Plan, and ensure timely renovations and
reconstructions of aging facilities by including street improvement needs
in the City’s Capital Improvement Program. [MP, FB]
EE-1.5: Sustainable School Design
Encourage local school districts and private educational institutions to
incorporate sustainable design practices into construction and renovation
of school facilities to reduce energy and water consumption. [S] [DR]
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | EE-3
EE-1.6: School Technology
Support the efforts of public and private schools to improve school
facilities with cutting-edge technologies that enhance the learning
environment. [PA]
EE-1.7: Private and Alternative Schools
Support Burlingame’s private and alternative technical schools to ensure
a variety of options for different learning environments. [PA]
EE-1.8: Community Partnerships and Lifelong Learning
Identify opportunities for partnerships with schools, libraries, local
colleges, and other educational organizations to establish accessible
community education programs and events for all ages, including early
childhood education, English Language Learner classes, technology
classes, after-school programs, recreational activities, and senior
programs. [AC]
EE-1.9: Online Learning
Partner with schools, libraries, and local colleges to expand access to
online courses and digital learning opportunities. [AC]
EE-1.10: Library Facilities
Provide public library facilities that are inviting, accessible, and
comfortable for residents of all ages. Support facility and research
technology improvements as needed. [SO]
EE-1.11: Library Collections and Programs
Adapt library collections, materials, and programs over time to respond
to evolving community needs and advances in technology. [SO, FB]
EE-1.12: Expand Library Services
Increase access to educational resources by promoting online and digital
technologies that allow users to access non-print collections through
X. ENGAGEMENT AND ENRICHMENT
EE-4 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
electronic devices. Consider innovative ways to bring library services into
the community through library kiosks, pop-up libraries, book vending
machines, and book fairs. [SO]
EE-1.13: Library Funding
Pursue funding for library facility maintenance and enhancement of
programs and services through a variety of mechanisms, including
developer fees, general fund resources, special service districts, user fees,
bond initiatives, and grants. Include funds in the Capital Improvement
Program for timely facility improvements. [FB]
EE-1.14: Continuing Education
Encourage local colleges, vocational and technical schools, and large
institutions such as Mills-Peninsula Hospital to provide continuing
education courses and certificate programs. [AC]
EE-1.15: Workforce Resources and Training
Promote career resources, programs, and occupational skills training
services offered by local and regional agencies, such as the NOVA
Workforce Board and the California Employment Development
Department. Coordinate with local schools, colleges, and businesses to
sponsor job fairs and career training programs. [PI, AC]
Arts and Culture
Arts and culture are integral to a well-rounded community. The City
strives to expand arts and culture resources to meet the needs of all
Burlingame community members, and to have Burlingame recognized as
an arts and culture hub in the Bay Area, where cultural resources and arts
programming are interwoven into the community.
Goal EE-2: Celebrate and accommodate a diversity of arts and
culture programs and institutions.
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | EE-5
EE-2.1: Arts and Culture Master Plan
Develop a comprehensive Arts and Culture Master Plan that identifies
needs, opportunities, and funding mechanisms for arts city-wide. [MP]
EE-2.2: Arts Education
Partner with schools and other educational institutions to promote arts-
based learning for residents of all ages. [AC]
EE-2.3: Public Art
Establish an Art in Public Places Program, governed by a Public Art
Commission or committee, that provides opportunities for visual art to
enhance Burlingame’s open spaces. Utilize local artists for public art
installations whenever possible. [MP]
EE-2.4: Private Development
Encourage developers to incorporate public art into new development
sites and to participate in the Art in Public Places Program. [PA]
EE-2.5: Equitable Access
Provide all Burlingame community members with opportunities to
experience arts and culture by reducing barriers to entry, establishing
free and open community arts programs, and providing a range of arts
and cultural spaces for Burlingame’s diverse population. [PI, FB]
EE-2.6: Community-Based Institutions
Support community-based arts and culture institutions, and expand
partnerships to ensure long-term feasibility. [PA]
EE-2.7: Community Events
Support events that build community through a range of arts and cultural
opportunities. [PA]
X. ENGAGEMENT AND ENRICHMENT
EE-6 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Civic Engagement
Burlingame residents and business owners are passionate about their
community, and the City has created an environment in which the public
feels engaged and included. Burlingame’s governance structure will
continue to be open and participatory, promoting respectful public
discourse and democratic processes. The following goal and policies
bolster established public engagement mechanisms and ensure inclusive
decision-making processes that bring diverse people together in
meaningful ways.
Goal EE-3: Maintain an environment that promotes and encourages
productive public discourse.
EE-3.1: Councils, Committees, and Boards
Ensure that City decisions involve all interested community members by
continuing to use committees, councils, and boards consisting of
Burlingame residents, employees, and business owners.
EE-3.2: Diverse Representation
Ensure committees and decision-making bodies include representatives
that reflect the diversity of Burlingame’s population.
EE-3.3: Equitable Opportunities
Provide a range of opportunities for community participation in policies
and decision-making, and ensure access for Burlingame community
members of all ages, abilities, races, and socioeconomic statuses.
EE-3.4: Community Groups
Support and encourage neighborhood associations and other
community-based civic groups, and include these groups in decision-
making processes. [PA]
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | EE-7
EE-3.5: Public Outreach
Conduct outreach to educate Burlingame community members about
City issues and policies. [PI]
EE-3.6: Community Trust
Foster an environment of trust between Burlingame community members
and City government, and support the voices of all participants.
EE-3.7: Political Action
Promote tolerance of all legal forms of political action and protect the
rights of individual political expression.
X. ENGAGEMENT AND ENRICHMENT
EE-8 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
This page intentionally left blank.
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | IP-1
Chapter XI: IMPLEMENTATION
PROGRAMS
Table IP-1
Implementing Programs
Implementing Program
Estimated Timeframe(s) 5 Years 10 Years 15+ Years Annual On-going IP-1 Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance Update
City staff will review the current Zoning Code (Municipal Code
Title 25) and prepare a comprehensive update for City Council
adoption in order to align with the guiding principles, goals, and
policies of the General Plan.
√
Policy(ies) Implemented CC-3.10; CC-4.1 through CC-
12.8; 1.5; CC-2.5; ED-1.1 through
1.5; ED-2.1, 2.2; M-3.5; M-6.1
through 6.3
Program Category(ies) SR, DR, SO, MP, FB, PA
Responsible Department(s) Community Development
Supporting Department(s)
Central County Fire Department,
City Attorney, City Manager
(Sustainability Coordinator),
Public Works
Partner(s)
Funding Source(s) General Fund, Grants
XI. IMPLEMENTATION
IP-2 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Implementing Program
Estimated Timeframe(s) 5 Years 10 Years 15+ Years Annual On-going IP-2 Residential Design Guidebook
City staff will review the Residential Design Guidebook for
development in the City’s neighborhoods and prepare a
comprehensive update for City Council Adoption in order to align
with the guiding principles, goals, and polices of the updated
General Plan.
√ Policy(ies) Implemented CC-4.1 through 4.9; CC-10.1
Program Category(ies) DR, MP, FB, PA, SO
Responsible Department(s) Community Development
Supporting Department(s)
Central County Fire Department,
City Manager (Sustainability
Coordinator), Public Works
Partner(s)
Funding Source(s) General Fund, Grants
IP-3 Commercial Design Guidebook and Specific Plans
City staff will review the Commercial Design Guidebook together
with the adopted Specific Plans (Downtown, Bayfront, North
Burlingame/Rollins Road) and prepare a comprehensive update
for City Council Adoption in order for these documents to align
with the guiding principles, goals, and policies of the updated
General Plan.
√
Policy(ies) Implemented CC-5.1; CC-6.1 through 6.4; CC-
7.4 through CC-7.6; CC-8.3; CC-
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | IP-3
Implementing Program
Estimated Timeframe(s) 5 Years 10 Years 15+ Years Annual On-going 11.1 through 11.7; CC-12.1
through 12.10; ED-1.1 through
1.6; M-6.1; M-6.3
Program Category(ies) DR, MP, FB, PA, SO
Responsible Department(s) Community Development
Supporting Department(s)
Central County Fire Department,
City Attorney, City Manager
(Sustainability Coordinator),
Parks and Recreation, Public
Works
Partner(s)
Funding Source(s) General Fund, Grants
IP-4 Focused Development of Key Corridors
City staff will prepare, implement, and maintain a strategy for the
unique key corridors to maintain the character, businesses, and
marketing of the Broadway district, Rollins Road, Downtown, and
the Bayfront. Based on the findings of the strategy, City staff will
develop action programs to promote development opportunities
within these key business districts.
√ √
Policy(ies) Implemented CC-7.1 through 7.10; CC-9.1
through 9.3; CC-10.2 through
10.7; ED-1.1 through 1.6
Program Category(ies) DR
Responsible Department(s) Community Development
XI. IMPLEMENTATION
IP-4 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Implementing Program
Estimated Timeframe(s) 5 Years 10 Years 15+ Years Annual On-going Supporting Department(s)
Central County Fire Department,
City Manager (Sustainability
Coordinator), Public Works,
Parks and Recreation,
Partner(s)
Funding Source(s) General Fund, Grants
IP-7 State Historic Building Code
The City will continue to allow use of the State Historic Code for
the rehabilitation of historic resources within the Downtown
Specific Plan Area.
√ Policy(ies) Implemented CC-3.2, CC-3.3, CC-3.4, CC-3.6
Program Category(ies) MP, SO
Responsible Department(s) Community Development
Supporting Department(s)
Central County Fire Department
City Attorney
Partner(s) State Historic Preservation Office
Funding Source(s) General Fund, Grants
IP-8 Mills Act Program
The City will continue to carry out a California Mills Act Property
Tax Abatement Program within the Downtown Specific Plan Area.
√ √
Policy(ies) Implemented CC-3.7
Program Category(ies) MP, AC, PA
Responsible Department(s) Community Development
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | IP-5
Implementing Program
Estimated Timeframe(s) 5 Years 10 Years 15+ Years Annual On-going Supporting Department(s)
Finance, City Attorney
Partner(s) San Mateo County,
Funding Source(s) General Fund, Grants
IP-9 Historic Preservation Resource Center
City staff will prepare and maintain a web-based resource center
to promote Burlingame’s local historic resources and to provide
resources and incentives to encourage historic preservation.
√ √ Policy(ies) Implemented CC-3.1 through 3.11
Program Category(ies) DR, MP, AC, PA, PI
Responsible Department(s) Community Development
Supporting Department(s)
Library
Partner(s) Burlingame Historical Society
Funding Source(s) General Fund, Grants
IP-10 Branding and Marketing Program
City staff will develop and maintain a branding and marketing
strategy and promotional materials to maximize the effectiveness
of business retention and attraction efforts.
√ √
Policy(ies) Implemented ED-2.12 through 2.17
Program Category(ies) SO, MP, PA, PI
Responsible Department(s) Community Development
XI. IMPLEMENTATION
IP-6 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Implementing Program
Estimated Timeframe(s) 5 Years 10 Years 15+ Years Annual On-going Supporting Department(s)
City Manager, City Attorney,
Library, Parks and Recreation
Partner(s) Business Improvement Districts,
Chamber of Commerce, City
Council Economic Development
Subcommittee
Funding Source(s) General Fund, Grants
IP-11 Business Resource Center and Website
City staff will develop and maintain a business resource center
and web pages.
√ √
Policy(ies) Implemented ED-2.6 through 2.17
Program Category(ies) SO, MP, PA, PI
Responsible Department(s) Community Development
Supporting Department(s)
City Manager
Partner(s) Chamber of Commerce, City
Council Economic Development
Subcommittee
Funding Source(s) General Fund, Grants
IP-12 Business Attraction, Expansion, and Retention Program
City staff will carry out a comprehensive business attraction,
expansion, and retention program.
√
Policy(ies) Implemented ED-2.6 through 2.17
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | IP-7
Implementing Program
Estimated Timeframe(s) 5 Years 10 Years 15+ Years Annual On-going Program Category(ies) SO, MP, PA, PI
Responsible Department(s) Community Development
Supporting Department(s)
City Manager
Partner(s) City Council Economic
Development Subcommittee
Funding Source(s) General Fund
IP-13 Multimodal LOS and Design Standards
City staff will propose for the City Council’s adoption multi-modal
level of service (LOS) standards and a methodology that define
the process for determining which non-vehicular transportation
and transit improvements will be implemented. The multimodal
LOS program, design standards, and methodology should be
consistent with those adopted by San Mateo County.
√ Policy(ies) Implemented CC-1.2 through 1.4; M-1.1
through 1.4; M-2.1 through 2.5;
M3.1 through 3.8; M-4.1 through
4.5
Program Category(ies) DR, MP, AC, FB
Responsible Department(s) Public Works
Supporting Department(s)
Central County Fire Department,
Community Development,
Police
Partner(s)
Funding Source(s) General Fund
XI. IMPLEMENTATION
IP-8 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Implementing Program
Estimated Timeframe(s) 5 Years 10 Years 15+ Years Annual On-going IP-14 Multimodal LOS Guidelines
City staff will update the City’s Traffic Study Preparation
Guidelines to reflect the multi-modal LOS policies, standards, and
methodologies and to provide additional flexibility in
implementing multimodal transportation improvements.
√ Policy(ies) Implemented M-1.1 through 1.4
Program Category(ies) MP, AC, SO, FB
Responsible Department(s) Public Works
Supporting Department(s)
Central County Fire Department,
Community Development,
Police
Partner(s)
Funding Source(s) General Fund
IP-15 Survey Transportation and Transit Gaps and Barriers
City staff will coordinate with regional transit organizations to
assess implementation of transit services and provide updates to
the City Council accordingly.
√
Policy(ies) Implemented M-1.3; M-3.4; M-4.1 through 4.5
Program Category(ies) MP, FB, SO, AC
Responsible Department(s) Public Works
Supporting Department(s)
Community Development
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | IP-9
Implementing Program
Estimated Timeframe(s) 5 Years 10 Years 15+ Years Annual On-going Partner(s) C/CAG, SamTrans, Caltrain,
BART
Funding Source(s) General Fund
IP-16 Regional Connection Improvements
City staff will coordinate with regional agencies and adjacent
communities to identify better connections between city
roadways, pedestrian ways, bicycle facilities, transit corridors, and
neighboring and regional transportation networks.
√ Policy(ies) Implemented M-1.3; M-3.4; M-4.1 through 4.5
Program Category(ies) MP, FB, SO, AC
Responsible Department(s) Public Works
Supporting Department(s)
City Manager
Partner(s) C/CAG, SamTrans, San Mateo
County, City of Millbrae, Town of
Hillsborough, City of San Mateo
Funding Source(s) General Fund
IP-17 Collision Data Reporting
City staff will report traffic collision data for automobiles, bicycles,
and pedestrians to the City Council as needed and recommend
improvements as applicable.
√
Policy(ies) Implemented M-2.3; M-3.2
Program Category(ies) DR, MP
XI. IMPLEMENTATION
IP-10 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Implementing Program
Estimated Timeframe(s) 5 Years 10 Years 15+ Years Annual On-going Responsible Department(s) Public Works
Supporting Department(s)
Police
Partner(s)
Funding Source(s) General Fund, Grants
IP-18 Complete Streets Implementation
City staff will use a phased approach to evaluate and implement
the proposed Complete Streets improvements identified in the
Mobility Element. A priority list will be established through the
Capital Improvements program.
√ Policy(ies) Implemented CC-1.2 through 1.4; M-1.1; M-2.1
through 2.5; M-3.1 through 3.7
Program Category(ies) DR, MP, AC
Responsible Department(s) Public Works
Supporting Department(s)
Central County Fire Department,
Community Development,
Police
Partner(s)
Funding Source(s) General Fund, Grants
IP-20 Complete Streets Evaluation
City staff will periodically evaluate and prepare recommendations
on how well the streets and transportation network are serving
each category of users.
√
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | IP-11
Implementing Program
Estimated Timeframe(s) 5 Years 10 Years 15+ Years Annual On-going Policy(ies) Implemented CC-1.2 through 1.4; M-1.1; M-2.1
through 2.5; M-3.1 through 3.7
Program Category(ies) DR, MP, AC
Responsible Department(s) Public Works
Supporting Department(s)
Central County Fire Department,
Community Development,
Police
Partner(s)
Funding Source(s) General Fund
IP-21 Traffic-calming Measures
City staff will continue to identify neighborhoods where
appropriate traffic-calming measures could help reduce speeding
and create safer streets. This will largely be driven by requests
from residents and business/property owners. The CIP will be
updated accordingly.
√ Policy(ies) Implemented CC-1.3
Program Category(ies) DR
Responsible Department(s) Public Works
Supporting Department(s)
Central County Fire Department,
Community Development,
Police
Partner(s)
Funding Source(s) General Fund, Grants
IP-22 Pedestrian Master Plan √
XI. IMPLEMENTATION
IP-12 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Implementing Program
Estimated Timeframe(s) 5 Years 10 Years 15+ Years Annual On-going The City will develop a Pedestrian Master Plan for adoption by the
City Council that includes a planned sidewalk system, pedestrian
design standards, and an implementation program. As part of the
preparation of the Pedestrian Master Plan, staff will review and
incorporate (as appropriate) planned improvements and
programs that connect Burlingame’s existing and planned
pedestrian facilities to regional walking and bicycle facilities.
Policy(ies) Implemented CC-1.1, CC-1.3; M-1.4; M-2.1
through 2.5; M-17.1, M-17.2
Program Category(ies) SR, DR, MP, SO, FB, AC
Responsible Department(s) Public Works
Supporting Department(s)
City Manager (Sustainability
Coordinator), Community
Development, Parks and
Recreation
Partner(s) Bicycle/Pedestrian Interest
Groups, Burlingame School
District, San Mateo Union High
School District
Funding Source(s) General Fund, Grants
IP-23 Bicycle Master Plan
The City will develop, adopt, and implement a comprehensive
Bicycle Master Plan. As part of the preparation of the Bicycle
Master Plan, City staff will review and incorporate (as appropriate)
√
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | IP-13
Implementing Program
Estimated Timeframe(s) 5 Years 10 Years 15+ Years Annual On-going planned improvements and programs that connect Burlingame’s
existing and planned bike facilities to regional walking and bicycle
facilities, including the Bay Trail.
Policy(ies) Implemented CC-1.1, CC-1.3; M-1.4; M-2.1
through 2.5; M-17.1, M-17.2
Program Category(ies) SR, DR, MP, SO, FB, AC
Responsible Department(s) Public Works
Supporting Department(s)
City Manager (Sustainability
Coordinator), Community
Development, Parks and
Recreation
Partner(s) Bicycle/Pedestrian Interest
Groups, Burlingame School
District, San Mateo Union High
School District
Funding Source(s) General Fund, Grants
IP-24 Transit Rider Information
City staff will coordinate with regional agencies to identify
additional options for informing transit riders of the availability
and timing (e.g., headways) of public transit, and work with the
respective agencies to inform the City Council on updates to the
transit information program.
√
Policy(ies) Implemented M-4.1 through 4.5
Responsible Department(s) Public Works
XI. IMPLEMENTATION
IP-14 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Implementing Program
Estimated Timeframe(s) 5 Years 10 Years 15+ Years Annual On-going Supporting Department(s)
City Manager (Sustainability
Coordinator)
Partner(s) San Mateo County Transit
District
Funding Source(s) General Fund
Funding Source(s) General Fund
IP-26 Citywide TDM Plan
The City will develop a citywide Transportation Demand
Management (TDM) Plan for adoption by the City Council, which
could include strategies to reduce peak-hour traffic, such as
staggered work hours, flexible schedule options, local transit
service, and telecommuting from home offices.
√ √ Policy(ies) Implemented CC-1.1, CC-1.6; M-5.1, M-5.2; M-
8.2
Program Category(ies) SR, DR, MP, PI
Responsible Department(s) Community Development
Supporting Department(s)
Public Works, City Manager
(Sustainability Coordinator), City
Attorney
Partner(s) Commute.org
Funding Source(s) General Fund, Grants
IP-28 Off-Street Parking Regulations Comprehensive Update
City staff will propose amendments to the off-street parking
regulations in BMC Title 25 for adoption by the City Council to
√
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | IP-15
Implementing Program
Estimated Timeframe(s) 5 Years 10 Years 15+ Years Annual On-going incorporate smart growth principles and to incentivize walking,
biking, use of public transit, and use of emerging transportation
options.
Policy(ies) Implemented CC-1.1, CC-1.5; M-7.1 through
7.7; M-8.1, M-8.2
Program Category(ies) SR, SO, DR, FB, MP, PI
Responsible Department(s) Community Development
Supporting Department(s)
Central County Fire Department,
City Attorney, Public Works
Partner(s)
Funding Source(s) General Fund
IP-29 Parking Management Plans for Downtown and the
Broadway District
City staff will prepare and propose Parking Management Plans for
adoption by the City Council for the Downtown and Broadway
commercial districts.
√
Policy(ies) Implemented CC-1.1, CC-1.5; M-7.1 through
7.7; M-8.1
Program Category(ies) SR, SO, DR, FB
Responsible Department(s) Community Development,
Public Works
Supporting Department(s)
Central County Fire Department,
City Manager
Partner(s) Business Improvement Districts
(BIDs)
Funding Source(s) General Fund, Grants, BID Funds
XI. IMPLEMENTATION
IP-16 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Implementing Program
Estimated Timeframe(s) 5 Years 10 Years 15+ Years Annual On-going IP-31 Various Street Redesign of Roadways
Subject to available funding, the City staff will carry out various
roadway redesigns to improve mobility and safety, such as but not
limited to:
• The roadway improvement/reconfiguration plans for
California Drive, Bayshore Highway, and the
Broadway/railroad grade separation identified in the Mobility
Element
• The roundabout reconfiguration of Bellevue Avenue, Primrose
Road, and Douglas Avenue to allow for improved pedestrian
movement.
• The improvements to El Camino Real that might be
accomplished in coordination with Caltrans to achieve the
City’s mobility goals without compromising the tree-lined
character of the boulevard, including implementing
recommendations of the El Camino Real Task Force as
appropriate.
√
Policy(ies) Implemented M-1.1; M-1.4; M-2.4; M-3.1; M-
3.3; M-10.1; M-11.1; M-12.2; M-
14.1; M-14.3
Program Category(ies) SR, SO, DR, FB
Responsible Department(s) Public Works
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | IP-17
Implementing Program
Estimated Timeframe(s) 5 Years 10 Years 15+ Years Annual On-going Supporting Department(s)
Central County Fire Department
Community Development,
Police
Partner(s)
Funding Source(s) General Funds, Grants, Impact
Fees
IP-32 Capital Improvement Program
City staff will annually review and update the Capital Improvement
Program to ensure adequate and timely provision of public facility
and municipal utility provisions to address water systems,
wastewater systems, storm drain systems, etc.
√ Policy(ies) Implemented M-3.7; IF-1.1 through 1.7; IF 2.1
through 2.12; IF 3.1 through 3.6;
IF 4.1 through 4.8
Program Category(ies) FB, SO, MP, PI, PA, DR
Responsible Department(s) Public Works
Supporting Department(s)
City Manager, Finance, Parks
and Recreation
Partner(s)
Funding Source(s) General Fund
IP-33 Water Conservation Programs
City staff will continue to develop and implement water
conservation programs that decrease water use and heighten
√
XI. IMPLEMENTATION
IP-18 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Implementing Program
Estimated Timeframe(s) 5 Years 10 Years 15+ Years Annual On-going users’ awareness of the need to conserve, even during periods of
non-drought.
Policy(ies) Implemented CC-1.1, CC-1.7; IF-2.10
Program Category(ies) SR, DR, SO, PI
Responsible Department(s) Public Works
Supporting Department(s)
Central County Fire Department,
City Manager (Sustainability
Coordinator), Community
Development, Finance
Partner(s) SFPUC
Funding Source(s) General Fund
IP-36 Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance
City staff will propose to the City Council as necessary that the
Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance be
updated to be consistent with the processing capabilities at the
transfer stations and waste facilities that process Burlingame’s
construction and demolition debris.
√
Policy(ies) Implemented CC-1.13; IF-5.5
Program Category(ies) SR, DR
Responsible Department(s) Community Development
Supporting Department(s)
Public Works
Partner(s) Rethink Waste, Recology of San
Mateo County
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | IP-19
Implementing Program
Estimated Timeframe(s) 5 Years 10 Years 15+ Years Annual On-going Funding Source(s) Recycling Fund
IP-37 Rainwater Harvesting and Greywater Systems
City staff will evaluate the appropriateness of amending the City’s
building and development codes to support and encourage
rainwater harvesting and greywater systems.
√ Policy(ies) Implemented CC-1.1, CC-1.7; If-2.11; IF-4.8
Program Category(ies) SR, DR, SO, PI
Responsible Department(s) Community Development
Supporting Department(s)
City Attorney, City Manager
(Sustainability Coordinator),
Finance, Public Works
Partner(s)
Funding Source(s) General Fund
IP-37 Underground Utility Ordinance
The City will continue to require private developers to
underground utilities along the street frontage of their project site
when new or substantial development occurs.
√ Policy(ies) Implemented IF-6.3
Program Category(ies) PR, MP
Responsible Department(s) Public Works
Supporting Department(s)
City Attorney Community
Development
Partner(s)
XI. IMPLEMENTATION
IP-20 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Implementing Program
Estimated Timeframe(s) 5 Years 10 Years 15+ Years Annual On-going Funding Source(s) N/A
IP-42 Disaster and Emergency Program
Central County Fire Department staff and City staff will prepare a
comprehensive update of the City’s disaster and emergency
program.
√ Policy(ies) Implemented CS-3.1 through 3.15
Program Category(ies) SO< FB< PI
Responsible Department(s) Central County Fire Department
Supporting Department(s)
City Manager, Finance, , Parks
and Recreation, Police, Public
Works
Partner(s)
Funding Source(s) General Fund, Grants
IP-43 Disaster Drills
Central County Fire Department staff will conduct training and
exercise drills to train City staff and test the effectiveness of the
Emergency Operations Plan and operational readiness of the
Emergency Operations Center.
√
Policy(ies) Implemented CS-2.8; CS-3.2; CS-3.7
Program Category(ies) SO, AC, PI
Responsible Department(s) Central County Fire Department
Supporting Department(s)
Community Development, City
Manager, Human Resources,
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | IP-21
Implementing Program
Estimated Timeframe(s) 5 Years 10 Years 15+ Years Annual On-going Library, Finance, Parks and
Recreation, Police, Public Works
Partner(s)
Funding Source(s) General Fund
IP-44 Affiliate Volunteers
The Central County Fire Department will continue its volunteer
program for Burlingame residents certified in Community
Emergency Response Training (CERT) and promote the “Get
Ready” program for all citizens.
√ Policy(ies) Implemented CS-3.5; CS-3.10, CS-3.13
Program Category(ies) SO, FB, PI
Responsible Department(s) Central County Fire Department
Supporting Department(s)
City Manager
Partner(s) Affiliate Volunteer Groups
Funding Source(s) General Fund, Grants
IP-45 Emergency Communication System
The City and Central County Fire Department will participate in
the SMC Alert emergency communication system (the system for
sending emergency information and updates in San Mateo
County).
√
Policy(ies) Implemented CS-3.5; CS-3.10; CS-3.13
Program Category(ies) SO, FB, PI
XI. IMPLEMENTATION
IP-22 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Implementing Program
Estimated Timeframe(s) 5 Years 10 Years 15+ Years Annual On-going Responsible Department(s) Central County Fire Department,
Police
Supporting Department(s)
City Manager, Parks and
Recreation, Police, Public Works
Partner(s) San Mateo County Office of
Emergency Services
Funding Source(s) General Fund, Grants, Impact
Fees
IP-46 Seismic and Geologic Safety Standards
The City will review and update (as necessary) its seismic and
geologic safety standards when there is an update to the Uniform
Building Code and the California Building Code.
√ Policy(ies) Implemented CS-7.1; CS-7.4
Program Category(ies) DR
Responsible Department(s) Community Development
Supporting Department(s)
City Attorney, Public Works
Partner(s)
Funding Source(s) General Fund
IP-47 Seismic Retrofit Program
City staff will evaluate and make recommendations as appropriate
regarding creation of a seismic retrofit program to encourage
property owners to upgrade buildings, especially masonry
buildings, soft-story buildings (i.e., buildings designed with
√
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | IP-23
Implementing Program
Estimated Timeframe(s) 5 Years 10 Years 15+ Years Annual On-going minimal bracing on the first floor), and critical facilities (i.e.
hospitals, schools, and long-term care facilities).
Policy(ies) Implemented CS-7.2; CS-7.3
Program Category(ies) DR
Responsible Department(s) Community Development
Supporting Department(s)
City Attorney
Partner(s)
Funding Source(s) General Fund, Grants
IP-49 Flood Plain Management Ordinance Comprehensive
Update
City staff will coordinate with the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) and San Mateo County on updates
to the Burlingame flood maps and countywide efforts to address
sea level rise.
√ Policy(ies) Implemented CS-5.1 through 5.7
Program Category(ies)
Responsible Department(s) Public Works
Supporting Department(s)
City Attorney, City Manager,
Community Development
Partner(s) FEMA, Sea Change San Mateo
County
Funding Source(s) General Fund, Grants
XI. IMPLEMENTATION
IP-24 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Implementing Program
Estimated Timeframe(s) 5 Years 10 Years 15+ Years Annual On-going IP-51 Noise
Policy(ies) Implemented
Program Category(ies)
Responsible Department(s)
Supporting Department(s)
Partner(s)
Funding Source(s)
IP-52 Hazardous Materials
Policy(ies) Implemented
Program Category(ies)
Responsible Department(s) Central County Fire Department,
Public Works
Supporting Department(s)
Partner(s) San Mateo County
Environmental Health
Funding Source(s)
IP-53 Healthy Community Program
City staff will coordinate with local health officials, planners,
nonprofit organizations, businesses, hospitals, local health clinics,
√
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | IP-25
Implementing Program
Estimated Timeframe(s) 5 Years 10 Years 15+ Years Annual On-going and community groups on strategies, programs, and practices
that prioritize the overall health of Burlingame residents and
employees.
Policy(ies) Implemented CC-1.3; CC-1.4; HP1.1 through
HP1.14
Program Category(ies) DR, SO, PA, AC, PI
Responsible Department(s) City Manager (Sustainability
Coordinator)
Supporting Department(s)
Community Development, Parks
and Recreation
Partner(s) Chamber of Commerce, Mills
Peninsula Medical Center,
Sustainable San Mateo County
Funding Source(s) General Fund, Grants
IP-54 Healthy Development Checklist
City staff will develop a checklist of health strategies that could be
incorporated into the design of discretionary development
projects and plans. Staff will share this resource with project
applicants to help them design their projects to promote
community health.
√
Policy(ies) Implemented CC-1.3; CC-1.4; HP-1.5; HP-1.13
Program Category(ies) DR, MP, SO, AC
Responsible Department(s) City Manager (Sustainability
Coordinator)
XI. IMPLEMENTATION
IP-26 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Implementing Program
Estimated Timeframe(s) 5 Years 10 Years 15+ Years Annual On-going Supporting Department(s)
City Attorney, Community
Development, Parks and
Recreation, Public Works
Partner(s) Sustainable San Mateo County
Funding Source(s) General Fund, Grants
IP-56 Residents in Need
City staff will review service assistance programs, grants, loans,
and permitting procedures to maintain or modify homes to meet
the needs of residents in need. Staff will assemble a clearinghouse
of information providing referrals on services, financial assistance,
or incentives available to people in need.
√
Policy(ies) Implemented HP-1.9
Program Category(ies) DR, HS
Responsible Department(s) Community Development
Supporting Department(s)
Partner(s)
Central County Fire Department,
City Attorney, City Manager,
Finance
Funding Source(s) General Fund, Grants
IP-57 Urban Forest Management Plan
City staff will maintain the Urban Forest Management Plan.
√
Policy(ies) Implemented CC-1.1; CC-1.14; CC-2.1 through
2.7
Program Category(ies) SR
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | IP-27
Implementing Program
Estimated Timeframe(s) 5 Years 10 Years 15+ Years Annual On-going Responsible Department(s) Parks and Recreation
Supporting Department(s)
Central County Fire Department,
City Attorney, City Manager,
Community Development,
Public Works
Partner(s)
Funding Source(s) General Fund, Grants
IP-58 Climate Action Plan
City staff will prepare a climate change sustainability assessment
strategy to evaluate the City’s susceptibility to climate change
impacts and identify tools and strategies to mitigate impacts and
create a more resilient city.
√ √ Policy(ies) Implemented CC-1.1; CC-1.9 through 1.15
Program Category(ies) SR
Responsible Department(s) City Manager (Sustainability
Coordinator)
Supporting Department(s)
Community Development,
Public Works
Partner(s)
Funding Source(s) General Fund, Grants
IP-59 Parks
Policy(ies) Implemented
Program Category(ies)
XI. IMPLEMENTATION
IP-28 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Implementing Program
Estimated Timeframe(s) 5 Years 10 Years 15+ Years Annual On-going Responsible Department(s)
Supporting Department(s)
Partner(s)
Funding Source(s)
IP-60 Scenic Resources
Policy(ies) Implemented
Program Category(ies)
Responsible Department(s)
Supporting Department(s)
Partner(s)
Funding Source(s)
IP-61 Bio Resources
.
Policy(ies) Implemented
Program Category(ies)
Responsible Department(s)
Supporting Department(s)
Partner(s)
Funding Source(s)
IP-62 Waterway Protection
Policy(ies) Implemented
Program Category(ies)
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | IP-29
Implementing Program
Estimated Timeframe(s) 5 Years 10 Years 15+ Years Annual On-going Responsible Department(s)
Supporting Department(s)
Partner(s)
Funding Source(s)
IP-63 Recycled Water Plan
City staff will evaluate the feasibility of delivering recycled water to
customers to increase the use of recycled water.
√
Policy(ies) Implemented CC-1.1; CC-1.7; IF-2.11
Program Category(ies) SR, DR, SO, PI
Responsible Department(s) Public Works
Supporting Department(s)
City Attorney, City Manager,
Community Development,
Finance
Partner(s)
Funding Source(s) General Fund, Grants
IP-64 Water Conservation Standards
The City will continue to maintain Water Conservation Standards
within the Municipal Code for households, businesses, industries,
and public infrastructure.
√
Policy(ies) Implemented CC-1.1; CC-1.7; CC-1.8; IF-2.10
Program Category(ies) SR, DR, SO, PI
Responsible Department(s) Public Works
XI. IMPLEMENTATION
IP-30 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Implementing Program
Estimated Timeframe(s) 5 Years 10 Years 15+ Years Annual On-going Supporting Department(s)
Central County Fire Department,
City Attorney, City Manager
(Sustainability Coordinator),
Community Development
Finance, Parks and Recreation
Partner(s)
Funding Source(s) General Fund
IP-65 Energy Reduction Initiative
City staff will develop and implement a public information and
education campaign to encourage every household and every
business to reduce their energy consumption.
√ √ Policy(ies) Implemented CC-1.1; CC-1.8
Program Category(ies) SR, SO
Responsible Department(s) City Manager (Sustainability
Coordinator)
Supporting Department(s)
Community Development,
Public Works
Partner(s)
Funding Source(s) General Fund, Grants
IP-66 Financing Program for Energy Efficiency Retrofits
City staff will continue to promote Property Assessed Clean
Energy (PACE) programs, which are energy efficiency retrofit
financing programs for residential, commercial, or industrial
properties.
√ √
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | IP-31
Implementing Program
Estimated Timeframe(s) 5 Years 10 Years 15+ Years Annual On-going
Policy(ies) Implemented CC-1.1; CC-1.8
Program Category(ies) SR, SO
Responsible Department(s) City Manager (Sustainability
Coordinator)
Supporting Department(s)
Community Development,
Finance
Partner(s) Authorized PACE administrators
Funding Source(s) General Fund, Grants
IP-68 City Building Audits and Reports
City staff will conduct periodic energy efficiency audits of City-
owned buildings to identify opportunities for efficiency
improvements from both operations and equipment upgrades.
√
Policy(ies) Implemented CC-1.1, CC-1.11
Program Category(ies) SR, DR
Responsible Department(s) Public Works
Supporting Department(s)
Central County Fire Department,
City Manager (Sustainability
Coordinator), Community
Development, Finance, Parks
and Recreation
Partner(s)
Funding Source(s) General Fund, Grants
IP-69 Carbon Management Activities Program √ √
XI. IMPLEMENTATION
IP-32 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Implementing Program
Estimated Timeframe(s) 5 Years 10 Years 15+ Years Annual On-going As part of the Climate Action Plan, City staff will track carbon
sequestration activities on private and public lands, such as
planting trees or managing wetlands.
Policy(ies) Implemented CC-1.1; HP-2.1 through 2.15
Program Category(ies) SR, MP, AC
Responsible Department(s) City Manager (Sustainability
Coordinator)
Supporting Department(s)
Community Development, Parks
and Recreation, Public Works
Partner(s)
Funding Source(s) General Fund, Grants
IP-71 Environmental Education Programs
City staff will coordinate with San Mateo County Energy Watch,
Pacific Gas and Electric Company, non-profit organizations, and
other agencies and businesses to continue with environmental
education programs.
√
Policy(ies) Implemented CC-1.1; CC-1.9 through 1.15
Program Category(ies) SR, DR
Responsible Department(s) City Manager (Sustainability
Coordinator)
Supporting Department(s)
Community Development,
Library, Public Works
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | IP-33
Implementing Program
Estimated Timeframe(s) 5 Years 10 Years 15+ Years Annual On-going Partner(s) Chamber of Commerce, San
Mateo County Energy Watch,
PG&E
Funding Source(s) General Fund, Grants
IP-72 Library as an Education and Lifelong Learning Resource
The Library will continue to serve as an education and lifelong
learning resource to promote and provide access to local and
web-based educational resources, programs, and services for
parents, students, and adults.
√ √ Policy(ies) Implemented EE-1.1 through 1.9
Program Category(ies) AC, PR, PA, DR
Responsible Department(s) Library
Supporting Department(s)
City Manager, Parks and
Recreation
Partner(s)
Funding Source(s) General Fund, Grants
IP-73 Education Partnership
The City will maintain its partnership with the Burlingame Unified
School District in order to offer enrichment, athletic, safety, and
other programs and services to Burlingame’s youth.
√
Policy(ies) Implemented EE-1.4; EE-1.9
Program Category(ies) AC, PR, PA, DR
Responsible Department(s) City Manager
XI. IMPLEMENTATION
IP-34 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
Implementing Program
Estimated Timeframe(s) 5 Years 10 Years 15+ Years Annual On-going Supporting Department(s)
Library, Parks and Recreation,
Police
Partner(s) Burlingame School District
Funding Source(s) General Fund
IP-75 Library Strategic Plan
City staff will maintain the Library Strategic Plan and periodically
prepare a report that evaluates the implementation of the Library
Strategic Plan.
√ Policy(ies) Implemented EE-1.10 through 1.15
Program Category(ies) AC, PR, PA, DR
Responsible Department(s) Library
Supporting Department(s)
City Manager
Partner(s)
Funding Source(s) General Fund, Grants
IP-77 Public Facilities Impact Fees
City staff will update the Public Facilities Impact Fee Feasibility
Study and Nexus Report to assess public impact fees for public
services. Based on the findings of the Feasibility Study and Nexus
Report and direction from the City Council, staff may recommend
that the City Council amend the Public Facilities Impact Fees.
√
Policy(ies) Implemented M-9.1, M-9.2, EE-1.10
Program Category(ies) MP, AC, FB, SO
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | IP-35
Implementing Program
Estimated Timeframe(s) 5 Years 10 Years 15+ Years Annual On-going Responsible Department(s) Finance
Supporting Department(s)
Central County Fire Department,
City Attorney, City Manager,
Community Development,
Library, Parks and Recreation,
Police, Public Works
Partner(s)
Funding Source(s) General Fund
XI. IMPLEMENTATION
IP-36 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
This page intentionally left blank.
Draft Environmental
Impact Report
SCH#: 2017082018
June 28, 2018
Consultant to the City
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame Table of Contents
June 28, 2018
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................ 1-1
1.1 Purpose and Scope .................................................................................................. 1-3
1.2 Organization of the Program EIR ............................................................................. 1-4
1.3 Approach to EIR Analysis ........................................................................................ 1-5
1.4 Scoping and Public Review ...................................................................................... 1-5
1.5 Citation ..................................................................................................................... 1-7
Chapter 2 Summary ................................................................................................................. 2-1
2.1 Proposed 2040 General Plan ................................................................................... 2-1
2.2 Environmental Issues ............................................................................................... 2-2
2.3 Summary of Significant Impacts and Mitigation Measures ....................................... 2-2
2.4 Summary of Alternatives ........................................................................................ 2-10
Chapter 3 Project Description ................................................................................................ 3 - 1
3.1 Background .............................................................................................................. 3-1
3.2 Project Location and Environmental Setting ............................................................ 3-1
3.3 Existing General Plan ............................................................................................... 3-2
3.4 Burlingame 2040 General Plan (Envision Burlingame) ............................................ 3-2
3.5 Intended Use of this EIR ........................................................................................ 3-11
Chapter 4 Introduction to Environmental Analysis .............................................................. 4-1
4.1 Program EIR Evaluation of Impacts ......................................................................... 4-1
4.2 “Significant Impacts” and Other Key EIR Terminology ............................................. 4-2
Chapter 5 Aesthetics and Visual Resources ......................................................................... 5-1
5.1 Setting ...................................................................................................................... 5-1
5.2 Environmental Effects .............................................................................................. 5-4
Chapter 6 Agricultural and Forestry Resources ................................................................... 6-1
6.1 Setting ...................................................................................................................... 6-1
6.2 Environmental Effects .............................................................................................. 6-2
Chapter 7 Air Quality ............................................................................................................... 7-1
7.1 Environmental Setting .............................................................................................. 7-1
7.2 Regulatory Setting .................................................................................................. 7-12
7.3 Environmental Effects ............................................................................................ 7-16
Chapter 8 Biological Resources ............................................................................................. 8-1
8.1 Setting ...................................................................................................................... 8-1
8.2 Environmental Effects .............................................................................................. 8-8
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame Table of Contents
June 28, 2018
Chapter 9 Geology, Soils, and Minerals ................................................................................ 9-1
9.1 Setting ...................................................................................................................... 9-1
9.2 Environmental Effects .............................................................................................. 9-3
Chapter 10 Greenhouse Gas Emissions .............................................................................. 10-1
10.1 Setting .................................................................................................................. 10-1
10.2 Regulatory Setting ................................................................................................ 10-9
10.3 Environmental Effects ........................................................................................ 10-22
Chapter 11 Hazards and Hazardous Materials .................................................................... 11-1
11.1 Setting .................................................................................................................. 11-1
11.2 Environmental Effects .......................................................................................... 11-6
Chapter 12 Historic and Cultural Resource ......................................................................... 12-1
12.1 Setting .................................................................................................................. 12-1
12.2 Environmental Effects .......................................................................................... 12-4
Chapter 13 Hydrology and Water Quality ............................................................................ 13-1
13.1 Setting .................................................................................................................. 13-1
13.2 Environmental Effects .......................................................................................... 13-4
Chapter 14 Land Use and Planning ...................................................................................... 14-1
14.1 Setting .................................................................................................................. 14-1
14.2 Environmental Effects .......................................................................................... 14-8
Chapter 15 Noise and Vibration ............................................................................................ 15-1
15.1 Setting .................................................................................................................. 15-1
15.2 Regulatory Setting .............................................................................................. 15-16
15.3 Environmental Effects ........................................................................................ 15-21
Chapter 16 Population and Housing .................................................................................... 16-1
16.1 Setting .................................................................................................................. 16-1
16.2 Environmental Effects .......................................................................................... 16-2
Chapter 17 Public Services ................................................................................................... 17-1
17.1 Setting .................................................................................................................. 17-1
17.2 Environmental Effects .......................................................................................... 17-5
Chapter 18 Transportation and Circulation ......................................................................... 18-1
18.1 Setting .................................................................................................................. 18-1
18.2 Environmental Effects .......................................................................................... 18-6
Chapter 19 Tribal Cultural Resources .................................................................................. 19-1
19.1 Setting .................................................................................................................. 19-1
19.2 Environmental Effects .......................................................................................... 19-3
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame Table of Contents
June 28, 2018
Chapter 20 Utilities and Service Systems ........................................................................... 20-1
20.1 Setting .................................................................................................................. 20-1
20.2 Environmental Effects .......................................................................................... 20-5
Chapter 21 Alternatives ......................................................................................................... 21-1
21.1 Purpose ................................................................................................................ 21-1
21.2 Rationale for Alternative Selection ....................................................................... 21-1
21.3 Alternatives Considered ....................................................................................... 21-2
21.4 Environmentally Superior Alternative ................................................................. 21-11
Chapter 22 CEQA Mandated Components .......................................................................... 22-1
22.1 Cumulative Impacts 22-1
22.2 Growth-Inducing Effects ....................................................................................... 22-7
22.3 Significant Unavoidable Impacts .......................................................................... 22-8
22.4 Irreversible Environmental Changes .................................................................... 22-9
22.5 Effects Not Found to be Significant .................................................................... 22-10
22.6 Energy ................................................................................................................ 22-10
Chapter 23 EIR Preparers ...................................................................................................... 23-1
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Air Quality Data
Appendix B: Greenhouse Emissions Data
Appendix C: Noise Data
Appendix D: Traffic Data
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame Table of Contents
June 28, 2018
FIGURES
Figure 3-1 Regional Context Map ............................................................................................. 3-1
Figure 3-2 Planning Area .......................................................................................................... 3-2
Figure 3-3 Existing Land Use Plan ............................................................................................ 3-6
Figure 3-4 Land Use Plan ......................................................................................................... 3-6
Figure 3-5 Neighborhoods Context Diagram ............................................................................ 3-7
Figure 7-1 SFO Airport, Prevailing Wind Conditions ................................................................. 7-6
Figure 8-1 Existing Vegetation Communities ............................................................................ 8-3
Figure 14-1 Existing Land Use in Planning Area .................................................................... 14-3
Figure 15-1 Noise Measurement Locations ............................................................................ 15-8
Figure 15-2 Existing 2017 Noise Contours ........................................................................... 15-12
Figure 15-3 Future 2040 Noise Contours .............................................................................. 15-32
Figure 18-1 Multimodal Circulation Network ........................................................................... 18-2
Figure 18-2 Transit Network .................................................................................................... 18-2
Figure 18-3 Bicycle Network ................................................................................................... 18-2
Figure 18-4 Proposed Intersections ........................................................................................ 18-9
TABLES
Table 1-1 Summary of Scoping Comments ............................................................................... 1-6
Table 2-1 Summary of Significant Impacts and Recommended Mitigation Measures .............. 2-3
Table 3-1 Required Element Location in General Plan ............................................................. 3-3
Table 3-2 Existing Developed and Proposed Build-Out Summary ............................................ 3-6
Table 4-1 Definitions of Key Terminology .................................................................................. 4-2
Table 5-1 Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Aesthetics and Visual Resources ................................. 5-6
Table 6-1 Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Agriculture and Forestry Resources ............................. 6-4
Table 7-1 San Mateo County/SFBAAB Emissions Summary ................................................... 7-1
Table 7-2 City of Burlingame Existing (2017) Conditions Operational Emissions ..................... 7-8
Table 7-3 Ambient Air Quality Standards and SFBAAB Attainment Status ............................. 7-10
Table 7-4 Local Air Quality Conditions (2015-2017) ................................................................ 7-11
Table 7-5 Potentially Applicable BAAQMD Rules and Regulations ........................................ 7-14
Table 7-6 BAAQMD Thresholds of Significance for Plans ...................................................... 7-17
Table 7-7 Existing Regulations and Proposed Burlingame General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts from Construction Emissions .......................................... 7-20
Table 7-8 Potential General Plan Build-Out (Year 2040) Operational Emissions ................... 7-22
Table 7-9 Existing Regulations and Proposed Burlingame General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts from Operational Emissions ............................................ 7-24
Table 7-10 BAAQMD 2017 Clean Air Plan Control Measure Sectors ..................................... 7-30
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame Table of Contents
June 28, 2018
Table 7-11 Clean Air Plan Control Measures Included in 2040 General Plan ......................... 7-31
Table 7-12 2040 General Plan VMT and Population Increases .............................................. 7-33
Table 7-13 Existing Regulations and Proposed Burlingame General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Community Risk and Hazard Impacts .......................................... 7-34
Table 7-14 Existing Regulations and Proposed Burlingame General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts from Odors ...................................................................... 7-38
Table 8-1 Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Biological Resources.................................................. 8-11
Table 9-1 Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Geology and Soils ........................................................ 9-6
Table 10-1 Global Warming Potential (GWP) of Common GHG (100 Year Horizon) .............. 10-4
Table 10-2 2004-2015 Statewide GHG Emissions (Million MTCO2e) ..................................... 10-5
Table 10-3 2011 Bay Area GHG Emissions, by Sector and County (MMTCO2e)................... 10-6
Table 10-4 2005 Burlingame Municipal Operations GHG Emissions ...................................... 10-7
Table 10-5 2005 to 2015 Burlingame Community-Wide GHG Emissions ............................... 10-8
Table 10-6 IPCC GWPs (2nd Assessment Report vs. 5th Assessment Report) ................... 10-24
Table 10-7 Revised Community-wide GHG Inventory (2005 and 2015) ............................... 10-25
Table 10-8 Revised Local Government Operations GHG Inventory (2005 and 2015) .......... 10-25
Table 10-9 GHG Reduction Targets ...................................................................................... 10-26
Table 10-10 Growth Factors Used to Forecast Emissions .................................................... 10-27
Table 10-11 BAU Community-wide GHG Forecast ............................................................... 10-27
Table 10-12 Adjusted BAU Community-wide GHG Forecast ................................................ 10-28
Table 10-13 Adjusted BAU Regulatory Reduction Breakdown ............................................. 10-28
Table 10-14 Future Community-wide GHG Reduction Targets ............................................. 10-29
Table 10-15 Summary of Quantified Policies and Progress Toward Future GHG Goals ...... 10-30
Table 10-16 General Plan Build-Out GHG Emissions ........................................................... 10-32
Table 10-17 General Plan Consistency with BAAQMD 2017 Clean Air Plan ........................ 10-35
Table 10-18 Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Global Climate Change and Greenhouse
Gas Emissions ........................................................................................................... 10-40
Table 11-1 Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Hazards and Hazardous Materials ............................. 11-9
Table 12-1 Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Cultural Resources..................................................... 12-7
Table 13-1 Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Hydrology and Water Quality ..................................... 13-7
Table 14-1 Existing Land Use in Planning Area ...................................................................... 14-2
Table 14-2 2040 General Plan Land Use ................................................................................ 14-9
Table 14-3 Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Land Use and Planning ............................................ 14-12
Table 15-1 Typical Outdoor and Indoor Noise Levels ............................................................. 15-3
Table 15-2 Existing Ambient Noise Levels (dBA) .................................................................... 15-9
Table 15-3 Existing (2017) Traffic Noise Level Contour Distances ....................................... 15-11
Table 15-4 Existing (2013) Caltrain and Freight Rail Noise Exposure Level ......................... 15-14
Table 15-5 Existing (2013) Caltrain and Freight Rail Vibration Exposure Level .................... 15-14
Table 15-6 FTA Ground-Borne Vibration Impact Criteria for General Assessment ............... 15-16
Table 15-7 Caltrans’ Vibration Threshold Criteria for Building Damage ................................ 15-17
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame Table of Contents
June 28, 2018
Table 15-8 Caltrans’ Vibration Threshold Criteria for Human Response............................... 15-18
Table 15-9 Proposed Burlingame 2040 General Plan Exterior Land Use
Compatibility Standards ............................................................................................. 15-19
Table 15-10 Typical Construction Equipment Noise Levels (dBA) ........................................ 15-23
Table 15-11 Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Construction Noise ................................................... 15-24
Table 15-12 Ground-Borne Vibration and Noise from Typical Construction Equipment ....... 15-27
Table 15-13 Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Construction Vibration .............................................. 15-29
Table 15-14 Future Build-out 2040 Traffic Noise Level Contour Distances .......................... 15-33
Table 15-16 Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Traffic Noise ............................................................. 15-35
Table 15-17 Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Rail Noise ................................................................. 15-41
Table 15-18 Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts from Traffic and Rail Vibration ....................................... 15-45
Table 15-19 Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Stationary and Other Noise Sources ........................ 15-46
Table 15-20 Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Noise ........................................................................ 15-49
Table 16-1 Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Population and Housing ............................................. 16-4
Table 17-1 Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Public Services........................................................... 17-9
Table 18-1 Relevant Plans and Policies Related to Transportation Systems.......................... 18-3
Table 18-2 Signalized Intersection Level of Service (Los) Definitions ................................... 18-18
Table 18-3 Unsignalized Intersection Level of Service Definitions .......................................... 18-9
Table 18-4 Existing Intersection Level of Service Summary ................................................. 18-10
Table 18-5 2040 Proposed General Plan Intersection Level of Service Summary................ 18-12
Table 18-6 Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Transportation and Circulation ................................. 18-15
Table 19-1 Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Tribal Cultural Resources........................................... 19-5
Table 20-1 Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Utilities and Public Services ....................................... 20-8
Table 21-1 Existing Developed and Proposed Build-Out Summary ....................................... 21-3
Table 21-2 Existing and Future Land Use (in acres) ............................................................... 21-3
Table 22-1 Proposed Burlingame General Plan Policies that Ensure Efficient
Use of Electricity and Natural Gas Resources ........................................................... 22-14
Table 22-2 Proposed Burlingame General Plan Policies that Ensure Efficient
Use of Transportation Fuels ....................................................................................... 22-16
Table 22-3 Proposed Burlingame General Plan Policies that Ensure Efficient
Use and Consumption of Energy Related to Water Resources, Wastewater,
and Solid Waste ......................................................................................................... 22-22
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 1. Introduction June 28, 2018 Page 1-1
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 1_Introduction_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
1. INTRODUCTION
The City of Burlingame (Lead Agency) has completed updates to all elements of its General
Plan, except for the Housing Element, which was updated in 2015. The updates are intended to
refine policies regarding long-term growth in the community and to ensure that the General Plan
reflects current State law. The project, referred to as the “2040 General Plan,” is the subject of
this Environmental Impact Report (EIR).
The adoption and implementation of the 2040 General Plan is defined as a “project” and is
subject to review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) 1970 (Public
Resources Code, Section 21000 et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of
Regulations, Section 15000 et seq.). Accordingly, the City has prepared this EIR to assess the
long-range and cumulative environmental consequences that could result from adoption and
implementation of the proposed 2040 General Plan, including any updates to land use
regulatory documents used to implement the 2040 General Plan, including but not limited to the
Zoning Code (Title 25 of the Municipal Code) and specific plans. This EIR has been prepared in
accordance with the CEQA Statutes and Guidelines and with the City of Burlingame’s local rules
and procedures for implementing CEQA. This document has been prepared by professional
planning consultants under contract to the City of Burlingame.
The City of Burlingame is the Lead Agency for preparation of this EIR, as defined by CEQA
(Public Resources Code, Section 21067, as amended) because the City has primary
discretionary authority with respect to adoption, amendment, and implementation of the
proposed 2040 General Plan. The content of this document reflects the independent judgment
of the City.
The body of State law known as “CEQA” was originally enacted in 1970 and has been amended
since. The legislative intent of these regulations is established in Section 21000 of the California
Public Resources Code, as follows:
“The Legislature finds and declares as follows:
a. The maintenance of a quality environment for the people of this state now and in the
future is a matter of statewide concern.
b. It is necessary to provide a high-quality environment that at all times is healthful and
pleasing to the senses and intellect of man.
c. There is a need to understand the relationship between the maintenance of high-
quality ecological systems and the general welfare of the people of the state,
including their enjoyment of the natural resources of the state.
d. The capacity of the environment is limited, and it is the intent of the Legislature that
the government of the State take immediate steps to identify any critical thresholds
for the health and safety of the people of the state and take all coordinated actions
necessary to prevent such thresholds being reached.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 1. Introduction June 28, 2018 Page 1-2
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 1_Introduction_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
e. Every citizen has a responsibility to contribute to the preservation and enhancement
of the environment.
f. The interrelationship of policies and practices in the management of natural
resources and waste disposal requires systematic and concerted efforts by public
and private interests to enhance environmental quality and to control environmental
pollution.
g. It is the intent of the Legislature that all agencies of the state government which
regulate activities of private individuals, corporations, and public agencies which are
found to affect the quality of the environment, shall regulate such activities so that
major consideration is given to preventing environmental damage, while providing a
decent home and satisfying living environment for every Californian.
The Legislature further finds and declares that it is the policy of the State to:
h. Develop and maintain a high-quality environment now and in the future, and take all
action necessary to protect, rehabilitate, and enhance the environmental quality of
the State.
i. Take all action necessary to provide the people of this state with clean air and water,
enjoyment of aesthetic, natural, scenic, and historic environmental qualities, and
freedom from excessive noise.
j. Prevent the elimination of fish or wildlife species due to man's activities, ensure that
fish and wildlife populations do not drop below self-perpetuating levels, and preserve
for future generations representations of all plant and animal communities and
examples of the major periods of California history.
k. Ensure that the long-term protection of the environment, consistent with the provision
of a decent home and suitable living environment for every Californian, shall be the
guiding criterion in public decisions.
l. Create and maintain conditions under which man and nature can exist in productive
harmony to fulfill the social and economic requirements of present and future
generations.
m. Require governmental agencies at all levels to develop standards and procedures
necessary to protect environmental quality.
n. Require governmental agencies at all levels to consider qualitative factors as well as
economic and technical factors and long-term benefits and costs, in addition to short-
term benefits and costs and to consider alternatives to proposed actions affecting the
environment.”
A concise statement of legislative policy, with respect to public agency consideration of projects
for some form of approval, is found in Section 21002, quoted below.
“The Legislature finds and declares that it is the policy of the state that public agencies
should not approve projects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 1. Introduction June 28, 2018 Page 1-3
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 1_Introduction_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
mitigation measures available which would substantially lessen the significant
environmental effects of such projects, and that the procedures required by this division
are intended to assist public agencies in systematically identifying both the significant
effects of proposed projects and the feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures
which will avoid or substantially lessen such significant effects. The Legislature further
finds and declares that in the event specific economic, social, or other conditions make
infeasible such project alternatives or such mitigation measures, individual projects may
be approved in spite of one or more significant effects thereof.”
1.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE
The Burlingame 2040 General Plan is a long-range planning program that guides the orderly
growth and development within the Burlingame planning area, which is defined to be all
properties within the Burlingame corporate limits and properties within its so-called sphere of
influence. The 2040 General Plan communicates the community’s vision for its future and
establishes a policy framework to govern decision-making concerning the physical development
of the community, including assurances that the community at large will be supported by an
adequate range of public services and infrastructure systems. The 2040 General Plan analyzed
in this EIR has been tailored to address revised land use policy direction for defined “focus
areas,” to update maps and policies to reflect current State law, and to reflect the vision
regarding circulation and mobility improvements, public health and safety, sustainability, and
education.
The 2040 General Plan would not authorize the construction of any specific development project
or other form of land use approval or any kind of public facilities or capital facilities expenditures
or improvements. As such, a Program EIR is the appropriate type of document to identify the
geographic extent of sensitive resources and hazards, along with existing and planned services
and infrastructure support systems that occur in the planning area. Further, the Program EIR is
described in Section 15168 of the CEQA Guidelines as the appropriate analytical framework to
assess the cumulative environmental effects of the full plan in a first-tier level of analysis, to
identify broad concerns and sets of impacts, and to define/develop regulatory standards and
programmatic procedures that reduce impacts and help achieve environmental goals and
objectives.
Later activities proposed pursuant to the goals and policies of the 2040 General Plan will be
reviewed in light of this EIR and may focus on those site-specific and localized environmental
issues that could not be examined in sufficient detail as part of this EIR. As with all projects
proposed in the City, projects contained in specific focus areas where land use changes are
proposed will be subject to CEQA compliance at such time the City receives a permit application
for the project. At that time, the CEQA analysis would specifically address impacts of the
project on localized traffic; the ability of service providers to serve the project; consistency with
2040 General Plan policies; consistency with building and engineering regulations of the City;
site-specific biological, cultural resource, and visual effects; and impacts on on-site and off-site
drainage.
The advantages of a Program EIR include consideration of effects and alternatives that cannot
practically be reviewed at the project-level, consideration of cumulative impacts that may not be
apparent on a project-by-project basis, the ability to enact citywide mitigation measures, and
subsequent reduction in paperwork.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 1. Introduction June 28, 2018 Page 1-4
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 1_Introduction_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
1.2 ORGANIZATION OF THE PROGRAM EIR
The Draft EIR is divided into two volumes. Volume 1 contains the primary analysis of potential
environmental impacts discussed in the following nine sections:
Chapter 1.0: Introduction
Chapter 2.0: Executive Summary
A brief project description and summarizes project impacts and mitigation measures
Chapter 3.0: Project Description
Provides detailed description of the proposed project
Chapters 4.0 through 20.0: Environmental Impact Analysis
Considers project impacts and identifies mitigation measures designed to reduce
significant impacts for each issue of concern.
Chapter 21.0: Alternatives
Provides an analysis of alternatives to the proposed project
Chapter 22.0: CEQA Mandated Sections
Provides an analysis of cumulative impacts, growth-inducing impacts, and significant
irreversible environmental impacts and Identifies areas of no significant impact
Chapter 23.0: Preparation Team and Organizations and Persons Consulted
Lists the preparers of this analysis. Also contains reference information on people and
organizations consulted during the preparation of the EIR
Included as part of Volume 1 is the extensive General Plan Existing Conditions Report (City of
Burlingame, 2015). For most of the EIR disciplines the environmental setting sections
summarize existing conditions taken from the Existing Conditions Report (ECR). These are
disciplines where there has been no significant change in conditions from the time the ECR was
prepared to the time the DEIR was prepared. These disciplines are: aesthetics, agriculture,
biology, cultural resources, geology and soils, hydrology and water quality, hazards, land use,
population and housing, public services, tribal cultural resources, and utilities. For the other
disciplines, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, noise, and traffic, the environmental setting
sections may include both information from the ECR, as well as new information gathered from
2016-2018. Those specific sections have referenced where the new information comes from if
not from the ECR.
Pursuant to section 15150 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the Existing Conditions Report is
incorporated into the Draft Program EIR by reference. The Existing Conditions Report is
available at the City of Burlingame 2040 General Plan website at:
http://www.Burlingame.org/GENERALPLAN/
Copies of the Existing Conditions Report may be viewed during regular business hours (8:00
a.m. to 5:00 p.m.), Monday through Friday, at the City of Burlingame Planning Division, 501
Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA 94010.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 1. Introduction June 28, 2018 Page 1-5
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 1_Introduction_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Volume 2 includes the EIR appendices, including documentation of the scoping process and
Notice of Preparation (NOP). The appendices include:
• Appendix A: Notice of Preparation
• Appendix B: NOP Distribution List, Comment Letters, and Scoping Meeting Notes
• Appendix C: Air Quality and Climate Change Report
• Appendix D: Noise Study
• Appendix E: Traffic Impact Analysis
In compliance with Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, a mitigation monitoring reporting
program (MMRP) will be prepared as a separately bound document that will be adopted in
conjunction with the certification of the Final EIR. The MMRP, responses to public comments,
any revisions to the Draft EIR, and findings will be identified as Volume 3.
1.3 APPROACH TO EIR ANALYSIS
The approach to the analysis presented in this EIR is programmatic in nature given the broad
scope of the 2040 General Plan. Each environmental issue is analyzed in the same manner,
starting with a discussion of the existing environmental setting, including physical conditions and
pertinent planning and regulatory framework. Thresholds of significance are then defined and
are used to measure the proposed 2040 General Plan potential impact to the environment.
Thresholds of significance are based on a broad list of questions and impact topics set forth in
Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines. The impact analysis section examines the broad,
long-term environmental effects resulting from implementation of the goals and policies
contained in each of the 2040 General Plan elements. The assessment of impacts focuses on
how the impact in question could occur and whether some aspect of the proposed 2040 General
Plan would trigger or somehow induce those sets of conditions due to the unique effects of the
proposed policies, rather than a generalized consideration of growth as the primary force behind
potential impacts. The presence of sensitive environmental resources, hazards in specific
areas, and the broad implications of the 2040 General Plan throughout the planning area are
considered in the determination of impact significance. If the analysis indicates that a significant
impact could occur, even with the benefits of any proposed planning policies, mitigation
measures are provided.
For each environmental issue area examined in Chapter 4.0, the discussion concludes with a
statement regarding the level of impact significance remaining with imposition of the mitigation
measures.
1.4 SCOPING AND PUBLIC REVIEW
To define the scope of the investigation of the Program EIR, the City of Burlingame distributed a
Notice of Preparation (NOP) (included in Volume 2) to city, county, and state agencies; other
public agencies; and interested private organizations and individuals. The NOP review period
ran from August 2, 2017 through September 1, 2017.The City also held a public scoping
meeting on August 14, 2017 at the City Hall Council Chambers. The purpose of the NOP was to
identify agency and public concerns regarding potential impacts of the proposed project, and to
request suggestions concerning ways to avoid significant impacts (Section 15082, CEQA
Guidelines).
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 1. Introduction June 28, 2018 Page 1-6
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 1_Introduction_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Five written comments were received during the 30-day public review period for the NOP (from
Caltrans, the Native American Heritage Commission, the City/County Association of
Governments of San Mateo County, Jennifer Pfaff, and Derek Brindle). They are included in
Volume 2 of this EIR. Oral comments were received from two people during the meeting, as well
as from Planning Commission members. The scoping comments addressed in this Program EIR
are summarized in Table 1-1 (Summary of Scoping Comments).
Table 1-1 Summary of Scoping Comments
Commenting
Entity
Summary of
Comment
Section in EIR
where
Addressed
Comments
Agencies
Caltrans Provide a VMT
analysis in the EIR;
address increasing
transit service; GP
policies should
promote greater
non-automotive
access and mobility;
identify travel
demand impact fees
Chapter 18 The traffic study adheres to the City’s
standards for traffic impact analyses (see
discussion in Chapter 18). Transit
services that serve the planning area are
also addressed in Chapter 18. The
General Plan Mobility Element includes
policies that promote greater use of
mass transit and other non-automotive
transit, walking, bicycles. Travel demand
impact fees are addressed in Chapter
18.
Native American
Heritage
Commission
Adhere to Tribal
Consultation laws
Chapters 12
and 19
Letters to five tribes that are active in
San Mateo County were sent the NOP
for the General Plan EIR by City staff.
No tribes responded to the NOP.
Affiliated tribes within the planning area
will be notified by the City when specific
development proposals are submitted to
the City for permitting.
City/County
Association of
Governments of
San Mateo County
Discuss potential
impacts of new land
uses on the SF
Airport Land Use
Compatibility Plan
Chapter 14 The 2040 General Plan Public Safety
Element includes policies that ensure
new land uses do not affect air traffic at
San Francisco International Airport.
Individuals
Jennifer Pfaff Concerned about
implications of
growth on
transportation
systems; want to
see a robust
network of public
transportation
options
Chapter 18 Non-automotive transit options are
addressed in Chapter 18. Additionally,
this chapter of the EIR addresses how
General Plan growth would impact traffic
and transportation systems in the
Planning Area and on the Peninsula.
Derek Brindle Would like to see
the City consider
increasing high
density category to
140 du/acre from
120 du/acre
Chapter 21 The alternative of increasing allowable
densities in the North Burlingame
planning area is an alternative.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 1. Introduction June 28, 2018 Page 1-7
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 1_Introduction_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Notice of Completion
Pursuant to Section 15085 of the State CEQA Guidelines, a Notice of Completion (NOC) will be
filed with the State Office of Planning and Research (OPR) and the DEIR will be circulated for
public and agency review for a period of 45 days. A copy of the DEIR will be posted at the
Burlingame Library and at City Hall. Copies of the DEIR will be sent to responsible agencies,
local agencies, and concerned agencies and individuals, as requested. Public hearings will be
held in conjunction with the review of the project.
Response to Comments on DEIR
Comments from all agencies and individuals are invited regarding the information contained in
the Draft Program EIR. Such comments should explain any perceived deficiencies in the
assessment of impacts, provide the information that is purportedly lacking in the Draft Program
EIR or indicate where the information may be found. All comments on the Draft Program EIR
are to be submitted to:
Kevin Gardiner, Planning Manager
City of Burlingame Planning Division
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
kgardiner@burlingame.org
Following a 45-day period of circulation and review of the Draft Program EIR, all comments and
the City’s responses to the comments will be incorporated into a Final Program EIR prior to
certification of the document by the City of Burlingame.
Availability of EIR Materials
All materials related to the Preparation of this Program EIR are available for public review. To
request an appointment to review these materials, please contact:
Kevin Gardiner, Planning Manager
City of Burlingame Planning Division
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
kgardiner@burlingame.org
1.5 CITATION
Preparation of this Program EIR and the 2040 General Plan rely on information from many
sources, including the appendix materials previously listed and numerous other references.
Pursuant to Section 15148 of the State CEQA Guidelines, citations from the appendix materials
and other sources are provided throughout the EIR. Citations are provided in parenthesis when
used and are inclusive to each environmental impact topic (Sections 4.1 through 4.12).
References cited are located at the end of each environmental impact section.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 2. Summary June 28, 2018 Page 2-1
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 2_Summary_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
2. SUMMARY
This EIR chapter provides a summary description of the City of Burlingame 2040 General Plan,
a list of associated environmental issues to be resolved, a summary identification of significant
impacts and mitigation measures associated with the 2040 General Plan, and a summary
identification of possible alternatives to the 2040 General Plan (pursuant to CEQA Guidelines
Section 15123, Summary).
This summary should not be relied upon for a thorough understanding of the details of the
project, its individual impacts, and related mitigation needs. Please refer to Chapter 3 for a
complete description of the project, Chapters 5 through 20 for a complete description of
environmental impacts and associated mitigation measures, Chapter 21 for a description and
evaluation of alternatives to the project, and Chapter 22 for CEQA-mandated sections.
2.1 PROPOSED 2040 GENERAL PLAN
The City of Burlingame is proposing to adopt the 2040 General Plan, which represents the
community’s view of its future and expresses the community’s conservation and development
goals for the next 22 years (2018-2040). The purpose of 2040 General Plan is to: (1) identify
land use, transportation, environmental, economic, and social goals and policies as they relate
to land use and development; (2) provide a basis for a community’s decision-making regarding
land use; (3) provide citizens an opportunity to participate in the planning and decision-making
process; and (4) inform citizens, developers, decision-makers, and others of the ground rules
that guide development in the community.
Based upon community input and decision maker direction, the updated General Plan includes
overarching guiding principles for future growth, change, and preservation. These establish the
foundation of the entire plan, apply across all topical areas, and describe the future envisioned
by the community. Guiding principle are provided for the following topics: balanced and smart
growth, community character/urban forest, connectivity, economic diversity and vitality, healthy
people/healthy places, education, and civic engagement.
The General Plan accommodates an additional 2,951 housing units more than current
conditions, which translates to a projected population at 2040 General Plan buildout of 36,493
residents, or 6,769 residents than the existing population. The 2040 General Plan would allow
an increase in dwelling units mostly in the multi-family category. Nonresidential land uses
(office, commercial, industrial) would increase by 18 percent, while existing institutional land
uses would decrease by almost a third (due to reclassification of uses).
The proposed 2040 General Plan does not significantly alter existing new land use
designations, but creates more mixed-use options in existing focused commercial areas,
including Downtown, California Drive, Broadway and North Burlingame. The mixed-use
designation allows multi-family dwellings to be built close to shopping and regional
transportation. The 2040 General Plan also focuses on new and revised policies and
implementation programs, consistent with regional forecasts and recently adopted City plans
and initiatives, as described in chapter 3 (Project Description) of this EIR.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 2. Summary June 28, 2018 Page 2-2
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 2_Summary_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Implementation of the Burlingame 2040 General Plan would require the following City actions:
1. Certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report for the proposed General Plan;
2. Adoption of the 2040 General Plan itself; and
3. Approval of any associated zoning amendments and any associated amendments to
other City regulations to reflect and implement the land uses, goals, policies, and
implementation programs specified by the 2040 General Plan.
2.2 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
As required by the CEQA Guidelines, this EIR addresses the following areas of potential
environmental impact or controversy known to the Lead Agency (the City), including those
issues and concerns identified by the City in its Notice of Preparation (NOP) of this EIR (dated
August 2, 2017) and by other agencies, organizations, and individuals in response to the NOP.
These environmental concerns relate to the following topics (listed in the order that they are
addressed in this EIR):
• Aesthetics and Visual Resources
• Agricultural and Forestry Resources
• Air Quality
• Biological Resources
• Geology, Soils, and Minerals
• Global Climate Change and Greenhouse Gas Emissions
• Hazards and Hazardous Materials
• Historic and Cultural Resources
• Hydrology and Water Quality
• Land Use and Planning
• Noise
• Population and Housing
• Public Services
• Transportation and Circulation
• Tribal Cultural Resources
• Utilities and Service Systems
2.3 SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
For each of the 16 environmental topics listed above, any "significant" project or cumulative
impact and associated mitigation measure or measures identified in this EIR are summarized in
Table 2-1, the SUMMARY OF POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS AND RECOMMENDED
MITIGATION MEASURES, which follows. The summary chart has been organized to
correspond with the more detailed impact and mitigation discussions in chapters 5 through 19 of
this EIR. The chart is arranged in five columns: (1) identified impacts, (2) significance without
mitigation, (3) recommended mitigation measures, (4) the entity responsible for implementing
each mitigation measure, and (5) the level of impact significance after implementation of the
mitigation measure(s).
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 2. Summary June 28, 2018 Page 2-3
_______________________
S = Significant
LS = Less than significant
SU = Significant unavoidable impact
NA = Not applicable
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 2_Summary_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 2-1: Summary of Significant Impacts and Recommended Mitigation Measures
Impacts
Significance
Without
Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Mitigation
Responsibility
Significance
With
Mitigation
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Impact 10-1: Increases in GHG Emissions.
The proposed General Plan Update contains
a goal and policy that require the
development and maintenance of a CAP.
Goal HP-2 states it is the intention of the City
to achieve greenhouse gas emissions
reductions consistent with State goals, and
Policy CC-1.1 states the City would maintain
up-to-date Climate Action Plan policies and
continue to provide annual sustainability
reports. Under these guiding standards, the
City has set a goal to update its existing CAP
and identifies measures that can feasibly (in
terms of cost and implementation) reduce
GHG emissions to levels consistent with state
reduction goals. Although the policies
contained within the General Plan Update
could reduce emissions of GHG, not all may
be feasible in terms of their cost and
implementation. The City’s updated CAP
would evaluate the feasibility and
implementation of General Plan policies in
greater detail and identify the potential
emissions reductions available from these
and, if necessary, additional GHG reduction
policies. A few of these policies have already
been identified and would be implemented by
the City through Mitigation Measure 10-1, as
SU Mitigation Measure 10-1. To help reduce
GHG emissions generated by community-
wide activities, the City shall implement the
following, additional policies as part of the
General Plan Update:
• M-3.10: Bicycle Sharing – Implement
a bicycle sharing program in
Burlingame to provide an alternative
to driving, enhance bicycle
accessibility, and offer a last mile
option to transit.
• M-4.7: Increase use of available
shuttles in Burlingame by improving
signage, outreach, and coordination
with co-sponsors.
• IF-6.9: ECO100 – Increase ECO100
enrollment by residences and
businesses. ECO100 is the 100%
renewable and carbon-free electricity
rate from Peninsula Clean Energy.
Coordinate with community
champions and PCE to expand
outreach on ECO100.
The reductions associated with
implementation of Policy IF-6.9 has been
City SU
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 2. Summary June 28, 2018 Page 2-4
_______________________
S = Significant
LS = Less than significant
SU = Significant unavoidable impact
NA = Not applicable
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 2_Summary_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 2-1: Summary of Significant Impacts and Recommended Mitigation Measures
Impacts
Significance
Without
Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Mitigation
Responsibility
Significance
With
Mitigation
presented below.
Until these additional reductions have been
demonstrated, this would be a significant
and unavoidable impact (see criterion [a]
under Section 10.3.1, “Significance Criteria”).
quantified and included in the reductions
accounted for in Table 10-15. Both M-3.10
and M-4.7 would be quantified in the CAP
update.
The City cannot at this time conclusively
demonstrate that implementation of the
Burlingame 2040 General Plan, including
Policy CC-1.1, would not generate GHG
emissions that exceed the City’s existing Year
2020 and future Year 2030 and Year 2040
GHG reduction goals. Accordingly, this
impact is considered significant and
unavoidable.
Impact 10-2: Plan Consistency. The
proposed General Plan Update would be
inconsistent with the 2017 Scoping Plan
Update, and the 2017 Clean Air Plan,
because community-wide emissions are not
in line with state GHG reduction goals. The
General Plan Update is also inconsistent with
Plan Bay Area 2040, because although there
are many features that support a sustainable,
transit-oriented Burlingame, the City cannot
demonstrate the currently adopted Specific
Plans within the Burlingame El Camino Real
SU There are no measures that would reduce
this impact. This impact would be significant
and unavoidable.
City SU
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 2. Summary June 28, 2018 Page 2-5
_______________________
S = Significant
LS = Less than significant
SU = Significant unavoidable impact
NA = Not applicable
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 2_Summary_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 2-1: Summary of Significant Impacts and Recommended Mitigation Measures
Impacts
Significance
Without
Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Mitigation
Responsibility
Significance
With
Mitigation
PDA in conjunction with the policies
contained in the proposed update would
reduce per capita CO2 emissions from
passenger vehicles and light duty trucks by
15 percent, by 2035. Accordingly, the
proposed General Plan Update would conflict
with or obstruct implementation of a plan,
policy, or regulation adopted with the intent
GHG emissions. Although implementation of
general plan policies would be required by the
City, until these additional reductions have
been demonstrated, this would be a
significant and unavoidable impact (see
criterion [a] under Section 10.3.2,
“Significance Criteria”).
Paleontological Resources
Impact 12-1: Paleontological Resources.
Since there is no information on the likelihood
of discovering paleontological resources and
there are currently no General Plan policies
requiring the discovery, monitoring, and
protection of paleontological resources,
Mitigation 12-1 is recommended to avoid
potentially significant impacts on
paleontological resources should they occur
in the planning area.
S Mitigation 12-1. Paleontological
Assessment. In areas containing middle to
late Pleistocene-era sediments where it is
unknown if paleontological resources exist,
prior to grading an assessment shall be made
by a qualified paleontological professional to
establish the need for paleontological
monitoring. Should paleontological monitoring
be required after recommendation by the
professional paleontologist and approval by
the Community Development Director,
paleontological monitoring shall be
implemented.
City LS
Noise
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 2. Summary June 28, 2018 Page 2-6
_______________________
S = Significant
LS = Less than significant
SU = Significant unavoidable impact
NA = Not applicable
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 2_Summary_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 2-1: Summary of Significant Impacts and Recommended Mitigation Measures
Impacts
Significance
Without
Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Mitigation
Responsibility
Significance
With
Mitigation
Impact 15-1: Short-Term Construction
Noise Levels. Implementation of projects
under the proposed GPU would involve
construction that would result in temporary
noise generation primarily from the use of
heavy-duty construction equipment. Based on
modeling for typical construction activities,
short-term construction-generated noise
could exceed applicable standards. This
would represent a potentially significant
impact.
S Mitigation 15-1. To ensure that future
development projects implement appropriate
construction noise controls, General Plan
Policy CS-4.10 shall be revised to state:
Policy CS-4.10 Construction Noise Study: All
development projects shall be subject to the
applicable construction hour limitations
established by the City’s Municipal Code.
Development projects that are subject to
discretionary review and that are located near
noise-sensitive land uses shall assess
potential construction noise levels and
minimize substantial adverse impacts by
implementing feasible construction noise
control measures that reduce construction
noise levels at sensitive receptor locations.
Such measures may include, but are not
limited to: 1) Construction management
techniques (e.g., siting staging areas away
from noise-sensitive land uses, phasing
activities to take advantage of
shielding/attenuation provided by topographic
features or buildings, monitoring construction
n); 2) Construction equipment controls (e.g.,
ensuring equipment has mufflers, use of
electric hook-ups instead of generators); 3)
Use of temporary sound barriers (equipment
enclosures, berms, walls, blankets, or other
devices) when necessary; and 4) Monitoring
City LS
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 2. Summary June 28, 2018 Page 2-7
_______________________
S = Significant
LS = Less than significant
SU = Significant unavoidable impact
NA = Not applicable
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 2_Summary_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 2-1: Summary of Significant Impacts and Recommended Mitigation Measures
Impacts
Significance
Without
Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Mitigation
Responsibility
Significance
With
Mitigation
of actual construction noise levels to verify
the need for noise controls.
Although specific construction activities and
noise levels associated with future
development projects are this time is not
known, Mitigation Measure 15-1 revises the
proposed General Plan to require the
implementation of feasible construction noise
control measures when development occurs
near noise-sensitive land uses and, therefore,
would render potential construction noise
impacts from future development projects a
less than significant impact with mitigation.
Impact 15-3: Increases in Traffic Noise
Levels. Implementation of the proposed
General Plan would increase noise levels
along roadways with nearby sensitive
receptors. Proposed policies would establish
noise standards for new development and
require that site-specific noise studies be
conducted to reduce noise exposure;
however, traffic-related noise increases are
predicted to exceed 3 dB, the level typically
audible to the human ear and, therefore,
considered a substantial increase in noise.
The application of the policies and objectives
outlined in the City’s General Plan update
would reduce the amount of future vehicle
S Mitigation 15-3. No feasible mitigation is
available.
NA SU
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 2. Summary June 28, 2018 Page 2-8
_______________________
S = Significant
LS = Less than significant
SU = Significant unavoidable impact
NA = Not applicable
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 2_Summary_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 2-1: Summary of Significant Impacts and Recommended Mitigation Measures
Impacts
Significance
Without
Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Mitigation
Responsibility
Significance
With
Mitigation
trips generated from implementation of the
General Plan, however, the potential level of
reduction is uncertain at this time and would
be contingent on the characteristic of each
individual future development project. Since a
reduction in vehicle trips cannot be
guaranteed, and future noise levels would
increase by 3 dB or more and/or potentially
expose noise-sensitive land uses to
conditionally acceptable or higher noise levels
(e.g., Broadway Avenue between El Camino
Real and Bernal Avenue). this would
represent a significant unavoidable impact
(see criteria [a] and [c] in subsection 15.3.1,
"Significance Criteria," above).
Transportation and Circulation
Impact 18-1: Project Intersection Impacts.
While the increased traffic associated with the
proposed General Plan at the California
Ave/Broadway intersection may be
considerable, the proposed General Plan
includes policies and implementation
programs to reduce the LOS impact by
updating the LOS standard to consider other
modes, and encourages strategies to
enhance travel modes other than the single
occupant auto. Table 18-7 identifies these
policies and programs. In addition to the
General Plan policies, the following mitigation
measure is recommended to reduce impacts
S Mitigation 18-1. At the intersection of
California Avenue and Broadway, the
proposed 2040 GP would worsen the
intersection level of service to unacceptable
LOS F and add more than 5 seconds of
average delay during both the AM and PM
peak hours. The draft 2040 GP identifies a
policy (M-12.2) to “coordinate with Caltrain
and Caltrans to design and construct a grade-
separated intersection at Broadway and the
rail tracks.” It is assumed that the proposed
grade separation project would restore
intersection level of service at California
Avenue and Broadway to acceptable
City LS
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 2. Summary June 28, 2018 Page 2-9
_______________________
S = Significant
LS = Less than significant
SU = Significant unavoidable impact
NA = Not applicable
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 2_Summary_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 2-1: Summary of Significant Impacts and Recommended Mitigation Measures
Impacts
Significance
Without
Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Mitigation
Responsibility
Significance
With
Mitigation
on the California Avenue and Broadway
intersection to less than significant.
conditions.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 2. Summary June 28, 2018 Page 2-10
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 2_Summary_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
2.4 SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES
To provide a basis for further understanding of the environmental effects of a proposed project
and possible approaches to reducing its identified significant impacts, the CEQA Guidelines
require an EIR to also “…describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the
location of the project, which would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project, but
would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project, and evaluate the
comparative merits of the alternatives.”
2.4.1 Identified Alternatives
Pursuant to these CEQA sections, Chapter 20 identifies and evaluates the following two
alternatives to the project:
• Alternative 1: No Project--Existing General Plan (1969, 1975, 1981). This Alternative
consists of buildout of the Planning Area in accordance with the existing Burlingame
General Plan. The existing General Plan consists of elements that were adopted in
1969, with some updated in 1975 and 1981. Because the existing general plan is old,
Alternative 1 is, in essence, the existing land use condition of the City. With fewer
housing units, less employment, and more auto-oriented development, Alternative 1: No
Project--Existing General Plan would be less effective in achieving the project objectives
than the proposed project.
• Alternative 2: Higher Development Density and Intensity in North Burlingame (120
Du/Acre To 140 Du/Acre) Alternative 2 assumes adoption of a similar 2040 General
Plan, but with increased density allowed in the North Burlingame focus area. Under this
alternative, the North Burlingame Mixed Use (NBMU) designation would allow densities
up to 140 units/acre, an increase of 20 units/acre. The office FAR would remain at 2.0
and the commercial FAR at 1.0.
• Alternative 3: No Live/Work Designation in the Northerly One-Third of the Rollins
Road Corridor Alternative 3 would remove the Live/Work designation from the General
Plan that applies to the northerly one-third of the Rollins Road Corridor. Instead, the
designation would be Innovation Industrial, at a maximum FAR of 0.75 for commercial
and industrial uses and 3.0 for hospitality uses.
Removal of the Live/Work designation would eliminate the potential for 480 residential
units in this area, or about 17% of the total additional multi-family units projected citywide
under proposed General Plan land use policy. The Live/Work units are envisioned as
providing housing for people who run their own small businesses, such as artists,
designers, and small wholesale businesses, among others. Removal of the Live/Work
designation would reduce the number of potential new residents in close proximity to the
Millbrae multi-model transit station.
• Under the Innovative Industrial designation, permitted uses would include light industrial
and warehouse, limited commercial uses, creative industry businesses, design
businesses, indoor sports and recreation, and wholesale uses.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 2. Summary June 28, 2018 Page 2-11
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 2_Summary_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
2.4.2 Environmentally Superior Alternative
The CEQA Guidelines (section 15126[e][2]) stipulate, "If the environmentally superior alternative
is the 'no project' alternative, the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative
among the other alternatives."
The Proposed Project would result in a significant, unavoidable noise impact on Broadway
between El Camino Real and Bernal Avenue due to the roadway providing access to new
residential units in the hillside neighborhood west of the road segment. None of the three
alternatives analyzed would substantially reduce vehicle trips along this roadway and thus
would not eliminate these significant, unavoidable impacts.
Additionally, the project would result in significant, unavoidable impacts related to the increase
in greenhouse emissions from future development and from the General Plan Update being
inconsistent with the 2017 Scoping Plan Update, the 2017 Clean Air Plan and the Plan Bay
Area 2040 as they related to reducing GHG emissions. This is due to the City not being able to
conclusively demonstrate that implementation of the Burlingame 2040 General Plan, including
Policy CC-1.1, would not generate GHG emissions that exceed the City’s existing Year 2020
and future Year 2030 and Year 2040 GHG reduction goals. None of the project alternatives
would eliminate these significant, unavoidable impacts.
Since the proposed project and Alternatives 2 and 3 have the same impact levels and none
would reduce significant unavoidable impacts, the proposed project is considered the superior
alternative as it meets all project objectives and is the blueprint that was generated through
significant research on land use trends, a series of public workshops generating a lot of public
input, and with significant input from the Planning Commission and City Council.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 3. Project Description June 28, 2018 Page 3-1
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 3_Project Description_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018.doc
3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3.1 BACKGROUND
Under California law (Government Code Section 65300 et seq.), every city and county is
required to adopt a general plan that functions as the overarching, comprehensive and long-
range policy document. For cities, the general plan guides the physical development of the
incorporated city and any land outside city boundaries (e.g., city limit) that has a relationship to
the city’s future growth and development. This typically includes land within a city’s Sphere of
Influence (SOI). The City of Burlingame’s SOI is largely conterminous with the existing city
limits, except for one portion near Mills Canyon Park.
The current City of Burlingame General Plan has not been comprehensively updated since it
was first adopted on October 20, 1969 by Resolution 87-69. The initial General Plan included
and Introduction and Goals, a Land Use Element, Circulation Element, Waterfront Element, and
Housing Element. Open Space and Conservation Elements were adopted in 1973, and Seismic
Safety, Safety, Scenic Roads and Highways, and Noise Elements were adopted in 1975. Since
each was adopted, the elements of the General Plan have remained largely unchanged, with
the exception of the Housing Element (most recently updated in 2015) and the Circulation
Element (2015). The City of Burlingame General Plan is being comprehensively updated
concurrent with updates to the City’s Zoning Ordinance and three adopted Specific Plans. The
combined policy and regulatory update process is collectively known as Envision Burlingame.
The project analyzed in this Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is the adoption and
long-term implementation of the updated City of Burlingame General Plan and any subsequent
amendments to Title 13 (Planning, Zoning, and Development) of the Burlingame Municipal
Code (Zoning Code) adopted to implement the updated General Plan. It also includes the
environmental assessment of targeted amendments to three specific plans: Downtown,
Bayfront, and North Burlingame/Rollins Road.
This EIR has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) (Public Resources Code, § 21000 et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (California
Code of Regulations, § 15000 et seq.). It is a “programmatic” EIR prepared in accordance with
State CEQA Guidelines Section 15168, which allows for the preparation of a Program EIR for a
series of actions that can be characterized as a single project. This is the standard approach
when evaluating environmental impacts associated with the adoption of a general plan.
3.2 PROJECT LOCATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The City of Burlingame is located on the San Mateo Peninsula, 16 miles south of San
Francisco. It is surrounded by the cities of Millbrae to the north, San Mateo to the south, the San
Francisco Bay to the east, and Hillsborough to the west (Figure 3-1 Regional Map). Major
transportation facilities serving the City include Interstate 280, US Route 101 (Highway 101),
two Caltrain commuter rail stations (Broadway and Downtown), and San Francisco International
Airport. A Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART)/Caltrain multimodal transit station is located just south
Burlingame in the city of Millbrae.
Burlingame General Plan EIR Figure 3-1 Regional MapN
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 3. Project Description June 28, 2018 Page 3-2
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 3_Project Description_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018.doc
The 5.8-square-mile area covered by the General Plan consists of the corporate limits of the
City (Figure 3-2 Planning Area), together with the City’s SOI. About three-quarters (76 percent)
of the City is considered developable land. The remaining 24 percent includes portions of San
Francisco Bay that are within City limits, including the Mills Canyon Preserve.
3.3 EXISTING GENERAL PLAN
The existing Burlingame General Plan consists of nine elements. The elements are listed below,
along with the date they were last updated.
• Land Use Element – 1969
• Circulation Element – 2015
• Housing Element – 2015
• Open Space Element – 1973
• Conservation Element – 1973
• Seismic Safety Element – 1975
• Safety Element – 1975
• Scenic Roads and Highways Element – 1975
• Noise Element – 1981
In addition to the general plan elements, the City has also adopted specific plans for the
Downtown, Bayfront, and North Burlingame/Rollins Road neighborhoods, as described below.
Downtown Specific Plan
Adopted in 2010, the Downtown Specific Plan guides development of Burlingame’s downtown
district centered on Burlingame and Howard Avenues. Plan goals include incentivizing
additional business growth along Howard Avenue and the side streets, re-examining Downtown
parking requirements, and protecting and preserving Downtown’s historic character.
Bayfront Specific Plan
Adopted in 2004 (with amendments in 2006 and 2012), the Bayfront Specific Plan provides
guidance for development of the Bayfront area to maximize its advantage of proximity to
Highway 101 and San Francisco International Airport. Primary land uses allowed include offices,
hotels, restaurants, commercial recreation, and light industrial businesses. The plan encourages
a retail node along the shoreline and other economic activity that bolsters revenues.
North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan
Adopted in 2004 (with amendments in 2007), the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan
provides land use changes and design improvements for the northwest area of Burlingame. A
key issue addressed in the plan includes Burlingame’s proximity to San Francisco Airport, which
has greatly affected the use and character of industrial buildings and other Rollins Road
properties.
3.4 BURLINGAME 2040 GENERAL PLAN (ENVISION BURLINGAME)
Project Initiation and Community Advisory Committee
The City of Burlingame began a community-based process to update the General Plan in 2015.
Early in the project, the City conducted neighborhood intercept surveys at Burlingame’s most
popular commercial areas to gather information of key assets, issues, and opportunities. In
October 2015, the City hosted the first community workshop, attended by over 70 people.
Trousdale Dr.E. Poplar Ave.Old Bayshore Highw ayMillbrae Ave.Hillcrest Blvd.California Dr.Airport Blvd.Peninsula Dr.Burlingame Ave.San Mateo Dr.El Camino Real Rollins Rd.BroadwayHillside Dr.Ralston Ave.E.PoplarAvAAe.Millbrae Ave.HillcrestBlvd.San Mate o Dr .RalstonAvAe.CCiittyy oooffSSSaaann MMaatteeooCCiiittyy oofffHHHiilllllssbbooorrroouugghhhCCiittyyy oofffMMMiiilllllbbbrraaaeeeSan Francisco BaySan Francisco InternationalAirport280101USBurlingame General Plan EIRFigure 3-2 Planning Area Boundary1,500750 3,000 FT 0NCity LimitsSOI
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 3. Project DescriptionJune 28, 2018 Page 3-3
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 3_Project Description_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018.doc
Concurrently, a Community Advisory Committee (CAC) was formed that included a diverse
group of area residents and stakeholders. The CAC’s purpose was to advise and make
recommendations to City staff and decision makers. The CAC held 18 meetings focusing on all
policy aspects covered in the General Plan. This included reviewing and providing input on all
draft General Plan elements.
Existing Conditions Report
The City published an Existing Conditions Report in November 2015 that summarizes and
analyzes demographic, economic, land use, community character, mobility, natural resources,
infrastructure, and other conditions in Burlingame. The purpose of this analysis was to help the
community better understand the issues and opportunities facing Burlingame. The Existing
Conditions Report contains environmental setting information that has been summarized and
referenced in the Environmental Setting sections of the DEIR.
Emerging Land Use Concepts
In May 2016, the City held a second community workshop and released an online survey to
allow the public an opportunity to review and provide input on the draft guiding principles and
land use alternatives for each of the six study areas. Over 200 people participated in the input
process. Based on this input, an Emerging Land Use Concept for formulated in the summer of
2016. The concept was reviewed and commented on by the community, CAC, and Planning
Commission. On September 7, 2016, the City Council discussed the Emerging Land Use
Concept and provided comments to City staff and the consultant team. Based on this direction,
staff developed a draft Land Use Diagram and buildout projections that formed the basis of both
the Draft General Plan and EIR.
Contents and Summary of the updated General Plan Document
The updated General Plan document includes all policy and regulatory content required by
State law. However, the plan itself has a unique structure and content outline as allowed under
State law. Table 3-1 shows where the required elements are addressed in the updated General
Plan.
Table 3-1: Required Element Location in General Plan
Required
Elements
Chapters of the General Plan Update
Community
Character Mobility Infrastructure Community
Safety
Healthy People
and Places
Land Use
Circulation
Housing*
Open Space
Conservation
Safety
Air Quality
Noise
Environmental
Justice
Specific Resource Issues
Historical
Resources
Urban Forest
Streetscapes
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 3. Project Description June 28, 2018 Page 3-4
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 3_Project Description_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018.doc
Table 3-1: Existing Developed and Proposed Build-Out Summary
Required
Elements
Chapters of the General Plan Update
Community
Character Mobility Infrastructure Community
Safety
Healthy People
and Places
Sea Level Rise
Public Health
Parks and
Recreation
Biological
Resources
Water
Resources
Scenic
Resources
* The Housing Element was adopted in 2015 and is not addressed by the General Plan Update nor evaluated in
this EIR
Chapter 1: Introduction
The Introduction of the General Plan provides an overview of the General Plan update process
and detailed information on how to read and use the plan.
Chapter 2: Community Context
The Community Context chapter provides a detailed overview of the history of Burlingame and
its context within the San Francisco Bay area. It also summarizes physical and economic
conditions influencing planning, as well as the basis for future population and employment
growth. Lastly, the chapter describes the community outreach and engagement process
conducting during the General Plan update.
Chapter 3: Guiding Principles
Based upon community input and decision maker direction, the updated General Plan includes
overarching guiding principles for future growth, change, and preservation. These establish the
foundation of the entire plan, apply across all topical areas, and describe the future envisioned
by the community. The goals, policies, measures, and actions in Chapters 4 through 10 support
these principles.
Balanced and Smart Growth
• Allow growth to occur in targeted areas where supportive physical and community
infrastructure are available or can readily be provided, and where such growth
contributes to the positive qualities and characteristics that define Burlingame.
• Maintain a balance of ownership and rental housing, with opportunities for people of
all income ranges to live in Burlingame.
• Base land use decisions on the ability of the multimodal transportation network to
support growth.
• Ensure that new commercial, office, and industrial development can accommodate
the evolving nature of how buildings are used, and business is conducted.
Community Character/Urban Forest
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 3. Project Description June 28, 2018 Page 3-5
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 3_Project Description_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018.doc
• Ensure that trees continue to be an integral character-defining feature of our
streetscapes, neighborhoods, and business districts.
• Recognize the distinct qualities of Burlingame’s many and varied neighborhoods and
business districts, and require that new development respond to and respect the
desired character-defining features of these places.
• Protect the character and quality of Burlingame’s historical buildings, neighborhoods,
districts, and landscapes.
• Be receptive to modern design approaches that complement the Burlingame
aesthetic and are harmonious with their surroundings.
• Protect and expand the City’s urban forest and tree groves as aesthetic, historical,
and environmental resources.
Connectivity
• Ensure provision of a well-defined multimodal transportation network that
accommodates a range of travel choices and that connects Burlingame to the region.
• Provide safe, convenient, and comfortable vehicular and pedestrian connections
across Highway 101, linking the Bayfront with the rest of the City.
• Develop and maintain safe and easy-to-use bicycle and pedestrian travelways
citywide, with an emphasis on providing connections from neighborhoods to local
schools, parks, shopping, and entertainment.
• Ensure the provision of “last-mile” connections from transit stations.
Economic Diversity and Vitality
• Support and encourage the operations of local, independent businesses equally to
businesses which are regionally and nationally owned.
• Accommodate a mix of businesses that collectively work to maintain a stable tax
base and revenue stream for the City.
Healthy People, Healthy Places
• Provide unique recreation experiences in parks, open spaces, and public plazas
citywide.
• Promote development approaches that emphasize non-motorized and pedestrian
access.
• Incorporate high-quality, energy-efficient, and sustainable design into all new
development.
• Preserve and enhance open spaces, natural resources, and environmentally
sensitive areas, including the Bay and the local creek system.
• Maintain and enhance public safety through community and environmental designs
that promote secure, active, and safe streets and neighborhoods.
• Celebrate and accommodate arts, culture, and diversity.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 3. Project Description June 28, 2018 Page 3-6
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 3_Project Description_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018.doc
Education
• Promote productive partnerships with local schools and other educational
institutions, and recognize that high-quality education contributes to overall
community success and health.
• Support programs that provide enrichment and life-long learning.
Civic Engagement
Maintain an environment that always welcomes and encourages productive public
discourse on issues shaping Burlingame’s future.
Chapter 4: Community Character Element
The Community Character Element (formerly called Land Use Element) establishes an overall
development capacity for the City and serves as a policy guide for determining the appropriate
physical development and character of the approximately 5.8 square miles within the City’s
jurisdiction. The development capacity of the proposed Land Use Diagram and Designations is
estimated to be 16,065 dwelling units (13,114 existing + 2,951 new), with an associated
population of approximately 36,600 residents (29,724 existing + 6,876 new). Nonresidential
development will include 4,749,000 square feet of office, (3,882,000 existing + 867,000 new),
3,035,000 square feet of commercial (2,275,000 existing + 760,000 new), 4,293,000 square feet
of industrial, (3,723,000 existing + 570,000 new), 3,208,000 square feet of hotel space,
(3,192,000 existing + 16,000 new), and 1,976,000 square feet of institutional uses (2,555,000
existing - 579,000). The buildout is outlined in Table 3-2 Existing Developed and Proposed
Build-Out Summary. Figure 3-3 Existing Land Use Plan and Figure 3-4 Draft Land Use Plan
illustrated current development patterns and planned distribution of uses, respectively.
As indicated in Table 3-2, the increase in dwelling units is mostly in the multi-family category,
which would support the projected 6,876 new residents. Nonresidential land uses (office,
commercial, industrial) would increase by 18 percent, while existing institutional land uses would
decrease by almost a third (due to reclassification of uses).
Table 3-2: Existing Developed and Proposed Build-Out Summary
Dwelling Units
Nonresidential Development
(in 1,000 Square Feet) Pop. Emp. Single-
Family
Multi-
Family Office Commercial Industrial Hotel Institutional
Existing
Land Use 6,873 6,241 3,882 2,275 3,723 3,192 2,555 29,724 29,879
Proposed
Land Use 6,921 9,144 4,749 3,035 4,293 3,208 1,976 36,493 39,610
Change +48 +2,903 +867 +760 +570 +16 -579 +6,769 +9,731
Percent
Change 0.1% +32% +18% +25% +13% +0.1% -29% +19% +25%
Source: City of Burlingame, MIG and Hexagon Transportation Consultants, July 2017
The Zoning Code and Specific Plans serve as the primary tools to implement General Plan land
use policies. Zoning districts that correspond to General Plan land use designations establish
use regulations, development standards, and design criteria for all types of development in
Burlingame General Plan EIRFigure 3-3 Existing Land Use Plan1,500750 3,000 FT 0N
Trousdale Dr.E. Poplar Ave.Old Bayshore H ighw ayMillbrae Ave.California Dr.Airport Blvd.Peninsula Dr.Burlingame Ave.Howard Ave.Pri mros e Rd.San Mateo Dr.El Camino Real Rollins Rd.BroadwayHillside Dr.Ralston Ave.BalboaPalomaDrakeMagnolia BernalCortezEastonLagunaBayswaterAdelineSu mmitSequoiaDavisAnzaCarmelitaShermanEaston
LoyolaToyonD wight
HuntVancouverSebastianOak GroveVernonPlymouthConcordCapuchinoParkHaleChapinPepperChapin
ArguelloLortonBloomfieldArundelDwight
GilbrethColumbusWa lnutBenitoCrescentPrimrose Occidental
RiveraH ighland
PoppyCastenadaStanleyMariposaEdgehillC hanning
Acaci
a
AtwaterAlcazarVictoria
De SotoQuesadaC larendon
MillsChula VistaLexingtonMittenCarlosMa rinMartinezBancroft
SanchezSanchezGroveCowanEastMyrtle
AlvaradoMarco PoloEscalanteStantonAviadorAlbemarleLangMorrellLarkspurFairfieldCrosswayMahlerWestmoorHinckleyCastilloValdiviaMonteroDevereuxOgdenBurlwayDavid RayLassenLa Mesa
Alturas
Los M
o
nt
e
s Newlandsh LindenLaurelLos AltosBeachMarstenOxfordArcAlmerCambridge
DoloresSkyviewDufferinDonnellyCorbittEl QuanitoLas PiedrasMajillaKenmarEdwardsMcdonaldEastwoodCar olAnsel
AzaleaMargaritaCost a Rica
JuanitaCadillacCumberland
RhinetteMeadowMontecitoSummerKillarneyWhitehorn NeuchatelBelvedereMarquitaBellevueRiveraTiberonLincolnAnita
PalmCarolanLindenParkCabrilloBroderickIngoldGuittard280101USSan Francisco Bay1,500750 3,000 FT 0NBroadway Mixed UseDowntown Specific PlanHigh Density ResidentialGeneral CommercialCalifornia Mixed UseLow Density ResidentialMedium Density Residential Medium/high Density Res.Live/WorkInnovation IndustrialBayfront CommercialBaylandsNorth Burlingame Mixed UseParks and RecreationLow Density Residential-SOIOpen Space EasementRail Corridor Open Space Easement-SOICitySOIMulti-family Residential OverlayBurlingame General Plan EIRFigure 3-4 Land Use PlanPublic/Institutional
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 3. Project Description June 28, 2018 Page 3-7
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 3_Project Description_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018.doc
Burlingame. Following adoption of the General Plan, the City will undertake focused
amendments to the Zoning Code and Specific Plans to achieve consistency between these
documents and the General Plan, thereby providing for consistent General Plan implementation.
The amendments will provide new development opportunities in targeted areas and along
corridors that can accommodate such development. Figure 3-5 shows the location of the
various plan areas in Burlingame A summary of the planning context and vision for each area
plan are provided below.
Bayfront. Burlingame’s Bayfront area covers approximately 2.5 linear miles of frontage along
San Francisco Bay. The Bayfront is characterized by the open waters of the bay, important
recreation and open space resources, and office buildings, hotels, and destination restaurants
that benefit from their proximity to San Francisco International Airport. These commercial uses
provide an important economic base for the City. Within the Bayfront Area, the Inner Bayshore
district between Old Bayshore Highway and Highway 101 has long provided space for
warehouses, industrial and logistic businesses, and office space that largely support uses at the
airport.
The Bayfront will be a regional recreation and business destination. Enhanced parks, natural
open spaces, and recreational amenities will offer places that residents and visitors can enjoy,
with enhanced access for pedestrian, cyclists, and watercraft. The area will be an environment
where hotels and airport-related services continue to thrive, and where new commercial uses
create a well-rounded district that serves a variety of needs. Industrial and office uses within the
Inner Bayshore district will continue as preferred land uses, and compatible creative industries
will be accommodated and encouraged. Long-term parking uses that serve operations at the
airport will only be considered in conjunction with office and hospitality development, and only
as a secondary or ancillary use. All development will be undertaken in a manner that protects
people and property from flood hazards and sea level rise.
North Burlingame. The North Burlingame area represents a primary gateway as motorists
travel south on El Camino Real. At this gateway, El Camino Real is a wide boulevard, with
frontage roads providing access to the suburban- character Burlingame Plaza commercial
center and office buildings between the boulevard and railroad tracks. Significantly, this north
end of the City has easy pedestrian and bicycle access to the Millbrae Multimodal BART station.
Properties in Burlingame could support much more intense development due to the proximity to
the multimodal BART station and to respond to housing needs for more diverse housing types.
North Burlingame will be a distinct, defining area of Burlingame, with streetscape enhancements
and new housing and complementary commercial uses at urban-level intensities. This transit-
oriented development node will provide housing for all income levels, connect with surrounding
commercial and institutional uses with improved pedestrian accommodations, and welcome
visitors to Burlingame with distinguishing and historically sensitive gateway features.
Broadway. Broadway is one of two primary commercial destinations in the City and is known
for its distinct small-town main street character. Whereas Downtown supports a diverse mix of
shops, restaurants, and professional offices with a regional emphasis—including a share of
national brand businesses—Broadway has a local, home-grown feel. The surrounding
residential neighborhoods support these businesses with foot traffic. And although Broadway is
a primary connection for vehicles traveling between Highway 101 and El Camino Real, the
roadway’s narrow width and tree canopy work to maintain lower traffic speeds that support the
Trousdale Dr.E. Poplar Ave.Old Bayshore Highw ayMillbrae Ave.Hillcrest Blvd.California Dr.Airport Blvd.Peninsula Dr.Burlingame Ave.San Mateo Dr.El Camino Real Rollins Rd.BroadwayHillside Dr.Ralston Ave.E.PoplarAvAAe.Millbrae Ave.HillcrestBlvd.San Mate o Dr .RalstonAvAe.CCiittyy oooffSSSaaann MMaatteeooCCiiittyy oofffHHHiilllllssbbooorrroouugghhhCCiittyyy oofffMMMiiilllllbbbrraaaeeeSan Francisco BaySan Francisco InternationalAirportBayfrontBayfrontBroadwayBroadwayDowntownDowntownCalifornia Dr.California Dr.El Camino RealEl Camino RealNorth North BurlingameBurlingameNorth BurlingameBayfrontBroadwayDowntownCalifornia Dr.El Camino RealRollins RoadRollins RoadRollins Road280101USCity Limits BayfrontRollins RoadNorth BurlingameCalifornia DriveEl Camino RealBroadwaySOI1,500750 3,000 FT 0NBurlingame General Plan EIR Figure 3-5 Neighborhoods Context Map
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 3. Project Description June 28, 2018 Page 3-8
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 3_Project Description_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018.doc
pedestrian environment. Broadway’s charm is in its scale, focus on an active street front and in
its mixture of neighborhood and community-serving rather than regional-serving businesses.
Broadway will continue to be a commercial corridor, with a requirement for ground-floor uses
and development approaches that encourage and support pedestrian activity. Public realm
improvements and ongoing maintenance will create a distinctive look for the corridor. Increasing
foot traffic, creating gathering places, and improving the façades will strengthen Broadway as a
neighborhood district and preserve its distinct character and function. Residential development
on upper floors will bring additional people and vitality to the district. An emphasis will be placed
on reuse and rehabilitation of character-defining structures. Infill development projects will
respect and respond to the pedestrian scale and simple architectural styles.
Downtown. In 2010, the City Council adopted the Burlingame Downtown Specific Plan. This
Specific Plan established direction for continuing the complementary mix of uses that allow
Downtown to be a truly pedestrian place, anchored by the library and other civic uses,
residential neighborhoods that offer a range of housing types, and restaurants and shops that
locals frequent and visitors enjoy. The extensive streetscape improvements along Burlingame
Avenue, completed in 2015, catalyzed private reinvestment along Downtown’s key artery and
inspired interest and investment throughout the district. Given the proximity of Downtown to the
Burlingame rail station, the Specific Plan creates opportunities for carefully located, more
intense development projects that take advantage of easy transit access, and responds to the
desire of existing and prospective new residents to live in a charming, walkable environment
that many compare to a European village.
As stated in the Burlingame Downtown Specific Plan, Downtown Burlingame will be an
economically, socially, and culturally vibrant local and regional destination, with a diverse and
balanced mix of activities, pedestrian-friendly streets, historical buildings, and inviting gathering
places. Burlingame Avenue will continue to be an active commercial venue, with restaurants,
shops, and entertainment venues for locals and visitors. Over time, the mix of uses along other
Downtown streets may shift in response to market conditions, with office uses, creative work
spaces, and emerging business types occupying spaces traditionally devoted to commercial
enterprises. New housing will be provided to meet all income levels and housing choices for
people at all stages in their lives. Emphasis will continue to be placed on preserving historical
structures and ensuring that new development projects blend with the aesthetic quality of their
surroundings. And while walking will be the primary way to get around Downtown, the City will
ensure that public parking facilities are well located, easy to find, demand priced, and attractive.
California Drive. California Drive, from just north of Broadway to Oak Grove Avenue (the
northern boundary of the Downtown district), has an eclectic character. The Caltrain right-of-
way to the east forms a hard boundary, with an intermittent landscaped buffer between the
tracks and California Drive. Low-scale commercial buildings—largely occupied by local
businesses in buildings built to the front property line—are interspersed with residential uses
either fronting California Drive or above and behind the commercial buildings. Despite the wide
right-of-way of California Drive and traffic speeds of an arterial roadway, the street has
characteristics of a pedestrian boulevard: a mix of complementary uses, buildings close to the
street, and businesses focused on local needs. The right-of-way is wider than what is needed
to accommodate anticipated traffic volumes through 2040, and pursuing a “road diet” for
California Drive will create a slower, more pedestrian-friendly corridor that will influence land
uses over the long term. The moderate-density residential neighborhoods behind the California
Drive frontage define a building scale and sensitivity for uses along California.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 3. Project Description June 28, 2018 Page 3-9
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 3_Project Description_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018.doc
California Drive between Juanita Avenue and Oak Grove Avenue will remain a medium-density
mixed-use corridor that transitions seamlessly to the abutting residential districts to the west. An
eclectic mix of uses reflective of long-established use patterns, a pedestrian scale, locally
owned retail and service commercial businesses, and existing residential units will continue.
Prototypical commercial uses are those that serve Burlingame residents and nearby
communities, do not involve late-night hours, and do not have any operating characteristics that
adversely impact residential uses. Residential uses on the upper floors of new buildings will
accommodate local and regional demand for innovative and interesting housing types.
California Drive will be reinvented as a fully multi-modal corridor, with a separate bike lane and
improved pedestrian connections along the west side of and across the road.
El Camino Real. El Camino Real extends approximately 52 miles along the peninsula,
connecting San Jose to San Francisco. Along most of its route, El Camino Real is known as
State Route 82, a roadway maintained by Caltrans. In most communities, land uses developed
along the route over time to respond to the road’s function as a commuter route, with motels
and auto-oriented commercial businesses typifying the uses. Much of El Camino Real in
Burlingame is an exception, however, with majestic eucalyptus trees lining the roadway and
multifamily residential buildings to each side. The apartments, townhomes, and condominiums
along El Camino Real represent almost every era of architectural style from the 1930s forward,
providing a diverse array of housing. Virtually absent along the stretch through Burlingame are
the commercial uses that predominate in other communities (except for the segment extending
from Dufferin Avenue north to Millbrae, which is included within the North Burlingame planning
area).
El Camino Real will continue to be an iconic roadway through Burlingame. Development along
the densely tree-lined boulevard will consist of distinctive multifamily housing, with commercial
development limited to properties that are within Downtown, at the intersection with Broadway,
and at a small node at Adeline Drive. The City, in conjunction with Caltrans, will develop a plan
to preserve the tree groves through management and a defined replanting plan for older trees.
Traffic management and safety will be addressed as outlined in the Mobility Element, with clear
direction to make El Camino Real pedestrian friendly through Burlingame.
Chapter 5: Economic Development Element
The Economic Development Element addresses diversifying Burlingame’s employment base
and commercial activity, supporting and encouraging local independent businesses equally with
regional and nationally owned firms, preserving established and supporting new revenue-
generating uses in all business districts, and ensuring the viability of both Broadway and
Burlingame Avenue as commercial districts. This element is not a state-mandated element.
Chapter 6: Mobility Element
The Mobility Element addresses the following citywide policies for integrated mobility:
• Provide a well-defined multi-modal transportation network
• Provide safe, convenient and comfortable vehicle and pedestrian connections across
Highway 101
• Develop citywide bike/pedestrian travelways
• Improve “first mile, last mile” connections from transit stops to homes and businesses
• Ensure safe access to libraries, schools and other community uses by foot and bicycle
• Improve connections between neighborhoods
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 3. Project Description June 28, 2018 Page 3-10
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 3_Project Description_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018.doc
Chapter 7: Infrastructure Element
The Infrastructure Element addresses the state and future of all utilities serving the City. These
include water supply, wastewater, stormwater drainage and flood control, solid waste, and
telecommunications. Goals and policies focus on ensuring that infrastructure is provided to
support land use intensities and demands over time.
Chapter 8: Community Safety Element
The Community Safety Element addresses the state and future of all public services serving the
City. These include police protection, fire and emergency medical services, and emergency
preparedness and disaster response. Additionally, it includes all aspects of safety related to
seismic and geologic hazards including, but not limited to, seismic safety codes, development in
a fault zone, hillside development, and seismic retrofits. Safety associated with noise is included
in this Element and includes major noise sources, sensitive land uses, noise standards, and
enforcement of the noise standards. Airport safety and heliports are also addressed. Finally,
maps and policies have been included to address potential flooding hazards associated with
sea level rise.
Chapter 9: Healthy People and Healthy Places Element
The Healthy People and Healthy Places Element addresses air quality and greenhouse gas
reduction goals and policies, and includes discussions of air quality standards, greenhouse
reduction targets, electric vehicles, and public education, among other issues. Goals and
policies related parks, open space and recreation are also included. An inventory and map of
natural resource areas open spaces, trails and open space corridors is included as is an
assessment of needs and opportunities. Finally, this element addresses protection of biological
resources, water resources, and scenic resources.
Chapter 10: Engagement and Enrichment Element
Although not a required element, the general plan update includes a chapter on Engagement
and Enrichment addressing education, arts, and culture with an emphasis on public school
system, lifelong learning opportunities, the library system, and museums. Civic engagement is
also addressed, as the City welcomes and encourages productive public discourse.
Chapter 11: Implementation
The Implementation chapter contains a matrix that identifies short-, medium-, long-term, and
ongoing actions that will help guide General Plan implementation, including identification of lead
City departments responsible for each action:
• Short-term actions (0-5 years after General Plan adoption)
• Medium-term actions (5-15 years after General Plan adoption)
• Long-term actions (15+ years after General Plan adoption)
• Annual actions
• Ongoing actions
Implementation tools and monitoring methods are addressed with discussions of the different
ways the City implements the General Plan, including:
• Development Review [DR]
• Master Plans [MP]
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 3. Project Description June 28, 2018 Page 3-11
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 3_Project Description_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018.doc
• Financing and Budgeting [FB]
• Studies and Reports [SR]
• Services and Operations [SO]
• Agency Coordination [AC]
• Partnerships with the Private Sector [PA]
• Public Information and Education [PI]
3.4 INTENDED USE OF THIS EIR
The policy framework set forth in the proposed General Plan would not result in the immediate
construction of any new development nor entitlement of any new project. All new development
within the planning area (City and SOI) will continue to be subject to the City’s development
review and approval processes (with San Mateo County responsible for the unincorporated SOI
area). Elected and appointed officials and City staff will review subsequent project applications
for consistency with the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance, and will prepare appropriate
environmental documentation to comply with CEQA and other applicable environmental
requirements.
Pursuant to Section 15168 of the State CEQA Guidelines, this EIR is a Program EIR. The goals,
policies, land use designations, implementation programs, and other substantive components of
the General Plan and implementing sections of the Zoning Ordinance and Specific Plans
constitute the “program” evaluated in this Program EIR. Subsequent activities undertaken by the
City and project proponents to implement the General Plan will be examined considering this
Program EIR to determine the appropriate level of environmental review required under CEQA.
Such subsequent implementation activities may include the following:
• Updating the Zoning Code
• Rezoning of properties to achieve consistency with the General Plan
• Updating and approval of Specific Plans and other development plans and planning
documents
• Approval of tentative maps, variances, conditional use permits, and other land use
permits and entitlements
• Approval of development agreements
• Approval of facility and service master plans and financing plans
• Approval and funding of public improvement projects
• Approval of resource management plans
• Issuance of permits and other approvals necessary for implementation of the General
Plan
• Issuance of permits and other approvals necessary for public and private development
projects
• Future amendments to the City’s Housing Element and other General Plan Elements
Following certification of this Program EIR and adoption of the General Plan by the lead agency
(City of Burlingame), other agencies may use this Program EIR in the approval of subsequent
implementation activities. These agencies may include but are not limited to those listed below.
No other permits will be required for the General Plan Amendments to move forward. However,
the San Francisco Airport Land Use Commission will be required to review the proposed
General Plan for consistency with the provisions of the San Francisco Airport Land Use
Compatibility Plan.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 3. Project Description June 28, 2018 Page 3-12
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 3_Project Description_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018.doc
Local Agencies
San Mateo County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO)
San Francisco Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC)
County of San Mateo
San Mateo County Transportation Authority (SMCTA)
City of Millbrae
City of San Mateo
Town of Hillsborough
State and Regional Agencies
• California Department of Fish and Wildlife
• California Department of Conservation
• California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD)
• California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
• San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board
• Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG)
• Bay Area Air Quality Management District
• San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC)
• San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC)
Federal Agencies
• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services
• U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 4. Introduction to the Environmental Analysis June 28, 2018 Page 4-1
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 4_Intro to Env Analysis_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018.doc
4. INTRODUCTION TO ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4.1 PROGRAM EIR EVALUATION OF IMPACTS
Pursuant to CEQA, this program EIR evaluates the General Plan-related impacts and mitigation
needs that can be identified at this time. The more detailed impacts of future individual, site-
specific development and infrastructure projects that may be undertaken pursuant to General
Plan goals and policies, but which are not proposed at this time and therefore are not yet
described in sufficient detail, are not considered in this program EIR. Rather, the CEQA-
required environmental review of such subsequent individual actions would be undertaken at a
later time, if and when such proposals come before the City in the form of a site-specific
development application or improvement project. At that time, when the details of the individual
action are sufficiently defined, the action would be subject to its own, project-specific,
environmental determination by the City in compliance with CEQA requirements.
4.1.1 Impact Assessment Assumptions
The purpose of this program EIR is to evaluate the likely environmental consequences of
development in the planning area pursuant to the 2040 General Plan, and to identify mitigation
measures and alternatives that could minimize or avoid potentially significant adverse
environmental impacts and increase beneficial effects.1 The planning area development
capacity assumptions used for the impact analyses in this program EIR are based on
projections regarding residential densities and non-residential development intensities reflective
of past development patterns and the maximum intensities allowed by the General Plan, with
the assumption that growth will occur in the defined focus areas. Regionally based employment
projection factors were derived from the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG).
The impact analyses in this EIR are based on the conservative assumption that the 2040
General Plan would be successful in meeting its objectives and, as a result, development within
the planning area would reach the projections assumed in the General Plan over the next 26
years (by 2040).
4.1.2 Impact Assessment Baseline
CEQA Guidelines sections 15125(a) and (e) stipulate that the existing environmental setting
(the environmental conditions in the project vicinity at the time the environmental analysis is
begun) should constitute the baseline physical conditions by which it is determined whether an
impact is significant. Pursuant to this guideline, all impact assessments in this EIR are based
upon comparison of the projected future "with project" conditions (i.e., buildout pursuant to the
proposed 2040 General Plan) with the existing environmental setting rather than with the future
"without project" condition (i.e., buildout pursuant to the existing General Plan). For a
generalized comparison of anticipated future "with project" conditions with future "without
project" conditions (i.e., with what would be expected to occur in the planning area in the
foreseeable future if the 2040 General Plan were not approved), see the discussion of
1CEQA Guidelines section 15149(b).
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 4. Introduction to the Environmental Analysis June 28, 2018 Page 4-2
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 4_Intro to Env Analysis_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018.doc
Alternative 1 (No Project - Existing 2002 General Plan) in Chapter 21 of this EIR (Alternatives to
the Proposed General Plan).
4.2 "SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS" AND OTHER KEY EIR TERMINOLOGY
This Draft EIR identifies the “significant impacts” of the project and corresponding mitigation
measures that would avoid or reduce those impacts to a less-than-significant level. Where it is
determined in this EIR that a particular impact cannot be avoided or reduced to a less-than-
significant level by the identified mitigation measures, the EIR identifies that impact as a
"significant unavoidable impact." Identified significant unavoidable impacts are also listed
together in Section 22.3 of this EIR. These terms—"significant," "unavoidable," "mitigation"—
and other key CEQA terminology used in this EIR are defined in Table 4-1.
Table 4-1: Definitions of Key Terminology
Significant/Potentially
Significant Impact
"Significant effect on the environment" means a substantial, or
potentially substantial, adverse change in any of the physical
conditions within the area affected by the project including land, air,
water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and objects of historic
and aesthetic significance. (CEQA Guidelines, section 15382.)
"An economic or social change by itself shall not be considered a
significant effect on the environment. A social or economic change
related to a physical change may be considered in determining
whether the physical change is significant." (CEQA Guidelines,
section 15382.)
Significant Cumulative
Impact
"Cumulative impacts" are defined as "two or more individual effects
which, when considered together, are considerable or which
compound or increase other environmental impacts." (CEQA
Guidelines, section 15355.)
Unavoidable Significant
Impact
"Unavoidable significant impacts" are defined as those significant
adverse environmental impacts for which either no mitigation or
only partial mitigation is feasible. If the project is to be approved
without imposing an alternative design, the Lead Agency must
include in the record of the project approval a written statement of
the specific reasons to support its action--i.e., a "statement of
overriding considerations." (CEQA Guidelines, sections 15126.2(b)
and 15093(b).)
Significance Criteria The criteria used in this EIR to determine whether an impact is or is
not "significant" are based on (a) CEQA-stipulated "mandatory
findings of significance"--i.e., where any of the specific conditions
occur under which the Legislature and the Secretary of Resources
have determined to constitute a potentially significant effect on the
environment, which are listed in CEQA Guidelines section 15065;
(b) specific criteria that a Resources Agency has determined are
"normally" considered to constitute a "significant effect on the
environment;" (c) the relationship of the project effect to the
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 4. Introduction to the Environmental Analysis June 28, 2018 Page 4-3
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 4_Intro to Env Analysis_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018.doc
Table 4-1: Definitions of Key Terminology
adopted policies, ordinances and standards of the County and of
responsible agencies; and/or (d) commonly accepted practice and
the professional judgment of the EIR authors and Lead Agency
staff.
Mitigation Measures For each significant impact, the EIR must identify a specific
"mitigation" measure or set of measures capable of "(a) avoiding
the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an
action; (b) minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude
of the action and its implementation; (c) rectifying the impact by
repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the impacted environment; (d)
reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation or
maintenance operations during the life of the action; or (e)
compensating for the impact by replacing or providing substitute
resources or environments." (CEQA Guidelines, section 15370.)
Source: MIG 2013.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 5. Aesthetics and Visual Resources June 28, 2018 Page 5-1
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 5_Aesthetics_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
5. AESTHETICS AND VISUAL RESOURCES
This chapter describes existing visual and scenic resources in the planning area. The chapter
includes the regulatory framework necessary to evaluate potential environmental impacts
resulting from the 2040 General Plan, describes potential impacts that could result from the
General Plan, and discusses General Plan goals, policies, and implementation programs that
would avoid or reduce those potential impacts.
5.1 SETTING
The environmental and regulatory setting of the Burlingame planning area, with respect to
aesthetics and visual resources, is described in detail in Section 6.4 (Infrastructure: Aesthetics)
and Sections 2.6 and 2.7 (Land Use and Urban Form: Urban Structure and Form and
Community Character) of the General Plan Existing Conditions Report (City of Burlingame,
2015). Pursuant to section 15150 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the Existing Conditions Report
is incorporated into the Draft Program EIR by reference. The Existing Conditions Report is
available at the City of Burlingame 2040 General Plan website at:
http://www.Burlingame.org/GENERALPLAN/
Copies of the Existing Conditions Report may be viewed during regular business hours (8:00
a.m.to 5:00 p.m.), Monday through Friday, at the City of Burlingame Planning Division, 501
Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA 94010.
5.1.1 Environmental Setting
Section 6.4 (Infrastructure: Aesthetics) and Sections 2.6 and 2.7 (Land Use and Urban Form:
Urban Structure and Form and Community Character) of the Existing Conditions Report
describe aesthetics and visual resources within the planning area. This information is based on
the existing visual character and resources in the county, which are linked to the region’s natural
hilly topography and San Francisco Bay. Interstate 280, located just west of Burlingame, is
officially designated as a State Scenic Highway (also known as the Junipero Serra Freeway).
Major findings from the Existing Conditions Report relevant to aesthetics and visual resources
are described below.
• Due to Burlingame’s topography, properties in its hillside areas have scenic views of
both the City and San Francisco Bay, with the skylines of East Bay cities visible on clear
days.
• Natural features most associated with Burlingame are its trees, and Burlingame has
been designated a “Tree City USA” for over 35 years. California Drive and El Camino
Real have groves of large, mature trees.
• Important scenic resources include views of marshlands and San Francisco Bay, visible
from the hills as well as from Old Bayshore Highway, and views of the extensive tree
canopy that can be seen from such streets as Carmelita Drive, Hillside Drive, and
Broadway.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 5. Aesthetics and Visual Resources June 28, 2018 Page 5-2
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 5_Aesthetics_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
• The City has gateways that mark major city entrances; the most notable is the historic
Broadway Burlingame sign at Broadway and California Drive that can be seen by
travelers entering Broadway from Highway 101.
• Downtown, which grew up around the Burlingame railroad station in the early days of the
City, consists of buildings from a wide range of ages and architectural styles, some of
which may have historic value. These buildings contribute to the variety and character of
the streets.
• The majority of Burlingame’s neighborhood housing stock was developed between the
1890s and 1960s. Residential growth occurred as a result of new subdivisions, with
large estates divided into smaller lots that were developed over time. The older
neighborhoods have homes built by individual developers, while later subdivisions along
Trousdale Drive have homes built by merchant builders. As a result, the city has a
unique character created by the diversity of architectural styles within its neighborhoods.
• Locally designated scenic roadways include Bayshore Freeway, Canyon Road, Easton
Drive, El Camino Real, Skyline Boulevard, Ralston Avenue, Hillside Drive, Trousdale
Drive, Airport Boulevard, Occidental Avenue, Ray Drive, Bellevue Avenue, Burlingame
Avenue, and California Drive. These scenic roadways were designated in the San Mateo
County or the City of Burlingame General Plans.
• The existing visual character of Burlingame combines commercial, residential, and
industrial development to the northwest and residential development nestled in the
western hills, with little undeveloped open space in the city.
• Burlingame is a source of substantial nighttime light since the City is urbanized.
5.1.2 Regulatory Setting
The Existing Conditions Report Natural Resources Section 6.4 (Infrastructure: Aesthetics)
discusses the following regulatory setting relevant to aesthetics and visual resources.
Federal
Federal regulations do not apply to aesthetic resources in Burlingame.
State
California Streets and Highways Code (Section 260). This code preserves and protects
scenic highway corridors from changes that would diminish the aesthetic value of lands adjacent
to highways. A California highway may be designated as scenic depending on how much of the
natural landscape can be seen by travelers, the scenic quality of the landscape, and the extent
to which development intrudes on the traveler’s enjoyment of the view. When a city (or county)
nominates an eligible scenic highway for official designation, it must identify and define the
scenic corridor of the highway, as defined by the motorist’s line of vision (a reasonable
boundary is selected when the view extends to a distant horizon). The city (or county) must also
adopt ordinances to preserve the scenic quality of the corridor, including: 1) regulation of land
use and density of development; 2) detailed land and site planning; 3) control of outdoor
advertising (including a ban on billboards); 4) careful attention to and control of earthmoving and
landscaping; and 5) careful attention to design and appearance of structures and equipment.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 5. Aesthetics and Visual Resources June 28, 2018 Page 5-3
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 5_Aesthetics_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Local
City of Burlingame Design Guidelines. In addition to the standard design review process for
development projects, three specific plans include guidelines for the appearance of the City’s
buildings, structures, and open spaces.
Residential Design Review. All new houses built in Burlingame, most second-story additions,
and some single-story additions, require an application to the Planning Commission for
Residential Design Review. Projects will be reviewed for compliance with the Residential Design
Guidebook, which offers guidance on appropriate design based on the style of the existing
home and the character of the surrounding neighborhood. A landscape plan is also required,
and the project may be required to plant new landscape trees, based on the City’s tree List.
Downtown Specific Plan – Streetscapes and Open Space, Design and Character
Guidelines. The Downtown Specific Plan area is framed by Oak Grove Avenue on the north,
the Caltrain tracks south to Burlingame Avenue and Anita Road on the east, Peninsula Avenue
and the City limits on the south, and El Camino Real on the west. This specific plan includes
design guidelines for architectural compatibility/consistency/diversity, pedestrian use and
character, commercial and residential streetscapes, signage, gateways, building scale, parking,
façade design, roof treatment, public open spaces, lighting, site amenities, land use transitions,
shadow impacts, landscaping (street trees), and historic building preservation.
Within the specific plan area, any actions proposing substantial physical changes to any parcel
of land or existing structure, or the proposed construction of new structures, shall be subject to
Design Review as outlined in Section 25.57 of the Burlingame Municipal Code.
Bayfront Specific Plan – Design Guidelines. The Bayfront planning area includes all of the
area in Burlingame that is located east of Highway 101 to San Francisco Bay, from the northern
border shared with the City of Millbrae at El Portal Creek, south to the Coyote Point County
Park, a San Mateo County recreational area. This specific plan includes design guidelines for
building/street relationships, Bayshore Highway interface, parking, landscaping, view corridors,
signage, gateways, Highway 101 frontage, street design, and building design.
North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan – Design Guidelines. The North
Burlingame/Rollins Road planning area includes the Rollins Road industrial corridor, which is
bordered by Highway 101 to the east and the Caltrain tracks to the west, and extends south
from the City of Millbrae to Broadway. On the west side of the Caltrain tracks, the planning area
also includes the El Camino Real commercial corridor, which is bordered by Millbrae to the
north, Ogden Drive and Marco Polo Way to Clarice Lane to the west, and to the rear property
lines of the residential neighborhoods to the south of the Mills Peninsula Hospital (Davis Drive
and Dufferin Avenue).
This specific plan includes design guidelines for setback distance, minimum and maximum
buildings heights, minimum building frontage, signs, awnings, lighting, parking and parking
structures, landscaping, and gateway features.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 5. Aesthetics and Visual Resources June 28, 2018 Page 5-4
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 5_Aesthetics_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Hillside Area Construction Permit Requirements. The City of Burlingame has designated
that development in most areas in the hillsides will require a Hillside Area Construction Permit,
which would allow neighbors, the Planning Commission, and City Council an opportunity to
review all construction in the hillside area that could affect existing distant views from inside
structures on nearby properties.
5.2 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
This section describes potential impacts on aesthetics or visual resources that could result from
the General Plan, and discusses General Plan goals, policies, and implementation programs
that would avoid or reduce those potential impacts. The section also recommends mitigation
measures as needed to reduce significant impacts.
5.2.1 Significance Criteria
Based on the CEQA Guidelines, implementation of the City of Burlingame 2040 General Plan
would have a significant impact related to aesthetics and visual resources if it would:
a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista;
b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway;
c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the Burlingame Planning
area or its surroundings; or
d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the Planning area or its surroundings.
5.2.2 Analysis Methodology
The methodology for evaluating potential environmental impacts on aesthetics and visual
resources followed this basic sequence:
a. The General Plan Existing Conditions Report was evaluated to identify existing
environmental conditions and problems related to aesthetics and visual resources,
including the regulatory framework that applies to these issues.
b. The CEQA Statute and Guidelines (2017), including Appendix G (Environmental
Checklist Form), were consulted to identify environmental impact topics and issues that
should be addressed in the program EIR. In part, this process resulted in the
significance criteria listed in subsection 5.2.1 above.
c. The General Plan, including the associated development capacity assumptions (see EIR
Section 3.6), was analyzed to identify goals, policies, implementation programs
(“policies” for short), and potential outcomes that address the significance criteria. This
analysis resulted in two basic conclusions regarding policies and outcomes: a) many
policies would avoid or reduce potential environmental impacts, and (b) some policies or
outcomes could result in new environmental impacts or increase the severity of existing
environmental problems.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 5. Aesthetics and Visual Resources June 28, 2018 Page 5-5
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 5_Aesthetics_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
d. For potential environmental impacts that would result from the 2040 General Plan,
mitigation measures were designed to avoid or reduce each impact to a less-than-
significant level. If implementation of all identified feasible mitigations cannot reduce the
impact to a less-than-significant level, then the impact is considered significant and
unavoidable.
5.2.3 Environmental Impacts
Potential Impacts of Future Development Pursuant to the 2040 General Plan
Impacts on visual resources within the planning area could occur if existing regulations and/or
proposed policies are not sufficient to preserve and enhance scenic vistas, scenic resources,
and overall visual character and quality of the community. The planning area is fully developed,
and future development pursuant to the General Plan policies would generally be constructed
within the context of an urbanized environment. (Significance Criteria 5.2.1 [a], [b], and [c])
Development directed by the policies of the General Plan could produce new sources of light
and/or glare that may potentially cause significant impacts on daytime and/or nighttime views.
Excessive or inappropriately directed lighting can adversely impact nighttime views by reducing
the ability to see the night sky and stars. Glare can be caused from unshielded or misdirected
lighting sources. For example, a floodlight attached to the side of a single-family residence could
be oriented inadvertently to shine into a neighbor’s house. Reflective surfaces (e.g., polished
metal) can also cause glare. Impacts associated with glare range from simple nuisance to
potentially dangerous situations (e.g., if glare is directed into the eyes of motorists). New
commercial development in the planning area could introduce inappropriate lighting or use
building materials that could cause inappropriate glare. (Significance Criterion 5.2.1 [d])
How Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies Reduce Impacts
Table 5-1 is aligned with relevant Existing Regulations and General Plan policies that relate to
aesthetics and visual resources. Column 1 (Objective) lists each Regulation and General Plan
goal, policy, and implementation program (“policy” for short), organized by General Plan
element, that addresses the potential impact identified in Table 5-1. Column 2 is a summary of
the regulation and the text of the policy. Column 3 answers the question, “How does the
regulation/policy avoid or reduce the potential impact?” Column 4 identifies the applicable
significance criteria that is addressed by the regulation/policy.
The verbs in Column 3 are intended to be applied consistently. The verb “ensures” means that
the policy is sufficient to guarantee the result identified in the policy. The verb “helps” means
that the policy contributes to avoiding or reducing the identified potential impact; in many cases,
“helps” is used for a policy that can be applied to avoid or reduce a wide range of potential
impacts. The verb “implements” is used for General Plan implementation programs to indicate
that the program provides the details to put the associated policy into action.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 5. Aesthetics and Visual Resources June 28, 2018 Page 5-6
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 5_Aesthetics_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 5-1: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Aesthetics and Visual Resources
Regulation/Policy Description of Regulation/Policy How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
Existing Regulations
California Streets
and Highways
Code (Section 260)
Preserves and protects scenic
highway corridors from changes
that would diminish the aesthetic
value of lands adjacent to
highways.
Maintains and protects
Interstate 280, a
designated State Scenic
Highway, as an
important scenic
resource.
(b) Scenic
highways
City of Burlingame
Design Guidelines
– Residential
Design Review
All new houses built in Burlingame,
most second-story additions, and
some single-story additions require
an application to the Planning
Commission for Residential Design
Review. Projects will be reviewed
for compliance with the Residential
Design Guidebook, which offers
guidance on appropriate design
based on the style of the existing
home and the character of the
surrounding neighborhood.
Ensures that new
development will not
degrade the existing
visual character of the
area. Ensures that
potential light and glare
impacts will be
addressed during design
review.
(c) Visual
character
(d) Light and
glare
City of Burlingame
Design Guidelines
– Downtown
Specific Plan,
Bayfront Specific
Plan, and North
Burlingame/Rollins
Road Specific Plan
Design Guidelines
All specific plans require individual
project consistency with the
applicable design guidelines. The
guidelines address topics such as:
architectural compatibility/
consistency/diversity, pedestrian
use and character, commercial
and residential streetscapes,
signage, gateways, building scale,
parking, façade design, roof
treatment, public open spaces,
lighting, site amenities, land use
transitions, shadow impacts,
landscaping (street trees), and
historic building preservation.
Ensures that new
development will not
degrade the existing
visual character of the
area. Ensures that
potential light and glare
impacts will be
addressed during design
review.
(c) Visual
character
(d) Light and
glare
Hillside Area
Construction Permit
Requirements
Development in most areas in the
hillsides require a Hillside Area
Construction Permit, which allows
neighbors, the Planning
Commission, and City Council an
opportunity to review all
construction in the hillside area
that could affect existing distant
views from inside structures on
nearby properties.
Helps ensure that scenic
vistas from within the
Planning area are
protected and that
scenic views of hillsides
are protected.
(a) Scenic vistas
(b) Scenic
resources
2040 General Plan Healthy People Healthy Places Element – Scenic Resources
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 5. Aesthetics and Visual Resources June 28, 2018 Page 5-7
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 5_Aesthetics_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 5-1: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Aesthetics and Visual Resources
Regulation/Policy Description of Regulation/Policy How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
Goal HP-7 Protect local scenic resources and
preserve views of the natural
amenities in the city.
Ensures that local scenic
vistas and scenic
resources are protected
throughout the city.
(a) Scenic vistas
(b) Scenic
highways
(c) Visual
character
(d) Light and
glare
Policy HP-7.1:
Hillside
Development
Continue to require a Hillside Area
Construction Permit for all new
residences or accessory
structures, as well as additions to
existing residences or accessory
structures, to protect residential
viewsheds. Consider establishing
specific development standards for
hillside residential projects to
ensure view preservation in the
area.
Helps ensure that scenic
vistas from within the
planning area are
protected and that
scenic views of hillsides
are protected.
(a) Scenic vistas
(b) Scenic
highways
Policy HP-7.2:
State Scenic
Highways
Protect officially designated
California State Scenic Interstate
280 by maintaining open space
and low-density residential land
uses along the highway corridor,
ensuring roadway signage does
not detract from scenic views, and
screening unattractive structures
with appropriate landscaping.
Maintains and protects
Interstate 280, a
designated State Scenic
Highway, as an
important scenic
resource.
(b) Scenic
highways
Policy HP-7.3: City
and County Scenic
Roadways
Protect local scenic roadways by
preserving mature trees wherever
possible, maintaining landscaping
along roadways, and ensuring that
development and land uses do not
detract from the aesthetics of the
corridor. Consider establishing
specific design guidelines for
residential development,
commercial development, and
roadway signage along scenic
corridors.
Protects the visual
character and/or quality
of the Burlingame
planning area and/or its
surroundings.
(a) Scenic vistas
(b) Scenic
highways
(c) Visual
character
Policy HP-7.4:
Scenic Gateways
Identify locations for gateway
treatments along scenic roadways
at key intersections, and establish
a cohesive signage aesthetic that
enhances scenic views.
Will protect scenic
resources within
gateway corridors and
ensure new signage or
gateway features are
aesthetically pleasing.
(a) Scenic vistas
(b) Scenic
highways
(c) Visual
character
Policy HP-7.6:
Connectivity to
Coordinate and identify
connectivity opportunities between
Enhances the quality of
scenic resources and
(a) Scenic vistas
(b ) Scenic
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 5. Aesthetics and Visual Resources June 28, 2018 Page 5-8
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 5_Aesthetics_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 5-1: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Aesthetics and Visual Resources
Regulation/Policy Description of Regulation/Policy How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
Recreation
Amenities
scenic routes and adjacent public
recreation areas such as parks,
scenic outlooks, and biking and
hiking trails. Prioritize the
development of separated bicycle
lanes along scenic routes to
connect with recreational trails.
provides more
opportunities for citizens
to enjoy the resources.
highways
(c) Visual
character
Policy HP-7.7:
Shoreline Views
Protect views to the Bay shoreline
by identifying viewsheds to the Bay
from key locations and restricting
the height of buildings within these
viewsheds. Ensure that new
Bayfront development does not
detract from the scenic qualities of
the area, and consider adopting
commercial and hotel design
guidelines specific to the Bayfront.
Helps ensure that the
views of the bay
shoreline are maintained
for their scenic qualities
and that potential visual
impacts of new bay
shoreline development
are minimized.
(a) Scenic vistas
(b) Scenic
highways
2040 General Plan Community Character Element – Neighborhoods
Policy CC-4.2
Attractive Design
Emphasize attractive building and
site design by paying careful
attention to building scale, mass,
placement, architecture, materials,
landscaping, screening of
equipment, loading areas, signage
and other design considerations.
Helps ensure that
potential light and glare
impacts will be
addressed during design
review.
(c) Visual
character
(d) Light and
glare
Policy CC-4.7
Hillside Residential
Design Standards
Regulate the design of streets,
sidewalks, cluster home
development, architecture, site
design, grading, landscaping, and
utilities in hillside areas to protect
aesthetics, natural topography,
and views of surrounding open
space and distant landscapes.
Helps ensure that
potential light and glare
impacts will be
addressed during design
review.
(c) Visual
character
(d) Light and
glare
Conclusions
In most cases, no one regulation, goal, policy, or implementation measure is expected to
completely avoid or reduce an identified potential environmental impact. However, the
collective, cumulative mitigating benefits of the regulations and policies listed in Table 5-1 will
result in a less-than-significant impact related to the identified significance criteria and the
corresponding environmental topic listed in Table 5-1. This conclusion is consistent with the
purpose and use of a program EIR for a general plan (see EIR Introduction, Chapter 1).
Based on the methodology described above, 2040 General Plan impacts on aesthetics and
visual resources would be less than significant (see criteria [a] through [d] in subsection 5.2.1,
“Significance Criteria,” above). No mitigation is required.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 6. Agricultural and Forestry Resources June 28, 2018 Page 6-1
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 6_Agriculture_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
6. AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
This chapter describes existing agricultural and forestry resources in the planning area. The
chapter includes the regulatory framework necessary to evaluate potential environmental
impacts resulting from the 2040 General Plan, describes potential impacts that could result from
the General Plan, and discusses General Plan goals, policies, and implementation programs
that would avoid or reduce those potential impacts.
6.1 SETTING
The environmental and regulatory setting of the planning area with respect to agricultural
resources is described in detail in Section 7.5 (Natural Resources: Open Space and Agricultural
Resources) of the General Plan Existing Conditions Report (City of Burlingame, 2015).
Regarding forestry resources, the planning area does not contain any forest land as defined in
Public Resources Code Section 12220(g), timberland as defined by Public Resources Code
Section 4526, or timberland zoned Timberland Production as defined by Government Code
Section 51104(g), as referenced in the State CEQA Guidelines (appendix G, Environmental
Checklist Form, item II.c). The Existing Conditions Report does not discuss forestry resources,
and General Plan implementation would not have an impact on forestry resources since no such
resources exist in Burlingame.
Pursuant to Section 15150 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the General Plan Existing Conditions
Report is incorporated into the Draft Program EIR by reference. The Existing Conditions Report
is available at the City of Burlingame 2040 General Plan website at:
http://www.burlingame.org/GENERALPLAN/
Copies of the Existing Conditions Report may be viewed during regular business hours (8:00
a.m. to 5:00 p.m.), Monday through Friday, at the City of Burlingame Planning Division, 501
Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA 94010.
6.1.1 Environmental Setting
The Natural Resources section (Section 7.5) of the Existing Conditions Report describes
agricultural resources within the planning area and vicinity. The major findings of the Natural
Resources section relevant to agricultural resources are described below.
• According to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources
Agency, Burlingame is designated as Urban and Built Up. No land in the City is
designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance.
• Burlingame and the surrounding area are urbanized. The City is not zoned for
agricultural use, nor does it contain any properties under Williamson Act contracts.
• Burlingame does not have areas zoned as forest land or timberland, or timberland zoned
as Timberland Production.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 6. Agricultural and Forestry Resources June 28, 2018 Page 6-2
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 6_Agriculture_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
6.1.2 Regulatory Setting
The Existing Conditions Report Natural Resources chapter (Section 7.5) discusses the following
regulatory setting relevant to agricultural resources.
Federal
No Federal regulations apply.
State
Williamson Act. The California Land Conservation Act, known as the Williamson Act, has been
the State’s premier agricultural land protection program since its enactment in 1965. Land under
a Williamson Act contract is restricted to agricultural uses. The Williamson Act is a non-
mandated State policy providing for preferential assessment of agricultural and open space
lands that meet local size and land use criteria.
Senate Bill 275. SB 275 created the Agricultural Land Stewardship Program Act of 1995, a
California Department of Conservation (CDOC) grant program for local governments and
nonprofit organizations to aid in the acquisition of agricultural conservation easements. CDOC
awards grant funding from the Agricultural Land Stewardship Program fund, which receives
revenue from gifts, donations, proceeds from the sale of general obligation bonds, funds
appropriated by the Legislature, Federal grants or loans, and other sources.
Local
Title 25 - Zoning Ordinance. The Zoning Ordinance for the City of Burlingame includes only
residential, commercial, parks, and industrial zone designations, and does not have any
provisions related to agricultural or forestry resources (City of Burlingame 2000, 2015).
6.2 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
This section describes potential impacts on agricultural and forestry resources that could result
from General Plan implementation, and discusses General Plan goals, policies, and
implementation programs that would avoid or reduce those potential impacts. The section also
recommends mitigation measures as needed to reduce significant impacts.
6.2.1 Significance Criteria
Based on the CEQA Guidelines, implementation of the City of Burlingame 2040 General Plan
would have a significant impact related to agricultural and forestry resources if it would:
a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance
(Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use;
b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract;
c. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public
Resources Code section 12220[g]), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 6. Agricultural and Forestry Resources June 28, 2018 Page 6-3
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 6_Agriculture_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government
Code section 51104[g]);
d. Result in loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use; or
e. Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature,
could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest
land to non-forest use.
The planning area does not contain any forest land or timberland, so criteria (c), (d), and (e) (for
forest land) do not apply, and no impact would result.
6.2.2 Analysis Methodology
The methodology for evaluating potential environmental impacts on agricultural and forestry
resources followed this basic sequence:
a. The General Plan Existing Conditions Report was evaluated to identify existing
environmental conditions and problems related to agricultural and forestry resources,
including the regulatory framework that applies to these issues.
b. The CEQA Statute and Guidelines (2017), including Appendix G (Environmental
Checklist Form), were consulted to identify environmental impact topics and issues that
should be addressed in the program EIR. In part, this process resulted in the
significance criteria listed in subsection 6.2.1 above.
c. The General Plan Policy Document, including the associated development capacity
assumptions (see EIR section 3.6), was analyzed to identify goals, policies,
implementation programs (“policies” for short), and potential outcomes that address the
significance criteria. This analysis resulted in two basic conclusions regarding policies
and outcomes: (a) many policies would avoid or reduce potential environmental impacts,
and (b) some policies or outcomes could result in new environmental impacts or
increase the severity of existing environmental problems.
d. For potential environmental impacts that would result from the 2040 General Plan,
mitigations were designed to avoid or reduce each impact to a less-than-significant level.
If implementation of all identified feasible mitigations cannot reduce the impact to a less-
than-significant level, then the impact is considered significant and unavoidable.
6.2.3 Environmental Impacts
Potential Impacts of Future Development under the 2040 General Plan
The City of Burlingame is an almost fully developed, urbanized area that does not contain any
areas zoned or designated solely for commercial agriculture or forestry resources; therefore,
there are no potential impacts from future development under the 2040 General Plan.
(Significance Criteria 6.2.1 [a] – [e])
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 6. Agricultural and Forestry Resources June 28, 2018 Page 6-4
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 6_Agriculture_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
How Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies Reduce Impacts
Table 6-1 is aligned with relevant Existing Regulations and General Plan policies that relate to
agricultural and forestry resources. Column 1 (Objective) lists each Regulation and General
Plan goal, policy, and implementation program (“policy” for short), organized by General Plan
element, that addresses the potential impact identified in Table 6-1. Column 2 is a summary of
the regulation and the text of the policy. Column 3 answers the question, “How does the
regulation/policy avoid or reduce the potential impact?” Column 4 identifies the applicable
significance criteria that is addressed by the regulation/policy.
The verbs in Column 3 are intended to be applied consistently. The verb “ensures” means that
the policy is sufficient to guarantee the result identified in the policy. The verb “helps” means
that the policy contributes to avoiding or reducing the identified potential impact; in many cases,
“helps” is used for a policy that can be applied to avoid or reduce a wide range of potential
impacts. The verb “implements” is used for General Plan implementation programs to indicate
that the program provides the details to put the associated policy into action.
Table 6-1: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies to Avoid or
Reduce Impacts on Agriculture and Forestry Resources
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
Existing Regulations
Williamson Act The Williamson Act is a non-
mandated State policy
providing for preferential
assessment of agricultural and
open space lands that meet
local size and land use criteria.
There are no
Williamson Act
contracts in the
planning area.
(b) Conflict with
agricultural
zoning
Title 25 - Zoning
Ordinance
The Zoning Ordinance for the
City of Burlingame includes
only residential, commercial,
parks, and industrial zone
designations and does not
have any provisions related to
agricultural or forestry
resources (City of Burlingame
2000, 2015).
There are no
agricultural or forestry
resources in the
planning area.
(a) Convert
farmland
(b) Conflict with
agricultural
zoning
(c) Conflict with
forestry zoning
(d) Loss of forest
land
(e) Convert
farmland to non-
agricultural use
Conclusions
In most cases, no one regulation, goal, policy, or implementation measure in itself is expected to
completely avoid or reduce an identified potential environmental impact. However, the
collective, cumulative mitigating benefits of the regulations and policies listed in Table 6-1 will
result in no impact related to the identified significance criteria and the corresponding
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 6. Agricultural and Forestry Resources June 28, 2018 Page 6-5
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 6_Agriculture_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
environmental topic listed in Table 6-1. This conclusion is consistent with the purpose and use
of a program EIR for a general plan (see EIR Introduction, Chapter 1).
Based on the methodology described above, implementation of the 2040 General Plan would
result in no impact on agricultural resources (see criteria [a], [b], and [e] in subsection 6.2.1,
“Significance Criteria,” above). Furthermore, since the planning area does not contain any forest
land or timberland, significance criteria (c), (d), and (e) (for forest land) do not apply, and no
impact would result. No mitigation is required.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 6. Agricultural and Forestry Resources June 28, 2018 Page 6-6
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 6_Agriculture_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
This page is intentionally blank.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 7. Air Quality June 28, 2018 Page 7-1
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 7_Air Quality_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
7. AIR QUALITY
This chapter of the EIR provides information on the existing air quality environment in the San
Francisco Bay Area and the City of Burlingame, summarizes applicable air quality guidelines,
standards, and regulations, and evaluates potential air quality impacts associated with the City’s
proposed 2040 General Plan. The chapter was prepared using methodologies and assumptions
recommended in the latest of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) CEQA
Air Quality Guidelines.1 Information on existing air quality conditions, federal and state ambient
air quality standards, and pollutants of concern was obtained from the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (U.S. EPA), California Air Resources Board (CARB), and BAAQMD. As
described in this chapter, the implementation of the proposed Burlingame 2040 General Plan
would not result in a significant CEQA air quality impact.
7.1 BACKGROUND INFORMATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Air quality is a function of pollutant emissions and topographic and meteorological influences.
The physical features and atmospheric conditions of a landscape interact to affect the
movement and dispersion of pollutants and determine its air quality.
7.1.1 Regulated Air Pollutants
The U.S. EPA has established National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for six
common air pollutants: ozone (O3), particulate matter (PM), which consists of “inhalable coarse”
PM (particles with an aerodynamic diameter between 2.5 and 10 microns in diameter, or PM10)
and “fine” PM (particles with an aerodynamic diameter smaller than 2.5 microns, or PM2.5),
carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), and lead. The U.S. EPA
refers to these six common pollutants as “criteria” pollutants because the agency regulates the
pollutants on the basis of human health and/or environmentally-based criteria.
CARB has established California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) for the six common
air pollutants regulated by the federal Clean Air Act (the CAAQS are more stringent than the
NAAQS) plus the following additional air pollutants: hydrogen sulfide (H2S), sulfates (SOX), vinyl
chloride, and visibility reducing particles.
Regulated air pollutants are described below:
• Ground-level Ozone, or smog, is not emitted directly into the atmosphere. It is created
from chemical reactions between oxides of nitrogen (NOX) and volatile organic
compounds (VOCs), also called Reactive Organic Gasses (ROG), in the presence of
sunlight.2 Thus, ozone formation is typically highest on hot sunny days in urban areas
with NOX and ROG pollution. Ozone irritates the nose, throat, and air pathways and can
cause or aggravate shortness of breath, coughing, asthma attacks, and lung diseases
such as emphysema and bronchitis.
1 Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2017. California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality
Guidelines. San Francisco, CA. June 2010, updated May 2017.
2 United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 2017. "Ozone Basics." U.S. EPA, Environmental
Topics [Air], Ground Level Ozone, What is “good”” versus “bad” ozone. April 5, 2017. Web. August 21, 2017.
<https://www.epa.gov/ozone-pollution/ozone-basics#what%20where%20how>
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 7. Air Quality June 28, 2018 Page 7-2
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 7_Air Quality_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
o ROG is a CARB term defined as any compound of carbon, excluding carbon
monoxide, carbon dioxide, carbonic acid, metallic carbides or carbonates, and
ammonium carbonate, and includes several low-reactive organic compounds
which have been exempted by the U.S. EPA.3
o VOC is a U.S. EPA term defined as any compound of carbon, excluding carbon
monoxide, carbon dioxide, carbonic acid, metallic carbides or carbonates, and
ammonium carbonate, which participates in atmospheric photochemical
reactions. The term exempts organic compounds of carbon which have been
determined to have negligible photochemical reactivity such as: methane,
ethane, and methylene chloride.4
• Particulate Matter (PM), also known as particle pollution, is a mixture of extremely small
solid and liquid particles made up of a variety of components such as organic chemicals,
metals, and soil and dust particles.5
o PM10, also known as inhalable coarse, respirable, or suspended PM10, consists of
particles less than or equal to 10 micrometers in diameter (approximately 1/7th
the thickness of a human hair). These particles can be inhaled deep into the
lungs and possibly enter the blood stream, causing health effects that include,
but are not limited to, increased respiratory symptoms (e.g., irritation, coughing),
decreased lung capacity, aggravated asthma, irregular heartbeats, heart attacks,
and premature death in people with heart or lung disease.6
o PM2.5, also known as fine PM, consists of particles less than or equal to 2.5
micrometers in diameter (approximately 1/30th the thickness of a human hair).
These particles pose an increased risk because they can penetrate the deepest
parts of the lung, leading to and exacerbating heart and lung health effects.7
• Carbon Monoxide (CO) is an odorless, colorless gas that is formed by the incomplete
combustion of fuels. Motor vehicles are the single largest source of carbon monoxide in
the Bay Area. At high concentrations, CO reduces the oxygen-carrying capacity of the
blood and can aggravate cardiovascular disease and cause headaches, dizziness,
unconsciousness, and even death.8
• Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) is a by-product of combustion. NO2 is not directly emitted, but is
formed through a reaction between nitric oxide (NO) and atmospheric oxygen. NO and
NO2 are collectively referred to as NOX and are major contributors to ozone formation.
3 California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2004. Definitions of VOC and ROG. Sacramento, CA. 2004. Available
online at: <https://www.arb.ca.gov/ei/speciate/voc_rog_dfn_11_04.pdf>
4 Ibid.
5 United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) 2016. "Particulate Matter (PM) Basics." U.S. EPA,
Environmental Topics [Air], Particulate Matter (PM), What is PM, and how does it get into the air? September 12,
2016. Web. August 21, 2017. <https://www.epa.gov/pm-pollution/particulate-matter-pm-basics#PM>
6 Ibid.
7 Ibid.
8 United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) 2016. "Carbon Monoxide (CO) Pollution in Outdoor Air."
U.S. EPA, Environmental Topics [Air], Carbon Monoxide (CO), What is CO? September 12, 2016. Web. August 21,
2017. <https://www.epa.gov/co-pollution/basic-information-about-carbon-monoxide-co-outdoor-air-
pollution#What%20is%20CO>
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 7. Air Quality June 28, 2018 Page 7-3
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 7_Air Quality_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
NO2 also contributes to the formation of particulate matter. NO2 can cause breathing
difficulties at high concentrations.9
• Hydrogen Sulfide (H2S) is a colorless gas with a strong “rotten egg” odor that can be
smelled at very low concentrations. H2S is also an irritant that can affect the eyes and
lungs. H2S is formed under anaerobic conditions and is a by-product of refining crude oil.
• Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) is one of a group of highly reactive gases known as oxides of
sulfur (SOX). Fossil fuel combustion in power plants and industrial facilities are the
largest emitters of SO2. Short-term effects of SO2 exposure can include adverse
respiratory effects such as asthma symptoms. SO2 and other SOX can react to form
PM.10
• Sulfates (SO42-) are the fully oxidized ionic form of sulfur. SO42- are primarily produced
from fuel combustion. Sulfur compounds in the fuel are oxidized to SO2 during the
combustion process and subsequently converted to sulfate compounds in the
atmosphere. Sulfate exposure can increase risks of respiratory disease.11
• Lead is a metal found naturally in the environment as well as in manufactured products.
Mobile sources used to be the main contributor to ambient lead concentrations in the air.
In the early 1970s, the U.S. EPA established national regulations to gradually reduce the
lead content in gasoline, and in 1996, lead was banned from gasoline. As a result of
these efforts, emissions of lead from the transportation sector and levels of lead in the
air decreased dramatically. Lead can adversely affect multiple organ systems of the
body and people of every age group. Lead poisoning in young children can cause brain
damage, behavioral problems, and liver or kidney damage. Lead poisoning to adults can
cause reproductive problems, muscle and joint pain, nerve disorders and kidney
disease.12
• Vinyl Chloride, or chloroethene, is a colorless gas with a mild, sweet odor that is used
to make polyvinyl chloride products. Exposure to high levels of vinyl chloride may result
in neurological effects and liver damage.
• Visibility Reducing Particles are PM that vary greatly in shape, size and chemical
composition and which impact the environment by decreasing visibility. These
particulates come from a variety of natural and manmade sources and can be made up
of many different materials such as metals, soot, soil, dust and salt. The statewide
standard for visibility reducing particle is to limit the effects on public welfare. Health
9 United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) 2016. "Basic Information About NO2." U.S. EPA,
Environmental Topics [Air], Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2), What is NO2, and how does it get into the air? September 8,
2016. Web. August 21, 2017. <https://www.epa.gov/no2-pollution/basic-information-about-
no2#What%20is%20NO2>
10 United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) 2016. "Sulfur Dioxide Basics." U.S. EPA,
Environmental Topics [Air], Sulfur Dioxide (SO2), What is SO2, and how does it get into the air? August 16, 2016.
Web. August 21, 2017. <https://www.epa.gov/so2-pollution/sulfur-dioxide-basics#what%20is%20so2>
11 California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2009. "History of Sulfates Air Quality Standard" California Ambient Air
Quality Standards. CARB, Air Quality Standards and Area Designations, Review of Ambient Air Quality Standards,
California Ambient Air Quality Standards. November 24, 2009. Web. August 21, 2017.
<http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/aaqs/caaqs/sulf-1/sulf-1.htm>
12 California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2016. "Lead and Health". California Ambient Air Quality Standards. CARB,
Air Quality Standards and Area Designations, Review of Ambient Air Quality Standards, California Ambient Air
Quality Standards. August 22, 2016. Web. August 21, 2017. <http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/aaqs/caaqs/sulf-1/sulf-
1.htm>
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 7. Air Quality June 28, 2018 Page 7-4
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 7_Air Quality_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
effects are associated with PM10 and PM2.5, which are a component of visibility
reducing particles.13
7.1.1.1 Toxic Air Contaminants
In addition to criteria air pollutants, the U.S. EPA and CARB have classified certain pollutants as
hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) or toxic air contaminants (TACs), respectively. These pollutants
can cause severe health effects at very low concentrations, and many are suspected or
confirmed carcinogens. The U.S. EPA has identified 187 HAPs, including such substances as
benzene and formaldehyde; CARB also considers particulate emissions from diesel-fueled
engines (DPM) and other substances to be TACs.14,15
• DPM is the exhaust from diesel engines and is comprised of hundreds of different
gaseous and particulate components, many of which are toxic. Many of the toxic
compounds adhere to the particles, and because diesel particles are very small (less
than 2.5 microns in diameter), they can penetrate deeply into the lungs. Mobile sources
using diesel fuel, including trucks, buses, automobiles, trains, ships and farm equipment,
are the largest source of DPM emissions in the Bay Area.
Common criteria air pollutants, such as ozone precursors, SO2, and PM, are emitted by a large
number of sources and have effects on a regional basis (i.e., throughout the SFBAAB); other
pollutants, such as TACs, and fugitive dust, are generally not as prevalent and/or emitted by
fewer and more specific sources. As such, these pollutants have much greater effects on local
air quality conditions and local receptors.
7.1.2 San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin
The U.S. EPA and CARB are the federal and state agencies charged with maintaining air quality
in the nation and state, respectively. The U.S. EPA delegates much of its authority over air
quality to CARB. CARB has geographically divided the state into 15 air basins for the purposes
of managing air quality on a regional basis. An air basin is a CARB-designated management
unit with similar meteorological and geographic conditions. The City of Burlingame, in San
Mateo County, is within the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin (SFBAAB). The SFBAAB covers
all of Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, Santa Clara, San Mateo, and San Francisco
counties, and portions of Solano and Sonoma counties.
7.1.2.1 Topography and Meteorology
The topography and meteorology of the SFBAAB are characterized by the coast mountain
ranges and the seasonal migration of the Pacific high-pressure cell. Regionally, basin airflow is
affected by the coast mountain ranges, which create complex terrains consisting of higher
elevations, valleys, and bays. The Golden Gate to the west and the Carquinez Strait to the east
create gaps in the mountain ranges that allow air to flow into and out of the SFBAAB. In the
13 California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2016. “Visibility-Reducing Particles and Health”. California Ambient Air
Quality Standards. CARB, Air Quality Standards and Area Designations, Review of Ambient Air Quality Standards,
California Ambient Air Quality Standards. October 11, 2016. Web. August 21, 2017. <
https://www.arb.ca.gov/research/aaqs/common-pollutants/vrp/vrp.htm?_ga=2.230919519.1187858073.1510543750-
1530985921.1461610856>
14 Since CARB’s list of TACs references and includes U.S. EPA’s list of HAPs, this EIR uses the term TAC when
referring to HAPs and TACs.
15 California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2016. “Overview: Diesel Exhaust and Health.” Health Effects of Diesel .
CARB. April 12, 2016. Web. August 21, 2017. <https://www.arb.ca.gov/research/diesel/diesel-health.htm>
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 7. Air Quality June 28, 2018 Page 7-5
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 7_Air Quality_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
summer, winds from the northwest are channeled through the Golden Gate and other narrow
openings, resulting in localized areas of high wind speeds. Air flowing from the coast inland is
called the sea breeze and begins developing in the late morning or early afternoon; air flowing
from the inland regions back to the coast, or drainage, occurs at night.
Basin climate is also influenced by the Pacific high-pressure cell, a semi-permanent area of high
pressure located over the Pacific Ocean. In the summer, the cell is centered over the
northeastern Pacific Ocean, pushing storms to the north and resulting in generally stable
conditions within the Bay Area. In the winter, the cell weakens and migrates south, bringing
cooler temperatures and stormy conditions.
The SFBAAB is most susceptible to air pollution during the summer when cool marine air
flowing through the Golden Gate can become trapped under a layer of warmer air (known as an
inversion) and prevented from escaping the valleys and bays created by the Coast Ranges. Air
pollution potential is highest along the southeastern portion of the peninsula because this area
is most protected from the high winds and fog of the marine layer, the emission density is
relatively high, and pollutant transport from upwind sites is possible. Wintertime inversions are
weaker and more localized, and are the result of rapid heat radiation from the earth’s surface.
San Francisco International Airport Wind Conditions
In general, the prevailing wind at San Francisco International Airport, located less than a mile
north of the city, blows from the northwest to the southeast and daytime wind speeds tend to be
lower than nighttime. Figure 7-1 below presents monitored wind conditions at San Francisco
International Airport for the 2009 to 2013 time period. The data clearly show a prevailing winds
are from the west and northwest.
7.1.2.2 County and Regional Emission Levels
CARB’s estimate of the amount of emissions generated within San Mateo County and the
SFBAAB in 2012, the most recent year for which data is available, is summarized in Table 7-1.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 7. Air Quality June 28, 2018 Page 7-6
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 7_Air Quality_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Figure 7-1: SFO Airport, Prevailing Wind Conditions
SFO Daytime (7 AM to 7 PM) Wind Pattern (2009 to 2013)
SFO Annual Wind Pattern (2009 to 2013)
Source: CARB 16
Wind roses depicting prevailing daytime (7 AM to 7 PM on top) and annual (bottom) wind patterns at SFO Airport
for the years 2009 to 2013. A wind speed of one meter per second (m/s) is approximately equal to 2.2 miles per
hour (mph).
16 California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2015. “Meteorological Files.” San Francisco Airport. CARB. Accessed
November 30, 2017. https://www.arb.ca.gov/toxics/harp/metfiles2.htm?
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 7. Air Quality June 28, 2018 Page 7-7
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 7_Air Quality_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 7-1: San Mateo County/SFBAAB Emissions Summary
Source San Mateo County 2012 Pollutant Emissions (Tons Per Day)
ROG NOX PM PM10 PM2.5 CO SOX
Stationary(A) 4.8 1.2 1.3 0.8 0.6 1.0 0.1
Area-wide(B) 6.8 1.7 8.8 4.7 1.4 4.5 0.0
Mobile(C) 13.1 36.0 2.0 2.0 1.4 93.1 2.4
Total(D) 24.6 38.9 12.1 7.5 3.3 98.7 2.6
Source SFBAAB 2012 Pollutant Emissions (Tons Per Day)
ROG NOX PM PM10 PM2.5 CO SOX
Stationary(A) 61.0 39.9 21.1 14.3 10.4 34.9 20.2
Area-wide(B) 69.2 15.2 56.5 56.5 18.5 69.2 0.5
Mobile(C) 112.7 235.8 16.8 16.4 10.5 865.4 3.6
Total(D) 242.9 290.8 142.5 87.2 37.4 696.5 24.3
Source San Mateo County 2012 Pollutant Emissions (Tons Per Year)(E)
ROG NOX PM PM10 PM2.5 CO SOX
Stationary(A) 1,741 434 464 285 201 376 47
Area-wide(B) 2,475 624 3,212 1,716 518 1,635 15
Mobile(C) 4,771 13,129 737 719 496 33,996 883
Total(D) 8,986 14,188 4,413 2,719 1,215 36,007 945
Source SFBAAB 2012 Pollutant Emissions (Tons Per Year)(E)
ROG NOX PM PM10 PM2.5 CO SOX
Stationary(A) 22,265 14,564 7,702 5,220 3,796 12,739 7,373
Area-wide(B) 25,258 5,548 20,623 20,623 6,753 25,258 183
Mobile(C) 41,136 86,067 6,132 5,986 3,833 31,5871 1,314
Total(D) 88,659 106,17 34,456 31,828 14,381 353,868 8,870
Source: CARB 17,18
(A) Stationary sources include fuel combustion in stationary equipment or a specific type of facility such as printing
and metals processing facilities.
(B) Area-wide sources include solvent evaporation (e.g., consumer products, painting, and asphalt paving) and
miscellaneous processes such as residential space heating, fugitive windblown dust, and cooking.
(C) Mobile sources include automobiles, trucks, and other vehicles intended for “on-road” travel and other self-
propelled machines such as construction equipment and all-terrain vehicles intended for “off-road” travel.
(D) Totals may not equal due to rounding.
(E) CARB emissions data is available in tons per day. Tons per year emission estimates are derived by multiplying
tons per day data times 365 days per year.
17 California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2013. Almanac Emission Projection Data (Published in 2013), 2012
Estimated Annual Average Emissions, San Mateo County. Sacramento, CA. 2013.
18 California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2013. Almanac Emission Projection Data (Published in 2013), 2012
Estimated Annual Average Emissions, San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin. Sacramento, CA. 2013.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 7. Air Quality June 28, 2018 Page 7-8
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 7_Air Quality_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
7.1.2.3 Estimated City of Burlingame Emission Levels
The California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod, Version 2016.3.2) was used to estimate
existing (Year 2017) area, energy, and mobile sources of emissions. The existing type (e.g.,
residential, commercial, industrial, etc.) and amount (e.g., residential units, commercial building
square footage, etc.) of different land uses in the City was entered into the model; in most
cases, default assumptions for area (e.g., number of fireplaces), energy (e.g., electricity and gas
consumption), and mobile sources were used to estimate emissions for City land uses. The only
exception to this was the average trip distance assumed in the model, which was adjusted to
reflect the vehicle miles travelled (VMT) estimates developed for the traffic impact analysis
prepared for the General Plan (see Chapter 18).19 The resulting existing emissions estimates
are presented in Table 7-2. Since the operational year was set to 2017, energy emissions are
likely underestimated since some of the City’s existing building stock does not meet current
energy efficiency standards
Table 7-2 City of Burlingame Existing (2017) Conditions Operational Emissions
Sources
Pollutant Emissions (Tons per Year)
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Dust Exhaust Dust Exhaust
Area 212.4 2.4 177.1 0.2 -- 11.9 -- 11.9
Energy 4.1 36.1 22.4 0.2 -- 2.8 -- 2.8
Mobile 76.8 210.2 745.1 1.7 142.0 2.6 38.2 2.7
Total(A) 292.3 248.7 944.6 2.1 142.0 17.2 38.2 17.1
Source: MIG 2018, see Appendix A
(A) Totals may not equal due to rounding.
Existing Sources of Toxic Air Contaminants
Common sources of TAC emissions in the SFBAAB include gasoline stations, dry cleaners,
diesel-fueled generators and pumps, other stationary sources (e.g., refineries), and mobile
sources such as cars and trucks travelling on roads and freeways, and construction equipment,
ships, and trains.
CARB data collected pursuant to the AB 2588 Air Toxics “Hot Spots” Program (see Section
7.2.2.1) indicates there were 57 facilities (including gas stations, print shops, auto body shops,
and dry cleaners) in the City subject to the requirements of AB 2588.20 Most of these facilities
are located in the industrial area of the City, away from sensitive residential receptor locations.
Although emissions data is not available for all facilities, CARB’s AB 2588 database indicates
most of these facilities (27) emit DPM (e.g., from a back-up generator), with other TAC
emissions such as formaldehyde, benzene, and other gasoline hydrocarbons emitted from far
fewer sources. The City’s waste water treatment plant is the largest source of TAC emissions
for which AB 2588 information was available at the time this EIR was prepared.
19 As part of the traffic impact analysis prepared for the Burlingame 2040 General Plan, Hexagon Transportation
Consultants provided estimates of existing (Year 2017) and buildout (Year 2040) VMT and intersection level of
service for the City. This EIR’s air quality analysis relies on the total VMT estimate provided for the General Plan
traffic impact analysis. As explained in more detail in Chapter 10, Greenhouses Gases and Energy, a different VMT
data source was used in the preparation of the City’s evaluation of GHG emissions to provide consistency with GHG
emissions inventory methodologies and regional data sources.
20 California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2016. “Facility Search Engine 2016 Criteria and Toxic plus Risk Data, City
of Burlingame. Sacramento, CA. 2016. https://www.arb.ca.gov/app/emsinv/facinfo/facinfo.php
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 7. Air Quality June 28, 2018 Page 7-9
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 7_Air Quality_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
As noted, mobile sources such as cars, trucks, and trains can also emit TACs. U.S. 101 passes
through the City’s eastern side and has an ADT volume greater than 100,000 vehicles; similarly,
I-280 runs adjacent to the City’s western border and also has an ADT of approximately 100,000
vehicles. In addition, segments of Broadway (near U.S. 101), Murchison Drive (near El Camino),
and Trousdale Drive (near El Camino) and all segments of California Drive, El Camino Real,
and Skyline Boulevard have an ADT above 10,000 vehicles; however, there are no roadways
within the City where ADT exceeds 50,000. Broadway (near U.S. 101), California Drive, and El
Camino Real are the most heavily travelled roadways within the City, with ADT ranging from
about 20,000 on California Drive to 30,000 on El Camino Real.
Although the City contains existing sources of TAC emissions, the BAAQMD has not identified
the City as an impacted community under its Community Air Risk Evaluation (CARE) program.21
In addition, according to CalEnviroScreen 3.0, the City (census tracts 6081605100 and
6081605300), is in the 1 to 15th percentile based on the CalEnviroScreen indicators (e.g.,
exposure, environmental effects, population characteristics, socioeconomic factors), does not
experience a high pollution burden, and is not considered a disadvantaged community pursuant
to Senate Bill 535, which allocates funding from the state’s Cap and Trade Program to
disadvantaged communities.22
Existing Sources of Odors
Existing sources of odors within the City include the City’s Wastewater Treatment Plant, the
Guittard Chocolate Company, and local industrial and commercial operations (e.g. gas stations,
restaurants, etc.).
7.1.3 Air Quality Conditions and Attainment Status
The federal and state governments have established emissions standards and limits for air
pollutants that may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare. These
standards typically take one of two forms: standards or requirements that are applicable to
specific types of facilities or equipment (e.g., petroleum refining, metal smelting), or
concentration-based standards that are applicable to overall ambient air quality. Air quality
conditions are best described and understood in the context of these standards; areas that
meet, or attain, concentration-based ambient air quality standards are considered to have levels
of pollutants in the ambient air that, based on the latest scientific knowledge, do not endanger
public health or welfare.
• Attainment. A region is “in attainment” if monitoring shows ambient concentrations of a
specific pollutant are less than or equal to the NAAQS or CAAQS. In addition, an area
that has been re-designated from nonattainment to attainment is classified as a
“maintenance area” for 10 years to ensure that the air quality improvements are
sustained.
• Nonattainment. If the NAAQSD or CAAQS are exceeded for a pollutant, the region is
designated as nonattainment for that pollutant. It is important to note that some NAAQS
and CAAQS require multiple exceedances of the standard in order for a region to be
classified as nonattainment. Federal and state laws require nonattainment areas to
develop strategies, implementation plans, and control measures to reduce pollutant
concentrations to levels that meet, or attain, standards.
21 Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2018. Community Air Risk Evaluation Impacted Areas Map.
BAAQMD. January 25, 2018
22 California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA). 2017. CalEnviroScreen 3.0. Sacramento,
CA. January, 2017. <https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/report/calenviroscreen-30>
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 7. Air Quality June 28, 2018 Page 7-10
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 7_Air Quality_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
• Unclassified. An area is unclassified if the ambient air quality monitoring data are
incomplete and do not support a designation of attainment or nonattainment.
Table 7-3 below lists the NAAQS and CAAQS and summarizes the SFBAAB attainment status.
Table 7-3: Ambient Air Quality Standards and SFBAAB Attainment Status
Pollutant Averaging
Time
CAAQS (A) NAAQS (B)
Standard (C) Attainment
Status (D) Standard (C) Attainment
Status (D)
Ozone 1-Hour 180 µg/m3 N -- --
8-Hour 137 µg/m3 N 137 µg/m3 N
PM10 24-Hour 50 µg/m3 N 150 µg/m3 U
Annual Average 20 µg/m3 N -- --
PM2.5 24-Hour -- -- 35 µg/m3 N (E)
Annual Average 12 µg/m3 N 12 µg/m3 U/A(F)
Carbon
Monoxide
1-Hour 23,000 µg/m3 A 40,000 µg/m3 A
8-Hour 10,000 µg/m3 A 10,000 µg/m3 A
Nitrogen
Dioxide
1-Hour 339 µg/m3 A 188 µg/m3 U(G)
Annual Average 57 µg/m3 -- 100 µg/m3 A
Sulfur
Dioxide
1-Hour 655 µg/m3 A 196 µg/m3 U(H)
24-Hour 105 µg/m3 A -- --
Sulfates 24-Hour 25 µg/m3 A -- --
H2S 1-Hour 42 µg/m3 U -- --
Vinyl Chloride 24-Hour 26 µg/m3 -- -- --
Source: BAAQMD,23 modified by MIG.
(A) Table does not list CAAQS for lead and visibility reducing particles. California standards for ozone, carbon
monoxide, sulfur dioxide (1 and 24-hour), nitrogen dioxide, suspended PM10 and PM2.5 are values that are
not to be exceeded. The standards for sulfates, hydrogen sulfide, and vinyl chloride are not to be equaled or
exceeded.
(B) Standards shown are the primary NAAQS designed to protect public health.
(C) All standards shown in terms of micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m3) for comparison purposes.
(D) A= Attainment, N= Nonattainment, U=Unclassifiable.
(E) On January 2013, the U.S. EPA issued a final rule to determine the Bay Area attains the 24-hour PM2.5
national standard. This EPA rule suspends key State Implementation Plan (SIP) requirements as long as
monitoring data continue to show that the Bay Area attains the standard. Despite this EPA action, the Bay Area
will continue to be designated as “non-attainment” for the national 24-hour PM2.5 standard until such time as
the Air District submits a “redesignation request” and a “maintenance plan” to EPA, and EPA approves the
proposed redesignation.
(F) In December 2012, EPA strengthened the annual PM 2.5 NAAQS from 15.0 to 12.0 micrograms per cubic
meter (ug/m3). In December 2014, EPA issued final area designation for the 2012 primary annual PM 2.5
NAAQS. Areas designated “unclassifiable/attainment” must continue to take steps to prevent their air quality
from deteriorating to unhealthy levels. The effective date of this standard is April 15, 2015.
(G) To attain this standard, the 3-year average of the 98th percentile of the daily maximum 1-hour average at each
monitor within an area must not exceed 0.100ppm (effective January 22, 2010). The US Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) expects to make a designation for the Bay Area by the end of 2017.
(H) On June 2, 2010, the US EPA established a new 1-hour SO2 standard, effective August 23, 2010, which is
based on the 3-year average of the annual 99th percentile of 1-hour daily maximum concentrations. The
existing 0.030 ppm annual and 0.14 ppm 24-hour SO2 NAAQS however must continue to be used until one
year following US EPA initial designations of the new 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. EPA expects to make this
designation for the Bay Area by the end of 2017.
23 Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2017. Air Quality Standards and Attainment Status.
BAAQMD. January 5, 2017. Web. Accessed April 24, 2018. <http://www.baaqmd.gov/research-and-data/air-quality-
standards-and-attainment-status>
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 7. Air Quality June 28, 2018 Page 7-11
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 7_Air Quality_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
7.1.3.1 Local Air Quality Conditions
Measurements of ambient air quality from the BAAQMD’s Redwood City monitoring station,
located at 8987 Barron Avenue in Redwood City, are representative of the air quality in the
Planning Area. Table 7-4 summarizes the pollutant concentrations of O3 and PM2.5 measured
from this station for the years 2015-2017. Data for PM10 is not available for this monitoring
station, so Table 7-4 summarizes the pollutant concentrations of PM10 from the San Francisco
monitoring station, located at 10 Arkansas Street in San Francisco.
Table 7-4: Local Air Quality Conditions (2015 – 2017)
Pollutant 2015 2016 2017
Ozone
Maximum 1-hour Concentration (ppm) 0.086 0.075 0.115
Maximum 8-hour Concentration (ppm) 0.071 0.060 0.086
Number of days exceeding State 1-hr standard 0 0 2
Number of days exceeding State 8-hr standard 1 0 2
Number of days exceeding Federal 8-hr standard 1 0 2
Carbon Monoxide
Maximum 1-hour Concentration (ppm) 3.4 2.2 2.8
Maximum 8-hour Concentration (ppm 1.6 1.1 1.4
Number of days national/state standard exceeded 0 0 0
Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5)
Maximum Concentration (μg/m3) 34.6 19.5 60.8
Number of days exceeding Federal 24-hr standard 0 0 6
Respirable Particulate Matter (PM10)(A)
Maximum Concentration (μg/m3) (California) 47.0 29.0 77
Number of days State 24-hr standard exceeded 0 0 2
Number of days Federal 24-hr standard exceeded 0 0 0
Source: BAAQMD 24
(A) Data for O3, CO, PM2.5 were obtained at the Redwood City monitoring station and data for PM10 was
obtained at the San Francisco monitoring station.
7.1.4 Sensitive Air Quality Receptors
Some people are more affected by air pollution than others. The BAAQMD defines sensitive
receptors as “facilities or land uses that include members of the population that are particularly
sensitive to the effects of air pollutants, such as children, the elderly and people with
illnesses.”25 In general, children, senior citizens, and individuals with pre-existing health issues,
such as asthmatics, are considered sensitive receptors. Both CARB and the BAAQMD consider
schools, schoolyards, parks and playgrounds, daycare facilities, nursing homes, hospitals, and
residential areas as sensitive air quality land uses and receptors.26,27
24 Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2017. Historical Air Monitoring Data. October, 2017. Web.
April 2018. <http://www.baaqmd.gov/about-air-quality/current-air-quality/air-monitoring-
data?DataViewFormat=yearly&DataView=tech&StartDate=1/1/2015&ParameterId=59>
25 Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2017. California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality
Guidelines. San Francisco, CA. June 2010, updated May 2017.
26 Ibid.
27 California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2005. Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Perspective.
Sacramento, CA. April 2005.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 7. Air Quality June 28, 2018 Page 7-12
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 7_Air Quality_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
In general, the sensitive air quality receptors within the City of Burlingame include, but are not
limited to:
• Existing low-density, medium-density, high-density, and mixed-use residential receptors
within the City,
• Existing schools and education or institutional facilities, including Mills Peninsula Health
Center, and
• Existing parks.
7.2 REGULATORY SETTING
7.2.1 Federal and State Clean Air Act
The Federal Clean Air Act, as amended, provides the overarching basis for both federal and
state air pollution prevention, control, and regulation. The Act establishes the U.S. EPA’s
responsibilities for protecting and improving the nation’s air quality. The U.S. EPA oversees
federal programs for setting air quality standards and designating attainment status, permitting
new and modified stationary sources of pollutants, controlling emissions of hazardous air
pollutants, and reducing emissions from motor vehicles and other mobile sources. In 1971, to
achieve the purposes of Section 109 of the CAA, the EPA developed primary and secondary
NAAQS. Primary standards are designed to protect human health with an adequate margin of
safety. Secondary standards are designed to protect property and public welfare from air
pollutants in the atmosphere.
The U.S. EPA requires each state prepare and submit a State Implementation Plan (SIP) that
consists of background information, rules, technical documentation, and agreements that an
individual state will use to attain compliance with the NAAQS within federally-imposed
deadlines. State and local agencies implement the plans and rules associated with the SIP, but
the rules are also federally enforceable.
In addition to being subject to federal requirements, air quality in the state is also governed by
more stringent regulations under the California Clean Air Act, which was enacted in 1988 to
develop plans and strategies for attaining the California Ambient Air Quality Standards. CARB,
which is part of the California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal-EPA), develops statewide
air quality regulations, including industry-specific limits on criteria, toxic, and nuisance
pollutants. The California Clean Air Act is more stringent than federal law in a number of ways,
including revised standards for PM10 and ozone and for visibility-reducing particles, sulfates,
hydrogen sulfide, and vinyl chloride.
In California, both the federal and state Clean Air acts are administered by CARB. It sets all air
quality standards including emission standards for vehicles, fuels, and consumer goods as well
as monitors air quality and sets control measures for toxic air contaminants. CARB oversees the
functions of local air pollution control districts and air quality management districts, which in turn
administer air quality activities at the regional level.
7.2.2 State Regulations
7.2.2.1 Air Toxics “Hot Spots” Program
State requirements specifically address air toxics issues through Assembly Bill (AB) 1807
(known as the Tanner Bill) that established the state air toxics program and the Air Toxics Hot
Spots Information and Assessment Act (AB 2588). The air quality regulations developed from
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 7. Air Quality June 28, 2018 Page 7-13
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 7_Air Quality_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
these bills have been modified recently to incorporate the federal regulations associated with
the Federal Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. The Air Toxics Hot Spots Information and
Assessment Act (Hot Spots Act) was enacted in September 1987. Under this bill, stationary
sources of emissions are required to report the types and quantities of certain substances that
their facilities routinely release into the air.
7.2.2.2 Asbestos Airborne Toxic Control Measure
CARB’s Asbestos Airborne Toxic Control Measure (ATCM) for Construction, Grading,
Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations (17 CCR §93105) into its own regulations.28
Asbestos Airborne Toxic Control Measure (ATCM) for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and
Surface Mining Operations applies to any road construction and maintenance, or construction
and grading operations on any property that is located in a geographic ultramafic rock unit or
has NOA, serpentine rock, or ultramafic rock.
7.2.2.3 In-Use Off-Road Diesel Equipment Program
CARB’s In-Use Off-Road Diesel Equipment regulation is intended to reduce emissions of NOx
and PM from off-road diesel vehicles, including construction equipment, operating within
California. The regulation imposes limits on idling; requires reporting equipment and engine
information and labeling all vehicles reported; restricts adding older vehicles to fleets; and
requires fleets to reduce their emissions by retiring, replacing, or repowering older engines or
installing exhaust retrofits for PM. The requirements and compliance dates of the off-road
regulation vary by fleet size, and large fleets (fleets with more than 5,000 horsepower) must
meet average targets or comply with Best Available Control Technology requirements beginning
in 2014. CARB has off-road anti-idling regulations affecting self-propelled diesel-fueled vehicles
25 horsepower and up. The off-road anti-idling regulations limit idling on applicable equipment
to no more than five minutes, unless exempted due to safety, operation, or maintenance
requirements.
7.2.2.4 On-Road Heavy-Duty Diesel Vehicles (In-Use) Regulation
CARB’s On-Road Heavy-Duty Diesel Vehicles (In-Use) regulation (also known as the Truck and
Bus Regulation) is intended to reduce emission of NOX, PM, and other criteria pollutants
generated from existing on-road diesel vehicles operating in California. The regulation applies to
nearly all diesel-fueled trucks and buses with a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) greater than
14,000 pounds that are privately or federally owned, and for privately and publicly owned school
buses. Heavier trucks and buses with a GVWR greater than 26,000 pounds must comply with a
schedule by engine model year or owners can report to show compliance with more flexible
options. Fleets complying with the heavier trucks and buses schedule must install the best
available PM filter on 1996 model year and newer engines, and replace the vehicle 8 years
later. Trucks with 1995 model year and older engines had to be replaced starting in 2015.
Replacements with a 2010 model year or newer engine meet the final requirements, but owners
can also replace the equipment with used trucks that have a future compliance date (as
specified in regulation). By 2023, all trucks and buses must have at least 2010 model year
engines with few exceptions.
28 California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2011. Final Regulation Order Amendments to the Airborne Toxic Control
Measure for Stationary Compression Ignition Engines. Effective May 19, 2011. Accessed September 25, 2017.
<https://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2010/atcm2010/finalregorder.pdf>
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 7. Air Quality June 28, 2018 Page 7-14
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 7_Air Quality_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
7.2.2.5 CARB Stationary Diesel Engines – Emission Regulations
In 1998, CARB identified DPM as a TAC. To reduce public exposure to DPM, in 2000, the
Board approved the Risk Reduction Plan to Reduce Particulate Matter Emissions from Diesel-
Fueled Engines and Vehicles (Risk Reduction Plan).29 Integral to this plan is the implementation
of control measures to reduce DPM such as the control measures for stationary diesel-fueled
engines. As such, diesel generators must comply with regulations under CARB’s amendments
to Airborne Toxic Control Measure for Stationary Compression Ignition Engines and be
permitted by BAAQMD.
7.2.2.6 CARB Air Quality and Land Use Handbook
In 1998, CARB identified particulate matter from diesel-fueled engines as a TAC. CARB’s Air
Quality and Land Use Handbook is intended to serve as a general reference guide for
evaluating and reducing air pollution impacts associated with new projects that go through the
land use decision-making process.30 The CARB Handbook recommends that planning agencies
consider proximity to air pollution sources when considering new locations for “sensitive” land
uses, such as residences, medical facilities, daycare centers, schools, and playgrounds. Air
pollution sources of concern include freeways, rail yards, ports, refineries, distribution centers,
chrome plating facilities, dry cleaners, and large gasoline service stations. Key
recommendations in the Handbook relative to the Plan Area include taking steps to consider or
avoid siting new, sensitive land uses:
• Within 500 feet of a freeway, urban roads with 100,000 vehicles/day, or rural roads with
50,000 vehicles/day;
• Within 300 feet of gasoline fueling stations; or
• Within 300 feet of dry cleaning operations (dry cleaning with TACs is being phased out
and will be prohibited in 2023). The SCAQMD (Regulation 14, Rule 21) has established
emission controls for the use of perchloroethylene, the most common dry cleaning
solvent.
7.2.3 Bay Area Air Quality Management District
The BAAQMD is the agency primarily responsible for maintaining air quality and regulating
emissions of criteria and toxic air pollutants within the SFBAAB. The BAAQMD carries out this
responsibility by preparing, adopting, and implementing plans, regulations, and rules that are
designed to achieve attainment of state and national air quality standards.
7.2.3.1 Rules and Regulations
The BAAQMD currently has 13 regulations containing more than 100 rules that control and limit
emissions from sources of pollutants. Table 7-5 below presents the major BAAQMD rules and
regulation that may apply to future development projects in the City.
Table 7-5: Potentially Applicable BAAQMD Rules and Regulations
29 California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2000. “Risk Reduction Plan to Reduce Particulate Matter Emissions from
Diesel-Fueled Engines and Vehicles.” Stationary Source Division and Mobile Source Control Division. October 2000.
30 California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2005. Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Perspective.
Sacramento, CA. April 2005.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 7. Air Quality June 28, 2018 Page 7-15
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 7_Air Quality_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Regulation Rule Description
1- General
Provisions and
Definitions
1- General Provisions and
Definitions
301 – Public Nuisance: Establishes that no person
shall discharge quantities of air contaminants or
other materials which cause injury, detriment,
nuisance or annoyance to any considerable number
or person or the public; or which endangers the
comfort, repose, health or safety of any such person
or the public.
2- Permits 2- New Source Review Provides for the review of new and modified sources
of pollutants; requires use of Best Available Control
Technology and emissions offsets to achieve no net
increase in nonattainment pollutants; implements
Prevention of Significant Deterioration review for
attainment pollutants.
2 – Permits 5 – New Source Review of
Toxic Air
Contaminants
Provides for the review of new and modified sources
of toxic air contaminants; requires use of Best
Available Control Technology for sources that have a
risk above certain thresholds and limits total project
risks to 10.0 in a million cancer risk, 1.0 chronic
hazard index, and 1.0 acute hazard index.
2 – Permits 6 – Major Facility Review Provides for the review and issuance of operating
permits for facilities that have the potential to emit
100 tons per year or more of any regulated air
pollutant, 10 tons per year of a single hazardous air
pollutant, and 25 tons per year or more of combined
hazardous air pollutants.
6 – Particulate
Matter
1 – General Requirements Limits visible particulate matter emissions.
7- Odorous
substances
Odorous Substances Establishes general limitations on odorous
substances and specific emission limitations on
certain odorous compounds, such as ammonia.
9 – Inorganic
Gaseous
Pollutants
8 – NOx and CO from
Stationary Internal
Combustion Engines
Limits emissions of NOx and CO from stationary
internal gas combustion engines more than 50 brake
horsepower.
11 – Hazardous
Pollutants
2 – Asbestos Demolition,
Renovation, and
Manufacturing
Controls emissions of asbestos to the atmosphere
during demolition.
Source: BAAQMD 31
7.2.3.1 2017 Clean Air Plan
On April 29, 2017, the BAAQMD adopted its Spare the Air-Cool the Climate 2017 Clean Air Plan
(Clean Air Plan). The 2017 Clean Air Plan updates the most recent Bay Area ozone plan, the
2010 Clean Air Plan, in fulfillment of state ozone planning requirements. Over the next 35 years,
the Plan will focus on the three following goals:
• Attain all state and national quality standards;
31 Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2017. Current Rules. BAAQMD. Accessed December 12,
2017. <http://www.baaqmd.gov/rules-and-compliance/current-rules>
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 7. Air Quality June 28, 2018 Page 7-16
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 7_Air Quality_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
• Eliminate disparities among Bay Area communities in cancer health risk from toxic air
contaminants; and
• Reduce Bay Area GHG Emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030, and 80 percent
below 1990 levels by 2050.
The Plan includes 85 distinct control measures to help the region reduce air pollutants and has
a long-term strategic vision which forecasts what a clean air Bay Area will look like in the year
2050. The control measures aggressively target the largest source of GHG, ozone pollutants,
and particulate matter emissions – transportation. The 2017 Plan includes more incentives for
electric vehicle infrastructure, off-road electrification projects such as Caltrain and shore power
at ports, and reducing emissions from trucks, school buses, marine vessels, locomotives and
off-road equipment.32
7.2.4 Local Regulations
The City of Burlingame’s existing General Plan establishes standards related to air quality;
however, future development within the City during the next approximately 20 years would be
subject to the policies contained in the proposed 2040 General Plan Update should the City
approve the 2040 General Plan. Therefore, since existing General Plan policies and standards
would cease to apply if the 2040 General Plan is adopted, they are not presented below. The
2040 General Plan policies pertaining to air quality are presented and analyzed in the impacts
section of this chapter (see Section 7.3).
7.3 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
The BAAQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Guidelines contains guidance on assessing and mitigating
both project- and plan-level air quality impacts. The BAAQMD’s guidelines state:33
“The term general and area plan refers broadly to discretionary planning activities which
may include, but are not limited to the following: general plans, redevelopment plans,
specific plans, area plans, community plans, congestion management plans, and
annexations of lands and service areas. General and area plans are often subject to
program-level analysis under CEQA, as opposed to project-level analysis. As a general
principle, the guidance offered within this chapter should be applied to discretionary,
program-level planning activities; whereas the project-level guidance offered in other
chapters should be applied to individual project-specific approvals, such as a proposed
development project. Air quality impacts from future development pursuant to general or
area plans can be divided into construction-related impacts and operational-related
impacts. Construction-related impacts are associated with construction activities likely to
occur in conjunction with future development allocated by the plan. Operational-related
impacts are associated with continued and future operation of developed land uses,
including increased vehicle trips and energy use.”
The proposed Burlingame 2040 General Plan provides the blueprint and basis for future land
use decisions in the City. As such, it is a planning-level document that does not authorize or
approve any specific project. Accordingly, this EIR evaluates the proposed Burlingame 2040
General Plan update using the plan-level guidance contained in the Chapter 9 of the BAAQMD’s
32 Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2017. 2017 Clean Air Plan: Spare the Air, Cool the Climate.
BAAQMD, Planning, Rules, and Research Division. April 19, 2017.
33 Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2017. California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality
Guidelines. San Francisco, CA. June 2010, updated May 2017.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 7. Air Quality June 28, 2018 Page 7-17
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 7_Air Quality_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
CEQA Air Quality Guidelines.34 Where possible, potential future construction and operational
emissions levels have been provided for information purposes only.
7.3.1 Significance Criteria
Based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, the implementation of the Burlingame 2040
General Plan would have a significant air quality impact if it would:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan;
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air
quality violation;
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria air pollutant for which
the region is in non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality
standard (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone
precursors);
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations; or
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people.
The BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines contain the BAAQMD’s recommendations to Lead
Agencies for evaluating and assessing the significance of a plan’s potential air quality impacts.35
The BAAQMD’s plan-level thresholds of significance are summarized in Table 7-6 below.
Table 7-6: BAAQMD Thresholds of Significance for Plans
Pollutant Threshold of Significance
Criteria Air Pollutants and
Precursor Emissions
Construction: None
Operational: Consistency with Current AQP and projected VMT
or vehicle trip increase is less than or equal to projected
population increase.
Local Community Risks and Hazards Land use diagram identifies special overlay zones around
existing and planned sources of TACs and PM2.5, including
special overlay zones of at least 500 feet (or Air District-
approved modeled distance) on each side of all freeways and
high-volume roadways, and plan identifies goals, policies, and
objectives to minimize potentially adverse impacts.
Odors Identify locations of odor sources in plan; identify goals, policies,
and objectives to minimize potentially adverse impacts.
34 Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2017. California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality
Guidelines. San Francisco, CA. June 2010, updated May 2017.
35 Ibid.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 7. Air Quality June 28, 2018 Page 7-18
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 7_Air Quality_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
7.3.2 Environmental Impacts
Impact 7-1: Increases in Criteria Air Pollutants and Precursor Emissions. The Burlingame
2040 General Plan includes policies that would be consistent with the 2017 Clean Air Plan and
would not result in an increase in VMT that exceeds the projected increase in population. This
would be a less than significant impact (see criteria [a], [b] and [c] in subsection 7.3.1,
"Significance Criteria," above).
Consistent with BAAQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Guidelines, the proposed Burlingame 2040
General Plan would result in a significant impact if it would be inconsistent with the 2017 Clean
Air Plan or result in a projected increase in vehicle trips or VMT that exceeds a projected
population increase.
Consistency with 2017 Clean Air Plan
In regards to consistency with the 2017 Clean Air Plan, the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines
recommend a lead agency analyze consistency using the following three questions:
1) Does the project support the primary goals of the Air Quality Plan?
2) Does the project include applicable control measures from the Air Quality Plan?
3) Does the project disrupt or hinder implementation of any Air Quality Plan control
measures?
Support for the Primary Goals of the 2017 Clean Air Plan
The BAAQMD’s 2017 Clean Air Plan is a multi-pollutant plan focused on protecting public health
and the climate. Specifically, the primary air quality-related goals of the 2017 Clean Air Plan are
to:
• Attain all state and national quality standards;
• Eliminate disparities among Bay Area communities in cancer health risk from toxic air
contaminants; and
The Burlingame 2040 General Plan sets forth the City’s vision for the types of development that
would occur over the next approximately 20 years. The General Plan’s proposed land use
designations permit slightly higher development intensity within the City boundaries than
compared to the existing General Plan. Criteria air pollutant and other emissions would result
from construction activities, and from the operation of residences, businesses, and other land
uses within the City. These emissions could interfere with the SFBAAB’s attainment of state and
national air quality standards.
In addition to the two goals above, the 2017 Clean Air Plan includes a third primary goal related
to Bay Area greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. For the purposes of this EIR, consistency with
the 2017 Clean Air Plan’s goal related to GHG emissions is considered and evaluated in detail
in Chapter 10, Greenhouse Gases, Impacts 10-1 and 10-2.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 7. Air Quality June 28, 2018 Page 7-19
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 7_Air Quality_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Attainment of Air Quality Standards - Construction Emissions
The proposed General Plan would not directly result in construction of any development or
infrastructure; however, future development supported by the General Plan would result in
short-term construction-related criteria pollutant emissions that have the potential to have an
adverse effect on air quality. Short-term criteria pollutant emissions would occur during
demolition, site preparation, grading, building construction, paving, and architectural coating
activities associated with specific new development projects. Emissions would occur from use of
equipment, worker, vendor and hauling trips, and disturbance of onsite soils (fugitive dust).
ROG and NOX emissions are primarily associated with gas and diesel equipment exhaust and
the application of architectural coatings. Fugitive dust emissions (PM10 and PM2.5) are primarily
associated with site preparation and vary as a function of such parameters as soil silt content,
soil moisture, wind speed, acreage of disturbance area, and VMT by construction vehicles on-
and off-site. Typical construction equipment associated with development and redevelopment
projects includes dozers, graders, excavators, loaders, and trucks.
Although it is not possible to know the exact type, number, location, or duration of future
construction projects, future development activities would generally entail demolition, site
preparation, grading, building construction, paving, and painting. Since Burlingame is generally
a built-out city, many new projects in the City will likely require the demolition of existing
structures to make room for newer ones. Fugitive dust (PM10) emissions would typically be
greatest during building demolition, site preparation, and grading due to the disturbance of soils
and transport of material. NOX emissions would also result from the combustion of diesel fuels
used to power off-road heavy-duty pieces of equipment (e.g., backhoes, bulldozers, excavators,
etc.). The types and quantity of equipment, as well as duration of construction activities, would
be dependent on project specific conditions. Larger projects would require more equipment over
a longer timeframe than that required for redevelopment of a single, residential home or small
residential or mixed use project.
As shown in Section 7.3.1, the BAAQMD does not maintain recommended plan-level thresholds
of significance for construction emissions; however, the BAAQMD does maintain and
recommend project-level thresholds that potential future development projects would be subject
to. In addition, the BAAQMD’s CEQA Guidelines identify and recommend a series of “Basic”
measures to control and reduction construction-related emissions. For all projects, the
BAAQMD recommends implementation of eight Basic Construction Measures 36 to reduce
construction fugitive dust emissions levels; these basic measures are also used to meet the
BAAQMD’s best management practices (BMPs) threshold of significance for construction
fugitive dust emissions (i.e., the implementation of all basic construction measures renders
fugitive dust impacts a less than significant impact). The City’s proposed General Plan Update
focuses on protecting Burlingame residents and employees from exposure to harmful air
pollutants. Table 7-7 summarizes the proposed Burlingame 2040 General Plan goals and
policies that address potential construction emissions within the City.
36 Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2017. California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality
Guidelines; page 8-4. San Francisco, CA. June 2010, updated May 2017.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 7. Air Quality June 28, 2018 Page 7-20
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 7_Air Quality_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 7-7: Existing Regulations and Proposed Burlingame General Plan Policies to Avoid or
Reduce Impacts from Construction Emissions
Regulation/Policy Description of Regulation/Policy How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance Criteria
Existing Regulations
BAAQMD
Regulation 11,
Hazardous
Pollutants, Rule 2,
Asbestos
Demolition,
Renovation, and
Manufacturing
Controls emissions of asbestos to
the atmosphere during demolition.
(a) Consistency with
the applicable air
quality plan
(b) Cause or
contribute to a
violation of air quality
standards
(c) Result in a
cumulatively
considerable
increase in non-
attainment pollutants
CARB’s Asbestos
Airborne Toxic
Control Measure
(ATCM) for
Construction,
Grading,
Quarrying, and
Surface Mining
Operations (17
CCR §93105)
Applies to any road construction
and maintenance, or construction
and grading operations on any
property that is located in a
geographic ultramafic rock unit or
has NOA, serpentine rock, or
ultramafic rock.
(a) Consistency with
the applicable air
quality plan
(b) Cause or
contribute to a
violation of air quality
standards
(c) Result in a
cumulatively
considerable
increase in non-
attainment pollutants
Healthy People, Healthy Places Element
Goal HP-3 Minimize exposure of residents
and employees of local businesses
to harmful air pollutants.
States the overall
goal of the City to
protect residents and
employees from
harmful air pollutants.
(a) Consistency with
the applicable air
quality plan
(b) Cause or
contribute to a
violation of air quality
standards
(c) Result in a
cumulatively
considerable
increase in non-
attainment pollutants
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 7. Air Quality June 28, 2018 Page 7-21
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 7_Air Quality_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 7-7: Existing Regulations and Proposed Burlingame General Plan Policies to Avoid or
Reduce Impacts from Construction Emissions
Regulation/Policy Description of Regulation/Policy How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance Criteria
Policy HP-3.1:
Regional Air
Quality Standards
Support regional policies and
efforts to improve air quality, and
participate in regional planning
efforts with the Bay Area Air
Quality Management District to
meet or exceed air quality
standards
Establishes the City’s
commitment to work
with agencies with
regulatory authority
over air quality at the
regional level.
(a) Consistency with
the applicable air
quality plan
(b) Cause or
contribute to a
violation of air quality
standards
(c) Result in a
cumulatively
considerable
increase in non-
attainment pollutants
Policy HP-3.10:
Truck Routes
Ensure projects that generate truck
traffic and existing truck routes
avoid sensitive land uses such as
schools, daycares, senior facilities,
and residences.
Reduces potential
sensitive receptor
exposure to dust and
exhaust emissions
from truck travel.
(a) Consistency with
the applicable air
quality plan
(b) Cause or
contribute to a
violation of air quality
standards
(c) Result in a
cumulatively
considerable
increase in non-
attainment pollutants
Policy HP-3.11:
Dust Abatement
Require dust abatement actions for
all new construction and
redevelopment projects.
Reduces fugitive dust
and PM10 emissions
from temporary
construction activities.
(a) Consistency with
the applicable air
quality plan
(b) Cause or
contribute to a
violation of air quality
standards
(c) Result in a
cumulatively
considerable
increase in non-
attainment pollutants
Policy HP-3.12:
Construction Best
Practices
Require construction projects to
implement the Bay Area Air Quality
Management District’s Best
Practices for Construction to
reduce pollution from dust and
exhaust as feasible.
Requires
implementation of
BAAQMD-
recommended
construction emission
measures as
necessary and
feasible.
(a) Consistency with
the applicable air
quality plan
(b) Cause or
contribute to a
violation of air quality
standards
(c) Result in a
cumulatively
considerable
increase in non-
attainment pollutants
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 7. Air Quality June 28, 2018 Page 7-22
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 7_Air Quality_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
As shown in Table 7-7, proposed General Plan Goal HP-3 and Policies HP-3.1 and HP-3.10 to
HP-3.12 to 4.6 establish the overall goal and intent of the City to protect residents and
employees from localized construction emissions, including dust and exhaust pollution. The
implementation of these policies would render potential construction emissions impacts from
future development projects consistent with 2017 Clean Air Plan’s goal to attain air quality
standards.
Attainment of Air Quality Standards - Operational Emissions
The proposed Burlingame 2040 General Plan would accommodate new residential, commercial,
and other land uses that will operate through the General Plan horizon year of 2040. Long-term
criteria pollutant emissions would result from the operation of potential residential, retail, light
industrial, commercial, and institutional uses supported by the proposed General Plan.
Operational air quality emissions are evaluated in terms of area source emissions, energy
demand emissions, and mobile emissions. Area source emissions are the combination of many
small emission sources that include use of outdoor landscape maintenance equipment, use of
consumer products such as cleaning products, and periodic repainting of a project. Energy
demand emissions result from use of electricity and natural gas. Mobile emissions result from
automobile and other vehicle sources associated with daily trips to and from the project vicinity.
The Burlingame 2040 General Plan would provide development capacity for up to an additional
2,952 dwelling units and up to 6,769 new residents. Buildout of the proposed General Plan will
also include approximately 1,634,211 of additional square feet of non-residential floor area
within the City. Development of future projects within the planning area would be subject to the
City’s standard CEQA review process and would be required to assess project-specific
emissions in relation to the BAAQMD significance thresholds. Although specific, project-level
emission estimates for potential future development projects are not available at this time,
CalEEMod can be used to provide an estimate of the potential area, energy, and mobile source
emissions resulting from the increase in development permitted by the 2040 General Plan for
information purposes only (i.e., not for the purpose of determining significance of potential air
quality impacts). The total net increase in the type (e.g., residential, commercial, industrial, etc.)
and amount (e.g., residential units, commercial building square footage, etc.) of land uses
envisioned by the 2040 General Plan was entered into the model. The resulting emissions
estimates associated with this net change in land uses are presented in Table 7-8. CalEEMod
output files are included as Appendix A of this report.
Table 7-8: Potential General Plan Build-Out (Year 2040) Operational Emissions
Emissions Sources
Pollutant Emissions (Tons per Year) (A)
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Dust Exhaust Dust Exhaust
Area 25.0 0.4 22.3 <0.0 -- 0.1 -- 0.1
Energy 1.0 8.9 6.4 0.1 -- 0.7 -- 0.7
Mobile 18.1 45.6 151.9 0.4 31.4 0.4 8.4 0.4
2040 Build-Out Total 44.1 54.8 180.5 0.4 31.4 1.3 8.4 1.2
Source: MIG, 2018 (see Appendix A).
(A) Emissions estimated using CalEEMod, V 2016.3.2.
(B) Existing Emissions levels were estimated using an operational year of 2040 to most accurately obtain the net
emissions as a result of the General Plan buildout.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 7. Air Quality June 28, 2018 Page 7-23
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 7_Air Quality_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
As shown in Table 7-8, the implementation of the Burlingame 2040 General Plan is likely to lead
to increases in emissions in the SFBAAB, an area of non-attainment for state and federal
ozone, PM10, and PM2.5 air quality standards. The City’s proposed General Plan Update focuses
on protecting Burlingame residents and employees from exposure to harmful air pollutants.
Table 7-9 summarizes the proposed Burlingame 2040 General Plan goals and policies that
address potential operational emissions within the City.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 7. Air Quality June 28, 2018 Page 7-24
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 7_Air Quality_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 7-9: Existing Regulations and Proposed Burlingame General Plan Policies to Avoid
or Reduce Impacts from Operational Emissions
Regulation/Policy Description of Regulation/Policy How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance Criteria
Existing Regulations
The Federal
Clean Air Act.
The CAA required the EPA to
establish NAAQS. EPA has
established primary and secondary
NAAQS for several different
pollutants, expressed in maximum
allowable concentrations generally
defined in units of parts per million
(ppm) or in micrograms per cubic
meter (µg/m3). The primary
standards protect the public health
and the secondary standards
protect public welfare.
Establishes standards
and guidelines on air
pollutants for state
agencies to follow to
protect public health
and welfare.
(a) Consistency with
the applicable air
quality plan
(b) Cause or
contribute to a
violation of air quality
standards
(c) Result in a
cumulatively
considerable
increase in non-
attainment pollutants
California Clean
Air Act.
CARB is responsible for preparing
and enforcing the Federally-
required SIP to achieve and
maintain NAAQS, as well as the
CAAQS, which were developed as
part of the California Clean Air Act
(1988). CAAQS for criteria
pollutants equal or surpass
NAAQS, and include other
pollutants for which there are no
NAAQS. CARB is also responsible
for assigning air basin attainment
and nonattainment designations in
California.
Establishes standards
and guidelines on air
pollutants for local
agencies to follow to
protect public health
and welfare.
(a) Consistency with
the applicable air
quality plan
(b) Cause or
contribute to a
violation of air quality
standards
(c) Result in a
cumulatively
considerable
increase in non-
attainment pollutants
Healthy People, Healthy Places Element
Policy HP-2.6:
Renewable Energy
Pursue the goal of using 100%
renewable energy for the City’s
municipal accounts. Encourage
residents and businesses to opt up
to 100% renewable purchase for
additional community-wide
greenhouse gas reductions.
Encourage and support
opportunities for developing local
solar power projects.
Ensures consistency
with control measures
from the 2017 Clean
Air Plan.
(a) Consistency with
the applicable air
quality plan
(b) Cause or
contribute to a
violation of air quality
standards
(c) Result in a
cumulatively
considerable increase
in non-attainment
pollutants
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 7. Air Quality June 28, 2018 Page 7-25
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 7_Air Quality_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 7-9: Existing Regulations and Proposed Burlingame General Plan Policies to Avoid
or Reduce Impacts from Operational Emissions
Regulation/Policy Description of Regulation/Policy How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance Criteria
Policy HP-2.7:
Residential Solar
Power
Encourage homeowners to install
solar power systems. Provide
information to homeowners on the
benefits of solar power and funding
opportunities. Promote Property
Assessed Clean Energy (PACE)
programs that finance renewable
energy systems. Offer incentives for
home solar power systems.
Ensures consistency
with control measures
from the 2017 Clean
Air Plan.
(a) Consistency with
the applicable air
quality plan
(b) Cause or
contribute to a
violation of air quality
standards
(c) Result in a
cumulatively
considerable increase
in non-attainment
pollutants
Policy HP-2.8:
Energy Efficiency
Support energy efficiency
improvements in the aging building
stock citywide. Encourage energy
efficiency audits and upgrades at the
time of sale for existing homes and
buildings. Host energy efficiency
workshops, and distribute
information to property owners,
tenants, and residences. Publicize
available programs such as PACE
financing and San Mateo Energy
Watch programs. Incentivize low-
cost retrofits to residents and
businesses.
Ensures consistency
with control measures
from the 2017 Clean
Air Plan.
(a) Consistency with
the applicable air
quality plan
(b) Cause or
contribute to a
violation of air quality
standards
(c) Result in a
cumulatively
considerable increase
in non-attainment
pollutants
Policy HP-2.9:
Municipal Energy
Efficiency
Continue to enhance energy
efficiency in City facilities. Conduct
periodic energy audits to assess
energy efficiency progress and
needed improvements.
Ensures consistency
with control measures
from the 2017 Clean
Air Plan.
(a) Consistency with
the applicable air
quality plan
(b) Cause or
contribute to a
violation of air quality
standards
(c) Result in a
cumulatively
considerable increase
in non-attainment
pollutants
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 7. Air Quality June 28, 2018 Page 7-26
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 7_Air Quality_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 7-9: Existing Regulations and Proposed Burlingame General Plan Policies to Avoid
or Reduce Impacts from Operational Emissions
Regulation/Policy Description of Regulation/Policy How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance Criteria
Policy HP-2.10:
Municipal Green
Building
Aim for new construction and major
renovations of City facilities to be
zero net energy.
Ensures consistency
with control measures
from the 2017 Clean
Air Plan.
(a) Consistency with
the applicable air
quality plan
(b) Cause or
contribute to a
violation of air quality
standards
(c) Result in a
cumulatively
considerable increase
in non-attainment
pollutants
Policy HP-2.11:
Innovative
Technologies
Encourage the advancement of
emerging technologies and
innovations around energy, waste,
water, and transportation Support
local green technology businesses.
Explore demonstration project
opportunities.
Ensures consistency
with control measures
from the 2017 Clean
Air Plan.
(a) Consistency with
the applicable air
quality plan
(b) Cause or
contribute to a
violation of air quality
standards
(c) Result in a
cumulatively
considerable increase
in non-attainment
pollutants
Policy HP-2.12:
Green Businesses
Attract green technology businesses
to Burlingame. Focus outreach on
established and new green
technology businesses along Rollins
Road. Encourage existing
businesses to integrate green
practices by offering an annual
green business award, workshops,
and informational materials.
Ensures consistency
with control measures
from the 2017 Clean
Air Plan.
(a) Consistency with
the applicable air
quality plan
(b) Cause or
contribute to a
violation of air quality
standards
(c) Result in a
cumulatively
considerable increase
in non-attainment
pollutants
Policy HP-2.13:
Composting
Encourage the South Bayside
Waste Management Authority
(SBWMA) to explore and consider
rate plans that support zero waste
goals. Identify opportunities to
support and implement zero waste
goals and strategies for the City and
community.
Ensures consistency
with control measures
from the 2017 Clean
Air Plan.
(a) Consistency with
the applicable air
quality plan
(b) Cause or
contribute to a
violation of air quality
standards
(c) Result in a
cumulatively
considerable increase
in non-attainment
pollutants
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 7. Air Quality June 28, 2018 Page 7-27
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 7_Air Quality_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 7-9: Existing Regulations and Proposed Burlingame General Plan Policies to Avoid
or Reduce Impacts from Operational Emissions
Regulation/Policy Description of Regulation/Policy How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance Criteria
Policy HP- 2.14:
Zero Waste
Purchase electric or hybrid models
of lawn and garden and construction
equipment for City maintenance
operations, as feasible.
Ensures consistency
with control measures
from the 2017 Clean
Air Plan.
(a) Consistency with
the applicable air
quality plan
(b) Cause or
contribute to a
violation of air quality
standards
(c) Result in a
cumulatively
considerable increase
in non-attainment
pollutants
Policy HP- 2.15:
Alternative Fuel
Purchase electric or hybrid models
of lawn and garden and construction
equipment for City maintenance
operations, as feasible.
Ensures consistency
with control measures
from the 2017 Clean
Air Plan.
(a) Consistency with
the applicable air
quality plan
(b) Cause or
contribute to a
violation of air quality
standards
(c) Result in a
cumulatively
considerable increase
in non-attainment
pollutants
Goal HP-3 Minimize exposure of residents
and employees of local businesses
to harmful air pollutants.
States the overall
goal of the City to
protect residents and
employees from
harmful air pollutants.
(a) Consistency with
the applicable air
quality plan
(b) Cause or
contribute to a
violation of air quality
standards
(c) Result in a
cumulatively
considerable
increase in non-
attainment pollutants
Policy HP-3.1
Regional Air
Quality Standards
Support regional policies and efforts
to improve air quality, and participate
in regional planning efforts with the
Bay Area Air Quality Management
District to meet or exceed air quality
standards.
Establishes the City’s
commitment to work
with agencies with
regulatory authority
over air quality at the
regional level.
(a) Consistency with
the applicable air
quality plan
(b) Cause or
contribute to a
violation of air quality
standards
(c) Result in a
cumulatively
considerable
increase in non-
attainment pollutants
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 7. Air Quality June 28, 2018 Page 7-28
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 7_Air Quality_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 7-9: Existing Regulations and Proposed Burlingame General Plan Policies to Avoid
or Reduce Impacts from Operational Emissions
Regulation/Policy Description of Regulation/Policy How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance Criteria
Policy HP-3.2
Local Air Quality
Standards
Work with local businesses,
industries, and developers to reduce
the impact of stationary and mobile
sources of pollution. Ensure that
new development does not create
cumulative net increases in air
pollution, and require Transportation
Demand Management Techniques
(TDM) when air quality impacts are
unavoidable.
Establishes the City’s
commitment to work
with agencies with
regulatory authority
over air quality at the
local level.
(a) Consistency with
the applicable air
quality plan
(b) Cause or
contribute to a
violation of air quality
standards
(c) Result in a
cumulatively
considerable
increase in non-
attainment pollutants
Policy HP-3.3
Indoor Air Quality
Standards
Require that developers mitigate
impacts on indoor air quality for new
residential and commercial
developments, particularly along
higher-density corridors, near
industrial uses, along the freeway
and rail line, such as in North
Burlingame, along Rollins Road, and
in Downtown. Potential mitigation
strategies include installing air filters
(MERV 13 or higher), building
sounds walls, and planting
vegetation and trees as pollution
buffers.
Establishes the City’s
commitment to reduce
health risk exposure
associated with TACs
and PM2.5 through a
plan-based community
risk reduction strategy,
which includes source
reduction measures to
reduce operational
TAC and PM2.5
emissions.
(a) Consistency with
the applicable air
quality plan
(b) Cause or
contribute to a
violation of air quality
standards
(c) Result in a
cumulatively
considerable
increase in non-
attainment pollutants
Policy HP-3.4 Air
Pollution Reduction
Support regional efforts to improve
air quality, reduce auto use, expand
infrastructure for alternative
transportation, and reduce traffic
congestion. Focus efforts to reduce
truck idling to two minutes or fewer
in industrial and warehouse districts
along Rollins Road and the Inner
Bayshore.
Establishes the City’s
commitment to work
with agencies with
regulatory authority
over air quality at the
Federal, State, and
regional levels.
(a) Consistency with
the applicable air
quality plan
(b) Cause or
contribute to a
violation of air quality
standards
(c) Result in a
cumulatively
considerable
increase in non-
attainment pollutants
Policy HP-3.5:
Woodstove and
Fireplace
Replacement
Encourage residents to replace
wood-burning fireplaces and
stoves with cleaner electric heat
pumps, natural gas, or propane
stoves. Educate the public about
financial assistance options
through the Bay Area Air Quality
Management District’s fireplace
and wood stove replacement
incentive program
Establishes the City’s
commitment to
reduce emissions
from existing sources
in operation in the
City.
(a) Consistency with
the applicable air
quality plan
(b) Cause or
contribute to a
violation of air quality
standards
(c) Result in a
cumulatively
considerable
increase in non-
attainment pollutants
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 7. Air Quality June 28, 2018 Page 7-29
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 7_Air Quality_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 7-9: Existing Regulations and Proposed Burlingame General Plan Policies to Avoid
or Reduce Impacts from Operational Emissions
Regulation/Policy Description of Regulation/Policy How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance Criteria
Policy HP-3.6:
Caltrain
Electrification
Encourage the electrification of
Caltrain to eliminate emissions
from the rail line.
Establishes the City’s
commitment to
reduce emissions
from existing sources
in operation in the
City.
(a) Consistency with
the applicable air
quality plan
(b) Cause or
contribute to a
violation of air quality
standards
(c) Result in a
cumulatively
considerable
increase in non-
attainment pollutants
As shown in Table 7-9, the Burlingame 2040 General Plan Healthy People and Healthy Places
Element contains a number of policies intended to reduce emissions. In addition to these air
quality-related policies, the General Plan’s Community Character, Mobility, and Infrastructure
Elements contain land use, transportation, and infrastructure policies would provide air quality
benefits from sustainable land use planning and design consideration, complete streets and
other mobility considerations that would reduce vehicle trips, and infrastructure planning to
support alternative means of transportation. The combined effect of these policies was
estimated to provide a potential, approximately 16% reduction in NOX emissions (see Appendix
A) from the emissions level shown in Table 7-8, although reductions would depend on the
precise mix of future development within the City.
The BAAQMD does not maintain plan-level operational thresholds of significance for use by a
lead agency; however, as described further below, the implementation of the General Plan
would not result in projected increase in VMT that exceeds the projected in population
associated with General Plan growth. The implementation of the proposed Burlingame 2040
General Plan policies would render potential operational emissions impacts from future
development projects consistent with 2017 Clean Air Plan’s goal to attain air quality standards.
Eliminate Disparities in Health Risks
The City of Burlingame is not an impacted community identified under the BAAQMD’s CARE
Program and is not considered a disadvantaged pursuant to SB 535. As explained in more
detail under Impact 7-2, the Burlingame 2040 General Plan includes policies that would render
potential health risks to sensitive receptors from existing and new sources of TACs consistent
with the 2017 Clean Air Plan’s goal to eliminate disparities in health risks.
Inclusion/Consistency with Clean Air Plan Control Measures
The 2017 Clean Air Plan contains 85 control strategies designed to reduce ozone precursors,
protect public health, and serve as a regional climate protection strategy. The control strategies
are based on nine economic sectors, consistent with CARB’s Scoping Plan. The 85 control
strategies identified in the 2017 Clean Air plan are grouped by nine economic-based “sectors”
as shown in Table 7-10.37
37 The BAAQMD 2017 Clean Air Plan use the same economic sectors contained in CARB’s 2017 Scoping Plan.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 7. Air Quality June 28, 2018 Page 7-30
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 7_Air Quality_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 7-10 BAAQMD 2017 Clean Air Plan Control Measure Sectors
Sector No. of
Measures General Description of Sector Applicability
Agriculture (AG) 4
Applies to sources of air pollution from agricultural operations include
on and off-road trucks and farming equipment, aircraft for crop
spraying, animal waste, pesticide and fertilizer use, crop residue
burning, travel on unpaved roads, and soil tillage.
Buildings
(BL) 4
Applies to residential, commercial, governmental and institutional
buildings, which generate emissions through energy use for heating,
cooling, and operating the building, and from the materials used in
building construction and maintenance
Energy
(EN) 2
Applies to emissions of criteria pollutants, TACs, and GHGs from
electricity generated and used within the Bay area, as well as GHG
emissions from electricity generated outside the Bay area that is
imported and used within the region
Natural and
Working Lands
(NW)
3
Applies to emissions from natural and working lands, including
forests, woodlands, shrub lands, grasslands, rangelands, and
wetlands.
Stationary
Sources
(SS)
40
Applies to stationary sources generally used in commercial and
industrial facilities. Such sources are typically regulated through
BAAQMD rulemaking, permitting, and enforcement programs
Super GHGs (SL) 3 Applies to emissions of methane, black carbon, and fluorinated gases
Transportation
(TR) 23
Applies to on-road motor vehicles such as light-duty automobiles or
heavy-duty trucks , as well as off-road vehicles, including airplanes,
locomotives, ships and boats, and off-road equipment such as airport
ground-support equipment, construction equipment and farm
equipment.
Waste
(WA) 4 Applies to emissions from landfills and composting activities.
Water
(WR) 2
Applies to direct emissions from the treatment of water and
wastewater at publicly owned treatment works and indirect emissions
associated with the energy used to pump, convey, recycle, and treat
water and wastewater throughout the Bay
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 7. Air Quality June 28, 2018 Page 7-31
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 7_Air Quality_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
The BAAQMD’s implementation of the control strategies employ a wide range of tools and
resources, many of the control strategies are not intended or designed to be achieved by local
government. Table 7-11 identified applicable control measures that rely, or partially rely, on local
government implementation and correlates the measures to specific goals and polices in the
proposed Burlingame 2040 General Plan; Table 7-9 also lists additional policies that are
consistent with the 2017 Clean Air Plan but which are primarily implemented by the BAAQMD.
Table 7-11: Clean Air Plan Control Measures Included in 2040 General Plan
2017 Clean Air Plan
Control Measure
Relevant Burlingame 2040 General Plan
Goal and/or Policy
Transportation (TR) Control Measures
TR2 Trip Reduction Programs
The General Plan would promote compatible, transit-oriented land
uses which would reduce vehicle trips and encourage the use of
transportation modes that reduce VMT and GHG emissions. Part of
the vision for the General Plan is to provide a safe and convenient
mobility for all users and modes of transportation. Relevant goals
and policies include:
Goal M-1; Policy: M-1.1, M-1.2, M-1.4
Goal M-4; Policy: M-4.1, M-4.4, M-4.5
Goal M-5; Policy: M-5.1,
Goal M-6; Policy: M-6.2
Goal M-8; Policy: M-8.2
TR7 Safe Routes to Schools and
Safe Routes to Transit
The General Plan aims to ensure that neighborhood streets are
safe and provide efficient vehicular access to residential
neighborhoods and schools. Relevant goals and policies include:
Goal M-17; Policy M-17.1
TR9 Bicycle and Pedestrian
Access and Facilities
Policies in the 2040 General Plan support a network development
of high-quality, safe, convenient bicycle and pedestrian facilities to
encourage fewer vehicle trips and reduce GHG emissions.
Relevant goals and policies include:
Goal M-1; Policy: M-1.1, M-1.2, M-1.4
Goal M-2; Policy: M-2.1, M-2.2; M-2.3; M-2.4, M-2.5
Goal M-3; Policy: M-3.1; M-3.2; M-3.3; M-3.4; M-3.5, M-3.6, M-3.7,
M-3.8, M-3.9
TR13 Parking Policies The General Plan support parking management strategies that
address issues associated with parking, including congestion and
air quality degradation. Relevant goals and policies include:
Goal M-7; Policy: M-7.1, M-7.3, M-7.5, M-7.6
Energy (EN) Control Measures
EN2 Decrease Electricity Demand Implementation of the General Plan would aid in achieving GHG
emission reductions through increased use of renewable energy,
increased energy efficiency and investing in innovative technology.
Relevant goals and policies include:
Goal HP-2; Policy: HP-2.6, HP-2.8, HP-2.9, HP-2.11
Natural and Working Lands (NW) Control Measures
NW-2 Urban Tree Planting The General Plan aims to protect, expand and manage urban tree
resources within the City. Relevant goals and policies include:
Goal HP-5; Policy: HP-5.5, HP-5.6, HP-5.7
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 7. Air Quality June 28, 2018 Page 7-32
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 7_Air Quality_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 7-11: Clean Air Plan Control Measures Included in 2040 General Plan
2017 Clean Air Plan
Control Measure
Relevant Burlingame 2040 General Plan
Goal and/or Policy
NW-3 Carbon Sequestration in
Wetlands
The General Plan supports the goal of protection and restoration of
wetlands in the San Francisco Bay. Relevant goals and policies
include:
Goal HP-5; Policy: HP-5.12
Building (BL) Control Measures
BL1 Green Buildings Implementation of policies in the General Plan would require
municipal buildings to continue increasing energy efficiency.
Relevant goals and policies include:
Goal HP-2; Policy: HP-2.9, HP-2.10
Waste Management (WA) Control Measures
WA4 Recycling and Waste
Reduction
A goal in the General Plan is no expand composting and recycling
services to residential and commercial buildings, and to support
zero waste goals for the City. Relevant goals and policies include:
Goal HP-2; Policy: HP-2.13, HP- 2.14
Water (WR) Control Measures
WR2 Support Water Conservation General Plan policies would protect local and regional water
resources though conservation, recycling and, sustainable
management practices. Relevant goals and policies include:
Goal HP-6; Policy: HP-6.2, HP-6.4, HP-6.8
As shown in Table 7-11, the proposed Burlingame 2040 General Plan would include policies
that are consistent with and similar to applicable 2017 Clean Air Plan control measures.
Disrupt or Hinder Implementation of Clean Air Plan Control Measures
As shown in Table 7-11, the proposed Burlingame 2040 General Plan would include policies
that are consistent with and similar to applicable 2017 Clean Air Plan control measures. The
Burlingame 2040 General Plan would also provide air quality benefits from sustainable land use
planning and design consideration, complete streets and other mobility considerations that
would reduce vehicle trips, and infrastructure planning to support alternative means of
transportation. Thus, the proposed General Plan would not disrupt or hinder implementation of
any 2017 Clean Air Plan control measures.
Increases in VMT and Population under the Burlingame 2040 General Plan
The proposed Burlingame 2040 General Plan’s potential increases in VMT and population
under build-out conditions is summarized in Table 7-12.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 7. Air Quality June 28, 2018 Page 7-33
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 7_Air Quality_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 7-12: 2040 General Plan VMT and Population Increases
Year Annual VMT(A) Population(B)
Existing 2017 510,078,010 29,725
Build-Out 2040 608,306,445 36,600
Percent Increase 19.3% 23.1%
Sources: City of Burlingame 38 and Hexagon 39.
(A) VMT estimates are based on the total VMT estimate provided for the General Plan traffic
impact analysis. As explained in more detail in Chapter 10, Greenhouses Gases and Energy,
a different VMT data source was used in the preparation of the City’s evaluation of GHG
emissions to provide consistency with GHG emissions inventory methodologies and regional
data sources. The increase in VMT between 2015 and 2040 associated with the GHG chapter
data source is 20.6%. Thus, population growth would continue to be higher than the growth in
VMT for both VMT data sources.
(B) Existing population is based on 2016 population data from the California Department of
Finance and is considered representative, or a slight underestimate of the City’s 2017
population.
As shown in Table 7-12, the projected increase in VMT under the proposed Burlingame 2040
General Plan would not exceed the projected population increase that would occur under the
General Plan. Thus, the Burlingame 2040 General Plan would not result in a significant increase
in emissions of criteria air pollutants or precursor pollutants.
Significance Conclusion
The implementation of the proposed Burlingame 2040 General Plan would be consistent with
the 2017 Clean Air Plan and would not result in an increase in VMT that is more than the
projected increase in population. Thus, the proposed General Plan would not result in significant
increases in criteria air pollutant or precursor pollutant emissions. The implementation of
General Plan policies would render potential emissions impacts from build-out of the General
Plan a less than significant impact.
Impact 7-2: Community Risks and Hazards. Implementation of the Burlingame 2040 General
Plan would result in new sensitive receptors that could be exposed to localized concentrations
of toxic air contaminants or PM2.5. In addition, the General Plan could result in new sources of
toxic air contaminants that could impact existing sensitive receptors. The Burlingame 2040
General Plan contains policies to ensure potentially adverse community risks and hazards are
adequately evaluated and addressed. Therefore, this impact is considered to be less than
significant (see criteria [d] in subsection 7.3.1, “Significance Criteria,” above)
Within the SFBAAB, localized risks are primarily associated with exposure to TACs and PM2.5
emissions. As discussed in Section 7.1.1, TACs are a defined set of airborne pollutants that
may pose a present or potential hazard to human health, and PM2.5 is a type of particle pollution
that pose an increased risk because they can penetrate the deepest parts of the lung, leading to
and exacerbating heart and lung health effects. Common sources of TACs and PM2.5 emissions
are stationary sources (e.g., diesel backup generators, gasoline stations, and dry cleaners),
which are subject to BAAQMD permit requirements. Another common and often more significant
source type is on-road motor vehicles on high-volume roads, such as U.S. 101 and I-280, and
38 City of Burlingame, 2017. Public Draft Burlingame 2040 General Plan. Burlingame, CA. August 2017
39 Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. (Hexagon). 2018. Burlingame 2040 General Plan 2015 and 2040 ADT
Plots. April 2018.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 7. Air Quality June 28, 2018 Page 7-34
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 7_Air Quality_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
off-road sources such as construction equipment and diesel-powered trains travelling on the
Caltrain corridor. Although the proposed General Plan does not include plans for any new, large
stationary sources of emissions, it could result in new sensitive receptors (primarily residential
receptors) near existing sources of emissions.
Consistent with BAAQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Guidelines, the proposed Burlingame 2040
General Plan would not result in a significant community risk and hazard impact if the land use
diagram identifies special overlay zones around existing and planned sources of TACs and
PM2.5, including special overlay zones of at least 500 feet on each side of all freeways and high-
volume roadways, and the plan identifies goals, policies, and objectives to minimize potentially
adverse impacts. For example, the CARB Air Quality and Land Use Handbook recommends
avoiding the siting of new sensitive land uses (e.g., residences, schools, etc.) within:
• Within 300 feet of large gasoline fueling stations (with a throughput of more than 3.6
million gallons of gasoline per year);
• Within 300 feet of dry cleaning operations;
• Within 500 feet of freeways, urban roads with 100,000 vehicles/day, or rural roads with
50,000 vehicles/day; and
• Within 1,000 feet of a major rail service or maintenance yard.
Although the Burlingame 2040 General Plan Land Use Diagram (see Chapter 2, Project
Description) does not graphically depict overlay zones around specific, existing sources of TACs
such as the Wastewater Treatment Plant or U.S. 101, the policies contained within the General
Plan do identify specific and general areas of concern where potential adverse impacts are of
concern. Table 7-13 summarizes the proposed Burlingame 2040 General Plan goals and
policies that address potential TAC emissions and associated adverse health risk impacts within
the City.
Table 7-13: Existing Regulations and Proposed Burlingame General Plan Policies to Avoid or
Reduce Community Risk and Hazard Impacts
Regulation/Policy Description of Regulation/Policy How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance Criteria
Existing Regulations
Tanner Act Toxics
Act (AB 1807,
Chapter 1047,
Statutes of 1983)
Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs) in
California are regulated primarily
through the AB 1807 sets forth a
formal procedure for ARB to
designate substances as TACs.
Ensures that TACs
are considered when
siting sensitive land
uses.
(d) Expose sensitive
receptors to
substantial pollutant
concentrations
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 7. Air Quality June 28, 2018 Page 7-35
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 7_Air Quality_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 7-13: Existing Regulations and Proposed Burlingame General Plan Policies to Avoid or
Reduce Community Risk and Hazard Impacts
Regulation/Policy Description of Regulation/Policy How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance Criteria
BAAQMD
Regulation 2, Rule
5 (“New Source
Review of Toxic
Air Contaminant”)
This regulation applies
preconstruction permit review to
new and modified sources of toxic
air contaminants and contains
project health risk limits and
requirements for Toxics Best
Available Control Technology.
BAAQMD Regulation 11
(“Hazardous Pollutants”) sets
emission and/or performance
standards for hazardous
pollutants.
Ensures that TACs
are considered when
siting sensitive land
uses.
(d) Expose sensitive
receptors to
substantial pollutant
concentrations
Healthy People and Healthy Places Element
Goal HP-3 Minimize exposure of residents
and employees of local businesses
to harmful air pollutants.
Establishes the City’s
commitment to work
with agencies with
regulatory authority
over air quality at the
regional level.
(d) Expose sensitive
receptors to
substantial pollutant
concentrations
HP-3.2 Local Air
Quality Standards
Work with local businesses,
industries, and developers to
reduce the impact of stationary
and mobile sources of pollution.
Ensure that new development
does not create cumulative net
increases in air pollution and
require Transportation Demand
Management Techniques (TDM)
when air quality impacts are
unavoidable.
Establishes the City’s
commitment to work
with agencies with
regulatory authority
over air quality at the
local level.
(d) Expose sensitive
receptors to
substantial pollutant
concentrations
HP-3.3 Indoor Air
Quality Standards
Require that developers mitigate
impacts on indoor air quality for
new residential and commercial
developments, particularly along
higher density corridors, near
industrial uses, along the freeway
and rail line, such as in North
Burlingame, along Rollins Road,
and in Downtown. Potential
mitigation strategies include
installing air filters (MERV 13 or
higher), building sounds walls, and
planting vegetation and trees as
pollution buffers.
Establishes the City’s
commitment to reduce
health risk exposure
associated with TACs
and PM2.5 through a
plan-based community
risk reduction strategy,
which includes source
reduction measures to
reduce operational
TAC and PM2.5
emissions.
(d) Expose sensitive
receptors to
substantial pollutant
concentrations
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 7. Air Quality June 28, 2018 Page 7-36
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 7_Air Quality_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 7-13: Existing Regulations and Proposed Burlingame General Plan Policies to Avoid or
Reduce Community Risk and Hazard Impacts
Regulation/Policy Description of Regulation/Policy How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance Criteria
HP-3.4 Air
Pollution
Reduction
Support regional efforts to improve
air quality, reduce auto use,
expand infrastructure for
alternative transportation, and
reduce traffic congestion. Focus
efforts to reduce truck idling to two
minutes or fewer in industrial and
warehouse districts along Rollins
Road and the Inner Bayshore.
Establishes the City’s
commitment to work
with agencies with
regulatory authority
over air quality at the
Federal, State, and
regional levels.
(d) Expose sensitive
receptors to
substantial pollutant
concentrations
HP-3.7 Proximity
to Sensitive
Locations
Avoid locating stationary and
mobile sources of air pollution near
sensitive uses such as residences,
schools, childcare facilities,
healthcare facilities, and senior
living facilities. Where adjacencies
exist, include site planning and
building features that minimize
potential conflicts and impacts.
Establishes the City’s
commitment to avoid
locating sources of
hazardous pollutants
near sensitive
receptor locations.
(d) Expose sensitive
receptors to
substantial pollutant
concentrations
HP-3.8: Proximity
to Emission
Sources
Avoid locating residential
developments and other sensitive
uses near significant pollution
sources such as freeways and
large stationary source emitters.
Require Bay Area Air Quality
Management District
recommended procedures for air
modeling and health risk
assessment for new sensitive land
uses located near sources of toxic
air contaminants.
Establishes the City’s
commitment to avoid
locating sensitive
receptors near
freeways and large
stationary sources
and to implement
appropriate risk
assessment
procedures when
necessary.
(d) Expose sensitive
receptors to
substantial pollutant
concentrations
HP-3.9: Building
Site Design and
Operations
Place sensitive uses within
development projects (e.g.
residences, daycares, medical
clinics) as far away from emission
sources (including loading docks,
busy roads, stationary sources) as
possible. Design open space,
commercial buildings, or parking
garages between sensitive land
uses and air pollution sources as a
buffer. Locate operable windows,
balconies, and building air intakes
far away from emission sources.
Establishes the City’s
commitment to
ensure mixed-use
projects are designed
to minimize potential
risks from sources of
air pollution.
(d) Expose sensitive
receptors to
substantial pollutant
concentrations
HP-3.10: Truck
Routes
Ensure projects that generate truck
traffic and existing truck routes
avoid sensitive land uses such as
residences, schools, daycares,
senior facilities, and residences.
Reduces potential
sensitive receptor
exposure to dust and
exhaust emissions
from truck travel.
(d) Expose sensitive
receptors to
substantial pollutant
concentrations
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 7. Air Quality June 28, 2018 Page 7-37
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 7_Air Quality_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
As shown in Table 7-13, proposed General Plan Goal HP-3 and Policies HP-3.2 to HP-3.4 and
HP-3.7 to HP-3.10 establish the overall goal and intent of the City to protect residents and
employees from harmful pollutants, including TACs, by working with the community to reduce
emissions, ensuring developers mitigate indoor air quality, and evaluating the location of new
emissions sources and new receptors and implementing BAAQMD procedures for assessing
health risks. Although the land use diagram does not identify overlay zones around existing
sources of TAC emissions, the policies within the General Plan clearly state guidelines for
projects and areas of the City where risks would be minimized. Therefore, the implementation of
these policies would render potential adverse community risks and hazards both to and from
future development projects a less than significant impact.
Impact 7-3: Odors. Implementation of the Burlingame 2040 General Plan would result in new
sensitive receptors that could be exposed to odors from existing or new industrial and
commercial sources; however, the implementation of General Plan policies would ensure a
substantial number of people are not exposed to objectionable odors. This would represent a
less than significant impact (see criteria [e], in subsection 7.3.1, "Significance Criteria,"
above).
According to the BAAQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Guidelines land uses associated with odor
complaints include agricultural operations, wastewater treatment plants, landfills, and certain
industrial operations (such as manufacturing uses that produce chemicals, paper, etc.). While
odors do not present a health risk of themselves, they are often considered a nuisance by
people who live, work, or otherwise are located near outdoor odor sources. The BAAQMD’s
CEQA Air Quality Guidelines identify a screening distance for one and two miles for food
processing facilities and wastewater treatment plants, respectively. Projects located outside of
these screening distances would most likely not be exposed to odors, while projects within
these screening distances may be exposed to odors.
The Burlingame 2040 General Plan does not directly authorize any new potential odor sources
within the City, but implementation of the General Plan would increase residential development
within the City, including development that could be less than one mile from the City’s existing
wastewater treatment plant, and new retail, restaurant, and other commercial land uses
permitted by the General Plan in mixed-use areas such as the Broadway, California Drive, and
North Burlingame Mixed Use Areas.
Consistent with BAAQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Guidelines, the proposed Burlingame 2040
General Plan would not result in a significant odor impact if it identifies the potential locations of
odor sources and identifies goals, policies, and objectives to minimize potentially adverse odor
impacts. Table 7-14 summarizes the proposed Burlingame 2040 General Plan goals and
policies that address potential TAC emissions and associated with odors within the City.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 7. Air Quality June 28, 2018 Page 7-38
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 7_Air Quality_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 7-14: Existing Regulations and Proposed Burlingame General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts from Odors
Regulation/Policy Description of Regulation/Policy How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance Criteria
Healthy People and Healthy Places Element
Goal HP-3 Minimize exposure of residents
and employees of local businesses
to harmful air pollutants.
Establishes the City’s
commitment to work
with agencies with
regulatory authority
over air quality at the
regional level.
(e) Create
objectionable odors
that affect a
substantial number
of people
HP-3.2 Local Air
Quality Standards
Work with local businesses,
industries, and developers to
reduce the impact of stationary
and mobile sources of pollution.
Ensure that new development
does not create cumulative net
increases in air pollution and
require Transportation Demand
Management Techniques (TDM)
when air quality impacts are
unavoidable.
Establishes the City’s
commitment to work
with agencies to
reduce stationary and
other potential sources
of odors.
(e) Create
objectionable odors
that affect a
substantial number
of people
HP-3.3 Indoor Air
Quality Standards
Require that developers mitigate
impacts on indoor air quality for
new residential and commercial
developments, particularly along
higher density corridors, near
industrial uses, along the freeway
and rail line, such as in North
Burlingame, along Rollins Road,
and in Downtown. Potential
mitigation strategies include
installing air filters (MERV 13 or
higher), building sounds walls, and
planting vegetation and trees as
pollution buffers.
Establishes the City’s
commitment to
mitigate air quality
impacts
(e) Create
objectionable odors
that affect a
substantial number
of people
HP-3.7 Proximity
to Sensitive
Locations
Avoid locating stationary and
mobile sources of air pollution near
sensitive uses such as residences,
schools, childcare facilities,
healthcare facilities, and senior
living facilities. Where adjacencies
exist, include site planning and
building features that minimize
potential conflicts and impacts.
Establishes the City’s
commitment to avoid
locating sources of
hazardous pollutants
near sensitive
receptor locations.
(d) Expose sensitive
receptors to
substantial pollutant
concentrations
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 7. Air Quality June 28, 2018 Page 7-39
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 7_Air Quality_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 7-14: Existing Regulations and Proposed Burlingame General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts from Odors
Regulation/Policy Description of Regulation/Policy How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance Criteria
HP-3.8: Proximity
to Emission
Sources
Avoid locating residential
developments and other sensitive
uses near significant pollution
sources such as freeways and
large stationary source emitters.
Require Bay Area Air Quality
Management District
recommended procedures for air
modeling and health risk
assessment for new sensitive land
uses located near sources of toxic
air contaminants.
Establishes the City’s
commitment to avoid
locating sensitive
receptors near
freeways and large
stationary sources
and to implement
appropriate risk
assessment
procedures when
necessary.
(d) Expose sensitive
receptors to
substantial pollutant
concentrations
HP-3.9: Building
Site Design and
Operations
Place sensitive uses within
development projects (e.g.
residences, daycares, medical
clinics) as far away from emission
sources (including loading docks,
busy roads, stationary sources) as
possible. Design open space,
commercial buildings, or parking
garages between sensitive land
uses and air pollution sources as a
buffer. Locate operable windows,
balconies, and building air intakes
far away from emission sources.
Establishes the City’s
commitment to
ensure mixed-use
projects are designed
to minimize potential
risks from sources of
air pollution, including
odors.
(d) Expose sensitive
receptors to
substantial pollutant
concentrations
As shown in Table 7-14, proposed General Plan Goal HP-3 and Policies HP-3.2 to HP-3.4 and
HP-3.7 to HP-3.10 establish the overall goal and intent of the City to protect residents and
employees from harmful pollutants, including odors, by working with the community to reduce
emissions, ensuring developers mitigate indoor air quality, and evaluating the location of new
emissions sources and new receptors. The implementation of these policies would render
potential odor impacts to and from future development projects a less than significant impact.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 8. Biological Resources June 28, 2018 Page 8-1 8. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
This EIR chapter describes the existing biological resources in the planning area. The chapter
includes the regulatory framework necessary to evaluate potential environmental impacts
resulting from the 2040 General Plan, describes potential impacts that could result from the
General Plan, and discusses General Plan goals, policies, and implementation programs that
would avoid or reduce those potential impacts.
8.1 SETTING
The environmental and regulatory setting of the planning area with respect to biological
resources is described in detail in Section 7.2 (Natural Resources and Hazards: Biological
Resources) of the General Plan Existing Conditions Report (City of Burlingame, 2015). Pursuant
to section 15150 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the Existing Conditions Report is incorporated
into the Draft Program EIR by reference. The Existing Conditions Report is available at the City
of Burlingame 2040 General Plan website at:
http://www.Burlingame.org/GENERALPLAN/
Copies of the Existing Conditions Report may be viewed during regular business hours (8:00
a.m. to 5:00 p.m.), Monday through Friday, at the City of Burlingame Planning Division, 501
Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA 94010.
8.1.1 Environmental Setting
The Natural Resources and Hazards chapter (Chapter 6) of the Existing Conditions Report
describes the biological resources within and in the vicinity of the planning area. The major
findings of the Existing Conditions Report Natural Resources and Hazards chapter relevant to
biological resources are described below. See Figure 8-1 (Existing Vegetation Communities).
Federal agencies, State agencies, and non-governmental organizations have identified 31
special status species. Including San Francisco Bay, approximately 919 acres of aquatic habitat
exist within Burlingame city limits that may be subject to regulation under Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act.
Two native resident or migratory wildlife species with established resident or migratory wildlife
corridors, or native wildlife nursery sites, are found within Burlingame city limits.
The City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance protects trees based on minimum heights and
diameters, and trees considered unique or historical.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 8. Biological Resources June 28, 2018 Page 8-2
This page is intentionally blank.
Trousdale Dr.E. Poplar Ave.Old Bayshore Highw ayMillbrae Ave.Hillcrest Blvd.California Dr.Airport Blvd.Peninsula Dr.Burlingame Ave.San Mateo Dr.El Camino Real Rollins Rd.BroadwayHillside Dr.Ralston Ave.E.PoplarAvAAe.Millbrae Ave.HillcrestBlvd.San Mate o Dr .RalstonAvAe.CCiittyy oooffSSSaaann MMaatteeooCCiiittyy oofffHHHiilllllssbbooorrroouugghhhCCiittyyy oofffMMMiiilllllbbbrraaaeeeSan Francisco BaySan Francisco InternationalAirport280101USCity Limits Developed - Open SpaceSOI HerbaceousMixed - ForestEvergreen Forest1,500750 3,000 FT 0NBurlingame General Plan EIR Figure 8-1 Existing Vegetation CommunitiesEmergent Herbaceous Wetlands
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 8. Biological Resources June 28, 2018 Page 8-4
This page is intentionally blank.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 8. Biological Resources June 28, 2018 Page 8-5 8.1.2 Regulatory Setting
The Existing Conditions Report Natural Resources and Hazards chapter discusses the following
regulatory setting relevant to biological resources.
Biological resources in California are managed by a complex network of Federal and State
regulations. The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS) administer laws pertaining to the protection of threatened and
endangered species, as well as permits for project activities occurring near or in waters of the
State or United States. For marine environment species, the National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS) administers the same or similar laws as the CDFW and USFWS.
See subsection 13.1.2 (Hydrology and Water Quality, Regulatory Setting) for additional Federal
and State regulations relevant to biological resources.
Federal
Federal Endangered Species Act. The Federal Endangered Species Act of (FESA) protects
plants and wildlife that are listed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) as endangered or threatened. Section 9 of the FESA
prohibits the taking of endangered wildlife, which is defined as “harass, harm, pursue, hunt,
shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, collect, or attempt to engage in such conduct.” For plants, this
statute pertains to removing, possessing, maliciously damaging, or destroying any endangered
plant on Federal land and removing, cutting, digging up, damaging, or destroying any
endangered plant on non-Federal land in knowing violation of State Law (16 USC 1538). Under
Section 7 of the FESA, Federal agencies are required to consult with the USFWS if their
actions, including permit approvals or funding, could adversely affect an endangered species
(including plants) or its critical habitat. Through consultation and the issuance of a biological
opinion, the USFWS may issue an incidental take statement allowing the take of the species
that is incidental to another authorized activity, provided that the action will not jeopardize the
continued existence of the species. Consultation would be triggered if a particular project within
the Planning Area affects wetlands or waters of the U.S., requiring the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers to issue a 404 permit. Section 10 of the FESA provides for issuance of incidental take
permits to private parties, provided a habitat conservation plan is developed.
Migratory Bird Treaty Act. The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) implements international
treaties between the U.S. and other nations devised to protect migratory birds, any of their
parts, eggs, and nests from a variety of activities such as hunting, pursuing, capturing, killing,
selling, and shipping, unless expressly authorized in the regulations or by permit. As authorized
by the MBTA, the USFWS issues permits to qualified applicants for the following types of
activities: falconry, raptor propagation, scientific collecting, special purposes (rehabilitation,
education, migratory game bird propagation and salvage), take of depredating birds, taxidermy,
and waterfowl sale and disposal. The regulations governing migratory bird permits can be found
in 50 CFR part 13 General Permit Procedures and 50 CFR part 21 Migratory Bird Permits. The
State of California has incorporated the protection of birds of prey in Sections 3800, 3513, and
3503.5 of the California Fish and Game Code.
Federal Clean Water Act. The purpose of the Clean Water Act (CWA) is to restore and
maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation’s waters, which include
rivers, streams, estuaries, the territorial seas, ponds, lakes and wetlands. Wetlands are defined
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 8. Biological Resources June 28, 2018 Page 8-6 as those areas “that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and
duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of
vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions” (33 CFR 328.3 7b). Section 404
of the CWA prohibits the discharge of dredged or fill material into “waters of the United States”
without a permit from the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). The U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) also has authority over wetlands and may override
a USACE permit. Substantial impacts on wetlands may require an individual permit. Projects
that only minimally affect wetlands may meet the conditions of one of the existing Nationwide
Permits. A Water Quality Certification or waiver pursuant to Section 401 of the CWA is required
for Section 404 permit actions; this certification or waiver is issued by the Regional Water
Quality Control Board (RWQCB).
State
Section 65302(d) of the California Government Code. This section requires a conservation
element to be included in a general plan for the conservation, development, and utilization of
natural resources, including water and its hydraulic force, forests, soils, rivers, and other waters,
harbors, fisheries, wildlife, minerals, and other natural resources.
California Endangered Species Act. The California Endangered Species Act of 1970 (CESA)
generally parallels the main provisions of the Federal ESA, but unlike its Federal counterpart,
the CESA applies the take prohibitions to species proposed for listing (called “candidates” by
the State). Section 2080 of the California Fish and Game Code prohibits the taking, possession,
purchase, sale, and import or export of endangered, threatened, or candidate species, unless
otherwise authorized by permit or in the regulations; which is defined as “hunt, pursue, catch,
capture, or kill, or attempt to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill.” The CESA allows for take
incidental to otherwise lawful development projects. State lead agencies are required to consult
with the CDFW to ensure that any action they undertake is not likely to jeopardize the continued
existence of any endangered or threatened species or result in destruction or adverse
modification of essential habitat.
Fully Protected Species. The State of California first began to designate species as “Fully
Protected” prior to the creation of the CESA and the FESA. Lists of fully protected species were
initially developed to provide protection to those animals that were rare or faced possible
extinction, and included fish, mammals, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals. Most fully
protected species have since been listed as threatened or endangered under the CESA and/or
FESA. The regulations that implement the Fully Protected Species Statute (California Fish and
Game Code Section 4700) provide that fully protected species may not be taken or possessed
at any time. Furthermore, the CDFW prohibits any state agency from issuing incidental take
permits for fully protected species, except for necessary scientific research.
California Fish and Game. Sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3800 of the California Fish and Game
Code prohibit the “take, possession, or destruction of birds, their nests or eggs.” Disturbance
that causes nest abandonment and/or loss of reproductive effort (killing or abandonment of eggs
or young) is considered a “take.” Such a take would violate the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. The
act is implemented as part of the review process for any required State agency authorization,
agreement, or permit.
Native Plant Protection Act. The Native Plant Protection Act (NPPA) of 1977 was created with
the intent to “preserve, protect and enhance rare and endangered plants in this state.” The
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 8. Biological Resources June 28, 2018 Page 8-7 NPPA is administered by the CDFW. The Fish and Game Commission has the authority to
designate native plants as “endangered” or “rare” and to protect endangered and rare plants
from take. The CESA provides further protection for rare and endangered plant species, but the
NPPA remains part of the Fish and Game Code.
California Streambed Alteration Notification/Agreement. Section 1602 of the California Fish
and Game Code requires that a Streambed Alteration Application be submitted to the CDFW for
“any activity that may substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow or substantially change the
bed, channel, or bank of any river, stream, or lake.” The CDFW reviews the proposed actions
and, if necessary, submits a proposal for measures to protect affected fish and wildlife
resources to the applicant. The final proposal that is mutually agreed upon by the CDFW and
the applicant is the Streambed Alteration Agreement. Often projects that require a Streambed
Alteration Agreement also require a permit from the Corps under Section 404 of the Clean
Water Act. In these instances, the conditions of the Section 404 permit and the Streambed
Alteration Agreement may overlap.
Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act
(Porter-Cologne) imposes stringent controls on any discharges into the "waters of the state"
(California Water Code § 13000, et seq.). Waters of the state are defined as any surface water
or groundwater, including saline waters, within the boundaries of the state (California Water
Code § 13050(e)). Pursuant to Porter-Cologne, the State Water Resources Control Board
(SWRCB) has the ultimate authority over state water rights and water quality policy. However,
Porter-Cologne also establishes nine RWQCBs to oversee water quality at the local/regional
level. Under Porter-Cologne, the state retains authority to regulate discharges of waste into any
waters of the state, regardless of whether the USACE has concurrent jurisdiction under Section
404 of the CWA. This applies specifically to isolated wetlands considered non-jurisdictional by
the Corps (in accordance with the Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. Corps
decision, which limited the Corps’ jurisdiction over isolated wetlands).
Required RWQCB certification would be under the jurisdiction of San Francisco Bay RWQCB in
Oakland, California, and would include consultation with the CDFW under the provisions of
California Fish and Game Code section 5650F, which gives CDFW jurisdiction over the input of
any deleterious substances, such as silt, into the waters of the state, that result from
construction activities.
San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission. The San Francisco Bay
Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC), created by the California Legislature in
1965, has regulatory responsibility over development in San Francisco Bay and along the Bay's
nine-county shoreline. BCDC is authorized in the public interest to control both: (1) Bay filling
and dredging and (2) Bay-related shoreline development.
BCDC has jurisdiction over the open water, marshes, and mudflats of greater San Francisco
Bay (including Suisun, San Pablo, Honker, Richardson, San Rafael, San Leandro, and Grizzly
Bays, and the Carquinez Strait), the first 100 feet inland from the shoreline around San
Francisco Bay, the portion of the Suisun Marsh below the ten-foot contour line (including levees,
waterways, marshes, and grasslands), portions of most creeks, rivers, sloughs, and other
tributaries that flow into San Francisco Bay, and salt ponds, duck hunting preserves, game
refuges, and other managed wetlands that have been diked off from San Francisco Bay.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 8. Biological Resources June 28, 2018 Page 8-8 It is necessary to obtain a BCDC permit prior to undertaking most work in the Bay or within 100
feet of the shoreline, including filling, dredging, shoreline development, and other work. Several
different types of permit applications exist, depending on the size, location, and impacts of a
project.
Local Regulations
City of Burlingame Tree Preservation Ordinance. Burlingame Municipal Code Title 11
provides for the protection and preservation of significant trees. Title 11 designates what types
of trees located on what types of development or properties are “protected” and would require a
permit before removal or pruning (aside from routine maintenance), and determines when
removed or disfigured trees would require replacement. Protected trees include:
• Street trees, which are defined as any woody perennial plant having a single main axis
or stem more than 10 feet in height; or
• Any tree with a circumference of 48 inches or more when measured 54 inches above
natural grade; or
• A tree or stand of trees so designated by the City Council based upon findings that it is
unique and of importance to the public due to its unusual appearance, location, historical
significance, or other factor; or
• A stand of trees in which the Director of Parks has determined each tree is dependent
upon the others for survival.
8.2 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
This section describes potential impacts on biological resources that could result from the
General Plan and discusses General Plan goals, policies, and implementation programs that
would avoid or reduce those potential impacts. The section also recommends mitigation
measures as needed to reduce significant impacts. Since there are no HCPs or NCCPs in effect
in the planning area, there will be no impact related to Significance Criterion (f).
8.2.1 Significance Criteria
Based on the CEQA Guidelines, implementation of the City of Burlingame 2040 General Plan
would have a significant impact on biological resources if it would:
(a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any
species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional
plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service;
(b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service;
(c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section
404 of the Clean Water Act (including but not limited to marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.)
through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means;
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 8. Biological Resources June 28, 2018 Page 8-9 (d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or
wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or
impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites;
(e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a
tree preservation policy or ordinance; or
(f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan.
8.2.2 Analysis Methodology
The methodology for evaluating potential environmental impacts on biological resources
followed this basic sequence:
1) The General Plan Existing Conditions Report was evaluated to identify existing
environmental conditions and problems related to biological resources, including the
regulatory framework that applies to these issues.
2) The CEQA Statute and Guidelines (2017), including appendix G (Environmental
Checklist Form), were consulted to identify environmental impact topics and issues that
should be addressed in the program EIR. In part, this process resulted in the
significance criteria listed in Subsection 8.2.1 above.
3) The General Plan Policy Document, including the associated development capacity
assumptions (see EIR section 3.6), was analyzed to identify goals, policies,
implementation programs (“policies” for short), and potential outcomes that address the
significance criteria. This analysis resulted in two basic conclusions regarding policies
and outcomes: (a) many policies would avoid or reduce potential environmental impacts,
and (b) some policies or outcomes could result in new environmental impacts or
increase the severity of existing environmental problems.
4) For potential environmental impacts that would result from the 2040 General Plan,
mitigation measures were designed to avoid or reduce each impact to a less-than-
significant level. If implementation of all identified feasible mitigations cannot reduce the
impact to a less-than-significant level, then the impact is considered significant and
unavoidable.
8.2.3 Environmental Impacts
Potential Impacts of Future Development Pursuant to the 2040 General Plan
Impacts on special status species and migratory birds would be considered significant if
development pursuant to 2040 General Plan goals and policies results in the conversion of
vacant lands that have a reasonable potential to support special status species or habitat to
developable lands or other incompatible uses. A reasonable potential for occurrence includes
relatively recent sightings and presence of appropriate habitat for the species or birds. Table 6-
17 in the Existing Conditions Report lists the special status species that have the potential to
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 8. Biological Resources June 28, 2018 Page 8-10 occur in the planning area. Most are either associated with the hillside/canyon areas in the
western portion of the City or the bay frontage at the City’s eastern edge.
Within the hillside/canyon areas, special status species and/or habitat have been documented in
existing parks (e.g., arcuate bush-mallow, bent-flowered fiddleneck, Crystal springs lessingia,
Hillsborough chocolate lily, western leatherwood, and fringed myotis at Mills Canyon Park).
Within and near the bay shoreline, the following species have the potential to occur: peregrine
falcon, burrowing owl, Ridgway’s rail, California red-legged frog, saltmarsh common
yellowthroat, San Francisco garter snake, and Franciscan onion. Finally, several special status
species have the potential to occur in or near creeks and streams, in particular, Mills Creek,
Sanchez Creek, and Easton Creek. These species include Ridgway’s rail, California red-legged
frog, California central coast steelhead, saltmarsh common yellowthroat, San Francisco fork-
tailed damselfly, Choris’ popcornflower, Crystal Springs fountain thistle, and fragrant fritillary.
(Significance Criterion 8.2.1 [a])
Impacts on riparian habitat, other sensitive habitats, or wetlands would be considered significant
if development pursuant to the 2040 General Plan converts vacant lands that have a reasonable
potential to support riparian habitat, other sensitive habitats, or wetlands to developable lands or
other incompatible uses. Burlingame contains five different types of potentially jurisdictional
wetlands: estuarine and marine deepwater, estuarine and marine wetland, freshwater emergent
wetland, freshwater pond, and riverine. The area identified as “freshwater pond” is actually Anza
Lagoon, which is a brackish body of water connected to San Francisco Bay. (Significance
Criteria 8.2.1 [b] and [c])
Impacts on wildlife corridors and native wildlife nursery sites would be considered significant if
development pursuant to the 2040 General Plan results in the blockage or interference of
existing wildlife corridors or encroaches on or removes portions of native wildlife nursery sites.
Wildlife corridors in Burlingame include creek or stream channels and associated riparian
vegetation, canyons, and bay shoreline. Large groves of trees may support wildlife nursery
sites, as may the several aquatic habitats found in the City. (Significance Criterion 8.2.1 [d])
Impacts would occur if development pursuant to the General Plan would conflict with any local
policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or
ordinance. (Significance Criterion 8.2.1 [e])
Impacts would occur if development pursuant to the General Plan would conflict with the
provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP), Natural Community Conservation
Plan (NCCP), or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan. (Significance
Criterion 8.2.1 [f])
How Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies Reduce Impacts
Table 8-1 is aligned with relevant Existing Regulations and General Plan policies that relate to
biological resources. Column 1 (Objective) lists each Regulation and General Plan goal, policy,
and implementation program (“policy” for short), organized by General Plan element, that
addresses the potential impact identified in Table 8-1. Column 2 is a summary of the regulation
and the text of the policy. Column 3 answers the question, “How does the regulation/policy
avoid or reduce the potential impact?” Column 4 identifies the applicable significance criteria
that is addressed by the regulation/policy.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 8. Biological Resources June 28, 2018 Page 8-11
The verbs in Column 3 are intended to be applied consistently. The verb “ensures” means that
the policy is sufficient to guarantee the result identified in the policy. The verb “helps” means
that the policy contributes to avoiding or reducing the identified potential impact; in many cases,
“helps” is used for a policy that can be applied to avoid or reduce a wide range of potential
impacts. The verb “implements” is used for General Plan implementation programs to indicate
that the program provides the details to put the associated policy into action.
Table 8-1: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Biological Resources
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
Existing Regulation
Federal Endangered
Species Act
The Federal Endangered
Species Act of (FESA)
protects plants and wildlife
that are listed by the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS) and the National
Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS) as endangered or
threatened.
Ensures that Federally
listed plants and wildlife
are protected from urban
development and
incompatible land uses.
(a) Adverse effect on
special status
species
Migratory Bird Treaty
Act Water
The Migratory Bird Treaty
Act (MBTA) implements
international treaties
between the U.S. and
other nations devised to
protect migratory birds,
any of their parts, eggs,
and nests from a variety of
activities, such as hunting,
pursuing, capturing, killing,
selling, and shipping,
unless expressly
authorized in the
regulations or by permit.
Ensures that birds listed
under the MBTA are
protected from urban
development and
incompatible land uses.
(a) Adverse effect on
special status
species
Federal Clean Water
Act
The purpose of the Clean
Water Act (CWA) is to
restore and maintain the
chemical, physical, and
biological integrity of the
nation’s waters, which
include rivers, streams,
estuaries, the territorial
seas, ponds, lakes and
wetlands. Wetlands are
defined as those areas
“that are inundated or
saturated by surface or
ground water at a
Helps ensure that wetland
habitats are protected from
urban development and
incompatible land uses.
(b) Adverse effect on
sensitive habitats
(c) Adverse effect on
wetlands
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 8. Biological Resources June 28, 2018 Page 8-12 Table 8-1: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Biological Resources
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
frequency and duration
sufficient to support, and
that under normal
circumstances do support,
a prevalence of vegetation
typically adapted for life in
saturated soil conditions”
(33 CFR 328.3 7b).
Calif. Endangered
Species Act
The California Endangered
Species Act of 1970
(CESA) generally parallels
the main provisions of the
Federal ESA, but unlike its
Federal counterpart, the
CESA applies the take
prohibitions to species
proposed for listing (called
“candidates” by the State).
Ensures that State-listed
plants and wildlife are
protected from urban
development and
incompatible land uses.
(a) Adverse effect on
special status
species
Fully Protected
Species
The State of California first
began to designate
species as “Fully
Protected” prior to the
creation of the CESA and
the FESA. Lists of fully
protected species were
initially developed to
provide protection to those
animals that were rare or
faced possible extinction,
and included fish,
mammals, amphibians,
reptiles, birds, and
mammals. Most fully
protected species have
since been listed as
threatened or endangered
under the CESA and/or
FESA.
Ensures that State fully
protected species are
protected from urban
development and
incompatible land uses.
(a) Adverse effect on
special status
species
California Fish and
Wildlife Migratory Bird
Protection
Sections 3503, 3503.5,
and 3800 of the California
Fish and Game Code
prohibit the “take,
possession, or destruction
of birds, their nests or
eggs.” Disturbance that
causes nest abandonment
and/or loss of reproductive
effort (killing or
Ensures that birds listed
under the MBTA are
protected from urban
development and
incompatible land uses.
(a) Adverse effect on
special status
species
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 8. Biological Resources June 28, 2018 Page 8-13 Table 8-1: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Biological Resources
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
abandonment of eggs or
young) is considered a
“take.” Such a take would
violate the Migratory Bird
Treaty Act. The act is
implemented as part of the
review process for any
required State agency
authorization, agreement,
or permit.
Native Plant
Protection Act
The Native Plant
Protection Act (NPPA) of
1977 was created with the
intent to “preserve, protect
and enhance rare and
endangered plants in this
state.” The NPPA is
administered by the
CDFW. The Fish and
Game Commission has
the authority to designate
native plants as
“endangered” or “rare” and
to protect endangered and
rare plants from take. The
CESA provides further
protection for rare and
endangered plant species,
but the NPPA remains part
of the Fish and Game
Code.
Helps ensure that native
plants are considered and
protected/managed as part
of environmental review.
(a) Adverse effect on
special status
species
Streambed Alteration
Agreement
Section 1602 of the
California Fish and Game
Code requires that a
Streambed Alteration
Application be submitted to
the CDFW for “any activity
that may substantially
divert or obstruct the
natural flow or
substantially change the
bed, channel, or bank of
any river, stream, or lake.”
Ensures that impacts
associated with activities
proposed to take place in
water, rivers, streams, or
creeks will be minimized
and fully mitigated.
(c) Adverse effect on
wetlands
Porter-Cologne Water
Quality Control Act
The Porter-Cologne Water
Quality Control Act (Porter-
Cologne) imposes
stringent controls on any
discharges into the "waters
Helps ensure that wetland
habitats are acquired and
restored.
(c) Adverse effect on
wetlands
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 8. Biological Resources June 28, 2018 Page 8-14 Table 8-1: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Biological Resources
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
of the state" (California
Water Code § 13000, et
seq.). Waters of the state
are defined as any surface
water or groundwater,
including saline waters,
within the boundaries of
the state (California Water
Code § 13050(e)).
Bay Conservation and
Development
Commission
The San Francisco Bay
Conservation and
Development Commission
(BCDC), created by the
California Legislature in
1965, has regulatory
responsibility over
development in San
Francisco Bay and along
the Bay's nine-county
shoreline. BCDC is
authorized in the public
interest to control both: (1)
Bay filling and dredging,
and (2) Bay-related
shoreline development.
Protects the Burlingame
Bay shoreline and
associated species and
habitats from filling,
dredging, or other urban
development-related
impacts.
(b) Adverse effect on
sensitive habitats
(c) Adverse effect on
wetlands
City of Burlingame
Tree Preservation
Ordinance.
Burlingame Municipal
Code Title 11 provides for
the protection and
preservation of significant
trees.
Ensures certain trees
(defined in ordinance) are
“protected” and would
require a permit before
removal or pruning (aside
from routine maintenance),
and determines when
removed or disfigured trees
would require replacement.
(e) Conflict with local
biological
ordinances
Healthy People and Healthy Places Element
Goal HP-5 Protect, maintain, and
improve biological
resources in Burlingame,
including hillside habitats,
trees and plants, shoreline
areas, and creeks.
Helps ensure that open
space and natural
resources, including
biological resources, will be
managed and protected.
(a) Adverse effect on
special status
species
(b) Adverse effect on
sensitive habitats
(c) Adverse effect on
wetlands
(d) Interfere with
wildlife movement
Policy HP-5.1: Wildlife
Habitats
Preserve critical habitat
areas and sensitive
species within riparian
Helps ensure that new
development will not
encroach on biological
(b) Adverse effect on
sensitive habitats
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 8. Biological Resources June 28, 2018 Page 8-15 Table 8-1: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Biological Resources
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
corridors, hillsides, canyon
areas, tree canopies, and
wetlands that are within
the City’s control. Consult
with the California
Department of Fish and
Wildlife to identify and map
significant habitat areas,
and focus protection
measures on habitats with
special status species.
Protect declining or
vulnerable habitat areas
from disturbance during
design and construction of
new development.
resources at the shoreline
and in the hills.
Policy HP-5.2:
Migratory Birds
Identify and protect
habitats that contribute to
the healthy propagation of
migratory birds, including
trees and natural corridors
that serve as stopovers
and nesting places. Avoid
construction activities that
involve tree removal
between March and June
unless a bird survey has
been conducted to
determine that the tree is
unused during breeding
season by avian species
protected under California
Fish and Game Codes
3503, 3503.5 and 3511.
Ensures that birds listed
under the MBTA are
protected from urban
development and
incompatible land uses.
(a) Adverse effect on
special status
species
Policy HP-5.3:
Riparian Corridors
Protect and restore
riparian corridors to ensure
they function as healthy
biological areas and
wildlife habitats. Where
appropriate, restore
riparian habitat with native
vegetation.
Helps ensure that riparian
habitats are protected from
urban development and
incompatible land uses.
(b) Adverse effect on
sensitive habitats
(c) Adverse effect on
wetlands
(d) Interfere with
wildlife movement
Policy HP-5.4: Urban
Creeks
Encourage the restoration
and daylighting of
Burlingame’s urban creeks
where they have been
undergrounded, and where
Helps ensure that urban
creeks are protected from
urban development and
incompatible land uses and
that existing damage to
(b) Adverse effect on
sensitive habitats
(c) Adverse effect on
wetlands
(d) Interfere with
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 8. Biological Resources June 28, 2018 Page 8-16 Table 8-1: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Biological Resources
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
such daylighting is
appropriate for
surrounding conditions.
Coordinate with property
owners and local interest
groups in restoration
efforts. Remove culverts
and hardened creek
channels where
appropriate, and avoid
future culverting or
channelization of creeks.
creeks is remediated. wildlife movement
Policy HP-5.5:
Protection and
Expansion of Tree
Resources
Continue to preserve and
protect valuable native
trees and introduced
species that contribute to
the urban forest, but allow
for the gradual
replacement of trees for
on-going natural renewal.
Promote replacement with
native species. Use zoning
and building requirements
to ensure that existing
trees are integrated into
new developments and
that existing trees are well
protected during
construction activity.
Supports implementation of
the City of Burlingame Tree
Preservation Ordinance.
(e) Conflict with local
biological
ordinances
Policy HP-5.6: Tree
Preservation
Ordinance
Continue to adhere to the
Burlingame Tree
Preservation Ordinance
(Burlingame Municipal
Code Title 11), ensure the
preservation of protected
trees as designated by the
ordinance and continue to
be acknowledged by the
Arbor Day Foundation as a
Tree City USA.
Supports implementation of
the City of Burlingame Tree
Preservation Ordinance.
(e) Conflict with local
biological
ordinances
Policy HP-5.7: Urban
Forest Management
Plan
Continue to update and
use the Burlingame Urban
Forest Management Plan
for guidance on best
management practices
related to tree planting,
removal, and
maintenance.
Supports implementation of
the City of Burlingame
Urban Forest Management
Plan.
(b) Adverse effect on
sensitive habitats
(c) Adverse effect on
wetlands
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 8. Biological Resources June 28, 2018 Page 8-17 Table 8-1: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Biological Resources
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
Policy HP-5.8:
Invasive Plant
Species
Prohibit the use of any
invasive plant species in
landscaped or natural
areas. Work with the
California Invasive Plant
Council to identify invasive
plant species within
Burlingame, and establish
plans for removal. Ensure
that new development
obtains appropriate
permits and approvals
related to invasive species
from the Army Corps of
Engineers and other
relevant agencies.
Controls invasive species
in landscaped or natural
areas, and on public lands.
Restricts the planting of
invasive species within
new development.
(Invasive species “invade”
native habitat and upset
biological balance.)
(b) Adverse effect on
sensitive habitats
(c) Adverse effect on
wetlands
Policy HP-9: Invasive
Aquatic Species
Work with the California
Department of Fish and
Wildlife’s Invasive Species
Program to identify
invasive aquatic species
within Burlingame, and
meet the Regional
Monitoring Program’s
regulatory goals to reduce
exotic species that
threaten Bay Area water
quality.
Addresses invasive aquatic
species within the Planning
Area to reduce their
spread.
(a) Adverse effect on
special status
species
(b) Adverse effect on
sensitive habitats
(c) Adverse effect on
wetlands
Policy HP-5.10:
Shoreline Protection
and Enhancement
Maintain and improve the
quality of Burlingame’s
shoreline, and support
regulatory programs that
protect Bayfront open
space. Control shoreline
uses to minimize erosion,
and use a combination of
human-made and natural
elements to establish flood
barriers.
Helps ensure multi-
jurisdictional protection of
the Bay shoreline.
(a) Adverse effect on
special status
species
(b) Adverse effect on
sensitive habitats
(c) Adverse effect on
wetlands
Policy HP-5.11:
Canyon and Hillside
Protection
Protect Burlingame’s
canyon and hillside areas
by ensuring that
construction adjacent to
these spaces is
environmentally sensitive
and preserves natural
topography and
vegetation.
Ensures that urban
development adjacent to
canyons and hillsides
preserves natural
topography and vegetation.
(b) Adverse effect on
sensitive habitats
(c) Adverse effect on
wetlands
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 8. Biological Resources June 28, 2018 Page 8-18 Table 8-1: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Biological Resources
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
Policy HP-5.12:
Wetlands
Preserve wetland habitat
and associated species in
compliance with the
federal “no net loss” policy.
Where jurisdiction allows,
establish buffer zones at
the edge of wetland
habitats, and restrict
development in these
zones. If development
occurs adjacent to a
wetlands area, ensure a
qualified biologist has
conducted a wetlands
delineation in accordance
with federal and State
guidelines.
Ensures that wetlands and
surrounding watersheds
are considered and
protected from urban
development and other
incompatible land uses.
(b) Adverse effect on
sensitive habitats
(c) Adverse effect on
wetlands
Policy HP-5.13:
Regional Coordination
Coordinate efforts with the
San Mateo County Flood
Control District, Caltrans,
San Francisco Airport,
Peninsula Watershed
lands, and Coyote Point
Recreation Area to
preserve and manage
interconnecting wildlife
movement corridors.
Helps ensure that wetland
habitats are acquired and
restored.
(a) Adverse effect on
special status
species
(b) Adverse effect on
sensitive habitats
(c) Adverse effect on
wetlands
(d) Interfere with
wildlife movement
Policy HP-5.14:
Compliance with
Environmental Laws
Through environmental
review, ensure that all
projects affecting
resources of regional
concern satisfy regional,
State, and federal laws.
Ensures that the City
complies with all applicable
environmental laws
protecting natural
resources of regional
concern.
(a) Adverse effect on
special status
species
(b) Adverse effect on
sensitive habitats
(c) Adverse effect on
wetlands
Policy HP-5.15:
Access to Natural
Areas
Ensure public access to
natural resources,
particularly along the
Bayfront and in Mills
Canyon. Require new
development in the
Bayfront Area to provide
public access to the
waterfront, and work with
property owners to
connect gaps in the Bay
Trail.
Provides valuable
education opportunities to
teach the public about the
importance of protecting
and enhancing sensitive
natural biological
resources.
(a) Adverse effect on
special status
species
(b) Adverse effect on
sensitive habitats
(c) Adverse effect on
wetlands
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 8. Biological Resources June 28, 2018 Page 8-19
Conclusions
Because Burlingame has been largely urbanized for many years, important biological resources
are almost entirely associated with existing undeveloped areas of the City. Most of these are
protected from future development by existing land use designations: parks and open space
areas, creek corridors, lagoons, bay and estuaries, and areas of undevelopable topography or
where geologic or other hazards exist. As a result, impacts on biological resources cannot be
definitively estimated by using a land use conversion comparison. Instead, impacts would be
assessed on a project-by-project basis as applications are filed for land use entitlements. The
City would ensure that existing regulations and land use policies are used to avoid or reduce an
identified potential environmental impact. Such regulations and policies that relate to biological
resources are listed in Table 8-1 above.
In most cases, no one regulation, goal, policy, or implementation measure is expected to
completely avoid or reduce an identified potential environmental impact. However, the
collective, cumulative mitigating benefits of the regulations and policies listed in Table 8-1 will
result in a less-than-significant impact related to the identified significance criteria and the
corresponding environmental topic listed in Table 8-1. This conclusion is consistent with the
purpose and use of a program EIR for a general plan (see EIR Introduction, chapter 1).
Based on the methodology described above, 2040 General Plan impacts on biological
resources would be less than significant (see criteria [a] through [e] in subsection 8.2.1,
“Significance Criteria,” above). No mitigation is required. Since there are no HCPs or NCCPs in
effect in the Planning Area, there will be no impact related to Significance Criteria (f).
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 9. Geology, Soils, and Minerals June 28, 2018 Page 9-1
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 9_Geology_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
9. GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND MINERALS
This EIR chapter describes the existing geological, soil, and mineral conditions in the planning
area. The chapter includes the regulatory framework necessary to evaluate potential
environmental impacts resulting from the 2040 General Plan, describes potential impacts that
could result from the General Plan, and discusses General Plan goals, policies, and
implementation programs that would avoid or reduce those potential impacts. Although this
chapter includes mineral resources, there are no areas within the planning area where mineral
resources of value to the state or region are found (Dept. of Conservation, Div. of Mines and
Geology 1996).1
9.1 SETTING
The environmental and regulatory setting of the Burlingame planning area with respect to
geology, soils, and minerals is described in detail in Section 6.9 (Natural Resources: Geology
and Soils) of the General Plan Existing Conditions Report (City of Burlingame, 2015). Pursuant
to Section 15150 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the Existing Conditions Report is incorporated
into the Draft Program EIR by reference. The Existing Conditions Report is available at the City
of Burlingame 2040 General Plan website at:
http://www.Burlingame.org/GENERALPLAN/
Copies of the Existing Conditions Report may be viewed during regular business hours (8:00
a.m. to 5:00 p.m.), Monday through Friday, at the City of Burlingame Planning Division, 501
Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA 94010.
9.1.1 Environmental Setting
The Geology and Soils section (Section 6.9) of the Existing Conditions Report describes the
existing conditions related to geology (including seismic hazards), soils, and minerals. The
major findings of Section 6.9 relevant to these issues are described below. Since there are no
mineral resources of statewide or regional significance within the planning area, this topic is not
addressed further.
• A portion of the San Andreas Fault, including an Earthquake Fault Zone designated by
the State Department of Conservation, is approximately 1,000 feet west of the City. The
fault has a 6.4 percent probability of experiencing a 6.7+ magnitude earthquake by 2044.
• The eastern portion of the planning area is located in a very high liquefaction
susceptibility zone, as designated by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG)
Earthquake and Hazards Program.
• Existing landslide distribution data from ABAG's Earthquake and Hazards Program
shows that the western hills in Burlingame are in an area designated as "mostly
landslides."
1 ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dmg/pubs/ofr/OFR_96-03/OFR_96-03_Plate14.pdf
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 9. Geology, Soils, and Minerals June 28, 2018 Page 9-2
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 9_Geology_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
• The eastern portion of the planning area is located on soils that contain clay, which have
potential to be expansive.
• The City of Burlingame implements regulations and programs to minimize the risk of
geologic and seismic hazards. These regulations and programs include the Unreinforced
Masonry Building Hazard Reduction Program, the City Municipal Building Code and
building permit process, the City Grading and Clearing Permit process, the Multi-
Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan with the City of Burlingame Annex document,
and the Burlingame Neighborhood Network program.
9.1.2 Regulatory Setting
The Existing Conditions Report Geology and Soils section describes the state and local
regulatory setting relevant to geology (including seismic hazards) and soils.
Federal
Federal regulations are not applicable to the geology and soils in Burlingame.
State
California Government Code Section 65302(g). This code requires general plans to include a
safety element that provides for the protection of the community from unreasonable risks
associated with the effects of seismically induced surface rupture, ground shaking, ground
failure, tsunami, seiche, and dam failure; slope instability leading to mudslides and landslides;
subsidence; liquefaction; and other seismic hazards. The element must also include mapping of
known geologic or seismic hazards.
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act. The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act
(Public Resources Code Sections 2621-2630) was passed in 1972 to mitigate the potential
hazard of surface faults to structures for human occupancy. The main purpose of the Act is to
prevent the construction of human-occupied buildings over active faults. The Act only addresses
the hazard of fault rupture and is not directed toward other earthquake hazards.
The Act requires the State Geologist to establish regulatory zones (known as Earthquake Fault
Zones) around the surface traces of active faults and to issue maps to all affected cities,
counties, and State agencies for their use in planning and controlling development. Local
agencies must regulate most development projects within the zones, and there generally can be
no construction for human occupancy within 50 feet of an active fault zone.
Seismic Hazards Mapping Act. The Seismic Hazards Mapping Act (Public Resources Code
Sections 2690-2699.6) was passed in 1990 to address earthquake hazards other than fault
rupture, including liquefaction and seismically induced landslides. Seismic Hazard Zones are
mapped by the State Geologist to assist local governments in land use planning. The purpose of
the Act is to "reduce the threat to public safety and to minimize the loss of life and property by
identifying and mitigating these seismic hazards."
The ABAG Earthquake and Hazards Program map shows the location of Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zones and Seismic Hazard Zones, collectively referred to as Earthquake
Zones of Required Investigation. These zones are delineated to assist cities and counties in
fulfilling their responsibilities for protecting the public from the effects of surface fault rupture and
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 9. Geology, Soils, and Minerals June 28, 2018 Page 9-3
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 9_Geology_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
earthquake-triggered ground failure as required by the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning
Act and the Seismic Hazards Mapping Act. Further information on Earthquake Zones of
Required Investigation is available from the California Geological Survey (CGS). The
Geographic Information System (GIS) digital files of these regulatory zones released by the
California Geological Survey (CGS) are the official maps. GIS files are available at the CGS
website www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/.
California Building Code. The California Building Standards Code (CBSC), Title 24, serves as
the basis for the design and construction of buildings in California. The purpose of the CBSC is
to establish minimum standards to safeguard the public health, safety, and general welfare
through structural strength, means of egress facilities, and general stability by controlling the
design, construction, quality of materials, use and occupancy, location, and maintenance of
building and structures. The CBSC contains specific requirements for seismic safety,
excavation, foundations, retaining walls, and site demolition. It also regulates grading activities,
including drainage and erosion control.
The California Building Code (Part 2 of the 12-part CBSC) is updated every three years by order
of the legislature, with supplements published in intervening years. State law mandates that
local government enforce the California Building Code. In addition, a city, county, or city and
county may establish more restrictive building standards reasonably necessary because of local
climatic, geological, or topographical conditions.
State
Association of Bay Area Governments. The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG)
adopted the ABAG Multi-Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (Taming Natural Disasters)
as an overall strategy to maintain and enhance disaster response of the region, as well as to
fulfill the requirements of the Federal Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000. Each partner jurisdiction
(including Burlingame) is required to submit an “annex” document that contains jurisdiction-
specific hazard mitigation strategies to attach to the Multi-Jurisdictional Plan. The ABAG Plan
focuses on (1) identifying natural hazards the community and region face (e.g., earthquakes,
severe weather), (2) assessing the community’s and region’s vulnerability to these hazards, and
(3) identifying specific preventive actions that can be taken to reduce the risk from the hazards.
The City of Burlingame participated in the planning process, adopted its Local Hazard Mitigation
Plan ("annex"), and formally adopted the ABAG plan. Adoption of the ABAG Multi-Jurisdictional
Plan allows the City of Burlingame to become eligible for federal disaster assistance.
Unreinforced Masonry Building Hazard Reduction Program. Chapter 18.28 of the
Burlingame Municipal Code identifies the need to seismic retrofit and upgrade selected
buildings, defines the scope of unreinforced masonry buildings subject to this code, establishes
minimum standards for structural repair/seismic resistance, and sets a time frame for the
reasonable implementation of this program.
The scope of buildings subject to this code includes high-risk buildings and medium-risk
buildings. Unreinforced masonry buildings used exclusively for residential purposes containing
five or less units are exempt from complying with this code.
9.2 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
This section describes potential impacts related to geology (including seismicity) and soils that
could result from the General Plan, and discusses General Plan goals, policies, and
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 9. Geology, Soils, and Minerals June 28, 2018 Page 9-4
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 9_Geology_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
implementation programs that would avoid or reduce those potential impacts. The section also
recommends mitigation measures as needed to reduce significant impacts.
9.2.1 Significance Criteria
Per the CEQA Guidelines, implementation of the City of Burlingame 2040 General Plan would
have a significant impact related to geology, soils, and minerals if it would:
(a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of
loss, injury, or death involving:
1) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-
Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or
based on other substantial evidence of a known fault (Division of Mines and
Geology Special Publication 42);
2) Strong seismic ground shaking;
3) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction; or
4) Landslides;
(b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil;
(c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a
result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landsliding, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse;
(d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined by Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code,
creating substantial risks to life or property;
(e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative
wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of
wastewater;
Regarding criterion (e), the planning area is served by a comprehensive, integrated wastewater
collection, treatment, and disposal system. Neither septic tank systems nor alternative
wastewater disposal systems are proposed as part of General Plan implementation. No impact
will result, and this issue is not discussed further in this EIR.
9.2.2 Analysis Methodology
The methodology for evaluating potential environmental impacts related to geology, soils, and
minerals followed this basic sequence:
(1) The General Plan Existing Conditions Report was evaluated to identify existing
environmental conditions and problems related to geology, soils, and seismicity,
including the regulatory framework that applies to these issues.
(2) The CEQA Statute and Guidelines (2017), including Appendix G (Environmental
Checklist Form), were consulted to identify environmental impact topics and issues that
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 9. Geology, Soils, and Minerals June 28, 2018 Page 9-5
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 9_Geology_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
should be addressed in the program EIR. In part, this process resulted in the
significance criteria listed in subsection 9.2.1 above.
(3) The General Plan Policy Document, including the associated development capacity
assumptions (see EIR Section 3.6), was analyzed to identify goals, policies,
implementation programs (“policies” for short), and potential outcomes that address the
significance criteria. This analysis resulted in two basic conclusions regarding policies
and outcomes: (a) many policies would avoid or reduce potential environmental impacts,
and (b) some policies or outcomes could result in new environmental impacts or
increase the severity of existing environmental problems.
(4) For potential environmental impacts that would result from the 2040 General Plan,
mitigation measures were designed to avoid or reduce each impact to a less-than-
significant level. If implementation of all identified feasible mitigations cannot reduce the
impact to a less-than-significant level, then the impact is considered significant and
unavoidable.
9.2.3 Environmental Impacts
Potential Impacts of Future Development under the 2040 General Plan
Development pursuant to General Plan land use policy built on or near the San Andreas Fault
zone could expose people and structures to a fault rupture. The San Andreas fault has the
potential of generating earthquakes of magnitudes ranging from 6.5 to 7.5 on the Richter scale.
Strong earthquakes can cause widespread property damage, injury, and loss of life. Secondary
impacts include fires and disruption of utilities and service systems. (Significance Criterion 9.2.1
[a])
Two of the three required factors for liquefaction to occur are prevalent throughout the eastern
portion of the Planning area (the potential for strong ground shaking and loose, unconsolidated
sediments). (Significance Criterion 9.2.1 [a])
Future development under the General Plan could cause impacts associated with soil erosion,
resulting in increased fugitive dust, which affects air quality, and water quality degradation due
to increased sedimentation. Erosion of topsoil results in the loss of nutrient-rich soils that
support the establishment and continuance of vegetation. (Significance Criterion 9.2.1 [b])
The eastern portion of the planning area is subject to impacts associated with settlement and
compressible soils due to the widespread presence of young, unconsolidated alluvial soils which
are highly susceptible to liquefaction. Settlement, collapse, and subsidence are all related to the
generally loose and dry nature of the Planning area’s soils. The lack of clay bonds that support
soil strength in unconsolidated soils makes them susceptible to weakness under pressure.
Impacts associated with expansive soils are generally structurally related, including cracked
walls and foundations. (Significance Criterion 9.2.1 [c])
The western hills in Burlingame are in an area designated in ABAG’s Earthquake and Hazards
Program as "mostly landslides." Thus, development in the western hills could cause impacts on
structures and utilities from landslides, lateral spreading, or hillside collapse. (Significance
Criterion 9.2.1 [c])
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 9. Geology, Soils, and Minerals June 28, 2018 Page 9-6
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 9_Geology_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
The soils within the Bayfront and alluvial zones in Burlingame contain clay and, therefore, have
shrink/swell potential (i.e., are expansive soils). The organic and expansive soils within
Burlingame could be subject to subsidence. Development on expansive soils could cause
impacts on structures and utilities. (Significance Criterion 9.2.1 [d])
How Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies Reduce Impacts
Table 9-1 is aligned with the relevant Existing Regulations and General Plan policies that relate
to geology, soils, and minerals. Column 1 (Objective) lists each General Plan goal, policy, and
implementation program (“policy” for short), organized by General Plan element, that addresses
the potential impact identified in Table 9-1. Column 2 is a summary of the regulation and the text
of the policy. Column 3 answers the question, “How does the regulation/policy avoid or reduce
the potential impact?” Column 4 identifies the applicable significance criteria that is addressed
by the regulation/policy.
The verbs in Column 3 are intended to be applied consistently. The verb “ensures” means that
the policy is sufficient to guarantee the result identified in the policy. The verb “helps” means
that the policy contributes to avoiding or reducing the identified potential impact; in many cases,
“helps” is used for a policy that can be applied to avoid or reduce a wide range of potential
impacts. The verb “implements” is used for General Plan implementation programs to indicate
that the program provides the details to put the associated policy into action.
Table 9-1: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Geology and Soils
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
Existing Regulation
Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault
Zoning Act
The purpose of the Act is
to prevent the construction
of human-occupied
buildings over active faults.
The Act only addresses
the hazard of fault rupture
and is not directed toward
other earthquake hazards.
Prevents the construction
of human-occupied
buildings over active faults.
(a) Seismic related
hazards
Seismic Hazards
Mapping Act
The Seismic Hazards
Mapping Act was passed
in 1990 to address
earthquake hazards other
than fault rupture,
including liquefaction and
seismically induced
landslides. Seismic Hazard
Zones are mapped by the
State Geologist to assist
local governments in land
use planning. The purpose
of the Act is to "reduce the
threat to public safety and
to minimize the loss of life
and property by identifying
and mitigating these
seismic hazards."
Reduces the threat to
public safety and
minimizes the loss of life
and property by identifying
and mitigating seismic
hazards.
(a) Seismic related
hazards
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 9. Geology, Soils, and Minerals June 28, 2018 Page 9-7
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 9_Geology_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 9-1: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Geology and Soils
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
California Building
Code
The California Building
Standards Code (CBSC),
Title 24, serves as the
basis for the design and
construction of buildings in
California. The purpose of
the CBSC is to establish
minimum standards to
safeguard the public
health, safety, and general
welfare through structural
strength, means of egress
facilities, and general
stability by controlling the
design, construction,
quality of materials, use
and occupancy, location,
and maintenance of
building and structures.
The CBSC contains
specific requirements for
seismic safety, excavation,
foundations, retaining
walls, and site demolition.
Ensures that construction
projects are properly
designed and constructed
to minimize the effects of
seismic hazards, unstable
soils or other unstable
geologic units, and
expansive soils.
(a) Seismic related
hazards
(b) Substantial soil
erosion
(c) Unstable
geologic units or soil
(d) Expansive soils
Association of Bay
Area Governments
(ABAG)
ABAG adopted the ABAG
Multi-Jurisdictional Local
Hazard Mitigation Plan
(“Taming Natural
Disasters”) as an overall
strategy to maintain and
enhance disaster response
of the region, as well as to
fulfill the requirements of
the Federal Disaster
Mitigation Act of 2000.
Each partner jurisdiction
(including Burlingame) is
required to submit an
“Annex” document that
contains jurisdiction-
specific hazard mitigation
strategies to attach to the
Multi-Jurisdictional Plan.
Ensures that the Hazards
Mitigation Plan strategies
are prioritized and
associated operations
adequately funded.
Reduces seismic and
related geologic risks
through the hazards
mitigation planning.
(a) Seismic related
hazards
Unreinforced Masonry
Building Hazard
Reduction Program
Chapter 18.28 of the
Burlingame Municipal
Code identifies the need to
seismic retrofit and
upgrade selected
buildings, defines the
scope of unreinforced
masonry buildings subject
Ensures that individual
project sites are evaluated
for seismic and geologic
risks. Encourages
protection from seismic
hazards.
(a) Seismic related
hazards
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 9. Geology, Soils, and Minerals June 28, 2018 Page 9-8
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 9_Geology_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 9-1: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Geology and Soils
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
to this code, establishes
minimum standards for
structural repair/seismic
resistance, and sets a time
frame for the reasonable
implementation of this
program.
Community Safety Element
Goal CS-7 Protect people and
buildings in Burlingame by
reducing the risks
associated with geologic
and seismic hazards
Reduces seismic and
related geologic risks.
(a) Seismic related
hazards
Policy CS-7.1:
Geotechnical and
Structural Analysis
Require any site with a
slope exceeding 10
percent to reference the
Landslide Hazard Potential
Zone maps of the State of
California for all required
geotechnical and structural
analysis.
Helps minimize exposure
of people and structures to
risks of hillside
development, including
potential landslides.
Avoids soil erosion and the
loss of topsoil on unstable
and steep slopes.
Ensures that construction
is seismically and
geotechnically sound.
(a) Seismic related
hazards
(b) Substantial soil
erosion
(c) Unstable
geologic units or soil
(d) Expansive soils
Policy CS-7.2:
Residential Upgrades
Require that any
residential facility that is
being increased more than
50 percent assessed value
or physical size conform to
all provisions of the current
building code throughout
the entire structure.
Ensures that residential
building renovations of a
certain size are evaluated
for seismic and geologic
risks, and remediated to be
consistent with the current
building code.
(a) Seismic related
hazards
(b) Substantial soil
erosion
(c) Unstable
geologic units or soil
(d) Expansive soils
Policy CS-7.3:
Geologic Review
Create and implement a
geologic review procedure
that requires geologic
reports be prepared as
part of the development
review process.
Ensures that individual
project sites are evaluated
for seismic and geologic
risks.
(a) Seismic related
hazards
(b) Substantial soil
erosion
(c) Unstable
geologic units or soil
(d) Expansive soils
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 9. Geology, Soils, and Minerals June 28, 2018 Page 9-9
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 9_Geology_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Conclusions
In most cases, no one goal, policy, or implementation measure is expected to completely avoid
or reduce an identified potential environmental impact. However, the collective, cumulative
mitigating benefits of the policies listed in Table 9-1 will result in a less-than-significant impact
related to the identified significance criterion. This conclusion is consistent with the purpose and
use of a program EIR for a general plan (see EIR Introduction, Chapter 1).
Based on the methodology described above, 2040 General Plan impacts related to geology and
soils would be less than significant (see criteria [a] through [d] in subsection 9.2.1,
“Significance Criteria,” above). No mitigation is required.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-1
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
10. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
This EIR chapter describes the impacts of the proposed General Plan with respect to global
climate change and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The chapter was prepared using
methodologies and assumptions recommended by the Bay Area Air Quality Management
District (BAAQMD), the regional air quality regulatory agency.1 In keeping with these guidelines,
the chapter describes existing sources and quantities of GHG emissions, potential short-term
construction-related greenhouse gas emissions, potential direct and indirect operational
emissions associated with the General Plan.
10.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
10.1.1 Climate Change
Climate change is the distinct change in measures of climate for a long period of time. Climate
change can result from natural processes and from human activities. Natural changes in the
climate can be caused by indirect processes such as changes in the Earth’s orbit around the
Sun or direct changes within the climate system itself (i.e. changes in ocean circulation). Human
activities can affect the atmosphere through emissions of gases and changes to the planet’s
surface. Emissions affect the atmosphere directly by changing its chemical composition, while
changes to the land surface indirectly affects the atmosphere by changing the way the Earth
absorbs gases from the atmosphere. The term “climate change” is preferred over the term
“global warming” because “climate change” conveys the fact that other changes can occur
beyond just average increase in temperatures near the Earth’s surface. Elements that indicate
that climate change is occurring on Earth include:
Rising of global surface temperatures by 1.3° Fahrenheit (F) over the last 100 years
Change in precipitation patterns
Melting ice in the Artic
Melting glaciers throughout the world
Rising ocean temperatures
Acidification of oceans
Range shifts in plant and animal species
Climate change is intimately tied to the Earth’s greenhouse effect. The greenhouse effect is a
natural occurrence that helps regulate the temperature of the planet, and without it, life as we
know it on earth would not exist. Human activities since the beginning of the industrial revolution
(approximately 150 years) have been adding to the natural greenhouse effect by increasing the
gases in the atmosphere that trap energy, thereby contributing to an average increase in the
Earth’s temperature. Human activities that enhance the greenhouse effect are detailed below.
1 Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2017. California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality
Guidelines. San Francisco, CA. June 2010, updated May 2017
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-2
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
10.1.2 Greenhouse Gases
Gases that “trap” heat in the atmosphere and affect regulation of the earth’s temperature are
known as “greenhouse gases” (GHG). Many chemical compounds in the earth’s atmosphere
exhibit the GHG property. GHG allow sunlight to enter the atmosphere freely. When the sunlight
strikes the earth’s surface, it is either absorbed or reflected back toward space. Earth, or
materials near the earth’s surface, that have absorbed energy from sunlight warm up during the
daytime and emit infrared radiation back toward space during both the daytime and nighttime
hours. GHG absorb this long-wave, infrared radiation and “trap” the energy in the earth’s
atmosphere. The term “climate change” is preferred over the term “global warming” because
“climate change” conveys the fact that other changes can occur beyond just average increase in
temperatures near the earth’s surface.
GHG that contribute to climate regulation are a different type of pollutant than criteria or
hazardous air pollutants because climate regulation is global in scale, both in terms of causes
and effects. Some GHG are emitted to the atmosphere naturally by biological and geological
processes such as evaporation (water vapor), aerobic respiration (carbon dioxide, or CO2), and
off-gassing from low oxygen environments such as swamps or exposed permafrost (methane or
CH4); however, GHG emissions from human activities such as fuel combustion (e.g., CO2) and
refrigerants use (e.g., hydrofluorocarbons or HFCs) significantly contribute to overall GHG
concentrations in the atmosphere, climate regulation, and global climate change. Human
production of GHG has increased steadily since pre-industrial times (approximately pre-1880)
and atmospheric CO2 concentrations have increased from a pre-industrial value of 280 parts per
million (ppm) in the early 1800’s to 409 ppm in March 2018.2 The effects of increased GHG
concentrations in the atmosphere include increasing shifts in temperature and precipitation
patterns and amounts, reduced ice and snow cover, sea level rise, and acidification of oceans.
These effects in turn will impact food and water supplies, infrastructure, ecosystems, and overall
public health and welfare.
The 1997 United Nations’ Kyoto Protocol international treaty set targets for reductions in
emissions of four specific greenhouse gases – CO2, CH4, nitrous oxide (N2O), and sulfur
hexafluoride (SF6) – and two groups of gases – HFCs and perfluorocarbons (PFCs). These
GHG are the primary GHG emitted into the atmosphere by human activities. Water vapor is also
a common GHG that regulates the earth’s temperature; however, the amount of water vapor in
the atmosphere can change substantially from day to day, whereas other GHG emissions
remain in the atmosphere for longer periods of time. Black carbon consists of particles emitted
during combustion; although a particle and not a gas, black carbon also acts to trap heat in the
Earth’s atmosphere. Detailed descriptions of the most common GHG are described below.
Carbon Dioxide (CO2) is emitted and removed from the atmosphere naturally. Animal
and plant respiration involves the release of CO2 from animals and its absorption by
plants in a continuous cycle. The ocean-atmosphere exchange results in the absorption
and release of CO2 at the sea surface. CO2 is also released from plants during wildfires.
Volcanic eruptions release a small amount of CO2 from the Earth’s crust.
Human activities that affect CO2 in the atmosphere include burning of fossil fuels,
industrial processes, and product uses. Combustion of fossil fuels used for electricity
generation and transportation are the largest source of CO2 emissions in the United
States. When fossil fuels are burned, the carbon stored in them is released into the
2 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) 2018. “Mauna Loa CO2 Monthly Mean Data.” Trends in
Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide. NOAA, Earth System Research Laboratory, Global Monitoring Division. April 9, 2018.
Web. April 10, 2018. <http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/>
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-3
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
atmosphere entirely as CO2. Emissions from industrial activities also emit CO2 such as
cement, metal, and chemical production and use of petroleum produced in plastics,
solvents, and lubricants.
Methane (CH4) is emitted from human activities and natural sources. Natural sources of
CH4 include wetlands, gas hydrates, permafrost, termites, oceans, freshwater bodies,
soils, and wildfires. Human activities that cause CH4 releases include fossil fuel
production, animal digestive processes from farms, manure management, and waste
management. It is estimated that 50 percent of global CH4 emissions are human
generated. Releases from animal digestive processes at agricultural operations are the
primary source of human-related CH4 emissions. CH4 is produced from landfills as solid
waste decomposes. CH4 is a primary component of natural gas and is emitted during its
production, processing, storage, transmission, distribution, and use. Decomposition of
organic material in manure stocks or in liquid manure management systems also
releases CH4. Wetlands are the primary natural producers of CH4 because the habitat is
conducive to bacteria that produce CH4 during decomposition of organic material.
Nitrous Oxide (N2O) is emitted from human sources such as agricultural soil
management, animal manure management, sewage treatment, combustion of fossil
fuels, and production of certain acids. N2O is produced naturally in soil and water,
especially in wet, tropical forests. The primary human-related source of N2O is
agricultural soil management due to use of synthetic nitrogen fertilizers and other
techniques to boost nitrogen in soils. Combustion of fossil fuels (mobile and stationary)
is the second leading source of N2O, although parts of the world where catalytic
converters are used (such as California) have significantly lower levels than those areas
that do not.
Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) and Perfluorocarbons (PFCs) are entirely human made
and are mainly generated through various industrial processes. These types of gases
are used in aluminum production, semiconductor manufacturing, and magnesium
production and processing. HFCs and PFCs are also used as substitutes for ozone-
depleting gases like chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and halons.
Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6) is commonly used as an electrical insulator in high-voltage
electrical transmission and distribution equipment such as circuit breakers, substations,
and transmission switchgear. Releases of SF6 occur during maintenance and servicing
as well as from leaks of electrical equipment.
GHG can remain in the atmosphere long after they are emitted. The potential for a particular
greenhouse gas to absorb and trap heat in the atmosphere is considered its global warming
potential. The reference gas for measuring global warming potential is CO2, which has a global
warming potential of one. By comparison, CH4 has a global warming potential of 25, which
means that one molecule of CH4 has 25 times the effect on global warming as one molecule of
CO2. Multiplying the estimated emissions for non-CO2 GHG by their global warming potential
determines their CO2 equivalent (CO2e), which enables a project’s combined global warming
potential to be expressed in terms of mass CO2 emissions. The global warming potentials and
estimated atmospheric lifetimes of the common GHG are shown in Table 10-1.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-4
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 10-1: Global Warming Potential (GWP) of Common GHG (100 Year Horizon)
GHG GWP(A) GHG GWP(A)
Carbon Dioxide (CO2) 1 Perfluorocarbons (PFCs)
Methane (CH4) 25 CF4 6,500
Nitrous Oxide (N2O) 298 C2F6 9,200
Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) C4F10 7,000
HFC-23 14,800 C6F14 7,400
HFC-134a 1,430 Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6) 22,800
HFC-152a 140
HCFC-22 1,700
Source: CARB3
(A) GWPs are based on the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 4th Assessment Report.
The 4th Assessment Reports values have been presented to provided consistency with the statewide GHG
emissions inventory presented in Section 10.1.3.
10.1.3 Statewide GHG Emissions
CARB prepares an annual statewide GHG emissions inventory using regional, State, and
federal data sources, including facility-specific emissions reports prepared pursuant to the
State’s Mandatory GHG Reporting Program. The statewide GHG emissions inventory helps
CARB track progress towards meeting California’s AB 32 GHG emissions target of 431 million
metric tons of CO2 equivalents (MTCO2e), as well as establish and understand trends in GHG
emissions.4 Statewide GHG emissions for the 2005 to 2015 time period are shown in Table
10-2.
3 California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2014. First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan. Sacramento, CA.
May 2014.
4 CARB approved use of 431 MMCO2e as the state’s 2020 GHG emission target in May 2014. Previously, the target
had been set at 427 MMCO2e.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-5
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 10-2: 2004-2015 Statewide GHG Emissions (Million MTCO2e)
Scoping Plan Sector Year
‘04 ‘05 ‘06 ‘07 ‘08 ‘09 ‘10 ‘11 ‘12 ‘13 ‘14 ‘15
Agriculture 34 34 36 36 36 34 35 36 37 35 36 35
Commercial/Residential 44 42 43 43 44 44 45 46 43 43 38 38
Electric Power 115 108 105 114 120 101 90 88 95 90 88 84
High GWP 7 8 8 9 10 11 12 14 15 16 17 19
Industrial 98 95 93 90 90 88 91 90 91 93 93 92
Recycling and Waste 8 8 8 8 8 8 9 9 9 9 9 9
Transportation 182 184 184 184 173 166 163 159 159 158 160 165
Total Million MCO2e(A) 488 480 476 484 481 452 445 442 448 444 442 440
Source: CARB5
(A) Totals may not equal due to rounding. CARB inventory uses GWPs based on the United Nations’ ICC’s 4th
Assessment Report.
As shown in Table 10-2, statewide GHG emissions have generally decreased over the last
decade, with 2015 levels (440 million MTCO2e) approximately 10 percent less than 2004 levels
(488 million MTCO2e). The transportation sector (165 million MTCO2e) accounted for more
than one-third (approximately 37.5%) of the State’s total GHG emissions inventory (440 million
MTCO2e) in 2015.
10.1.4 Regional and Local GHG Emissions
10.1.4.1 San Francisco Bay Area
The Bay Area Air Quality Mangaement District (BAAQMD) conducts periodic inventories of
GHG emissions within the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin. Data for the most recent inventory
(Year 2011) indicates the Bay Area emitted a total of 86.6 MMTCO2e, or approximately 20
5 California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2017. California Greenhouse Gas Emission by Scoping Plan Category
(2017 Edition: 2000 to 2015). Sacramento, CA. June 6, 2017.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-6
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
percent of the total statewide GHG emissions in Year 2011.6,7 Similar to the state inventory, the
combustion of fossil fuels in mobile sources such as cars, trucks, locomotives, ships, and boats
contribute the most (34.3 MMTCO2e) toward regional GHG levels (approximately 40 percent of
regional GHG emissions).
A summary of the 2011 regional GHG emissions inventory, by sector and county, is shown in
Table 10-3. San Mateo County, in which the City of Burlingame is located, emitted
approximately 7.7 MMTCO2e, or about nine percent of total regional emissions.
Table 10-3: 2011 Bay Area GHG Emissions, by Sector and County (MMTCO2e)
Sector Alameda Contra Costa Marin Napa San Francisco San Mateo Santa Clara Solano* Sonoma* Total SF Bay Area Industrial/
Commercial 2.7 17.8 0.4 0.2 1.2 1.4 4.1 2.7 0.5 31.0
Residential Fuel 1.3 1.0 0.3 0.1 0.9 0.8 1.5 0.3 0.4 6.6
Electricity/ Co-
Generation 0.9 7.2 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.4 2.2 0.4 0.2 12.0
Off-Road
Equipment 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.4 0.0 0.1 1.2
Transportation 7.9 5.0 1.3 0.9 3.0 5.0 7.6 1.6 2.0 34.3
Agriculture/
Farming 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.2 1.1
TOTAL
(All Sectors)1 13.2 31.4 2.4 1.5 5.7 7.7 16.0 5.1 3.5 86.5
Source: BAAQMD8
* Portions within BAAQMD.
1 Totals may not equal due to rounding.
The 2011 Regional GHG Emissions Inventory also includes a list of the “Top 200” major GHG
emitting point source facilities in the region. None of the facilities listed are located within the
City of Burlingame.
6 Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2017. California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality
Guidelines. San Francisco, CA. June 2010, updated May 2017.
7 The BAAQMD GHG inventory is based on the U.N. IPCC’s 2nd Assessment Report, which uses different GWP
values to compute carbon dioxide equivalents. The GWP values in the 2nd Assessment Report are generally lower
than the values in the UN IPCC 4th Assessment Report, which the CARB statewide inventory uses. For example, the
GWP of methane was reported as 21 in the 2nd Assessment Report and is reported as 25 in the 4th Assessment
Report.
8 Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) 2015. Bay Area Emissions Inventory Summary Report:
Greenhouse Gases Base Year 2011. San Francisco, CA. January 2015.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-7
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
10.1.4.2 City of Burlingame
The City of Burlingame adopted its initial Climate Action Plan (CAP) in June 2009, which
established the 2005 calendar year as the baseline year for GHG emission inventory and
emissions reduction planning purposes. The 2009 CAP was developed using tools and
methodologies provided by the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) –
Local Governments for Sustainability, and set forth measures to reduce GHG emissions in the
city through the year of 2020, consistent with the state’s goals laid out in AB 32 (see Section
10.2.3.2). Table 10-4, below, summarizes the 2005 baseline municipal operations inventory
quantified in the CAP.
Table 10-4: 2005 Burlingame Municipal Operations GHG Emissions
Sector Metric Tons CO2e
Energy 1,368
Vehicles Fleet 603
Landfill 354
Wastewater Treatment 431
Solid Waste Generation 35
Employee Commute 535
Generators 11
Refrigerants 0
Total 3,338
Notes: MTCO2e/yr = metric tons carbon dioxide equivalent per year. Totals may not be completely accurate,
due to rounding of figures.
On July 11, 2014, the City released its 2010 Community Greenhouse Gas Inventory Report,
which provided an update on the City’s community-wide progress toward meeting the 2020
goal. The 2010 Community Greenhouse Gas Inventory Report presented emissions from the
residential, commercial, industrial, transportation, solid waste, and municipal sectors, and also
incorporated emissions from landfills and wastewater, which were assessed in the 2005
municipal operations inventory. Off-road transportation, another sector that was not assessed in
the CAP, was also added to the 2005 baseline in the 2010 Report.
In addition to the CAP and 2010 Community Greenhouse Gas Inventory Report, GHG
emissions within the City have been estimated by DNV GL under contract with the County of
San Mateo as part of County’s Regionally Integrated Climate Action Planning Suite (RICAPS).
RICAPS is a partnership engaging all 20 incorporated cities and the County in climate action
planning and implementation. Table 10-5, below, summarizes the community-wide GHG
emissions presented in the 2010 Community Greenhouse Gas Inventory Report, as well as
annual inventories from 2011 through 2015.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-8
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 10-5: 2005 to 2015 Burlingame Community-Wide GHG Emissions
Sector Metric Tons CO2e
2005 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Residential 47,523 47,232 46,997 46,133 46,299 38,276 38,231
Commercial/
Industrial 74,466 73,759 73,646 75,261 74,260 70,409 67,642
Transportation –
Local Roads 60,935 58,151 52,664 60,223 60,227 59,705 60,774
Transportation –
State Highways 142,279 122,520 141,143 135,404 135,653 135,331 138,323
Transportation –
Off-road
Equipment
17,674 18,111 23,597 23,976 24,359 24,750 25,146
Transportation –
Caltrain
Not
Estimated 2,410 2,426 2,443 2,507 2,433 2,473
Solid Waste –
Generated
Waste
11,742 5,523 4,402 4,145 4,869 4,284 5,042
Solid Waste –
Landfills 265 204 262 176 181 208 204
Wastewater 338 495 845 838 805 854 852
Water Not
Estimated 530 374 427 416 393 316
City-owned
Stationary
Sources
Not
Estimated 3 3 2 2 6 6
Total 355,221 328,937 346,358 349,027 349,578 336,650 339,010
Source: Burlingame, 2014; Butterworth9
Notes: MTCO2e/yr = metric tons carbon dioxide equivalent per year. Totals may not be completely accurate, due to
rounding of figures.
As shown in Table 10-5, the 2015 annual community-wide GHG inventory shows emissions
have decreased by approximately 4.6 percent, when compared to 2005 levels. To remain
consistent with AB 32 goals, the City would need to reduce its emissions to 15 percent below
2005 levels by 2020. Based on the way GHG emissions have trended between 2011 and 2015,
this approximately 10.4 percent gap, or 36,942 MTCO2e, is unlikely to be closed by the 2020
target year.
9 Butterworth 2018. Personal communication between Ben Butterwoth, DNV GL, and Chris Dugan, MIG. Email RE:
Burlingame GHG inventory. September 2017.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-9
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
10.2 REGULATORY SETTING
Agencies at the international, national, statewide, and local levels are considering or have
adopted strategies to control emissions of gases that contribute to global climate change.
The agencies described below work jointly, as well as individually, to address climate change
through legislation, regulations, planning, policy-making, education, and implementation
programs.
10.2.1 International
10.2.1.1 International Regulation and the Kyoto Protocol
In 1988, the United Nations established the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to
evaluate the impacts of global warming and to develop strategies that nations could implement
to curtail global climate change. In 1992, the United States joined other countries around the
world in signing the United Nations’ Framework Convention on Climate Change agreement with
the goal of controlling greenhouse gas emissions. As a result, the Climate Change Action Plan
was developed to address the reduction of GHGs in the United States. The plan currently
consists of more than 50 voluntary programs for member nations to adopt.
10.2.1.2 Paris Climate Agreement
On December 12, 2015, representatives from 196 nations entered into a pact to adopt green
energy sources, cut down on climate change emissions, and limit the rise of global
temperatures while also cooperating to cope with the impact of unavoidable climate change.
The agreement focuses on attempting to limit the rise in global temperatures to two degrees
Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit). Voluntary pledges, taken by each country that signed the
Paris climate agreement, set 2020 as the year in which reductions would begin.
In June 2017, the U.S. announced its intention to withdraw from the Paris Climate Agreement.
Per the language in the agreement, the earliest effective date for the United States to withdraw
is November 2020.
10.2.2 Federal
10.2.2.1 Federal Regulation and the Clean Air Act
On December 7, 2009, the U.S. EPA announced GHG Emissions threaten the public health and
welfare of the American people and that GHG emissions from on-road vehicles contribute to
that threat. The U.S. EPA’s final findings respond to the 2007 U.S. Supreme Court decision on
Massachusetts v. EPA that found GHGs fit within the Clean Air Act definition of air pollutants.
The findings did not themselves impose any reduction requirements, but rather allowed EPA to
finalize the GHG standards proposed for new light-duty vehicles as part of joint rulemaking with
the Department of Transportation.10
In order to enact the 2009 GHG standards for new light-duty vehicles, the U.S. EPA was
required to issue an endangerment finding. The finding, which applied to the six Kyoto GHGs
(CO2, CH4, N2O, SF6, HFCs, and PFCs), laid the foundation for future GHG regulation
development on a national level.
10 United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) 2009. EPA’s Endangerment Finding. December 7,
2009. Web. Accessed April 10, 2018. <https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-
08/documents/endangermentfinding_legalbasis.pdf>
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-10
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
10.2.2.2 GHG Tailoring Rule
The U.S. EPA’s GHG Tailing Rule, issued in May 2010, established an approach to permitting
GHG emissions under Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Title V.11 The initial
Rule applied to any facility having the potential to emit more than 250 tons per year of “any air
pollutant,” or 100 tons per year for certain types of sources. This was challenged by the Utility
Air Regulatory Group in 2012.
In 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in Utility Air Regulatory Group v. EPA (No.
12-1146), finding the U.S. EPA may not treat greenhouse gases as an air pollutant for the
purposes of determining if a source is a “major source” under PSD or Title V operating permit
programs strictly based on the source’s potential to emit GHG. The Court did rule, however, that
the source may become subject to the U.S. EPA’s “Best Available Control Technology” (BACT)
requirements under the PSD program, as long as the source is already being regulated for
emitting conventional pollutants.
Regardless of whether or not a source is subject to BACT requirements, all facilities emitting
25,000 MTCO2e or more of GHG in the United States are required to report their emissions to
the U.S. EPA through the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (codified in 40 CFR Part 98).
The Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program provides the U.S. EPA with valuable data to inform
future policy decisions.
10.2.3 State and Regional
The following describes the actions taken by California Governors and the California Legislature
that have resulted in new policies directed at reducing statewide GHG emissions. These
policies, codified in statues and enacted through regulations, are implemented by state and
regional entities through plans and programs.
10.2.3.1 Executive Orders
Executive Order S-01-07
Executive Order S-1-07, the Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS), was issued by Governor
Schwarzenegger on January 18, 2007. The LCFS calls for a reduction of at least 10 percent in
the carbon intensity of California’s transportation fuels by 2020 by promoting the use of GHG
reducing transportation fuels (e.g., liquid biofuels, renewable natural gas, electricity, and
hydrogen) through a fuel-neutral declining carbon intensity standard.12 The LCFS regulation was
initially approved by CARB in 2009. The LCFS regulation is discussed in greater detail below,
under Section 10.2.3.4.
Executive Order S-14-08 an Executive Order S-21-09
On November 17, 2008, Governor Schwarzenegger signed Executive Order S-14-08 requiring
all retail sellers of electricity serve 33 percent of their load with renewable energy by 2020.
Executive Order S-21-09, signed September 15, 2009, directed CARB to enact regulations to
11 PSD and Title V are permitting programs required under the Clean Air Act that protect air quality.
12 California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2016. Low Carbon Fuel Standard Program Background. February 2, 2016.
Web. Accessed January 29, 2018. <https://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/lcfs/lcfs-background.htm>
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-11
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
achieve the goal of 33 percent renewables by 2020 under its AB 32 authority. The Renewable
Portfolio Standard (RPS) Program is discussed in greater detail below, under Section 10.2.3.4.
Executive Order S-03-15
On June 1, 2005, Governor Schwarzenegger signed Executive Order S-03-15, which set the
following GHG reduction targets for the State:
2000 levels by 2010,
1990 levels by 2020, and
80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050.
These reduction targets were codified in 2008 through the passage of Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32).
AB 32 is discussed in greater detail below, under Section 10.2.3.2.
Executive Order B-30-15
Executive Order B-30-15, issued by Governor Jerry Brown on April 29, 2015, set a target of
reducing GHG emissions by 40 percent below 1990 levels in 2030. To achieve this ambitious
target, Governor Brown identified five key goals for reducing GHG emissions in California
through 2030:
1. Increase renewable electricity to 50 percent,
2. Double energy efficiency savings achieved in existing buildings and make heating fuels
cleaner,
3. Reduce petroleum use in cars and trucks by up to 50 percent,
4. Reduce emissions of short-lived climate pollutants, and
5. Manage farms, rangelands, forests, and wetlands to increasingly store carbon.
By directing state agencies to take measures consistent with their existing authority to reduce
GHG emissions, Executive Order B-30-15 establishes coherence between the 2020 and 2050
GHG reduction goals set by AB 32, and seeks to align California with the scientifically
established GHG emissions levels needed to limit global warming below two degrees Celsius.
Executive Order B-30-15’s reduction goal was codified in 2016 through SB 32. SB 32 is
discussed in greater detail below, under Section 10.2.3.2.
10.2.3.2 Senate and Assembly Bills
Assembly Bill 32: California Global Warming Solutions Act
In September 2006, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed AB 32, the California Climate
Solutions Act of 2006. AB 32 establishes the caps on statewide greenhouse gas emissions
proclaimed in Executive Order S-3-05 and set the following timeline for meeting state GHG
reduction targets:
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-12
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
January 1, 2009: Adopt Scoping Plan
January 1, 2010: Early action measures take effect
January 1, 2011: Adopt GHG reduction measures
January 1, 2012: Reduction measures take effect
December 31, 2020: Deadline for 2020 reduction target
In order to effectively implement the emissions cap, AB 32 directed CARB to establish a
mandatory reporting system to tract and monitoring GHG emissions from large stationary
sources (see Mandatory Greenhouse Gas Reporting Regulation, below), prepare a Scoping
Plan demonstrating how the 2020 deadline can be met (see CARB Scoping Plan, below), and
develop appropriate regulations and programs to implement the plan by 2012.
Senate Bill 32 and Assembly Bill 197
To reinforce the goals established through Executive Order B-30-15, Governor Brown went on
to sign SB 32 and AB 197 on September 8, 2016. SB 32 made the GHG reduction target to
reduce GHG emissions by 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 a requirement, as opposed to
a goal. AB 197 gives the Legislature additional authority over CARB to ensure the most
successful strategies for lowering emissions are implemented, and requires CARB to, “protect
the state’s most impacted and disadvantaged communities …[and] consider the social costs of
the emissions of greenhouse gases.”
Senate Bill 350: Clean Energy and Pollution Reduction Act
SB 350 was signed into law in September 2015 and establishes tiered increases to the RPS by
requiring 40 percent of the state’s energy supply come from renewable sources by 2024, 45
percent by 2027, and 50 percent by 2030. SB 350 also set a new goal of doubling the energy-
efficiency savings in the electricity and natural gas sectors through energy efficiency and
conservation measures. The RPS Program is discussed in greater below, under Section
10.2.3.4.
Senate Bill 375: Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act
SB 375, known as the Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act, went into effect in
January 2009. The objective of SB 375 is to better integrate regional planning of transportation,
land use, and housing to reduce sprawl and ultimately reduce greenhouse gas emissions and
other air pollutants. SB 375 tasks CARB to set GHG reduction targets for each of California’s 18
regional Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs). Each MPO is required to prepare a
Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) as part of their Regional Transportation Plan (RTP).
The SCS is a growth strategy in combination with transportation policies that will show how the
MPO will meet its GHG reduction target. If the SCS cannot meet the reduction goal, an
Alternative Planning Strategy may be adopted that meets the goal through alternative
development, infrastructure, and transportation measures or policies.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-13
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Assembly Bill 1493: Pavley I
With the passage of Assembly Bill (AB) 1493 (Pavley I) in 2002, California launched an
innovative and pro-active approach for dealing with GHG emissions and climate change at the
state level. AB 1493 requires CARB to develop and implement regulations to reduce automobile
and light truck GHG emissions. These stricter emissions standards apply to automobiles and
light trucks from 2009 through 2016. Although litigation was filed challenging these regulations
and the U.S. EPA initially denied California’s related request for a waiver, a waiver has since
been granted.13 In 2012, the EPA issued a Final Rulemaking that set even more stringent fuel
economy and GHG emissions standards for model years 2017 through 2025 among light-duty
vehicles.
Senate Bill 605 and Senate Bill 1383
SB 605, signed into law on September 24, 2014, directed CARB to develop a comprehensive
SLCP strategy, in coordination with other state agencies and local air quality management and
air pollution control districts to reduce emissions of SLCPs. SB 1383, signed into law on
September 19, 2016, directed the Board to approve and begin implementing the SLCP Strategy
by January 1, 2018. SB 1383 set statewide 2030 emission reduction targets of 40 percent below
2013 levels by 2030 for methane and HFCs, and 50 percent below 2013 levels by 2030 for
anthropogenic black carbon emissions. SB 1383 also establishes targets for reducing organic
waste in landfills. The SLCP Strategy is discussed below, under Section 10.2.3.3.
Assembly Bill 398: Extension of the Cap-and-Trade Program
On July 26, 2017 Governor Brown Signed AB 398 into law, extending the state’s cap-and-trade
program to 2030. The enacted bill makes design changes to the post-2020 carbon market, such
as including a price ceiling, price containment points, additional limits to the number and
location of offset credits, limits on who can set greenhouse gas emissions requirements, and
specifics on industry assistance factors.14
10.2.3.3 Plans Resulting from Senate and Assembly Bills
CARB Scoping Plan
The CARB Scoping Plan is the comprehensive plan primarily directed at identifying the
measures necessary to reach the GHG reduction targets stipulated in AB 32. The Scoping Plan
was initially adopted in 2008, underwent its first update in 2014, and is currently implemented
through its second update, which was approved in late 2017. Per AB 32, the Scoping Plan is
required to be updated every five years.
13 California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2017. Clean Car Standards – Pavley, Assembly Bill 1493. Web. Accessed
November 8, 2017 <https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/ccms/ccms.htm>
14 Center for Climate and Energy Solutions (C2ES) 2017. Ye, Jason. Summary of California’s Extension of its Cap-
and-Trade Program. Arlington, VA. August 2017. Web. Accessed January 29, 2018.
<https://www.c2es.org/site/assets/uploads/2017/09/summary-californias-extension-its-cap-trade-program.pdf>
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-14
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
2008 Scoping Plan
As part of AB 32, CARB had to determine what 1990 GHG emissions levels were, project a
“business-as usual” (BAU)15 estimate for 2020, and determine the GHG emissions reductions
needed to achieve the 2020 target. In 2007, CARB approved a statewide 1990 emissions level
and corresponding 2020 GHG reduction limit of 427 million MTCO2e.16 In 2008, CARB adopted
its Climate Change Scoping Plan (2008 Scoping Plan), which projects, absent regulation or
under a BAU scenario, 2020 statewide GHG emissions levels of 596 million MTCO2e. The key
elements of the 2008 Scoping Plan focused on:
Expanding and strengthening existing energy efficiency programs, as well as building
and appliance standards;
Achieving a statewide renewables energy mix of 33 percent;
Developing a California cap-and-trade program that links with other Western Climate
Initiative partner programs to create a regional market system;
Establishing targets for transportation-related GHG emissions for regions throughout
California, and pursuing policies and incentives to achieve those targets;
Adopting and implementing measures pursuant to existing State laws and policies,
including California’s clean car standards, goods movement measures, and the LCFS;
and
Creating targeted fees, including a public goods charge on water use, fees on high GWP
gases, and a fee to fund the administrative costs of the State’s long-term commitment to
AB 32 implementation.17
First Update to the Scoping Plan
On May 22, 2014, the Board approved the First Update to the Scoping Plan (First Update). The
First Update highlighted California’s progress toward meeting the 2020 GHG emission reduction
goals defined in the 2008 Scoping Plan, recalculated the 1990 GHG emissions level using the
GWPs contained in IPCC’s 4th Assessment Report,18 and built upon the 2008 Scoping Plan with
new strategies and recommendations. The First Update:
Identified opportunities to leverage new and existing funds to further drive GHG emission
reduction through strategic planning and targeted low carbon investments;
Defined CARB’s climate change priorities over the next five years;
Laid the groundwork to reach post-2020 goals set forth in Executive Orders S-3-05 and
B-16-12; and
15 BAU is a term used to define emissions levels without considering reductions from future or existing programs or
technologies.
16 California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2007. Staff Report California 1990 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Level and
2020 Emissions Limit. Sacramento, CA. November 16, 2007.
<http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/pubs/reports/staff_report_1990_level.pdf>
17 California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2009. “Climate Change Scoping Plan – A Framework for Change."
Endorsed by ARB December 2008. Sacramento, CA. Revised May 11, 2009.
<http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/document/scopingplandocument.htm>
18 The 427 MMTCO2e 2020 emissions level, established in the 2008 Scoping Plan, was recalculated to be slightly
higher at 431 MMTCO2e.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-15
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Evaluated how to align the State’s long-term GHG reduction strategies with other State
policy priorities for water, waste, natural resources, clean energy, transportation, and
land use.
2017 Scoping Plan Update
On December 14, 2017 CARB adopted the second update to the Scoping Plan, the 2017
Climate Change Scoping Plan Update (2017 Scoping Plan Update). The primary objective of
the 2017 Scoping Plan Update is to identify the measures needed to achieve the mid-term GHG
reduction target for 2030 (i.e., reduce emissions by 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030), as
established under Executive Order B-30-15 and SB 32. The 2017 Scoping Plan Update
identifies an increasing need for coordination among state, regional, and local governments to
achieve the GHG emissions reductions that can be gained from local land use planning and
decisions. It notes emission reduction targets set by more than one hundred local jurisdictions in
the state could result in emissions reductions of up to 45 MMTCO2E and 83 MMTCO2E by 2020
and 2050, respectively. To achieve these goals, the 2017 Scoping Plan Update includes a
recommended plan-level efficiency threshold of six metric tons or less per capita by 2030 and
no more than two metric tons by 2050.
The major elements of the 2017 Scoping Plan Update framework include:
Implementing and/or increasing the standards of the Mobile Source Strategy, which
includes increasing zero emission vehicle (ZEV) buses and trucks;
LCFS, with an increased stringency (18 percent by 2030);
Implementation of SB 350, which expands the RPS to 50 percent and doubles energy
efficiency savings by 2030;
California Sustainable Freight Action Plan, which improves freight system efficiency,
utilizes near-zero emissions technology, and deployment of ZEV trucks;
Implementing the proposed Short-Live Climate Pollutant Strategy, which focuses on
reducing CH4 and hydrocarbon emissions by 40 percent and anthropogenic black
carbon emissions by 50 percent by the year 2030;
Continued implementation of SB 375;
Post-2020 Cap-and-Trade Program that includes declining caps;
20 percent reduction in the GHG Emissions from refineries by 2030; and
Development of a Natural and Working Lands Action Plan to secure California’s land
base as a net carbon sink.
Plan Bay Area
Plan Bay Area, initially adopted by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and
Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) on July 18, 2013, is the integrated long-range
transportation, land-use, and housing plan developed for the Bay Area pursuant to SB 375. The
success of Plan Bay Area implementation is evaluated on thirteen different goals with
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-16
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
corresponding performance targets. One of these goals, reducing per-capita CO2 emissions
from cars and light-duty trucks by 15 percent, is directly related to GHG emissions.19
One of the most noteworthy aspects of Plan Bay Area, is that the forecasted development
pattern, also known as the preferred scenario, virtually accommodates all new development
within the existing urbanized footprint of the Bay Area. Approximately 80 percent of new
development anticipated in Plan Bay Area is located throughout nearly 200 different Priority
Development Areas (PDAs). PDAs are transit-oriented, infill development opportunity areas
within existing communities, meaning that future growth consistent with the regional plan would
not increase urban sprawl. It is important to emphasize that although PDAs have been identified
in the regional plan, individual jurisdictions throughout the Bay Area are not required to
constrain future land use designations and development to the preferred scenario described in
Plan Bay Area (i.e., lead agencies retain the authority to approve land use designations and
projects under CEQA as they see fit).
An update to Plan Bay Area, titled Plan Bay Area 2040, was jointly approved by the ABAG
Executive Board and by MTC on July 26, 2017. Unlike the 2013 version of Plan Bay Area, Plan
Bay Area 2040 is a limited and focused update that reevaluates projected household and
employment growth in the Bay Area over the next 24 years. The success of Plan Bay Area 2040
implementation is evaluated on the same 13 goals and performance targets as the 2013 version
of Plan Bay Area. The 2017 update continues to provide a roadmap for accommodating
expected growth in the Bay Area, and connecting it to a transportation investment strategy
focused on moving the Bay Area toward key regional goals for the environment (e.g., state GHG
reduction goals), economy, and social equity.20
Plan Bay Area 2040 identifies one PDA within the City, which is located along El Camino Real
and is appropriately labeled as the Burlingame El Camino Real PDA. The Burlingame El
Camino Real PDA encompasses an approximately half mile buffer centered along El Camino
Real that runs the length of the city – from Burlingame’s northern border with Millbrae to its
southern border with San Mateo. Two specific plans, adopted by the City of Burlingame, exist
within the PDA: the Downtown Specific Plan in the southern portion of the City, and the North
Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan in the northern portion of the City.
Short-Lived Climate Pollutant Strategy
The SLCP Strategy, developed by CARB pursuant to SB 605 and SB 1383 legislation, was
adopted by the Board on March 14, 2017. The SLCP Strategy identifies the state’s approach to
reducing anthropogenic and biogenic sources of SLCPs; specifically, black carbon, methane,
and HFCs.
CARB encourages the replacement of old fireplace and woodstoves with EPA-Certified wood-
burning devices or appliances that use other sources of fuel, such as electricity, propane, and
natural gas. These conversions often come as a result of education and outreach, as well as
monetary incentives. For future developments, CARB intends on working with air districts to
19 Per the efficiency metrics established by CARB, Plan Bay Area is required to demonstrate that the regional plan is
capable of reducing per capita passenger vehicle and light duty truck CO2 emissions by seven percent by 2020 and
15 percent by 2035, as compared to the 2005 baseline. Per SB 375, these reductions are required to be
demonstrated without taking into account Pavely, LCFS, and any other Scoping Plan provisions adopted since 2007
that are expected to further reduce CO2 emissions and result in a decrease in total CO2 emissions over time.
20 Association of Bay Area Governments / Municipal Transit Commission (ABAG/MTC). 2017. Plan Bay Area 2040.
Approved July 26, 2017.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-17
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
determine the most effective approach for avoiding new residential wood combustion emissions
throughout California.
As noted in the SLCP Strategy, “[m]ethane is emitted from a wide range of fugitive sources and
biological processes, and is the second largest source of GHG emissions globally.” The two
primary sources of methane emissions in California are from landfills and agricultural
operations. To address emissions from landfills, CARB is working with the California
Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) to develop regulations by late
2018 that will reduce the level of the statewide disposal of organic waste by 50 percent of 2014
levels by 2020 and 75 percent of 2014 levels by 2025. Recovering and utilizing edible food that
would otherwise be landfilled can help to reduce methane emissions. In addition, technologies
such as a landfill gas collection system can be used to extract fugitive sources of methane,
which in turn can be either burnt off or turned into fuel.
Manure and enteric fermentation are responsible for approximately 25 and 30 percent of the
State’s methane emissions, respectively, and are therefore critical sources to control. Due to the
dynamic nature of capturing such emissions, CARB has been, and will continue to be, working
alongside other state agencies, industry representatives, and stakeholders to research and
develop feasible, cost-effective strategies for addressing agricultural methane emissions. SB
1383 stipulates that manure methane emission control regulations are to be implemented on or
after January 1, 2024. However, the statute allows ARB to require monitoring and reporting of
emissions from dairy and livestock operations before that date. Consistent with SB 1383, CARB,
in consultation with the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA), will analyze the
progress dairies are making in achieving the goals in the SLCP Strategy by July 1, 2020, and
may adjust those goals as necessary.
Controlling emissions of HFCs poses a unique challenge, in the sense that the majority of HFC
emissions come from fugitive emissions of refrigerants used in refrigeration and air-conditioning
system Many of these high-HFC refrigerants are already in operation currently, and it will take
time to replace the older units with newer, lower-HFC emitting appliances. The SLCP Strategy
notes California has already begun phase out both the sale and production of high-GWP
refrigerants, and identifies a number of additional measures that can be taken. A couple of
these measures include financial incentives for low-GWP refrigeration early adoption and
prohibition of high-GWP refrigerants in new stationary sources.
Mobile Source Strategy
On May 16, 2016, CARB released the updated Mobile Source Strategy that demonstrates how
the State can simultaneously meet air quality standards, achieve greenhouse gas emissions
reduction targets, decrease health risks from transportation emissions, and reduce petroleum
consumption over the next fifteen years. It is anticipated implementation of the Mobile Source
Strategy will result in a 45 percent reduction in GHG emissions, and a 50 percent reduction in
the consumption of petroleum-based fuels.21 Actions identified in the strategy include, but are
not limited to:
Deployment of zero-emissions and cleaner combustion technologies, especially around
freight hubs such as ports, rail yards, and distribution centers;
21 California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2016. 2016 Mobile Source Strategy. Sacramento, CA. May
2016. <https://www.arb.ca.gov/planning/sip/2016sip/2016mobsrc.pdf>
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-18
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Increasing the number of passenger plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEV) and non-
combustion ZEV;
Requiring heavy-duty vehicles operating in the state to utilize cleaner internal
combustion engines, renewable fuels, and/or zero-emission technology; and
Improving the efficiency of the freight transport system and reducing growth in VMT.
10.2.3.4 Regulations and Programs
Mandatory Greenhouse Gas Reporting Regulation
CARB has adopted the Regulation for the Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emissions
(Title 17, CCR, Section 95100 – 95133 (17 CCR §95100 – 95133)), which requires electricy
generators, industrial facilities, fuel suppliers, and electricy importers that emit greater than or
equal to 10,000 MTCO2e from combustion annually to report their GHG emissions to CARB.
Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS) Program
In 2002, California established its RPS Program, with the goal of increasing the percentage of
renewable energy in the state’s electricity mix to 20 percent of retail sales by 2017. The 2003
Integrated Energy Policy Report recommended accelerating that goal to 20 percent by 2010,
and the 2004 Energy Report Update further recommended increasing the target to 33 percent
by 2020. The state’s Energy Action Plan also supported this goal. In 2006 under Senate Bill
107, California’s 20 percent by 2010 RPS goal was codified. The legislation required retail
sellers of electricity to increase renewable energy purchases by at least one percent each year
with a target of 20 percent renewables by 2010. Publicly owned utilities set their own RPS
goals, recognizing the intent of the legislature to attain the 20 percent by 2010 target.
On November 17, 2008, Governor Schwarzenegger signed Executive Order S-14-08 requiring
“[a]ll retail sellers of electricity shall serve 33 percent of their load with renewable energy by
2020.” The following year, Executive Order S-21-09 directed the California Air Resources
Board, under its AB 32 authority, to enact regulations to achieve the goal of 33 percent
renewables by 2020.
In October 2015, Governor Brown signed Senate Bill 350 to codify ambitious climate and clean
energy goals. One key provision of SB 350 is for retail sellers and publicly owned utilities to
procure “half of the state’s electricity from renewable sources by 2030.”
Cap-and-Trade Program
The CARB Cap-and-Trade Program was initially identified in the 2008 Scoping Plan as one of
the strategies California will employ to reduce GHG emission that cause climate change. It, the
program, stated on January 1, 2012, with an enforceable compliance obligation beginning in
2013. Cap-and-Trade help put California on the path to meeting its goal of reducing GHG
emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2020, and ultimately achieving an 80 percent reduction
from 1990 levels by 2050.
The Cap-and-Trade Program is a market-based regulation that is designed to reduce GHG
emissions from multiple sources. Cap-and-Trade sets a firm limit, or cap, on GHGs and
minimizes the compliance costs of achieving AB 32 goals. The cap began declining at a rate of
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-19
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
approximately three percent per year, starting in 2013.22 The Cap-and-Trade Program remains
one of the most prominent tools used by CARB in reducing GHG emissions to comply with the
reduction goals set forth in Executive Order S-03-15, AB 32, and SB 32. The 2017 Scoping Plan
Update continues to rely on the Cap-and-Trade Program as one of the key elements in reducing
GHG emissions. Depending on how successful the other measures identified in the 2017
Scoping Plan Update are, the cap may be adjusted downward at a faster rate to ensure
California remains on track to achieving the reductions necessary to meet the 2030 goal.
Low Carbon Fuel Standard Regulation
CARB initially approved the LCFS regulation in 2009, identifying it as one of the nine discrete
early action measures in the 2008 Scoping Plan to reduce California’s GHG emissions. The
LCFS regulation defines a Carbon intensity, or “CI,” reduction target (or standard) for each year,
which the rule refers to as the “compliance schedule.” The LCFS regulation requires a reduction
of at least 10 percent in the CI of California’s transportation fuels by 2020 and maintains that
target for all subsequent years.
CARB has begun the rulemaking process for strengthening the compliance target of the LCFS
through the year 2030. For a new LCFS target, the preferred scenario in the 2017 Scoping Plan
Update identifies an 18 percent reduction in average transportation fuel carbon intensity,
compared to a 2010 baseline, by 2030 as one of the primary measures for achieving the state’s
GHG 2030 target. Achieving the SB 32 reduction goals will require the use of a low carbon
transportation fuels portfolio beyond the amount expended to result from the current compliance
schedule.23
Advanced Clean Cars Program
In January 2012, CARB approved the Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) Program (formerly known as
Pavley II) for model years 2017 through 2025. The components of the ACC program are the
Low-Emission Vehicle (LEV) regulations and the Zero-Emission Vehivle (ZEV) regulation. The
Program combines the control of smog, soot, and global warming gases and requirements for
greater numbers of zero-emission vehicles into a single package of standards. By 2025, new
automobiles under California’s Advanced Clean Car program will emit 34 percent less global
warming gases and 75 percent less smog-forming emissions.
Title 24 Energy Standards
The CEC first adopted Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings
in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to reduce energy consumption in the state.
Although not originally intended to reduce GHG emissions, increased energy efficiency, and
reduced consumption of electricity, natural gas, and other fuels would result in fewer GHG
emissions from residential and nonresidential buildings subject to the standard. The standards
are updated periodically to allow for the consideration and inclusion of new energy efficiency
technologies and methods.
22 California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2018. Cap-and-Trade Program. Web. Accessed January 30, 2018.
<https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/capandtrade/capandtrade.htm>
23 California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2017. Low Carbon Fuel Standard 2018 Amendments. “Pre-Rulemaking
Concept Paper.” July 24, 2017. Web. Accessed January 30, 2018.
<https://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/lcfs/lcfs_meetings/080717conceptpaper.pdf>
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-20
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Part 11 of the Title 24 Building Standards Code is referred to as the California Green Building
Standards Code (CALGreen Code). The purpose of the CALGreen Code is to “improve public
health, safety and general welfare by enhancing the design and construction of buildings
through the use of building concepts having a positive environmental impact and encouraging
sustainable construction practices in the following categories: (1) planning and design; (2)
energy efficiency; (3) water efficiency and conservation; (4) material conservation and resource
efficiency; and (5) environmental air quality.” The CALGreen Code is not intended to substitute
or be identified as meeting the certification requirements of any green building program that is
not established and adopted by the California Building Standards Commission (CBSC). The
CBSC has released the 2016 California Green Building Standards Code on its website. Unless
otherwise noted in the regulation, all newly constructed buildings in California are subject of the
requirements of the CALGreen Code.
CALGreen contains both mandatory and voluntary measures. For non-residential land uses
there are 39 mandatory measures including, but not limited to exterior light pollution reduction,
wastewater reduction by 20 percent, and commissioning of projects over 10,000 square feet.
Two tiers of voluntary measures apply to non-residential land uses, for a total of 36 additional
elective measures.
California’s Building Energy Efficiency Standards are updated on an approximately three-year
cycle. The 2016 standards, adopted January 1, 2017, improve upon existing standards in the
fact that they are 28 percent more efficient for residential construction and five percent more
efficient for non-residential construction, when compared to the previous 2013 standards.24
Although the 2016 standards do not achieve zero net energy, they are close to the state’s goal,
and mark important steps towards making building practices greener throughout California. It is
anticipated the 2019 standards will take the final step in establishing requirements for zero net
energy for newly constructed residential buildings throughout California.
California Solar Initiative
The California Solar Initiative (CSI) was authorized in 2006 under SB 1 and allows the California
Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to provide incentives to install solar technology on existing
residential, commercial, nonprofit, and governmental buildings if they are customers of the
State’s investor-owned utilities (IOUs), including Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E). The CSI
program had a budget of nearly $2.2 billion to be expended by 2016 with a goal to reach 1,940
megawatts (MW) of installed solar power throughout the state by that time.25 The CSI program
has several components, including the Research and Development, Single-Family Affordable
Solar Housing (SASH), Multi-Family Affordable Solar Housing (MASH), and Solar Water
Heating Pilot Program, each of which provides incentives to further the installation of solar
technology on California’s buildings.
24 California Energy Commission (CEC) 2015. “2016 Building Energy Efficiency Standards Adoption
Hearing Presentation”. June 10, 2015. Accessed April 17, 2017. Web.
<http://www.energy.ca.gov/title24/2016standards/rulemaking/documents/2015-06-10_hearing/2015-06-
10_Adoption_Hearing_Presentation.pdf>
25 California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) 2012. California Solar Initiative Annual Program
Assessment. June 2012.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-21
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
10.2.3.5 Bay Area Air Quality Management District
Clean Air Plan
On April 19, 2017, the BAAQMD adopted the 2017 Clean Air Plan: Spare the Air, Cool the
Climate (Clean Air Plan), which updates the adopted Bay Area 2010 Clean Air Plan, and
continues to provide the framework for assuring that the NAAQS and CAAQS are attained and
maintained in the Bay Area. In addition to addressing criteria air pollutant concentrations and
public exposure to toxic air contaminants, the 2017 Clean Air Plan lays the groundwork for a
long-term effort to reduce Bay Area GHG emissions 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 and
80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050, consistent with GHG reduction targets adopted by the
State of California.
As opposed to focusing solely on the nearer 2030 GHG reduction target, the 2017 Clean Air
Plan makes a concerted effort to imagine and plan for a successful and sustainable Bay Area in
the year 2050. In 2050, the Bay area is envisioned as a region where:
Energy efficient buildings are heated, cooled, and powered by renewable energy;
The transportation network has been redeveloped with an emphasis on non-vehicular
modes of transportation and mass-transit;
The electricity grid is powered by 100 percent renewable energy; and
Bay Area residents have adopted lower-carbon intensive lifestyles (e.g., purchasing low-
carbon goods in addition to recycling and putting organic waste to productive use).
The 2017 Clean Air Plan includes a comprehensive, multipollutant control strategy that is
broken up into 85 distinct measures and categorized based on the same economic sector
framework used by CARB for the AB 32 Scoping Plan Update.26 The accumulation of all 85
control measures being implemented support the three overarching goals of the plan. These
goals are:
Attain all state and national air quality standards;
Eliminate disparities among Bay Area communities in cancer health risk from toxic air
contaminants; and
Reduce Bay Area GHG emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 and 80
percent below 1990 levels by 2050.
Greenhouse Gas Plan Level Guidance
In May 2017, the BAAQMD published a new version of the CEQA Air Quality Guidelines, which
includes revisions made to address the Supreme Court’s decision on the California Building
Industry Association v. BAAQMD. The Guidelines contain the BAAQMD’s recommendations to
Lead Agencies for evaluating and assessing the significance of a project’s potential greehouse
gas impacts.27
26 The sectors included in the AB 32 Scoping Plan Update are: stationary (industrial) sources, transportation, energy,
buildings, agriculture, natural and working lands, waste management, water, and super-GHG pollutants.
27 Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2017. California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality
Guidelines. San Francisco, CA. June 2010, updated May 2017
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-22
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Included in the CEQA Air Quality Guidelines are qualitative criteria that the BAAQMD will use to
judge whether a CAP or other plan designed to reduce community-wide GHG emissions (e.g.,
sustainability plan or general plan) will meet the criteria established by the Governor’s Office of
Planning and Research (OPR) per CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5. These qualitative criteria
are as follows:
GHG emissions inventory should be complete and comprehensive,
Calculations and assumptions should be transparent,
GHG reduction strategies should rely primarily on mandatory measures,
Build in a margin of safety,
Measures should address existing as well as new development, and
Implementation and monitoring should be clearly defined.
The document also provides guidance on developing the quantitative sections of a local CAP,
including development of GHG emission inventories, projections, mitigation measures, and
implementation and monitoring procedures.
10.3 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
This section evaluates potential GHG impacts that could occur under implementation of the
proposed General Plan Update.
10.3.1 Significance Criteria
Based on Appendix G to the State CEQA Guidelines, a significant impact would occur if a
proposed project would:
(1) Generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact
on the environment.
(2) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing
the emissions of GHGs.
Included in the CEQA Air Quality Gidelines is a plan-level GHG efficiency threshold of 6.6
MTCO2e per service population (SP),28 per year. The 6.6 MTCO2e/SP/yr threshold does not
directly address post-2020 GHG emissions, but is presented in conjunction with the estimated
2020 emissions levels for informational purposes.
To evaluate the significance of proposed project’s GHG emissions, this EIR compares
estimated emissions against an interpolated efficiency metric of 4.0 MTCO2e/capita/yr for the
year 2040, which was derived from the recommended plan-level efficiency thresholds for 2030
and 2050, as presented in the 2017 Scoping Plan Update.29 The City’s estimated GHG
28 Service Population is defined as the number of residents and employees within the planning area.
29 2040 is the halfway point between 2030 and 2050; thus, half the reductions that need to occur between 2030 and
2050 should be achieved by 2040. Using the efficiency metric for 2030, 6.0 MTCO2e/capita/yr and taking half of the
reductions between that and the 2050 efficiency metric of 2.0 MTCO2e/capita/yr, results in a derived efficiency metric
of 4.0 MTCO2e/capita/yr for year 2040. The City is not adopting nor proposing to use the 4.0 MTCO2e/capita/yr
efficiency threshold for general use; rather, it is only intended for use in this EIR.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-23
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
emissions in 2030 is also compared against the 2017 Scoping Plan Update’s 6
MTCO2e/capita/yr efficiency metric for informational purposes.
10.3.2 GHG Methodology, Inventory, and Forecast Updates
The City of Burlingame is currently in the process of preparing a new CAP that would replace
the 2009 CAP that is currently in effect. The CAP update would integrate feasible GHG
reduction policies contained in the proposed General Plan Update, and identify additional GHG
reduction measures, if necessary. The following analysis highlights updates to previous
emissions inventories, presents GHG emission forecasts through 2040, and provides a
preliminary assessment of reductions associated with the policies contained in the proposed
General Plan Update.
It should be noted the updated inventories and forecasts use different VMT data than the air
quality (Chapter 7) and traffic (Chapter 18) sections of this EIR. This is because the VMT data
used in the traffic impact analysis and prepared for the General Plan was only modeled for 2015
and 2040. The CAP not only estimates mobile source emissions for 2015 and 2040, but also the
2005, 2020, and 2030 calendar years. The data set used for the CAP was obtained from MTC.
It was used in Plan Bay Area 2040, and is also located on the BAAQMD’s website under the
VMT data portal; this VMT data provided by the portal is intended for use by local jurisdictions
for climate planning purposes. The VMT data portal, however, does not provide VMT estimates
for 2050. Therefore, this EIR does not estimate Year 2050 GHG emissions in the City.
10.3.2.1 Historic Inventory Updates
An international organization known as ICLEI – Local Governments for Sustainability prepares
guidance documents to assist local governments in estimating GHG emissions originating in, or
related to activities occurring within, their jurisdiction. Both the existing GHG inventories (see
Section 10.1.4.2) and the new CAP that is being prepared follow the U.S. Community Protocol
for Accounting and Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Version 1.1) and Local
Government Operations Protocol (Version 1.1) to estimate historic emissions. The GHG
emission inventories developed using these protocols are based on activity data for energy use
(natural gas and electricity), solid waste, and water use and wastewater generation.
Transportation emissions are based on VMT within the City.
Although both the existing inventories and the inventories that are being prepared as part of the
CAP update follow the same protocols for estimating emissions, the new inventories follow a
slightly different methodology for one of the sectors (transportation), and make use of newer,
more up to date, data sources. The updated methodology and data sources are utilized
because they provide more accurate representation of emissions during the time frame in
question. These altered data sources and methodologies are discussed below in greater detail.
Global Warming Potential (GWP) – Both Inventories
As described in Section 10.1.2, the potential for a particular GHG to absorb and trap heat in the
atmosphere is known as its GWP. Whereas the 2009 CAP and subsequent inventories
developed for the City utilized the IPCC 2nd Assessment Report’s GWPs, the BAAQMD is now
recommending the use of the IPCC 5th Assessment Report’s GWP values for climate action
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-24
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
planning purposes.30 Table 10-6, below, highlights the three most notable GWPs used to
estimate GHG emissions for both the community-wide and local government operations
inventories.
Table 10-6: IPCC GWPs (2nd Assessment Report vs. 5th Assessment Report)
GHG GWP
2nd Assessment Report 5th Assessment Report
Carbon Dioxide (CO2) 1 1
Methane (CH4) 21 28
Nitrous Oxide (N2O) 310 265
Source: IPCC31
As shown in Table 10-6, the GWP went up between the 2nd Assessment Report for CH4, while
the GWP for N2O went up. These up and down fluctuations in GWPs between the two
assessment reports are fairly common for the rest of the GHGs analyzed in the reports.
VMT Methodology and Data Sources – Community-wide Inventory
The U.S. Community Protocol for Accounting and Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emissions
contains two methodologies for estimating GHG emissions resulting from the operation of on-
road, motor vehicles. The pervious inventories followed the in-boundary methodology, which is
an alternative method that assesses emissions resulting from all VMT occurring within the
jurisdiction’s boundaries, regardless of whether or not the trip started or ended within the City
(i.e., all emissions, including those related to vehicles passing through the City were counted).
The revised community-wide inventories that are being developed as part of the new CAP follow
the origin-destination methodology, which is the preferred methodology in the U.S. Community
Protocol and is recommended for use by the BAAQMD (Young, 2018). In addition to the new
methodology used to estimate emissions there is also a new source for VMT data that has
come about from Plan Bay Area 2040 (see Section 10.2.3.3). This data is available to the public
and is recommended for use by the BAAQMD to retain a consistent VMT data source across all
jurisdictions in the Bay; however, this data portal does not include VMT estimates for the Year
2050.
Solid Waste Data Source – Community-wide Inventory
In 2015, the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle)
released its 2014 Disposal-Facility-Based Characterization of Solid Waste in California
document. Data contained in this document was used to update the 2015 inventory’s
assumptions for the composition of waste generated by the City.
Population Data – Community-wide Inventory
30 Young 2018. Personal communication between Abby Young, BAAQMD, and Phil Gleason, Environmental Analyst
III, MIG. Phone call. January 4, 2018.
31 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2013. Greenhouse Gas Protocol. “Global Warming Potential
Values.” Web. Accessed April 26, 2018. <http://www.ghgprotocol.org/sites/default/files/ghgp/Global-Warming-
Potential-Values%20%28Feb%2016%202016%29_1.pdf>
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-25
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
The Community Context Element of the proposed General Plan presents the number of housing
units, population, and employment in the City during 2016. This data is utilized for 2015 since it
is the most accurate data currently available in that time frame.
Revised Community-wide and Local Government Operations Inventories
The revised 2005 and 2015 community-wide and local government operations inventories are
presented below in Table 10-7 and Table 10-8, respectively.
Table 10-7: Revised Community-wide GHG Inventory (2005 and 2015)
Sector
Metric Tons CO2e
2005 2015
Residential 47,344 38,249
Commercial / Industrial 78,215 67,669
Transportation – On-road Vehicles 108,099 107,781
Transportation – Off-road Equipment 15,788 25,113
Transportation – Caltrain Not Estimated 2,471
Solid Waste – Generated Waste 8,979 6,043
Solid Waste – Landfills 354 277
Wastewater 343 497
Water 570 307
City-owned Stationary Sources 28 6
Total 260,809 247,591
Notes: MTCO2e/yr = metric tons carbon dioxide equivalent per year. Totals may not be completely accurate, due to
rounding of figures.
Table 10-8: Revised Local Government Operations GHG Inventory (2005 and 2015)
Sector
Metric Tons CO2e
2005 2015
Energy 1,563 1,250
Vehicles Fleet 603 702
Landfill 354 277
Wastewater Treatment 431 405
Solid Waste Generation 35 14
Employee Commute 535 474
Generators 11 4
Refrigerants 0 3
Total 3,533 3,128
Notes: MTCO2e/yr = metric tons carbon dioxide equivalent per year. Totals may not be completely accurate, due to
rounding of figures.
As shown in Table 10-7, community-wide GHG emissions in 2015 were approximately 5.1
percent lower than those in 2005. This is approximately the same level of reduction seen in the
previous inventories that were developed (i.e., 4.6 percent, as discussed in Section 10.1.4.2).
Table 10-8 shows government operations have dramatically improved from 2005 to 2015, as
reductions are approximately 11 percent lower than the 2005 baseline.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-26
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
10.3.2.2 Community-wide and Local Government Operations GHG Targets
During the development of the existing, 2009 CAP, the Green Ribbon Task Force
recommended that Burlingame meet the GHG emission reduction target of 15 percent below the
base year (2005) by 2020 and 80 percent by the year 2050.32 Accordingly, the 2009 CAP set its
2020 target year reduction to 15 percent below its 2005 emissions.
As detailed in Section 10.3.2.1, the community-wide and local government operations
inventories have been updated for 2005 and 2015 in preparation of the new CAP that is being
developed. Due to these updates, it is also necessary to reevaluate and re-estimate the
emissions levels Burlingame would need to meet to be consistent with statewide GHG reduction
goals. As shown in Table 10-7, annual GHG emissions during 2005 are estimated to have been
approximately 260,809 MTCO2e, with approximately 3,533 MTCO2e of those emissions
stemming from local government operations. Table 10-9 summarizes the reductions that would
need to be met to support statewide GHG goals through the year 2040.
Table 10-9: GHG Reduction Targets
Sector
Metric Tons CO2e
2005(A) 2020(B) 2030(C) 2040(D)
Target Year Reduction 260,809 221,687 133,012 88,675
Notes:
(A) The value for 2005 was not the target year reduction, rather it is the estimated GHG emissions level for that year, as
shown in Table 10-7.
(B) The goal for 2020 is to reduce emissions to 15 percent below 2005 levels. This is also considered to be
representative of the emissions levels in 1990.
(C) The statewide GHG goal for 2030 is to reduce emissions levels to 40 percent below 1990 levels. As noted in (A),
above, 2020 emissions are considered representative of 1990 levels. Thus, the 2030 target is also 40 percent below
the estimated 2020 goal.
(D) The 2040 reduction goal is an interim target between the 2030 and 2050 reduction goals. Whereas the 2030
reduction goal is the reduce emissions by 40 percent below 1990 levels and the 2050 reduction goals is to reduce GHG
emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels, the 2040 interim target represents a goal of reducing emissions of 60
percent below 1990 levels.
10.3.2.3 Business-as-Usual Community-wide GHG Emissions Forecast
Business-as-usual (BAU) emissions forecasts were developed for 2020, 2030, and 2040 using
demographic growth projections contained in the Community Context Element of the proposed
General Plan Update (Table CX-1). These demographic growth projections and well as the
interpolated data used for the estimation of 2020 and 2030 emissions are summarized below in
Table 10-10.
32 As detailed in the 2008 Scoping Plan, 15 percent below 2005 emissions levels are considered to be representative
of emissions during 1990. Estimating emissions that were occurring in 1990 is critical since reduction targets set by
the state are based on emissions in relation to what they were in 1990. For example, Executive Order S-3-05
established GHG targets for 2020 (being they would be brought down to 1990 levels) and for 2050 (being that
emissions would be brought to 80 percent below 1990 levels). Similarly, B-30-15 and SB 32 set a statewide GHG
reduction goal of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 as an interim target for 2050.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-27
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 10-10: Growth Factors Used to Forecast Emissions
Metric 2015(A) 2020 2030 2040
Housing Units 13,144 13,631 14,605 16,065
Population 29,724 30,870 33,162 36,600
Jobs 29,879 31,501 34,745 39,610
Service Population 59,603 62,371 67,907 76,210
Source: Burlingame, 2017.
Notes:
(A) Although Table CX-1 in the Community Context Element of the proposed General Plan provides values for 2016,
they are also used here for the 2015 values, since they are the most accurate data sources available. In addition, the
use of these values retain consistency with the rest of the chapters herein this EIR.
Emissions forecasts for 2020, 2030, and 2040 were derived by presuming average annual
growth from 2015 to the forecast year. The BAU forecasts do not take into account the future
regulatory environment, and the reductions that would be achieved through statewide initiatives,
such as RPS. See Table 10-11 for a summary of the BAU Community-wide GHG forecasts.
Table 10-11: BAU Community-wide GHG Forecast
Sector
Metric Tons CO2e
2015 2020 2030 2040
Residential 38,249 40,118 43,856 47,594
Commercial / Industrial 67,669 70,675 77,132 84,683
Transportation – On-road Vehicles 107,781 111,884 114,844 130,020
Transportation – Off-road Equipment 25,113 26,219 28,459 30,669
Transportation – Caltrain 2,471 2,581 2,880 3,020
Solid Waste – Generated Waste 6,043 6,313 6,854 7,394
Solid Waste – Landfills 277 251 206 168
Wastewater 497 519 564 609
Water 307 320 348 375
City-owned Stationary Sources 6 6 7 7
Total 247,591 258,888 275,070 304,569
Percent Change From 2015 - +4% +11% +23%
Notes: MTCO2e/yr = metric tons carbon dioxide equivalent per year. Totals may not be completely accurate, due to
rounding of figures.
As shown in Table 10-10, GHG emissions would continue to increase through the proposed
General Plan’s horizon year of 2040 absent any further regulatory actions or changes in
behaviors within the City.
10.3.2.4 Adjusted Business-as-Usual Community-wide GHG Emissions Forecast
The adjusted business-as-usual (Adjusted BAU) forecast takes into account the impact state
legislation will have on reducing GHG emissions on the local level. These pieces of legislation
include the Pavley II/CAFÉ Vehicle Standards, the Tire Pressure Program, RPS Program, and
the current (i.e., 2016) Title 24 Building Standards.33 The Adjusted BAU forecast is presented
below in Table 10-12, and the reductions attributable to the currently regulatory environment are
presented in Table 10-13.
33 The Cap-and-Trade Program is not included in the Adjusted BAU scenario.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-28
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 10-12: Adjusted BAU Community-wide GHG Forecast
Sector
Metric Tons CO2e
2015 2020 2030 2040
Residential 38,249 38,669 37,806 39,890
Commercial / Industrial 67,669 66,825 61,209 65,624
Transportation – On-road Vehicles 107,781 101,626 83,466 86,874
Transportation – Off-road Equipment 25,113 26,219 28,459 30,699
Transportation – Caltrain 2,471 2,581 2,880 3,020
Solid Waste – Generated Waste 6,043 6,313 6,854 7,394
Solid Waste – Landfills 277 251 206 168
Wastewater 497 519 564 609
Water 307 320 348 375
City-owned Stationary Sources 6 6 7 7
Total 247,591 243,331 221,719 234,661
Percent Change From 2015 - -2% -11% -6%
Notes: MTCO2e/yr = metric tons carbon dioxide equivalent per year. Totals may not be completely accurate, due to
rounding of figures.
Table 10-13: Adjusted BAU Regulatory Reduction Breakdown
Scenario / Regulation
Metric Tons CO2e
2020 2030 2040
BAU Community-wide GHG Forecast 258,888 275,070 304,569
Title 24 Improvements (2016) 2,281 6,520 10,619
Renewable Portfolio Standard 3,453 17,160 19,312
Transportation (Fuel Efficiency and Fleet Characteristics) 10,258 31,379 43,146
Total ABAU Reductions 15,992 55,059 73,077
Adjusted BAU Community-wide GHG Forecast 243,331 221,719 234,661
Notes: MTCO2e/yr = metric tons carbon dioxide equivalent per year. Totals may not be completely accurate, due to
rounding of figures.
As shown in Table 10-12, GHG emissions under the Adjusted BAU Scenario would decrease
through 2030 under current legislation in place. Annual GHG emissions would increase,
however, between 2030 and 2040, because there is no legislation in place that would continue
to decrease GHG emissions. The current reductions attributable to existing legislation would
remain in place, but new growth in the City would cause GHG emissions to rise once again.
10.3.2.5 General Plan Policy Quantification Analysis (Preliminary Gap Analysis)
As shown in Table 10-12, existing legislation enacted at the state level will assist the City in
reducing GHG emissions; however, greater reductions are still necessary if the City is to align
their emissions with statewide goals. Table 10-14, below, summarizes the reduction targets the
City would need to achieve to be consistent with AB 32 and SB 32, and compares those target
year reductions against the Adjusted BAU forecasted emissions.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-29
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 10-14: Future Community-wide GHG Reduction Targets
Metric Tons CO2e
2020 2030 2040
Adjusted BAU Forecast 243,331 221,719 234,661
GHG Reduction Target(A) 221,687 133,012 88,674
Emissions Gap 21,644 88,707 145,987
Notes: MTCO2e/yr = metric tons carbon dioxide equivalent per year. Totals may not be completely accurate, due to
rounding of figures.
(A) Emission reduction targets are from Table 10-9.
As shown in Table 10-14, the City has made progress toward meeting the 2020 goal; however,
greater reductions still need to be realized if the City is to meet future GHG reduction goals for
2030 and 2040. This EIR presents preliminary GHG reductions associated with some of the
policies contained in the proposed General Plan that have been gauged to be readily feasible
and implementable. There are additional policies contained within the proposed General Plan
Update that are also feasible, but their implementation timing, cost, and other factors require
evaluation in greater detail before their reductions have been assessed. Additional, feasible,
measures contained within the proposed General Plan Update will be addressed in the CAP
that is under development. The estimated GHG reductions associated with policies proposed in
the General Plan Update are as follows:
CC-1.2: Mixed Use, Transit Oriented Infill Development – Promote higher density infill
development with a mix of uses on underutilized parcels, particularly near transit stations
and stops.
CC-1.5: Transportation Demand Management – Require all major development projects
include a Transportation Demand Management program to reduce single-occupancy car
trips.
CC-1.9: Green Building Practice and Standards – Support the use of sustainable
building elements such as green roofs, cisterns, and permeable pavements. Continue to
enforce the California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen). Periodically revisit
the minimum standards required for permit approval. Adopt zero-net-energy building
goals for municipal buildings.
HP-2.7: Residential Solar Power – Encourage homeowners to install solar power
systems. Provide information to homeowners on the benefits of solar power and funding
opportunities. Promote Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) programs that finance
renewable energy systems. Offer incentives for home solar power systems.
HP-2.8: Energy Efficiency – Support energy efficiency improvements in the aging
building stock citywide. Encourage energy efficiency audits and upgrades at the time of
sale for existing homes and buildings. Hot energy efficiency workshops, and distribute
information to property owners, tenants, and residences. Publicize available programs
such as PACE financing and San Mateo Energy Watch programs. Incentivize low-cost
retrofits to residents and businesses.
M-6.1: Transit Supportive Land Use – Plan for an accommodate land uses that facilitate
development of compact, mixed use development with the density, diversity of use, and
local accessibility supportive of transit use.
Table 10-15 summarizes the estimated reductions that would be achieved by implementing the
measures presented above.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-30
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 10-15: Summary of Quantified Policies and Progress Toward Future GHG Goals
Scenario / Policy
Metric Tons CO2e
2020 2030 2040
Adjusted BAU Forecast 243,331 221,719 234,661
General Plan Policy Reductions
CC-1.2 and M-6.1 164 384 536
CC-1.5 175 389 681
CC-1.9 - 2,225 7,436
HP-2.7 485 862 1,363
HP-2.8 - 279 1,397
IF-6.9(A) 16,562 31,010 30,078
Total Policy Reductions 17,386 35,149 41,491
General Plan Scenario GHG Emissions 225,945 186,570 193,170
GHG Reduction Target(B) 221,687 133,012 88,674
Target Achieved? No No No
Additional Reductions Needed 4,258 53,558 104,496
Notes: MTCO2e/yr = metric tons carbon dioxide equivalent per year. Totals may not be completely accurate, due to
rounding of figures.
(A) Policy IF-6.9 is not identified in the Burlingame General Plan Update 2040, and has been incorporated as part of
Mitigation Measure 10-1.
(B) Emission reduction targets are from Table 10-9.
As shown in Table 10-15, the currently quantified policies that are contained in the proposed
General Plan Update would continue to reduce GHG emissions toward their targets, but not to
the level necessary to conclude they would be consistent with state goals. The significance of
these emissions is discussed below under Section 10.3.3.
10.3.3 Environmental Impacts
Impact 10-1: Increases in GHG Emissions.
GHG Emissions
As described in subsections 10.3.2.3 – 10.3.2.5, above, future development supported by the
General Plan Update would result in GHG emissions associated with the construction and
operation of new and existing development within the City. A summary of short- and long-term
emissions and the analysis for each are included below.
Short-Term Emissions
Future development projects would result in short-term greenhouse gas emissions from
construction. Greenhouse gas emissions would be released by equipment used for demolition,
grading, paving, and building construction activities. GHG emissions would also result from
worker and vendor trips to and from project sites and from demolition and soil hauling trips.
Construction activities are short-term and cease to emit greenhouse gases upon completion,
unlike operational emissions that are continuous year after year until operation of the use
ceases.
Typically, construction-related GHG emissions do not substantially contribute (less than one
percent) to a project’s annual greenhouse gas emissions inventory and mitigation for
construction-related emissions is not effective in reducing a project’s overall contribution to
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-31
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
climate change, given how small of a piece of the total emissions construction emissions are.
Construction emissions associated with anticipated development within the City over the next
approximately 20 years has been captured in the “Transportation – Off-road Equipment”
category presented in the BAU and Adjusted BAU Forecasts, Table 10-11 and Table 10-12,
respectively.
Long-Term Emissions
Existing and future land use projects would result in continuous GHG emissions from energy
use (electricity and natural gas), solid waste disposal, and water use and wastewater
generation/treatment. Additionally, the operation of motor vehicles from people living in, working
in, and/or visiting Burlingame would also contribute to GHG emissions within the City.
Electricity use associated with both the physical usage of the development, as well as the
energy needed to transport water/wastewater, result in the production of GHGs if the electricity
is generated through non-renewable sources (i.e., combustion of fossil fuels). Natural gas use
results in the emission of two GHGs: CH4 (the major component of natural gas) and CO2 (from
the combustion of natural gas).34 Solid waste generated by land uses within the planning area
contribute to GHG emissions in a variety of ways. In addition, landfilling, the most common
waste management practice, results in the release of CH4 from the decomposition of organic
materials.35 Mobile sources, including vehicle trips to and from land uses within the City, result
primarily in emissions of CO2, with emissions of CH4 and NO2 also occurring in minor amounts.
Table 10-16 compares the project’s preliminary GHG inventory and efficiency metrics against
the thresholds established in Section 10.3.1.
34 GHG emissions associated with electricity use and natural gas consumption are both accounted for in the
“Residential” and “Commercial” categories in Table 10-11 and Table 10-12. Water and wastewater emissions are
accounted for in the “Water” and “Wastewater” categories, respectively.
35 Solid waste emissions are tracked independent of landfill emissions in the BAU and Adjusted BAU Forecasts. The
solid waste emissions presented in Tables 10-11 and 10-12 are representative of annual waste that is generated
within the City, and landfill emissions are reflective of emissions emanating from the closed Burlingame Landfill. The
Burlingame landfill, located at 1001 Airport Boulevard, was in operation from 1957 to 1987. The site accepted only
inorganic construction debris, concrete rubble, wood, plastic, garden refuse, metal, and clean soil; no household
garbage or hazardous waste was accepted. Although the site is now capped and built upon, methane emissions are
still collected via a landfill gas collection system and burnt off to prevent the majority of emissions from escaping into
the atmosphere where they would contribute to global climate change.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-32
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 10-16: General Plan Build-Out GHG Emissions
2020 2030 2040
BAAQMD GHG Efficiency Comparison
Total Annual Emissions (MTCO2e)(A) 225,945 186,570 193,170
Service Population(B) 62,371 67,907 76,210
GHG Efficiency (SP) 3.6 2.7 2.5
Efficiency Target (SP) 6.6 - -
Efficiency Achieved? Yes N/A N/A
2017 Scoping Plan Update Comparison
Total Annual Emissions (MTCO2e)(A) 225,945 186,570 193,170
Population(B) 30,870 33,162 36,600
GHG Efficiency (Capita) 7.3 5.6 5.3
Efficiency Target (Capita)(C) - 6 4
Efficiency Achieved? N/A Yes No
Significant Impact? - - Yes
Notes: MTCO2e/yr = metric tons carbon dioxide equivalent per year. Totals may not be completely accurate, due to
rounding of figures.
(A) See Table 10-14.
(B) See Table 10-10.
(C) Identified under Chapter 5 on page 99 of the 2017 Scoping Plan.
As shown in Table 10-16, the community-wide emissions are projected to meet the BAAQMD’s
efficiency metric for 2020 despite emissions not being brought down to 15 percent below 2005
levels (see Table 10-15). This means that although the City appears to be unable to meet their
established goal of reducing community-wide emissions in 2020 to 15 percent below 2005
levels, it is still consistent with overall state reduction goals, as the BAAQMD threshold was
designed to achieve.
Additionally, the City’s emissions would be consistent with the 2017 Scoping Plan’s annual
efficiency target for 2030. Annual GHG emissions in 2040 would, however, be inconsistent with
the 2017 Scoping Plan’s by approximately 1.3 MTCO2e/capita (see Table 10-16). Based on the
current regulations and policies contained in the proposed General Plan Update, it is unclear
whether the City of Burlingame will be able to achieve the State’s long-term goal of reducing
GHG emissions to 60 percent below 1990 levels by 2040 and 80 percent below 1990 levels by
2050. The City would continue to prepare the CAP update that is currently in progress. The CAP
would quantify additional policies contained in the proposed General Plan, and potentially
include additional measures to further reduce GHG emissions. A number of these measures,
and a brief description of how they would reduce impacts is presented in Table 10-18 at the end
of this chapter.
The proposed General Plan Update contains a goal and policy that require the development and
maintenance of a CAP. Goal HP-2 states it is the intention of the City to achieve greenhouse
gas emissions reductions consistent with State goals, and Policy CC-1.1 states the City would
maintain up-to-date Climate Action Plan policies and continue to provide annual sustainability
reports. Under these guiding standards, the City has set a goal to update its existing CAP and
identifies measures that can feasibly (in terms of cost and implementation) reduce GHG
emissions to levels consistent with state reduction goals. Although the policies contained within
the General Plan Update could reduce emissions of GHG, not all may be feasible in terms of
their cost and implementation. The City’s updated CAP would evaluate the feasibility and
implementation of General Plan policies in greater detail and identify the potential emissions
reductions available from these and, if necessary, additional GHG reduction policies. A few of
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-33
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
these policies have already been identified and would be implemented by the City through
Mitigation Measure 10-1, as presented below.
Mitigation Measure 10-1. To help reduce GHG emissions generated by community-
wide activities, the City shall implement the following, additional policies as part of the
General Plan Update:
M-3.10: Bicycle Sharing – Implement a bicycle sharing program in Burlingame to
provide an alternative to driving, enhance bicycle accessibility, and offer a last
mile option to transit.
M-4.7: Increase use of available shuttles in Burlingame by improving signage,
outreach, and coordination with co-sponsors.
IF-6.9: ECO100 – Increase ECO100 enrollment by residences and businesses.
ECO100 is the 100% renewable and carbon-free electricity rate from Peninsula
Clean Energy. Coordinate with community champions and PCE to expand
outreach on ECO100.
The reductions associated with implementation of Policy IF-6.9 has been quantified and
included in the reductions accounted for in Table 10-15. Both M-3.10 and M-4.7 would be
quantified in the CAP update.
As described above, the City cannot at this time conclusively demonstrate that implementation
of the Burlingame 2040 General Plan, including Policy CC-1.1, would not generate GHG
emissions that exceed the City’s existing Year 2020 and future Year 2030 and Year 2040 GHG
reduction goals. In addition, although Year 2050 emissions have not been numerically quantified
in this EIR, it is likely that the implementation of the General Plan would also contribute to GHG
emissions levels that exceed Year 2050 GHG reduction goals. Accordingly, this impact is
considered significant and unavoidable.
Mitigation. No additional, feasible mitigation has been identified at this time.
Impact 10-2: Plan Consistency. Adoption and implementation of the proposed General Plan
Update would conflict with the 2017 Scoping Plan, Plan Bay Area 2040, and the 2017 Clean Air
Plan. This would be a significant and unavoidable impact (see criterion [b] under Section
10.3.1, “Significance Criteria,” above).
Consistency with 2017 Scoping Plan
As discussed under Section 10.2.3.3, the 2017 Scoping Plan Update is CARB’s second
revision, and primary document used to ensure state GHG reduction goals are met. The 2017
Scoping Plan Update’s primary objective is to identify the measures needed to achieve the 2030
reduction target established under Executive Order B-30-15 and SB 32. The major elements of
the Scoping Plan are generally geared toward actions either CARB or other state entities will
pursue, such as, but not limited to:
Implementing the LCFS, with an increased stringency (18 percent by 2030);
Implementation of SB 350, which expands the RPS to 50 percent and doubles energy
efficiency savings; and
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-34
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Implementing the proposed Short-Lived Climate Pollutant Strategy, which focuses on
reducing CH4 and hydrocarbon emissions by 40 percent and anthropogenic black carbon
emissions by 50 percent by the year 2030.
Although most of these measures would be implemented at the state level, some of the
reductions would be realized at the local level. For example, regardless of actions taken by the
City, emissions generated through gasoline combustion in motor vehicles within Burlingame
would still produce less GHG in 2030 than they do now. Nonetheless, as shown in Table 10-16,
the City would not meet the recommended plan-level efficiency threshold of 4 MTCO2e per
capita per year interpolated threshold for 2040, as well as the 2 MTCO2e per capita per year
threshold for Year 2050. Since the proposed General Plan Update is inconsistent with state
GHG reduction goals, it also does not support the overarching goals of the 2017 Scoping Plan.
As such, the General Plan Update is considered to conflict with or obstruct implementation of
the 2017 Scoping Plan, since it does not achieve the reductions necessary to align community-
wide emissions with state GHG reduction goals.
Consistency with Plan Bay Area 2040
As described in Section Error! Reference source not found., Plan Bay Area 2040 is a long-
range planning document developed by ABAG and MTC to reduce GHG emissions from land
use and transportation. Plan Bay Area identifies PDAs as transit-oriented, infill development
opportunity areas within existing communities. Plan Bay Area 2040 identifies the Burlingame El
Camino Real PDA as one of the nearly 200 PDAs within the Bay Area. The City of Burlingame
has adopted two Specific Plans that fall within the PDA – the Downtown Specific Plan in the
southern portion of the City, and the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan in the
northern portion of the City.
The Downtown Specific Plan was adopted in May 2010 and established 12 sub-planning areas
within the planning area. Although nine of the 12 areas were considered “base areas” in the fact
there weren’t any alterations to design standards, the remaining three – known as “focus areas”
– include the Howard Avenue Mixed District, the California Drive District, and the R-4 Incentive
District. Overall, adoption of the Specific Plan resulted in a net capacity increase of 183,843
square feet of commercial space, 248,702 square feet of office space, and 875 to 1,232
residential units. The Downtown Specific Plan encourages land use diversity, mixing of uses,
and the development of institutions and services to serve Burlingame residents, all in close
proximity to Caltrain, SamTrans routes, and the local Burlingame Trolley. In addition, the
Downtown Specific Plan included a number of goals to improve the safety and circulation for
pedestrians and bicyclists.
The North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan was adopted in 2004 and was amended in
2007. Unlike the Downtown Specific Plan, the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan area
is comprised of two primary areas – the Rollins Road Area and El Camino Real North Area –
both of which are divided into four pieces for a total of eight subareas. The Rollins Road Area is
generally comprised of industrial land uses (with the exception of the Southern Gateway), and
provides opportunities for airport-related industries, food preparation, fabrication, automobile
sales and services, and other similar light industry uses. The El Camino Real North Area is
substantially smaller in size than the Rollins Road Area, but serves as a residential, retail, office,
and medical node within the City. Many of the subareas allow for mixed-use development to
occur. The Millbrae Intermodal Terminal is located north of the Rollins Road area, and is an at-
grade BART and Caltrain station that also features numerous bus lines and access to City-
operated shuttles.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-35
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-36
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Although both of these Specific Plans, in conjunction with the policies contained in the proposed
General Plan Update, support the vision of Plan Bay Area 2040 by locating transit oriented
development within close proximity to mass transit nodes, it cannot be assured their
implementation would reduce per capita passenger vehicle and light duty truck CO2 emissions
by seven percent by 2020 and 15 percent by 2035, as compared to the 2005 baseline.
36 Per the language in SB 375, these reductions are required to be demonstrated without taking
into account Pavely, LCFS, or other Scoping Plan provisions adopted since 2007 that are
expected to further reduce CO2 emissions and result in a decrease in total CO2 emissions over
time. As such, the proposed General Plan Update is found to be inconsistent with the specific
goal of Plan Bay Area 2040 that is to reduce per capita CO2 emissions from passenger vehicles
and light duty trucks by 15 percent by 2035.
Consistency with 2017 Clean Air Plan
As described under Section 10.2.3.5, the 2017 Clean Air Plan is the BAAQMD document that
lays the groundwork for a long-term effort to reduce Bay Area GHG emissions 40 percent below
1990 levels by 2030 and 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050, consistent with GHG reduction
targets adopted by the State of California. The 2017 Clean Air Plan analyzes GHG emissions
from construction, mobile, and stationary source activities in its emissions inventories and sets
forth 85 control strategies designed to reduce criteria air pollutant and GHG emissions. The 85
controls measures are grouped into nine categories: Stationary Source Measures,
Transportation Control Measures, Energy Control Measures, Buildings Control Measures,
Agriculture Control Measures, Natural and Working Lands Control Measures, Waste
Management Control Measures, Water Control Measures, and Super GHG Control Measures.
Table 10-17 presents the potentially applicable GHG control strategies and the proposed
General Plan Update’s consistency with those measures.
Table 10-17: General Plan Consistency with BAAQMD 2017 Clean Air Plan
2017 Clean Air Plan
Control Measures Project Consistency
Stationary Source Measures
SS15 – Natural Gas
Processing, Storage, and
Distribution
Although Burlingame does not directly own or operate natural gas
pipelines, storage or processing operations within the city, the City
would support improvements to natural gas infrastructure that may
be required by CPUC and implemented by PG&E. These
improvements would benefit the City by reducing fugitive natural gas
(i.e., methane) leaks that may originate from with the City's
jurisdictional boundaries.
SS17 – GHG BACT Threshold
The BAAQMD currently requires "major" facilities that emit 75,000
MTCO2e per year or more to implement the "Best Available Control
Technology” to control their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The
BAAQMD is currently considering lowering that 75,000 MTCO2e
threshold and applying its requirements to all regulated facilities, not
just "major" facilities. The City and any stationary sources subject to
the new requirements would comply with this measure.
36 For 2035, a 15 percent reduction from 2005 levels is the same as a 8.6 percent reduction from 2020 levels.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-37
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 10-17: General Plan Consistency with BAAQMD 2017 Clean Air Plan
2017 Clean Air Plan
Control Measures Project Consistency
SS32 – Emergency Backup
Generators
Emergency Backup Generators, or BUGs, are typically powered by
diesel fired engines that emit diesel particulate more, which is a
black carbon that contributes to climate change. BUGs are typically
installed with larger developments or critical infrastructure, tested on
a monthly basis to ensure functionality, and become active in the
event of a power outage. The BAAQMD acknowledges there are a
substantial number of BGs that do not meet current emission
standards and yet remain in operation. The BAAQMD is exploring
options to address emissions from BUGs. The City and its
constituents would comply with any and all applicable measures
and/or regulations that may be developed by the BAAQMD.
Transportation Measures
TR1 – Clean Air Teleworking
The primary objective of this control measure is to increase the
number of employees who telework in the Bay Area, especially on
Spare the Air days. The proposed General Plan Update includes
numerous policies, such as CC-1.5 (Transportation Demand
Management), and M-5.1 (TDM Guidelines and Programs) that
would support alternative works schedules and commutes, including
the potential for employees to telework.
TR2 – Trip Reduction Programs
The trip reduction measure includes a mandatory and voluntary trip
reduction program that resulted from SB 1339. In addition to
requiring all major development projects include a TDM program
(Policy CC-1.5), the City also intends on establishing specific TDM
guidelines and requirements within the zoning ordinance that would
reduce vehicle trips by promoting alternative modes of transportation
(Policy M-5.1). Furthermore, the City supports mixed-use, transit-
oriented development near transit stations and stops (Policy CC-
1.2).
TR7 – Safe Routes to Schools
and Transit
The City of Burlingame has, and will continue to support measures
that facilitates safe routes to school and transit. The proposed
General Plan Update includes policies such as CC-1.3 (Walkable
Streets and Neighborhoods), M-1.1 (Complete Streets), M-1.2
(Connectivity to Destinations), and M-3.2 (Safe and Functional
Network) that would support BAAQMD Control Measure TR7.
TR8 – Ridesharing and Last-
Mile Connections
The City of Burlingame currently operates two shuttle services in the
northern portion of the city that transport residents and employees
alike from the Millbrae Intermodal Station to various destinations
within the city. Policy M-4.7 (Shuttles) would also increase the
number of available shuttles in Burlingame. In addition to these
shuttles, the City would also implement the proposed Policies CC-
1.5 (Transportation Demand Management), and M-5.1 (TDM
Guidelines and Programs) that would include measures such as
ridesharing and addressing last-mile connections.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-38
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 10-17: General Plan Consistency with BAAQMD 2017 Clean Air Plan
2017 Clean Air Plan
Control Measures Project Consistency
TR9 – Bicycle and Pedestrian
Access and Facilities
The proposed General Plan Update includes numerous policies that
support bicycle and pedestrian access and facilities, including, but
not limited to, Policy M-1.1 (Complete Streets), M-1.4 (Focus on
Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety), M-3.1 (Uninterrupted Bicycle
Network), M-3.2 (Safe and Functional Network), and M-3.7 (Bicycle
Facility Maintenance).
TR10 – Land Use Strategies
Control measure TR10 supports land use patterns that reduce
vehicle miles traveled, especially within infill locations. The proposed
General Plan Update shares this support and would implement these
land use pattern through its proposed land use designations, and
through Policy CC-1.2 (Mixed Use, Transit Oriented Infill
Development), and Policy M-6.1 (Transit Supportive Land Use).
TR13 – Parking Policies
The proposed General Plan Update encourages reducing single-
occupancy vehicle trips (and thereby necessitating parking
allocations) by promoting transit oriented, infill development in transit
oriented areas (Policies CC-1.2 and M-6.1) and by reducing parking
through the implementation of Policies M-7.1 (Parking Pricing), M-
7.3 (Parking Requirements), M-7.5 (Create Parking Approaches),
and M-7.6 (Parking Demand Reductions).
TR14 – Cars & Light Trucks
Control measure TR14 encourages city and county governments
expand the use of ZEVs and partial emissions vehicles (PEVs)
comprising both batter electric and plug-in hybrid passenger vehicles
and light-duty trucks within the Bay Area. The proposed General
Plan Update includes Policy M-8.1 (Electric Vehicles Infrastructure)
that would seek to integrate emerging electric vehicle changing
states into public parking infrastructure to encourage and expand the
use of ZEV and PEV plug-in vehicles.
TR15 – Public Outreach
In addition to encouraging transit-oriented development, reducing
unnecessary parking supply, and facilitating the expansion of electric
vehicle infrastructure, the proposed General Plan Update also
includes Policy M-5.2 (Targeted Outreach) that would identify and
educate specific neighborhoods within the City that are suitable for
increased transit ridership given their proximity to bus stops or train
stations.
Energy Measures
EN1 – Decarbonize Electricity
Generation
Starting in October 2016, Peninsula Clean Energy (PCE), San Mateo
County’s new electricity provider, was rolled out to all residents and
businesses within San Mateo County. PCE was launched
collaboratively by the County of San Mateo and all twenty of its cities
to meet local climate action goals. PCE offers a choice of two
electricity options, each with a different percentage of sustainable
energy. ECOplus is the default, with 50% of the electricity provided
to its customers being sourced renewably, and ECO100, where
100% of the electricity is sourced from renewable sources. As of
mid-2017, the City of Burlingame opted to enroll all its municipal
accounts in ECO100. As of November 2017, approximately two
percent of all Burlingame residents were enrolled in the ECO100
option as well. Policy IC-6.9 (ECO100) contained in the proposed
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-39
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 10-17: General Plan Consistency with BAAQMD 2017 Clean Air Plan
2017 Clean Air Plan
Control Measures Project Consistency
General Plan Update directs the City to coordinate with community
members and PCE to expand outreach on ECO100, thereby
promoting the transition away from non-renewable energy sources.
The proposed General Plan Update also includes Policies CC-1.7
(Solar Energy) and HP-2.7 (Residential Solar Power) that would
encourage developments within the city to install PV systems.
EN2 – Decrease Energy Use
The proposed General Plan Update would facilitate decreasing
energy use through the implementation of Policies CC-1.9 (Green
Building Practice and Standards), HP-2.8 (Energy Efficiency), HP-
2.9 (Municipal Energy Efficiency) and HP-2.11 (Innovative
Technologies).
Building Control Measures
BL1 – Green Buildings
The proposed General Plan Update supports increasing energy
efficiency for all types of development through a number of policies.
Some of these policies include: CC-1.7 (Solar energy), CC-1.9
(Green Building Practice and Standards), HP-2.7 (Residential Solar
Power), HP-2.8 (Energy Efficiency), and HP-2.9 (Municipal Energy
Efficiency).
BL4 – Urban Heat Island
Mitigation
The proposed General Plan Update would combat the urban heat
island phenomenon by encouraging the installation of cool rooving
and cool paving technologies in new buildings and retrofits (Policies
CC-1.9 and HP-2.8, respectively). In addition, Policy CC-2.2
(Increase the Public Street Tree Population) promotes the overall
population of street trees, which would also help abate urban heat
island effects.
Natural and Working Lands Control Measures
NW2 – Urban Tree Planting
Having a vast network of trees planted throughout the City helps
sequester CO2, and also provides valuable shade that helps offset
the urban heat island effect. Expanding the urban forest is
addressed in the proposed General Plan Update through Policy CC-
2.2 (Increase the Public Street Tree Population).
Waste Management Measures
WA1 – Landfills
Control measure WA1 would reduce emission of methane and non-
methane organic compounds from landfills by increasing standards
for landfill gas collection control devices and fugitive leaks. There is
one, closed landfill within the City of Burlingame that burns off
emissions of methane via a landfill gas collection system. Although
the emissions are nominal in the scope of all open and closed
landfills within the Bay Area, the City would comply with any
additional restrictions required of the BAAQMD.
WA4 – Recycling and Waste
Reduction
Policies HP-2.13 (Composting) and HP-2.14 (Zero Waste) within the
proposed General Plan Update focus on expanding composting and
recycling services in residential and commercial developments, and
supports goals to implement zero waste strategies for the City and
community.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-40
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 10-17: General Plan Consistency with BAAQMD 2017 Clean Air Plan
2017 Clean Air Plan
Control Measures Project Consistency
Water Resource Measures
WR2 – Support Water
Conservation
The proposed General Plan Update would protect local and regional
water resources through conservation, recycling, and sustainable
management practices. For example, the proposed update contains
Policies CC-1.6 (Water Conservation), HP-6.2 (Water Conservation),
HP-6.4 (Water Recycling), and HP-6.8 (Water-Efficient
Landscaping).
Short Lived Climate Pollutant Strategies
SL2: Guidance for Local
Planners
The BAAQMD is currently in the process of developing guidance to
help local agencies to address SLCP, or super-GHGs, in their
climate action plans and programs. Although there are no formal
policies listed within the proposed General Plan Update in regard to
SLCPs, the City is committed to addressing climate change and
would adhere to guidance the BAAQMD releases.
As shown in Table 10-17, the proposed General Plan Update is consistent with the applicable
measures identified in the 2017 Clean Air Plan.
Although the proposed General Plan Update is consistent with all applicable measures
contained within the 2017 Clean Air Plan, it is still inconsistent with one of the ultimate goals of
the plan, which is to reduce Bay Area GHG emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030
and 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. As discussed above under Impact 10-1, the General
Plan would exceed the efficiency metrics to align community-wide emissions in Burlingame with
state reduction goals.
Plan Consistency Conclusion
As discussed above, the proposed General Plan Update would be inconsistent with the 2017
Scoping Plan Update, and the 2017 Clean Air Plan, because community-wide emissions are not
in line with state GHG reduction goals. The General Plan Update is also inconsistent with Plan
Bay Area 2040, because although there are many features that support a sustainable, transit-
oriented Burlingame, the City cannot demonstrate the currently adopted Specific Plans within
the Burlingame El Camino Real PDA in conjunction with the policies contained in the proposed
update would reduce per capita CO2 emissions from passenger vehicles and light duty trucks by
15 percent, by 2035. Accordingly, the proposed General Plan Update would conflict with or
obstruct implementation of a plan, policy, or regulation adopted with the intent GHG emissions.
Although implementation of general plan policies would be required by the City, until the
additional policies are quantified, it cannot be assured the City would be able to reduce the
significance of this impact. Thus, this impact is considered significant and unavoidable.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-41
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 10-18 Description
Column 1 (Objective) lists each General Plan goal, policy, and implementation program (“policy”
for short), organized by General Plan element, that addresses the potential impact identified in
Table 10-1. Column 2 is a summary of the regulation or text of the policy. Column 3 answers the
question, “How does the regulation/policy avoid or reduce the potential impact?” Column 4
identifies the applicable significance criteria that is addressed by the regulation/policy.
The verbs in Column 3 are intended to be applied consistently. The verb “ensures” means that
the policy is sufficient to guarantee the result identified in the policy. The verb “helps” means
that the policy contributes to avoiding or reducing the identified potential impact; in many cases,
“helps” is used for a policy that can be applied to avoid or reduce a wide range of potential
impacts. The verb “implements” is used for General Plan implementation programs to indicate
that the program provides the details to put the associated policy into action.
Table 10-18: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies to Avoid or
Reduce Impacts on Global Climate Change and Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance Criteria
Existing Regulations
SB 350: Renewables
Portfolio Standard
On November 17, 2008,
Governor Schwarzenegger
signed Executive Order S-
14-08 requiring “[a]ll retail
sellers of electricity shall
serve 33 percent of their
load with renewable
energy by 2020.” In
October 2015, Governor
Brown signed Senate Bill
350 to codify ambitious
climate and clean energy
goals. One key provision
of SB 350 is for retail
sellers and publicly owned
utilities to procure “half of
the state’s electricity from
renewable sources by
2030.”
Ensures utility providers
will meet minimum
requirements for
providing clean,
renewable sources to
electricity consumers by
2020 and 2030.
Reducing the amount of
electricity generated by
non-renewable sources
reduces the carbon
intensity of the electricity
produced and consumed.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Low Carbon Fuel
Standard, Advanced
Clean Cars Program
CARB initially approved
the LCFS regulation in
2009, identifying it as one
of the nine discrete early
action measures in the
2008 Scoping Plan to
reduce California’s GHG
emissions. For a new
LCFS target, the preferred
scenario in the 2017
Scoping Plan Update
identifies an 18 percent
reduction in average
transportation fuel carbon
Ensures GHG emission
reductions are achieved
for both the carbon
intensity of fuel, as well
as mandates for cleaner
car production. Reduces
emissions of GHG
associated with fuel
combustion in vehicles.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-42
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
intensity, compared to a
2010 baseline, by 2030 as
one of the primary
measures for achieving the
state’s GHG 2030 target.
In January 2012, CARB
approved the Advanced
Clean Cars (ACC)
Program (formerly known
as Pavley II) for model
years 2017 through 2025.
The components of the
ACC program are the Low-
Emission Vehicle (LEV)
regulations and the Zero-
Emission Vehicle (ZEV)
regulation.
California Title 24
Building Standards
California’s Building
Energy Efficiency
Standards are updated on
an approximately three-
year cycle. The 2016
standards, adopted
January 1, 2017, improve
upon existing standards in
the fact that they are 28
percent more efficient for
residential construction
and five percent more
efficient for non-residential
construction, when
compared to the previous
2013 standards (CEC,
2015).
Ensures new
development becomes
more efficient over time,
thereby reducing the
amount of energy
needed to support the
structure. Reduced
energy costs result in
reduced GHG emissions.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Healthy People and Healthy Places Element
Goal HP-2 Achieve greenhouse gas
emissions reductions
consistent with State goals.
States the overall goal of
the City to improve health
and sustainability of the
community, including
through reduction of GHG
emissions and reducing
air pollution.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy HP-2.1
Municipal Greenhouse
Gas Inventory
Continue to partner with
San Mateo County’s
Regionally Integrated
Climate Action Planning
Suite (RICAPS) to prepare
annual Municipal
Greenhouse Gas
inventories.
Provides the City with
annual updates on local
government operation
GHG emission progress
made toward statewide
goals.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy HP-2.2 Continue the partnership Provides the City with (a) General GHG
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-43
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Community
Greenhouse Gas
Inventory
with the San Mateo County
RICAPS to prepare annual
community-wide
greenhouse gas inventories.
annual updates on
community-wide GHG
emission progress made
toward statewide goals.
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy HP-2.3
Greenhouse Gas
Reduction Targets
Work to achieve
greenhouse gas emissions
reductions locally that are
consistent with the targets
established by AB 32
(California Global Warming
Solutions Act of 2006) and
subsequent supporting
legislation.
Establishes the City’s
goals to achieve GHG
emissions in line with
statewide reduction
targets.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy HP-2.4 Electric
Vehicles
Prepare an Electric Vehicle
Strategic Plan to support
and expand Burlingame’s
electric vehicle network.
Establish parking standards
that prioritize electric vehicle
spaces. Require new
residential developments to
install or be pre-wired for
electric vehicle charging
stations.
Encourages people in the
Bay Area to purchase and
use electric vehicles by
providing them with
supporting infrastructure.
Helps reduce GHG
emission from fuel
combustion in vehicles.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy HP-2.5
Municipal Electric
Vehicles
Purchase electric vehicles
as replacements for
gasoline-powered vehicles
in the City’s fleet. Install
electric vehicle charging
stations to incentivize City
employees to use electric
vehicles.
Encourages City
employees to purchase
and use electric vehicles
by providing them with
supporting infrastructure.
Helps reduce GHG
emission from fuel
combustion in vehicles.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy HP-2.6
Renewable Energy
Pursue the goal of using
100% renewable energy for
the City’s municipal
accounts. Encourage
residents and businesses to
opt up to 100% renewable
purchase for additional
community-wide
greenhouse gas reductions.
Encourage and support
opportunities for developing
local solar power projects.
Encourages electricity be
sourced from renewable
source other than the grid.
The grid’s electricity may
be produced by non-
renewable sources.
Reduces GHG emissions
associated with those
non-renewable sources.
This measure supports
new policy IF-6.9.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy HP-2.7
Residential Solar
Power
Encourage homeowners to
install solar power systems.
Provide information to
homeowners on the
benefits of solar power and
funding opportunities.
Promote Property Assessed
Clean Energy (PACE)
programs that finance
Encourages electricity be
sourced from renewable
source other than the grid.
The grid’s electricity may
be produced by non-
renewable sources.
Reduces GHG emissions
associated with those
non-renewable sources.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-44
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
systems. Offer incentives
for home solar power
systems.
Policy HP-2.8 Energy
Efficiency
Support energy efficiency
improvements in the aging
building stock citywide.
Encourage energy
efficiency audits and
upgrades at the time of sale
for existing homes and
buildings. Host energy
efficiency workshops, and
distribute information to
property owners, tenants,
and residences.
Establishes the City’s
intent to promote energy
efficiency, which would
lead to reduced GHG
emissions.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy HP-2.9
Municipal Energy
Efficiency
Continue to enhance
energy efficiency in City
facilities. Conduct periodic
energy audits to assess
energy efficiency progress
and needed improvements.
Establishes the City’s
commitment to promote
the use of specific energy
benchmarking programs
for nonresidential
buildings, which could
lead to additional energy
efficiency upgrades in
existing buildings and
result in the reduction of
GHG emissions.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy HP-2.10
Municipal Green
Building
Aim for new construction
and major renovations of
City facilities to be zero net
energy.
Establishes commitment
to reducing energy
consumption and GHG
emissions that may be
generated through energy
production/use.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy HP-2.13
Composting
Expand composting
services to multi-family
residential buildings and
commercial buildings.
Establishes goals to
reduce the amount of
methane generated by
organic matter
decomposition in landfills.
Reduced GHG emitted
into atmosphere.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy HP-2.14 Zero
Waste
Encourage the South
Bayside Waste
Management Authority
(SBWMA) to explore and
consider rate plans that
support zero waste goals.
Identify opportunities to
support and implement zero
waste goals and strategies
for the City and community.
Establishes goals to reach
zero waste. Zero waste
would result in less GHG
emissions from landfills.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy HP-2.15
Alternative Fuel
Purchase electric or hybrid
models of lawn and garden
and construction equipment
for City maintenance
operations, as feasible.
Establishes goal to reduce
GHG emissions
generated by law, garden,
and construction
equipment used for City
maintenance operations.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-45
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Goal HP-3 Minimize exposure of
residents and employees of
local businesses to harmful
air pollutants.
Establishes goals to
reduce air pollutant
emissions. Reductions in
air pollutant emissions
generally have a co-
benefit of reducing GHG
emissions
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy HP-3.4 Air
Pollution Reduction
Support regional efforts to
improve air quality, reduce
auto use, expand
infrastructure for alternative
transportation, and reduce
traffic congestion. Focus
efforts to reduce truck idling
to two minutes or fewer in
industrial and warehouse
districts along Rollins Road
and the Inner Bayshore.
Establishes goals to
support efforts that would
reduce GHG emissions
from the mobile sector.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy HP-3.5
Woodstove and
Fireplace Replacement
Encourage residents to
replace wood-burning
fireplaces and stoves with
cleaner electric heat pumps,
natural gas, or propane
stoves. Educate the public
about financial assistance
options through the Bay
Area Air Quality
Management District’s
fireplace and wood stove
replacement incentive
program.
Establishes goals to
reduce wood burning.
Would reduce emissions
of CO2 and black carbon.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Goal HP-6 Protect local and regional
water resources through
conservation, preservation,
and sustainable
management practices.
Establishes goals to
preserve water and use it
in sustainable ways.
Reduces energy needed
to transport and treat
water, which in turn
reduces GHG emissions.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy HP-6.2 Water
Conservation
Promote best practices for
water conservation
throughout the City, and
continue to enforce City
ordinances requiring high-
efficiency indoor water
fixtures in new
development. Educate the
public about Burlingame’s
water rebate programs, and
continue to establish tiered
water rates that promote
water conservation.
Consider water
consumption when
evaluating development
projects. Encourage
drought-tolerant
Establishes goals to
preserve water and use it
in sustainable ways.
Reduces energy needed
to transport water, which
in turn reduces GHG
emissions.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-46
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
landscaping and efficient
irrigation systems.
Policy HP-6.4 Water
Recycling
Promote recycled water use
to the extent such resources
are available. Work to allow
graywater and rainwater
catchment systems in
residential, commercial, and
industrial buildings.
Establish a recycled water
plan and implement a
recycled water program
associated with the
Wastewater Treatment
Facility, when financially
feasible.
Establishes goals to
preserve water and use it
in sustainable ways.
Reduces energy needed
to transport water, which
in turn reduces GHG
emissions.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy HP-6.8 Water-
Efficient Landscaping
Continue to enforce
Burlingame’s Water-
Efficient Landscaping
Ordinance, and promote the
use of native, drought-
tolerant landscaping.
Educate the public about
the Bay-Friendly
Landscaping Guidelines
and other resources for
water-efficient landscaping.
Establishes goals to
preserve water and use it
in sustainable ways.
Reduces energy needed
to transport water, which
in turn reduces GHG
emissions.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Community Character Element
Goal CC-1 Incorporate sustainable
practices in all development
decisions.
Establishes the City’s goal
for sustainable growth
patterns to address traffic
congestion and reduce
resource consumption
and greenhouse gas
emissions.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy CC-1.1 Climate
Action Plan
Maintain up-to-date Climate
Action Plan policies and
continue to provide annual
sustainability reports.
Establishes the City’s
commitment to address
global climate change.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy CC-1.2 Transit-
Oriented Development
Promote higher-density infill
development with a mix of
uses on underutilized
parcels, particularly near
transit stations and stops.
Establishes the City’s
commitment to high-
density, transit-oriented
development in specific
Priority Development
Areas. Improving transit
ridership and reducing
automobile use would
reduce operational mobile
source GHG emissions.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy CC-1.3
Walkable Streets and
Neighborhoods
Promote walkable
neighborhoods and
encourage pedestrian
activity by designing safe,
welcoming streets and
sidewalks that incorporate
signalized crosswalks,
Encourages modes of
transit other than those
that produce GHG
emissions when used
(e.g., gasoline or diesel
combustion).
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-47
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
attractive lighting and
landscaping, curb
extensions, and traffic-
calming measures at
appropriate locations.
Policy CC-1.4 Parking
Requirements
Study options for reduced
residential parking
requirements in areas that
are well served by public
transportation, such as the
North Burlingame and North
Rollins Road areas.
Implement preferred
options.
Encourages modes of
transit other than those
that produce GHG
emissions when used
(e.g., gasoline or diesel
combustion).
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy CC-1.5
Transportation
Demand Management
Require that all major
development projects
include a Transportation
Demand Management
program to reduce single-
occupancy car trips.
Establishes the City’s
commitment to reducing
VMT, and by association
GHG emissions
generated by vehicles on
the roadway.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy CC-1.6 Promote water conservation
by encouraging and
incentivizing property
owners to incorporate
drought-tolerant
landscaping, “smart”
irrigation systems, water
efficient appliances, and
recycled water systems.
Continue to enforce the
water-efficiency landscaping
ordinance. Encourage
recycling and reuse of
graywater in new buildings.
Establishes goals to
preserve water and use it
in sustainable ways.
Reduces energy needed
to transport water, which
in turn reduces GHG
emissions.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy CC-1.7 Solar
Energy
Incentivize solar panel
installation on existing
buildings and new
developments.
Encourages electricity be
sourced from renewable
source other than the grid.
The grid’s electricity may
be produced by non-
renewable sources.
Reduces GHG emissions
associated with those
non-renewable sources.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy CC-1.9 Green
Building Practice and
Standards
Support the use of
sustainable building
elements such as green
roofs, cisterns, and
permeable pavement.
Continue to enforce the
California Green Building
Standards Code
(CALGreen). Adopt zero-
net-energy building goals
for municipal buildings.
Establishes goal for new
construction and major
renovations of City
facilities to be zero net
energy.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-48
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Policy CC-1.12 Continue to educate
Burlingame community
members about sustainable
development strategies,
programs, and opportunities
Encourages community
members to reduce
energy, or activities that
would consume energy
that would result in GHG
emissions.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy CC-1.13 Electric
Vehicle Network
Support the electric vehicle
network by incentivizing use
of electric vehicles and
installations of charging
stations.
Encourages people in the
Bay Area to purchase and
use electric vehicles by
providing them with
supporting infrastructure.
Helps reduce GHG
emission from fuel
combustion in vehicles.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Goal CC-2 Ensure that public and
private trees are beautiful,
healthy, and safe, and that
they remain an integral
feature of the community.
Establishes goals to
increase the urban forest
in Burlingame. Trees
provide shade that reduce
the heat island effect.
Additionally, trees also
sequester CO2.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy CC-2.2 Increase
the Public Street Tree
Population
Identify ways to increase
the overall population of
street trees in Burlingame to
stem the natural decline of
the urban forest and create
a more equitable distribution
of tree canopy.
Establishes goals to
increase the urban forest
in Burlingame. Trees
provide shade that reduce
the heat island effect.
Additionally, trees also
sequester CO2.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy CC-2.3 Street
Tree Maintenance
Program
Maintain a citywide street
tree maintenance program
tied to a long-term funding
mechanism to ensure
adequate maintenance of all
public street trees.
Establishes goals to
increase the urban forest
in Burlingame. Trees
provide shade that reduce
the heat island effect.
Additionally, trees also
sequester CO2.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Mobility Element
Goal M-1 Achieve and maintain a
citywide circulation network
that provides safe, efficient,
and convenient mobility for
all users and modes of
transportation.
Establishes the City’s
commitment to making a
city-wide circulation
network for modes of
transportation other than
those that generate GHG
(e.g., pedestrian and
bicycle).
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy M-1.1 Complete
Streets
Define and develop a well-
connected network of
Complete Streets that can
move all modes safely,
efficiently, and comfortably
to promote efficient
circulation while also
improving public health and
safety.
Establishes the City’s
commitment to encourage
mixed-use development,
which would contribute to
reduction of automobile
usage and vehicle miles
traveled and lead to
reduced operational
emissions.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-49
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Policy M-1.2
Connectivity to
Destinations
Connect commercial
districts, centers of
employment, civic uses,
parks, schools, and other
destinations with high-
quality options for all travel
modes. Ensure the system
accommodates the needs
of all users, including youth,
the elderly, and people with
disabilities.
Establishes the City’s
goals to maintain a well-
connected, safe, non-
vehicular infrastructure
throughout Burlingame.
Well-connected and safe
routes promote travel for
modes other than
vehicles. Reduces GHG
emissions from the mobile
sector.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy M-1.4 Focus on
Pedestrian and Bicycle
Safety
Ensure that pedestrian and
bicyclist safety at
intersections and on
roadways is given priority
over motor vehicles.
Establishes the City’s
goals to maintain a well-
connected, safe, non-
vehicular infrastructure
throughout Burlingame.
Well-connected and safe
routes promote travel for
modes other than
vehicles. Reduces GHG
emissions from the mobile
sector.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Goal M-2 Ensure Burlingame’s streets
are comfortable, safe, and
attractive for people of all
ages and abilities to walk.
Establishes the City’s
goals to maintain a well-
connected, safe, non-
vehicular infrastructure
throughout Burlingame.
Well-connected and safe
routes promote travel for
modes other than
vehicles. Reduces GHG
emissions from the mobile
sector.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy M-2.1
Pedestrian Amenities
and Access
Expand pedestrian access
by eliminating gaps in
sidewalk and path networks,
improving safety, and
requiring safe and
comfortable pedestrian
facilities.
Establishes the City’s
goals to maintain a well-
connected, safe, non-
vehicular infrastructure
throughout Burlingame.
Well-connected and safe
routes promote travel for
modes other than
vehicles. Reduces GHG
emissions from the mobile
sector.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy M-2.2 Walkable
Infrastructure and
Access to Destinations
Ensure that schools,
commercial districts,
employment destinations,
parks, civic facilities, and
transit stops have safe and
convenient pedestrian
access, including
connections across
Highway 101 and trails
through parks and regional
networks. Explore improving
access across Highway 101
Establishes the City’s
goals to maintain a well-
connected, safe, non-
vehicular infrastructure
throughout Burlingame.
Well-connected and safe
routes promote travel for
modes other than
vehicles. Reduces GHG
emissions from the mobile
sector.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-50
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
exclusively for pedestrians
and cyclists.
Policy M-2.3
Pedestrian Priority
Promote and prioritize
pedestrian improvements
and safety where conflicts
or problems exist between
pedestrians and other travel
modes.
Establishes the City’s
goals to maintain a well-
connected, safe, non-
vehicular infrastructure
throughout Burlingame.
Well-connected and safe
routes promote travel for
modes other than
vehicles. Reduces GHG
emissions from the mobile
sector.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy M-2.4
Circulation around
Downtown Library
Improve pedestrian
circulation around the
Downtown library to
minimize potential
automobile/pedestrian
conflicts.
Establishes the City’s
goals to maintain a well-
connected, safe, non-
vehicular infrastructure
throughout Burlingame.
Well-connected and safe
routes promote travel for
modes other than
vehicles. Reduces GHG
emissions from the mobile
sector.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy M-2.5
Assessment and
Maintenance
Ensure the ongoing
assessment and
maintenance of sidewalks,
pavement markings,
pedestrian crossing signals,
and lighting.
Establishes the City’s
goals to maintain a well-
connected, safe, non-
vehicular infrastructure
throughout Burlingame.
Well-connected and safe
routes promote travel for
modes other than
vehicles. Reduces GHG
emissions from the mobile
sector.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Goal M-3 Develop a network of high-
quality, convenient, safe,
and easy-to-use bicycle
facilities to increase the
number of people who use
bicycles for everyday
transportation.
Establishes the City’s
goals to maintain a well-
connected, safe, non-
vehicular infrastructure
throughout Burlingame.
Well-connected and safe
routes promote travel for
modes other than
vehicles. Reduces GHG
emissions from the mobile
sector.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy M-3.1
Uninterrupted Bicycle
Network
Develop a safe, convenient,
and integrated bicycle
network that connects
residential neighborhoods to
employment, education,
recreation, and commercial
destinations throughout
Establishes the City’s
goals to maintain a well-
connected, safe, non-
vehicular infrastructure
throughout Burlingame.
Well-connected and safe
routes promote travel for
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-51
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Burlingame. modes other than
vehicles. Reduces GHG
emissions from the mobile
sector.
Policy M-3.2 Safe and
Functional Network
Ensure that roadway
intersections, crossings, on-
street bicycle lanes (Class
II), separated bicycle paths
(Class I), and other bicycle
network facilities provide
safe and comfortable
connections to support
continuous bicycle routes.
Establishes the City’s
goals to maintain a well-
connected, safe, non-
vehicular infrastructure
throughout Burlingame.
Well-connected and safe
routes promote travel for
modes other than
vehicles. Reduces GHG
emissions from the mobile
sector.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy M-3.4 Bicycle-
Transit integration
Design and construct
bicycle and transit facilities
so they reduce conflicts
between cyclists and buses
along transit corridors, while
also ensuring these new
facilities improve access to
transit and support
intermodal trips (e.g.,
bicycle to bus connections).
Establishes the City’s
goals to maintain a well-
connected, safe, non-
vehicular infrastructure
throughout Burlingame.
Well-connected and safe
routes promote travel for
modes other than
vehicles. Reduces GHG
emissions from the mobile
sector.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy M-3.5 Bicycle
Wayfinding Signage
and Marked Routes
Encourage bicycling by
providing wayfinding
signage that directs
bicyclists to designated bike
routes and to civic places,
cultural amenities, and
visitor and recreational
destinations. Along bike
routes, provide clear and
unambiguous signage that
alerts drivers to the
presence of cyclists.
Establishes the City’s
goals to maintain a well-
connected, safe, non-
vehicular infrastructure
throughout Burlingame.
Well-connected and safe
routes promote travel for
modes other than
vehicles. Reduces GHG
emissions from the mobile
sector.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy M-3.6 Support
Facilities for Cyclists
Provide standards in the
Zoning Code that address
required bicycle parking,
including provisions for
secured facilities, as well as
other development features
and incentives that
encourage bicycle use (e.g.,
changing rooms at places of
business).
Establishes the City’s
goals to maintain a well-
connected, safe, non-
vehicular infrastructure
throughout Burlingame.
Well-connected and safe
routes promote travel for
modes other than
vehicles. Reduces GHG
emissions from the mobile
sector.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy M-3.7 Bicycle
Facility Maintenance
Ensure that the City
maintains an adequate
capital improvement budget
for ongoing assessment
and maintenance of bicycle
facilities, including
Establishes the City’s
goals to maintain a well-
connected, safe, non-
vehicular infrastructure
throughout Burlingame.
Well-connected and safe
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-52
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
pavement markings,
wayfinding signage, and
bicycle parking/storage.
routes promote travel for
modes other than
vehicles. Reduces GHG
emissions from the mobile
sector.
Goal M-4 Improve transit access,
frequency, connectivity, and
amenities to increase transit
ridership and convivence.
Establishes the City’s
goals to connect residents
and employees to
alternative modes of
transportation (i.e., not
taking single-occupancy
trips). Reduces GHG
emissions from the mobile
sector.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy M-4.2 Caltrain
Electrification
Support efforts to electrify
Caltrain to improve regional
transit services to
Burlingame, if these
improvements do not result
in unacceptable safety or
noise impacts on the
community.
Establishes goals to
reduce GHG emissions
from the mobile sector
related to single-
occupancy vehicles. As
the electricity gird
becomes supplied with
more electricity from
renewable sources, the
GHG intensity of its
operation decreases.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy M-4.4 Access to
Transit
Ensure roadways and
sidewalks near transit stops
are designed to protect
pedestrians and bicyclists
and are well connected to
provide seamless access
to/from transit.
Establishes the City’s
goals to maintain a well-
connected, safe, non-
vehicular infrastructure
throughout Burlingame.
Well-connected and safe
routes promote travel for
modes other than
vehicles. Reduces GHG
emissions from the mobile
sector.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy M-4.5 Transit
Priority
Establish a network of
transit-serving corridors to
accommodate local and
regional transit routes,
supporting high-frequency
service on regional transit
streets to make transit
service more time
competitive with personal
vehicle trips.
Establishes the City’s
goals to connect residents
and employees to
alternative modes of
transportation (i.e., not
taking single-occupancy
trips). Reduces GHG
emissions from the mobile
sector.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy M-4.6 Broadway
Station
Work with Caltrans to
identify opportunities to
expand train transit services
at the Broadway Station,
including adding more
frequent community and
weekend stops at this
station.
Establishes the City’s
goals to connect residents
and employees to
alternative modes of
transportation (i.e., not
taking single-occupancy
trips). Reduces GHG
emissions from the mobile
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-53
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
sector.
Goal M-5 Implement TDM strategies
that reduce overall vehicle
trips and encourage the use
of transportation modes that
reduce VMT and
greenhouse gas emissions.
Establishes the City’s
commitment to reducing
VMT, and by association
GHG emissions
generated by vehicles on
the roadway.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy M-5.1 TDM
Guidelines and
Programs
Establish specific TDM
guidelines and requirements
within the Zoning Ordinance
that encourage travel by a
variety of modes for both
individuals and employees,
focusing different strategies
in different parts of the
community as appropriate
to promote sustainability
and economic development.
Establishes the City’s
commitment to reducing
VMT, and by association
GHG emissions
generated by vehicles on
the roadway.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy M-5.2 Targeted
Outreach
Develop outreach materials
for specific neighborhoods
in the city that are suitable
for increased transit
ridership given their
proximity to bus stops or
train stations as a way to
reduce drive-alone
automobile trips
Establishes the City’s
commitment to reducing
VMT, and by association
GHG emissions
generated by vehicles on
the roadway.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Goal M-6 Create an integrated
transportation program that
reduces peak-period vehicle
trips and vehicle miles
traveled.
Establishes the City’s
commitment to reducing
VMT, and by association
GHG emissions
generated by vehicles on
the roadway.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy M-6.1 Transit
Supportive Land Use
Plan for and accommodate
land uses that facilitate
development of compact,
mixed use development
with the density, diversity of
use, and local accessibility
supportive of transit use.
Establishes the City’s
commitment to high-
density, transit-oriented
development. Improving
transit ridership and
reducing automobile use
would reduce operational
mobile source GHG
emissions.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy M-6.2 Mixed
Use Areas
Promote residential,
employment, recreation,
and commercial uses within
designated mixed-use
areas to reduce walking
distances between
destinations and to create
an active street environment
throughout the day.
Establishes the City’s
commitment to high-
density, transit-oriented
development. Improving
transit ridership and
reducing automobile use
would reduce operational
mobile source GHG
emissions.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Goal M-8 Achieve air quality,
sustainability, and
greenhouse gas emission
reduction objectives through
technology upgrades and
Establishes the City’s
commitment to investing
in newer, more efficient
technologies that are
more sustainable and
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-54
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
improved management of
Burlingame’s streets.
ultimately reduce GHG
emissions.
Policy M-8.1 Electric
Vehicle Infrastructure
Identify electric vehicle
charging priority locations
and opportunities to
integrate emerging
technology into public
parking infrastructure to
encourage and expand the
use of zero-emissions
vehicles.
Encourages people in the
Bay Area to purchase and
use electric vehicles by
providing them with
supporting infrastructure.
Helps reduce GHG
emission from fuel
combustion in vehicles.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy M-8.2 Vehicle
Trip Reduction
Support vehicle trip
reduction strategies,
including building safer and
more inviting active
transportation networks,
supporting connections to
high frequency and regional
transit, implementing TDM
programs, and integrating
land use and transportation
decisions.
Establishes City’s
commitment to collaborate
with appropriate agencies
on promotion of
alternative fuel usage and
standards.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Infrastructure Element
Goal IF-2 Ensure the long-term
availability of water through
conservation methods and
regular maintenance and
improvements to the overall
water supply delivery
system.
Establishes goals to
preserve water and use it
in sustainable ways.
Reduces energy needed
to transport water, which
in turn reduces GHG
emissions.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy IF-2.11 Retrofits Implement programs that
incentivize businesses and
private institutions to
replace existing plumbing
fixtures with water-efficient
plumbing.
Demonstrates the City’s
commitment to working
with employers in the City
to reduce inefficient water
usage. Reduces GHG
emission associated with
transporting the water and
treating the wastewater.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy IF-2.12
Recycled Water
Increase the use of recycled
water as available, cost
effective, and safe. This
may include allowed use of
graywater systems
consistent with health and
building codes.
Establishes goals to
preserve water and use it
in sustainable ways.
Reduces energy needed
to transport and treat
water, which in turn
reduces GHG emissions.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Goal IF-5 Achieve waste reduction
goals in excess of State
mandates.
Establishes the City’s goal
of being a sustainable
community. Reduced
waste would reduce GHG
emissions associated with
landfilled emissions.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy IF-5.3 Municipal
Waste Reduction
Reduce municipal waste
generation by continuing to
employ a wide range of
simple and innovative
techniques, such as
Establishes the City’s goal
of being a sustainable
community. Reduced
waste would reduce GHG
emissions associated with
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-55
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
electronic communications
to reduce paper usage and
buying products with less
packaging and in bulk.
landfilled emissions.
Policy IF-5.4
Disposable, Toxic, and
Non-Renewable
Products
Identify uses of disposable,
toxic, and nonrenewable
products in City operations
and seek ways to reduce,
avoid, or substitute such
uses with less toxic options.
Establishes the City’s goal
of being a sustainable
community. Reduced
waste would reduce GHG
emissions associated with
landfilled emissions.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy IF-5.5
Construction Waste
Recycling
Require demolition,
remodeling, and major new
development projects
include salvaging or
recycling asphalt and
concrete and all other
nonhazardous construction
and demolition materials to
the maximum extent
practicable.
Establishes the City’s goal
of being a sustainable
community. Reduced
waste would reduce GHG
emissions associated with
landfilled emissions.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy IF-5.7
Composting
Facilitate the ability of all
residents to compost both
for their own use and for
collection by contract waste
haulers.
Establishes the City’s goal
of being a sustainable
community. Reduced
waste would reduce GHG
emissions associated with
landfilled emissions.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy IF-5.12 Reuse Encourage reuse of
materials and reusable
products. Develop a
program for reuse of
materials and reusable
products in City facilities
and outreach programs for
community-wide
participation by promoting
communitywide garage
sales and online venues.
Establishes the City’s goal
of being a sustainable
community. Reduced
waste would reduce GHG
emissions associated with
landfilled emissions.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy IF-5.15
Composting
Expand composting
programs in coordination
with waste vendor to all
residential type and
businesses.
Establishes the City’s goal
of being a sustainable
community. Reduced
waste would reduce GHG
emissions associated with
landfilled emissions.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Policy IF-5.16 Zero
Waste
Participate in negotiations
with waste vendor to
implement zero waste
supportive contracts and
services.
Establishes goals to reach
zero waste. Zero waste
would result in less GHG
emissions from landfills.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Goal IF-6 Ensure the provision of
adequate and safe gas and
electric services to
Burlingame residents and
businesses, and that energy
facilities are constructed in a
fashion that minimizes their
impacts on surrounding
Establishes the City’s goal
to provide energy
infrastructure that is
efficient and reliable. An
efficient energy
infrastructure would lead
to reduced GHG
emissions.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-56
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
development and
maximizes efficiency.
Policy IF-6.7 Electric
Vehicles
Work with energy providers
to plan for and provide for
the electricity needs of a
growing EV network in
Burlingame.
Establishes City’s
commitment to collaborate
with appropriate agencies
on promotion of
alternative fuel usage and
standards.
(a) General GHG
emissions
(b) Conflict with GHG
reduction plans
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 10. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
June 28, 2018 Page 10-57
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 10_GHG_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 11. Hazards and Hazardous Materials June 28, 2018 Page 11-1
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 11_Hazards_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
11. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
This chapter describes hazards and hazardous materials conditions in the planning area. The
chapter includes the regulatory framework necessary to evaluate potential environmental
impacts resulting from the 2040 General Plan, describes potential impacts that could result from
the General Plan, and discusses General Plan goals, policies, and implementation programs
that would avoid or reduce those potential impacts.
11.1 SETTING
For the environmental topics relevant to this EIR chapter, the environmental and regulatory
setting of the planning area with respect to hazards and hazardous materials is described in
Section 6.11 (Hazards and Hazardous Materials) of the General Plan Existing Conditions
Report (City of Burlingame, 2015). Pursuant to section 15150 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the
Existing Conditions Report is incorporated into the Draft Program EIR by reference. The
Existing Conditions Report is available at the City of Burlingame 2040 General Plan website at:
http://www.Burlingame.org/GENERALPLAN/
Copies of the Existing Conditions Report may be viewed during regular business hours (8:00
a.m. to 5:00 p.m.), Monday through Friday, at the City of Burlingame Planning Division, 501
Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA 94010.
11.1.1 Environmental Setting
The Hazards and Hazardous Materials section of the Existing Conditions Report describes the
existing conditions related to hazardous materials and airport hazards in the planning area, as
summarized below.
(a) Hazardous Materials. These major findings address the potential presence of hazardous
materials within the Planning area and analyze the potential risk these materials pose. Existing
and potential problems related to hazardous materials include water and soil contamination,
health hazards from existing or historical land uses that use or generate hazardous materials,
and the improper disposal of hazardous materials by business, industry, and individual
households.
• According to the State Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) EnviroStor
database, there is one school cleanup site in Burlingame that has a status of
"Certified/Operation & Maintenance - Land Use Restrictions."
• According to the State Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) EnviroStor
database, there is one school evaluation site in Burlingame that has a status of "Inactive
- Needs Evaluation."
• According to the State Water Resources Board GeoTracker database, 12 Leaking
Underground Storage Tank (LUST) cleanup sites in have a status of "Open."
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 11. Hazards and Hazardous Materials June 28, 2018 Page 11-2
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 11_Hazards_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
• According to the State Water Resources Board GeoTracker database, six Water Board
cleanup sites in Burlingame have a status of "Open."
• According to the State Water Resources Board GeoTracker database, one land disposal
site in Burlingame has a status of "Open."
• According to the State Water Resources Board GeoTracker database, 15 Underground
Storage Tank (UST) facilities in Burlingame have a status of "Permitted."
Permitted: For DTSC, facilities/sites that were required to obtain a permit or have received a hazardous
waste facility permit from DTSC or U.S. EPA in accordance with Section 25200 of the Health and Safety
Code or the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). For RWQCB, a permit has been issued
by an authorized local agency to the owner or operator of an underground storage tank (UST) (or a
unified program facility permit has been issued by an authorized local agency to the owner or operator of
a unified program facility on which the UST is located) that allows operation of the UST for the storage of
hazardous substances pursuant to State regulations.
Open Categories
Open–Remediation: An approved remedy or remedies that has/have been selected for the impacted
area at the site and is being implemented by the responsible party under an approved cleanup plan for
the site. This includes any ongoing remedy that is either passive or active, or uses a combination of
technologies.
Open–Verification Monitoring: Remediation phases that are essentially complete, and a
monitoring/sampling program is occurring to confirm successful completion of cleanup at the site, e.g., no
“active” remediation is considered necessary or no additional “active” remediation is anticipated as
needed, or an active remediation system has been shut-off and the potential for a rebound in
contaminant concentrations is under evaluation.
Open–Site Assessment: Site characterization, investigation, risk evaluation and/or site conceptual model
development are occurring at the site. Examples of site assessment activities include, but are not limited
to, the following: (1) identification of the contaminants and the investigation of their potential impacts; (2)
determination of the threats/impacts to water quality; (3) evaluation of the risk to humans and ecology;
(4) delineation of the nature and extent of contamination; (5) delineation of the contaminant plume(s);
and (6) development of the Site Conceptual Model.
Open–Eligible for Closure: Corrective action at the site has been determined to be completed and any
remaining petroleum constituents from the release are considered to be a low threat to human health,
safety, and the environment.
(b) Airport Hazards. These major findings summarize existing information related to potential
airport hazards and safety issues for people and property within the overflight zones of San
Francisco International Airport.
• Portions of the planning area are located within Area B of the Airport Influence Area
(AIA) boundary zones of San Francisco International Airport. Thus, as required by State
law, all applicable plans, ordinances, and development applications must be reviewed by
the City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County, which serves as the
Airport Land Use Commission.
• The basic strategy for minimizing risks to people on the ground near airports is to limit
the number of people who might gather in areas most susceptible to potential aircraft
accidents, by prohibiting/limiting certain non-compatible land uses. This generally
includes limiting buildings that serve people with limited mobility (e.g., children’s schools,
hospitals, nursing homes), sensitive industrial uses, residential uses, public uses, and
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 11. Hazards and Hazardous Materials June 28, 2018 Page 11-3
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 11_Hazards_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
uses that process/store hazardous or flammable materials (e.g., oil refineries, chemical
plants).
• While the potential for aircraft crash hazards within the planning area is low, any such
incident could result in a substantial hazard to people and property. This is due to the
location of the airport near many existing industrial, commercial, and residential
neighborhoods in the eastern portion of Burlingame.
11.1.2 Regulatory Setting
(a) Hazardous Materials. The Existing Conditions Report Hazards and Hazardous Materials
section (Section 6.11) describes the following regulatory setting related to hazardous materials.
Federal
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is
responsible for researching and setting national standards for a variety of environmental
programs, and delegates to states and local governments the responsibility for issuing permits
and monitoring and enforcing compliance. EPA Region IX has authority in the Bay region,
regulating chemical and hazardous materials use, storage, treatment, handling, transport, and
disposal practices; protecting workers and the community (along with CalOSHA, see below);
and integrating the federal Clean Water Act and Clean Air Act into California legislation.
Federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration. The Federal Occupational Health
and Safety Administration (OSHA) establishes and enforces Federal regulations related to
health and safety of workers who could be exposed to toxic and hazardous materials. OSHA
also sets health and safety guidelines for construction activities and manufacturing facility
operations.
State
California Environmental Protection Agency/Office of Emergency Services. The California
Environmental Protection Agency (Cal/EPA) establishes regulations governing the use of
hazardous materials in the State to protect air, water, and soil. The Office of Emergency
Services (OES) coordinates State and local agencies and resources for educating, planning,
and warning citizens of hazardous materials and related emergencies, including organized
response efforts in case of emergencies.
California Department of Toxic Substances Control. The California Department of Toxic
Substances Control (DTSC) regulates hazardous substances and wastes, oversees remedial
investigations, protects drinking water from toxic contamination, and warns public exposed to
listed carcinogens.
California Highway Patrol/California Department of Transportation. The California Highway
Patrol (CHP) and California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) have primary regulatory
responsibility for the transportation of hazardous wastes and materials.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 11. Hazards and Hazardous Materials June 28, 2018 Page 11-4
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 11_Hazards_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Regional and Local
San Mateo County Health System's Environmental Health Division. San Mateo County
Health System's Environmental Health Division (SMCEH) handles a wide variety of services to
ensure a safe and healthy environment in San Mateo County. SMCEH is the Certified Unified
Protection Agency (CUPA) for the City of Burlingame. As part of the CUPA Program, the
SMCEH administers the Hazardous Materials Business Plan (HMBP) Program, which
consolidates the reports required from businesses by State and Federal community right-to-
know laws, and the Hazardous Materials Management Plan and Hazardous Materials Inventory
Statement required by the California Fire Code. The HMBP is required to include a summary of
business activities, owner and operator information including emergency contacts, the type and
quantity of reportable hazardous materials, a site map, emergency response procedures, and
an employee training program. In general, the submittal of a HMBP is required if a business
handles and/or stores a hazardous material equal to or greater than the minimum reportable
quantities. These quantities are 55 gallons for liquids, 500 pounds for solids, and 200 cubic feet
(at standard temperature and pressure) for compressed gases. Exemptions to filing a HMBP are
listed in the Health and Safety Code.
SMCEH also administers the Underground and Above Ground Storage Tank Programs,
Groundwater Protection Program, Stormwater Protection Program, Emergency Response
Program, Household Hazardous Waste Program, Universal Waste Program, Medical Waste
Program, and Waste and Used Tire Program.
Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) Procedures. A Phase I ESA is the initial investigation
phase of a process established by the American Society for Testing and Materials Standards
(ASTM), cited by the Superfund Clean-Up Act of 1998, as adequate due diligence by new
purchasers of properties or their lenders prior to site development. Phase I ESAs must be
completed prior to property development by private parties to establish that the buyer has
exercised due diligence in purchasing the site.
The U.S. EPA has established requirements for preparers of Phase I and Phase II ESAs. EPA
has also established substantive standards for the information to be included in Phase I ESAs.
Under this environmental assessment process, a Phase I ESA report prepared for a real estate
holding would identify existing or potential environmental contamination liabilities. The Phase I
ESA typically addresses both the underlying land as well as physical improvements to the
property. The Phase I ESA site examination typically includes a jurisdictional agency file search
for any reported issues, and may also include definition of any evident signs of possible
asbestos- or lead-containing building materials or chemical residues in existing structures;
identification of possible hazardous substances stored or used onsite; assessment of possible
mold and mildew; and discussion of other relevant hazardous materials issues. Actual sampling
of soil, air, groundwater, or building materials typically is not conducted during a Phase I ESA.
The Phase I ESA generally is considered the first step in the environmental due diligence
process.
If a Phase I ESA indicates evidence of site contamination, a Phase II ESA would be required
prior to site development. The Phase II ESA includes collection of original samples of soil,
groundwater, or building materials to measure and analyze quantities of various contaminants.
The most frequent substances tested for are petroleum hydrocarbons, heavy metals, pesticides,
solvents, asbestos, and mold. Appropriate cleanup levels for each contaminant, based on
current and planned land use, would be determined in accordance with professional procedures
adopted by the lead jurisdictional agency (e.g., DTSC, RWQCB, BAAQMD, CUPA). At sites
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 11. Hazards and Hazardous Materials June 28, 2018 Page 11-5
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 11_Hazards_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
near ecological receptors, such as sensitive plant or animal species that could be exposed to
hazardous materials, cleanup levels would be determined according to the jurisdictional
agency’s adopted standards.
(b) Airport Hazards. The Existing Conditions Report Hazards chapter (Section 9.4) describes
the following regulatory setting related to airport hazards.
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The FAA Airport Safety and Operations Division has
primary responsibility for the safety and certification of airports and aircraft. The FAA establishes
and enforces standards, specifications, and recommendations for the safe operation and design
of commercial and general aviation airports. The FAA has no authority over off-airport land
uses; its role focuses on the safety of aircraft operations.
California Aeronautics Act (Public Utilities Code, Section 21670 et seq.). The Aeronautics
Act requires airport land use commissions to prepare an Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan
(ALUCP) for nearly all public-use airports in the State. The intent of the ALUCP is to encourage
compatibility between airports and the various land uses that surround them. Alameda County
has established an Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC), in accordance with State law, to
prepare land use compatibility plans for all public-use airports in the county and to review
general plans, proposed changes to zoning codes and ordinances, land use actions and
development projects, and airport development plans for consistency with compatibility policies.
Comprehensive Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan for the Environs of San Francisco
International Airport (2012). In recognition of the impact of airports on properties in their
vicinity, the state legislature passed laws that require establishment of an ALUC to develop
plans and policies for the orderly growth of airports and their surrounding areas. ALUCs were
given the authority to:
• Specify how land near airports is used, based on safety and noise compatibility
considerations;
• Develop height restrictions for new development to protect the airspace near the airport;
and
• Establish construction standards for new buildings near airports, including sound
insulation requirements.
The ALUC statute is to protect public health, safety and welfare through the adoption of land
use standards that minimize the public’s exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards. They
are also concerned with preventing the encroachment of incompatible land uses around airports
to preserve the utility of airports well into the future. The ALUC may adopt land use standards
which are more restrictive than state law to achieve its goals. The ALUC has no jurisdiction over
airport operations or existing land uses.
The ALUCP for San Francisco International Airport was last updated in 2012. The plan has four
primary concerns:
• Aircraft Noise Impact Reduction: Reduce the number of people living within the airport
vicinity who are exposed to noise from the airport and aircraft operations.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 11. Hazards and Hazardous Materials June 28, 2018 Page 11-6
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 11_Hazards_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
• Safety of People on the Ground and in Aircraft in Flight: Minimize the number of
future residents and land use occupants who are exposed to hazards related to airport
operations and practice.
• Height Restrictions and Airspace Protection: Protect navigable airspace around the
airport for safe and efficient operation of aircraft in flight.
• Overflight Notification: Establish areas within which aircraft flights to and from the
airport occur frequently enough and at a low enough altitude to be noticeable by
sensitive residents. Within these areas, real estate disclosure notices shall be required,
pursuant to State law.
The policies and criteria contained in the ALUCP apply to new development in the vicinity of the
airport. Existing land uses are exempt from the plan. Cities like Burlingame, which lie in the
airport area of influence, are required to update their General Plans and zoning to be consistent
with the ALUCP.
11.2 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
This section describes potential impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials that could
result from the General Plan, and discusses General Plan goals, policies, and implementation
programs that would avoid or reduce those potential impacts. The section also recommends
mitigation measures as needed to reduce significant impacts.
11.2.1 Significance Criteria
Based on the CEQA Guidelines, implementation of the City of Burlingame General Plan would
have a significant impact related to hazards and hazardous materials if it would:
(a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials;
(b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably
foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials
into the environment;
(c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school;
(d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled
pursuant to Government Code section 65962.5 and, as a result, create a significant
hazard to the public or the environment;
(e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, result in a safety
hazard for people residing or working in or outside the Planning area;
(f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in or outside the Planning area;
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 11. Hazards and Hazardous Materials June 28, 2018 Page 11-7
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 11_Hazards_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
(g) Impact implementation of, or physically interfere with, an adopted emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan; or
(h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving
wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where
residences are intermixed with wildlands.
There are no private airstrips near the planning area (Criterion [f]). Therefore, this issue is not
discussed further in this EIR.
11.2.2 Analysis Methodology
The methodology for evaluating potential environmental impacts related to hazards and
hazardous materials followed this basic sequence:
(1) The General Plan Existing Conditions Report was evaluated to identify existing
environmental conditions and problems related to hazards and hazardous materials,
including the regulatory framework that applies to these issues.
(2) The CEQA Statute and Guidelines (2013), including Appendix G (Environmental
Checklist Form), were consulted to identify environmental impact topics and issues that
should be addressed in the program EIR. In part, this process resulted in the
significance criteria listed in subsection 11.2.1 above.
(3) The General Plan Policy Document, including the associated development capacity
assumptions (see EIR section 3.6), was analyzed to identify goals, policies,
implementation programs (“policies” for short), and potential outcomes that address the
significance criteria. This analysis resulted in two basic conclusions regarding policies
and outcomes: (a) many policies would avoid or reduce potential environmental impacts,
and (b) some policies or outcomes could result in new environmental impacts or
increase the severity of existing environmental problems.
(4) For potential environmental impacts that would result from the General Plan, mitigation
measures were designed to avoid or reduce each impact to a less-than-significant level.
If implementation of all identified feasible mitigations cannot reduce the impact to a less-
than-significant level, then the impact is considered significant and unavoidable.
11.2.3 Environmental Impacts
Potential Impacts of Future Development under the 2040 General Plan
Hazardous materials and wastes would be routinely transported, used, and disposed of within
the planning area, particularly originating from or being delivered to the many industrial
businesses in the City and to San Francisco Airport. The transport, use, and disposal would
range from hazardous materials used for manufacturing processes to common household
hazardous wastes (HHW) such as paint and used motor oil. The use, transportation, and
disposal of hazardous materials and wastes has varying degrees of risk of upset dependent on
the type and quantity of the material or waste. Simple spills of HHWs can result in minor
environmental contamination to soil, air, or water. Releases of toxic chemicals from industrial
facilities pollute the air and may have immediate and adverse health effects on workers or
residents in the vicinity. Releases can occur accidentally or deliberately. A common means of
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 11. Hazards and Hazardous Materials June 28, 2018 Page 11-8
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 11_Hazards_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
accidental release occurs when a vehicle transporting hazardous wastes or materials is involved
in a collision and the wastes are released onto the roadway and surrounding environment.
(Significance Criteria 11.2.1 [a], [b], and c])
New development constructed on a site which has the potential to harbor hazardous wastes
from previous land uses (a Cortese list site), could harm occupants of the new development
project. (Significance Criterion 11.2.1 [d])
Development that takes place within an airport land use plan area could result in a safety
hazard for people residing or working in the planning area. Portions of the planning area are
located within Area B of the Airport Influence Area boundary zones of San Francisco
International Airport. Thus, as required by State law, all applicable plans, ordinances, and
development applications must be reviewed by the City/County Association of Governments of
San Mateo County, which serves as the ALUC. (Significance Criterion 11.2.1 [e])
Impairment of emergency or evacuation procedures can result in increased property damage
and/or personal injury by slowing emergency services response times or preventing the public
from being able to escape emergency situations. (Significance Criterion 11.2.1 [g])
Development in areas susceptible to wildfires has the potential to impact both the new
development and nearby existing development if there are no buffers between structures and
flammable vegetation and inadequate fire protection services in the vulnerable wildfire areas.
(Significance Criterion 11.2.1 [h])
How Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies Reduce Impacts
Table 11-1 is aligned with relevant Existing Regulations and General Plan policies that relate to
hazards and hazardous materials. Column 1 (Objective) lists each Regulation and General Plan
goal, policy, and implementation program (“policy” for short), organized by General Plan
element, that addresses the potential impact identified in Table 11-1. Column 2 is a summary of
the regulation/policy and the text of the policy. Column 3 answers the question, “How does the
regulation/policy avoid or reduce the potential impact?” Column 4 identifies the applicable
significance criteria that is addressed by the regulation/goal/policy.
The verbs in Column 3 are intended to be applied consistently. The verb “ensures” means that
the policy is sufficient to guarantee the result identified in the policy. The verb “helps” means
that the policy contributes to avoiding or reducing the identified potential impact; in many cases,
“helps” is used for a policy that can be applied to avoid or reduce a wide range of potential
impacts.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 11. Hazards and Hazardous Materials June 28, 2018 Page 11-9
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 11_Hazards_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 11-1: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
Existing Regulation
U. S. Environmental
Protection Agency
EPA Region IX has authority
in the Bay region, regulating
chemical and hazardous
materials use, storage,
treatment, handling,
transport, and disposal
practices; protecting workers
and the community and
integrating the federal Clean
Water Act and Clean Air Act
into California legislation.
Ensures potential
hazardous materials
impacts are minimized,
including accidental
releases, through
interagency
coordination.
(a) Hazardous
materials transport
or disposal
(b) Hazardous
materials release
(c) Hazardous
materials near
schools
(d) Cortese List Site
Federal Occupational
Safety and Health
Administration
The Federal Occupational
Health and Safety
Administration (OSHA)
establishes and enforces
Federal regulations related to
health and safety of workers
exposed to toxic and
hazardous materials. OSHA
also sets health and safety
guidelines for construction
activities and manufacturing
facility operations.
Ensures potential
hazardous materials
impacts are minimized,
including accidental
releases, through
interagency
coordination.
(a) Hazardous
materials transport
or disposal
(b) Hazardous
materials release
(c) Hazardous
materials near
schools
(d) Cortese List Site
California
Environmental
Protection
Agency/Office of
Emergency Services
The California Environmental
Protection Agency (Cal/EPA)
establishes regulations
governing the use of
hazardous materials in the
State to protect air, water,
and soil. The Office of
Emergency Services (OES)
coordinates State and local
agencies and resources for
educating, planning, and
warning citizens of
hazardous materials and
related emergencies,
including organized response
efforts in case of
emergencies.
Ensures potential
hazardous materials
impacts are minimized,
including accidental
releases, through
interagency
coordination.
(a) Hazardous
materials transport
or disposal
(b) Hazardous
materials release
(c) Hazardous
materials near
schools
(g) Interfere with
emergency
response plan
(f) Wildland fire
hazard
California Department
of Toxic Substances
Control
The California Department of
Toxic Substances Control
(DTSC) regulates hazardous
substances and wastes,
oversees remedial
investigations, protects
drinking water from toxic
Ensures potential
hazardous materials
impacts are minimized,
including accidental
releases, through
interagency
coordination.
(a) Hazardous
materials transport
or disposal
(b) Hazardous
materials release
(c) Hazardous
materials near
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 11. Hazards and Hazardous Materials June 28, 2018 Page 11-10
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 11_Hazards_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 11-1: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
contamination, and warns
public exposed to listed
carcinogens.
schools
(d) Cortese List Site
(e) Public Airport
Safety Hazard
(g)Interfere with
emergency
response plan
(f) Wildland fire
hazard
California Highway
Patrol/California
Department of
Transportation
The California Highway
Patrol (CHP) and California
Department of
Transportation (Caltrans)
have primary regulatory
responsibility for the
transportation of hazardous
wastes and materials.
Helps ensure the safe
transport of hazardous
materials through the
least vulnerable areas.
Helps avoid the potential
for accidental releases in
residential areas.
(a) Hazardous
materials transport
or disposal
San Mateo County
Health System's
Environmental Health
Division (SMCEH)
The SMCEH administers the
Underground and Above
Ground Storage Tank
Programs, Groundwater
Protection Program,
Stormwater Protection
Program, Emergency
Response Program,
Household Hazardous Waste
Program, Universal Waste
Program, Medical Waste
Program, and Waste and
Used Tire Program.
Ensures potential
hazardous materials
impacts are minimized,
including accidental
releases, through
interagency
coordination.
(a) Hazardous
materials transport
or disposal
(b) Hazardous
materials release
(c) Hazardous
materials near
schools
(d) Cortese List Site
(e) Public Airport
Safety Hazard
(g) Interfere with
emergency
response plan
(f) Wildland fire
hazard
Environmental Site
Assessment (ESA)
Procedures
A Phase I ESA is the initial
investigation phase of a
process established by the
American Society for Testing
and Materials Standards
(ASTM), cited by the
Superfund Clean-Up Act of
1998, as adequate due
diligence by new purchasers
of properties or their lenders
prior to site development.
Phase I ESAs must be
completed prior to property
development by private
parties to establish that the
buyer has exercised due
diligence in purchasing the
Ensures that all
development proposals
will be professionally
evaluated for potential
hazardous materials
impacts.
(d) Cortese List Site
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 11. Hazards and Hazardous Materials June 28, 2018 Page 11-11
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 11_Hazards_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 11-1: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
site.
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA)
The FAA Airport Safety and
Operations Division has
primary responsibility for the
safety and certification of
airports and aircraft. The
FAA establishes and
enforces standards,
specifications, and
recommendations for the
safe operation and design of
commercial and general
aviation airports.
Ensures that airports are
not creating a safety
hazard for people
residing or working in or
outside the planning
area.
(e) Public Airport
Safety Hazard
California Aeronautics
Act (Public Utilities
Code, Section 21670 et
seq.)
The Aeronautics Act requires
airport land use commissions
to prepare an Airport Land
Use Compatibility Plan
(ALUCP) for nearly all public-
use airports in the State.
The intent of the ALUCP is to
encourage compatibility
between airports and the
various land uses that
surround them.
Ensures that airports are
not creating a safety
hazard for people
residing or working in or
outside the planning
area.
(e) Public Airport
Safety Hazard
Comprehensive Airport
Land Use Compatibility
Plan for the Environs of
San Francisco
International Airport
(2012)
In recognition of the impact
of airports on properties in
their vicinity, the state
legislature passed laws that
require establishment of an
airport land use commission
(ALUC) to develop plans and
policies for the orderly
growth of airports and their
surrounding areas.
Ensures that airports are
not creating a safety
hazard for people
residing or working in or
outside the planning
area.
(e) Public Airport
Safety Hazard
Community Safety Element
Goal CS-6: Hazardous
Materials
Protect residents, workers,
and visitors from hazardous
materials through improved
regulations, disposal
practices, location and site
design requirements, and
public information and
education.
Minimizes potential
hazardous materials
impacts.
Avoids the location of
new development on,
and the exposure of
people to, contaminated
sites.
(a) Hazardous
materials transport
or disposal
(b) Hazardous
materials release
(c) Hazardous
materials near
schools
Policy CS-6.1:
Hazardous Materials
Storage and Disposal
Require the proper storage
and disposal of hazardous
materials to prevent leakage,
potential explosions, fire, or
the release of harmful fumes.
Coordinate with the Fire
Encourages proactive
avoidance of hazardous
materials releases.
(a) Hazardous
materials transport
or disposal
(b) Hazardous
materials release
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 11. Hazards and Hazardous Materials June 28, 2018 Page 11-12
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 11_Hazards_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 11-1: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
Department to identify and
monitor pre-incident plans
associated with hazardous
materials storage and use.
Policy CS-6.2:
Hazardous Materials
Information
Maintain information
channels to the residential
and business communities
about the illegal nature and
danger of dumping
hazardous material and
waste into the storm drain
system or in creeks.
Minimizes potential for
hazardous materials
releases
(a) Hazardous
materials transport
or disposal
(b) Hazardous
materials release
(c) Hazardous
materials near
schools
Policy CS-6.3:
Hazardous Waste
Disposal
Explore efficient, economical,
and convenient ways to offer
household hazardous waste
collection for residents in
partnership with the solid
waste contractors and San
Mateo County.
Minimizes potential for
hazardous materials
releases
(a) Hazardous
materials transport
or disposal
(b) Hazardous
materials release
Policy CS-6.4:
Proximity of Residents
to Hazardous Materials
Assess future residents’
exposure to hazardous
materials when new
residential development or
sensitive populations are
proposed within the
Live/Work land use
designation. Do not allow
residential development or
sensitive populations if such
hazardous conditions cannot
be mitigated to an
acceptable level of risk.
Minimizes the potential
for hazardous materials
impacts on schools.
(d) Cortese List Site
Policy CS-6.5:
Educational Programs
Continue to encourage
residents and businesses to
use non- and less-hazardous
products, especially less
toxic pest control products, to
slow the generation of new
reduce hazardous waste
requiring disposal through
the county-wide program.
Promotes proactive
avoidance of hazardous
materials impacts.
(a) Hazardous
materials transport
or disposal
(b) Hazardous
materials release
(c) Hazardous
materials near
schools
Goal CS-8: Airport and
Heliport Hazards
Minimize the community’s
exposure to aircraft safety
hazards associated with San
Francisco International
Airport.
Ensures that airports are
not creating a safety
hazard for people
residing or working in or
outside the Planning
area.
(e) Public Airport
Safety Hazard
Policy CS-8.1: Land
Use Safety
Consider all applicable
Federal statutes (including
Ensures that the airport
ALUC plan will be
(e) Public Airport
Safety Hazard
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 11. Hazards and Hazardous Materials June 28, 2018 Page 11-13
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 11_Hazards_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 11-1: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
Compatibility and
Airspace Protection
Criteria
49 U.S.C. 47107), Federal
regulations (including 14
Code of Federal Regulations
77 et seq.), the Federal
Aviation Administration
(FAA) Airport Compliance
Manual, FAA Advisory
Circulars, other forms of
written guidance, and State
law with respect to criteria
related to land use safety
and airspace protection
when evaluating
development applications
within the Airport Influence
Area of the San Francisco
International Airport and Mill-
Peninsula Medical Center
helipad.
reviewed for updates as
necessary as the 2040
General Plan is
implemented over time.
Policy CS-8.2: Airport
Land Use Compatibility
Plan
Require development
projects within the Airport
Influence Area designated in
the Airport Land Use
Compatibility Plan of the San
Francisco International
Airport to comply with all
applicable Federal statutes
(including 49 U.S.C. 47107),
Federal regulations
(including 14 Code of
Federal Regulations 77 et
seq.), the FAA’s Airport
Compliance Manual, FAA
Advisory Circulars, other
forms of written guidance,
and State law with respect to
criteria related to land use
safety and airspace
protection.
Ensures that the airport
ALUC plan will be
reviewed for updates as
necessary as the 2040
General Plan is
implemented over time.
(e) Public Airport
Safety Hazard
Policy CS-8.3: Airport
Land Use Commission
Review
Ensure all applicable plans,
ordinances, and
development applications are
reviewed by the City/County
Association of Governments
for San Mateo County’s
Airport Land Use
Commission, as required by
State law.
Ensures that the airport
ALUC will review
development application
that could affect airport
operations or create
airport hazards
(e) Public Airport
Safety Hazard
Goal CS-2: Fire
Prevention and
Ensure coordinated and
effective fire and emergency
Protects people and
property from wildfire
(f) Wildland fire
hazard
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 11. Hazards and Hazardous Materials June 28, 2018 Page 11-14
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 11_Hazards_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 11-1: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
Protection Services medical services to maintain
the health, safety, and well-
being of the Burlingame
community.
hazards.
Policy CS-2.2: Fire
Prevention Education
Maintain and implement a
fire prevention and safety
education program for
Burlingame residents and
businesses. Ensure that the
needs of high-risk population
groups, such as seniors, are
met with tailored programs.
Protects people and
property from wildfire
hazards.
(f) Wildland fire
hazard
Policy CS-2.3:
Development Review
Continue to include the
Central County Fire
Department in the review of
development proposals to
ensure projects adequately
address fire access and
building standards
Protects people and
property from wildfire
hazards.
(f) Wildland fire
hazard
Policy CS-2.4:
Adequate Water
Supply and
Infrastructure for Fire
Suppression
Require that new
development projects
document the availability of
water supplies and
infrastructure to meet the
fire-suppression needs of the
project without compromising
existing fire suppression
services to existing users.
Protects people and
property from wildfire
hazards.
(f) Wildland fire
hazard
Policy CS-2.6:
Removal of Fire
Hazards
Maintain code enforcement
programs that require private
and public property owners
to minimize fire risks by:
Maintaining buildings and
properties to prevent blighted
conditions
Removing excessive or
overgrown vegetation (e.g.,
trees, shrubs, weeds) in
accordance with wildland-
urban interface clearance
requirements.
Removing litter, rubbish
and illegally dumped items
from properties
Reduces wildfire
hazards.
(f) Wildland fire
hazard
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 11. Hazards and Hazardous Materials June 28, 2018 Page 11-15
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 11_Hazards_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Conclusions
The City would ensure that existing regulations and land use policies are used to avoid or
reduce an identified potential environmental impact. Such regulations and policies that relate to
hazards and hazardous materials are listed in Table 11-1 above.
In most cases, no one goal, policy, or implementation measure (“policy” for short) is expected to
completely avoid or reduce an identified potential environmental impact. However, the
collective, cumulative mitigating benefits of the policies listed in Table 11-1 will result in a less-
than-significant impact related to hazards and hazardous materials. This conclusion is
consistent with the purpose and use of a program EIR for a general plan (see EIR Introduction,
Chapter 1).
Based on the methodology described above, 2040 General Plan impacts related to hazards and
hazardous materials would be less than significant (see criteria [a] through [e], [g], and [h] in
subsection 11.2.1, “Significance Criteria,” above). No mitigation is required.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 12. Historic and Cultural Resources June 28, 2018 Page 12-1
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 12_Cultural_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
12. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
This chapter describes historic and cultural resources conditions in the planning area. Tribal
Resources are addressed in Chapter 19. This chapter includes the regulatory framework
necessary to evaluate potential environmental impacts resulting from the 2040 General Plan,
describes potential impacts that could result from the General Plan, and discusses General Plan
goals, policies, and implementation programs that would avoid or reduce those potential
impacts. It also recommends mitigation to reduce potentially significant impacts on
paleontological resources.
12.1 SETTING
For the environmental topics relevant to this chapter, the environmental and regulatory setting of
the planning area with respect to historic and cultural resources is described in Section 6.8
(Cultural Resources and Urban Forests) of the General Plan Existing Conditions Report (City of
Burlingame, 2015). Pursuant to section 15150 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the Existing
Conditions Report is incorporated into the Draft Program EIR by reference. The Existing
Conditions Report is available at the City of Burlingame 2040 General Plan website at:
http://www.Burlingame.org/GENERALPLAN/
Copies of the Existing Conditions Report may be viewed during regular business hours (8:00
a.m. to 5:00 p.m.), Monday through Friday, at the City of Burlingame Planning Division, 501
Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA 94010.
12.1.1 Environmental Setting
The Land Use and Urban Form Chapter and Natural Resources and Hazards Chapter (sections
2.8 and 6.8, respectively) of the Existing Conditions Report describe historic and cultural
resources within the planning area. The major findings below describe the cultural (historical
and archaeological) resources present or potentially present in the planning area. Significant
cultural resources in the city include structures that may be eligible for the National Register of
Historic Places (NRHP), the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), or otherwise
listed on the City of Burlingame List of Officially Designated Architecturally and Historically
Significant Buildings.
• Burlingame is situated within the historic territory of many discrete tribes of Native
Americans known collectively as the Ohlone (also known as Costanoans). The Ohlone
inhabited a natural environment of grasslands and oak forests in the Burlingame area.
• The planning area contains 10 recorded Native American sites; 31 historic period
buildings, structures, or objects; and one other historic period resource. Additionally, the
State Office of Historic Preservation Historic Property Directory (OHP HPD) lists 32
recorded buildings or structures within the Planning area, and Caltrans lists six San
Mateo County bridges eligible for NRHP listing.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 12. Historic and Cultural Resources June 28, 2018 Page 12-2
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 12_Cultural_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
• Burlingame incorporated in 1908. The original settlement centered around the
Burlingame train station. Burlingame's population grew slowly until 1906, when the San
Francisco earthquake and fires forced hundreds of people to leave the city in search of
new homes. A second settlement grew around the Broadway train station, and was
ultimately annexed into Burlingame.
• Four resources in Burlingame are listed on the National Register of Historic Places:
Burlingame Railroad Station, Kohl Mansion, Howard-Ralston Eucalyptus Tree Rows,
and Severn Lodge Dairy Wallscape.
12.1.2 Regulatory Setting
The Natural Resources and Hazards Chapter (Section 6.8) of the Existing Conditions Report
discusses the following regulatory setting relevant to historic and cultural resources.
Federal
National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). This law was enacted to
prevent unnecessary harm to historic properties. The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA)
includes regulations that apply specifically to Federal land-holding agencies, but also includes
regulations (Section 106) that pertain to all projects funded, permitted, or approved by any
Federal agency that has the potential to affect cultural resources. Provisions of the NHPA
establish a National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) (the National Register is maintained by
the National Park Service), the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, State Historic
Preservation Offices, and Federal grants-in-aid programs.
State
California Register of Historical Resources. On September 27, 1992, Assembly Bill 2881
(Statutes of 1992, Chapter 1075) was signed into law amending the Public Resources Code as
it affects historical resources (Public Resources Code §4850 et seq.). This legislation, which
became effective on January 1, 1993, also created the California Register of Historical
Resources, informally the CRHR. Under the CRHR, a historical resource may be determined
significant under one or more of the following four criteria:
• It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad
patterns of local or regional history, or the cultural heritage of California or the United
States; or
• It is associated with the lives of persons important to local, California, or national history;
• It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of
construction, or represents the work of a master or possesses high artistic values; or
• It has yielded, or has the potential to yield, information important to the prehistory or
history of the local area, California, or the nation.
Integrity is the authenticity of a historical resource’s physical identity evidenced by the survival
of characteristics that existed during the resource’s period of significance. All resources
nominated for listing on the CRHR must have integrity. Resources, therefore, must retain
enough of their historic character or appearance to be recognizable as historical resources and
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 12. Historic and Cultural Resources June 28, 2018 Page 12-3
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 12_Cultural_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
to convey the reasons for their significance. Integrity is evaluated with regard to the retention of
location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. It must also be
judged with reference to the particular criteria under which a resource is proposed for eligibility.
Alterations over time to a resource or historic changes in its use may themselves have
historical, cultural, or architectural significance.
It is possible that historical resources may not retain sufficient integrity to meet the criteria for
listing in the National Register, but they may still be eligible for listing in the California Register.
A resource that has lost its historic character or appearance may still have sufficient integrity for
the California Register if it maintains the potential to yield significant scientific or historical
information or specific data.
Local Regulations
City of Burlingame Tree Preservation Ordinance. Burlingame Municipal Code Title 11
provides for the protection and preservation of significant trees. Title 11 designates what types
of trees located on what types of development or properties are “protected” and would require a
permit before removal or pruning (aside from routine maintenance), and determines when
removed or disfigured trees would require replacement. Protected trees include:
• Street trees, which are defined as any woody perennial plant having a single main axis
or stem more than 10 feet in height; or
• Any tree with a circumference of 48 inches or more when measured 54 inches above
natural grade; or
• A tree or stand of trees so designated by the City Council based upon findings that it is
unique and of importance to the public due to its unusual appearance, location, historical
significance, or other factor; or
• A stand of trees in which the Director of Parks has determined each tree is dependent
upon the others for survival.
City of Burlingame Historic Resource Preservation Ordinance. Burlingame Municipal Code
Title 21 implements the historic preservation policies in the Downtown Specific Plan through a
voluntary program that provides property owners with fiscal benefits or zoning and code
incentives to preserve historic properties in the Downtown area. It applies only to properties
located within the Downtown Specific Plan boundaries. Preservation incentives include:
• Use of the California State Historic Building Code (SHBC) for projects involving
designated historic resources;
• Fee reductions for minor or major exterior modifications to historic resources done in
accordance with the Secretary of the Interior Standards for Rehabilitation;
• Flexibility in application of development standards such as parking reductions and
historic variances;
• Provisions for adaptive resuse of historic structures;
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 12. Historic and Cultural Resources June 28, 2018 Page 12-4
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 12_Cultural_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
• Mills Act contracts granting property tax relief for preservation of historic resources; and
• Provisions to allow preservation easements.
12.2 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
This section describes potential impacts related to historic and cultural resources that could
result from the General Plan, and discusses General Plan goals, policies, and implementation
programs that would avoid or reduce those potential impacts. The section also recommends
mitigation measures as needed to reduce significant impacts.
12.2.1 Significance Criteria
Based on the CEQA Guidelines, implementation of the City of Burlingame 2040 General Plan
would have a significant impact related to historic and cultural resources if it would:
(a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historic resource pursuant to
CEQA Guidelines section 15064.5;
(b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15064.5;
(c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic
feature; or
(d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries.
12.2.2 Analysis Methodology
The methodology for evaluating potential environmental impacts related to historic and cultural
resources followed this basic sequence:
(a) The General Plan Existing Conditions Report was evaluated to identify existing
environmental conditions and problems related to historic and cultural resources,
including the regulatory framework that applies to these issues.
(b) The CEQA Statute and Guidelines (2013), including appendix G (Environmental
Checklist Form), were consulted to identify environmental impact topics and issues that
should be addressed in the program EIR. In part, this process resulted in the
significance criteria listed in subsection 12.2.1 above.
(c) The General Plan Policy Document, including the associated development capacity
assumptions (see EIR section 3.6), was analyzed to identify goals, policies,
implementation programs (“policies” for short), and potential outcomes that address the
significance criteria. This analysis resulted in two basic conclusions regarding policies
and outcomes: (a) many policies would avoid or reduce potential environmental impacts,
and (b) some policies or outcomes could result in new environmental impacts or
increase the severity of existing environmental problems.
(d) For potential environmental impacts that would result from the 2040 General Plan,
mitigations were designed to avoid or reduce each impact to a less-than-significant level.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 12. Historic and Cultural Resources June 28, 2018 Page 12-5
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 12_Cultural_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
If implementation of all identified feasible mitigations cannot reduce the impact to a less-
than-significant level, then the impact is considered significant and unavoidable.
12.2.3 Environmental Impacts
Potential Impacts of Future Development under the 2040 General Plan
Future development within the planning area subject to the goals and policies of the General
Plan could impact historic resources where new development supplants older development.
Adverse modification of historic resources may also occur if appropriate restoration methods are
not implemented, thereby permanently altering the historic character of the resource. Impacts
associated with the destruction or alteration of historic resources can affect a City’s sense of
place and lose important information relevant to City, regional, and/or State history.
(Significance Criterion 12.2.1 [a])
Future development within the planning area subject to the goals and policies of the General
Plan could impact archaeological resources where excavation and other earthmoving activities
are required. Failure to properly survey development sites and, if necessary, monitor
earthmoving activities to ensure identification and recovery of archaeological resources could
result in a significant impact due to the loss of information related to pre-historic and historic
human activities. (Significance Criterion 12.2.1 [b])
Excavation and other earthmoving activities required for future development pursuant to
General Plan policy within surface and subsurface exposures of Pleistocene-era alluvium
materials could disturb paleontological resources. Failure to survey development sites and if
necessary, monitor earthmoving activities to ensure proper identification and recovery of
paleontological resources could result in a significant impact on fossil resources due to the loss
of information important to understanding pre-historic life and evolution. (Significance Criterion
12.2.1 [c])
The City currently does not have any policies related to the protection of paleontological
resources during development-related earthmoving activities. Therefore, this EIR includes
mitigation to avoid or minimize impacts on buried paleontological resources. Mitigation CR-1
below would be applicable to all future development and infrastructure proposals subject to
review pursuant to CEQA. These measures will ensure that future development sites are
surveyed and monitored and resources avoided, if possible, or identified, recovered, and
catalogued to disseminate and preserve applicable paleontological information. All monitoring
activities are to be implemented by qualified vertebrate professional paleontologists in
accordance with the guidelines of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology. Impacts on
paleontological resources would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
The potential exists that as yet undiscovered human remains may be encountered during future
development activities within the Planning area. Destruction of pre-historic or historic remains
can result in the loss of information important to the history of the State, the region, or the
immediate locality. Destruction of recent human remains could result in destruction of evidence
associated with a crime. (Significance Criterion 12.2.1 [d])
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 12. Historic and Cultural Resources June 28, 2018 Page 12-6
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 12_Cultural_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
How Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies Reduce Impacts
Table 12-1 is aligned with relevant Existing Regulations and General Plan policies that relate to
cultural resources. Column 1 (Objective) lists each Regulation and General Plan goal, policy,
and implementation program (“policy” for short), organized by General Plan element, that
addresses the potential impact identified in Table 12-1. Column 2 is a summary of the
regulation/policy and the text of the policy. Column 3 answers the question, “How does the
regulation/policy avoid or reduce the potential impact?” Column 4 identifies the applicable
significance criteria that is addressed by the regulation/goal.
The verbs in Column 3 are intended to be applied consistently. The verb “ensures” means that
the policy is sufficient to guarantee the result identified in the policy. The verb “helps” means
that the policy contributes to avoiding or reducing the identified potential impact; in many cases,
“helps” is used for a policy that can be applied to avoid or reduce a wide range of potential
impacts.
Impact 12-1. Since there is no information on the likelihood of discovering paleontological
resources and there are currently no General Plan policies requiring the discovery, monitoring,
and protection of paleontological resources, Mitigation 12-1 is recommended to avoid potentially
significant impacts on paleontological resources should they occur in the planning area.
Mitigation 12-1. Paleontological Assessment. In areas containing middle to late
Pleistocene-era sediments where it is unknown if paleontological resources exist, prior to
grading an assessment shall be made by a qualified paleontological professional to
establish the need for paleontological monitoring. Should paleontological monitoring be
required after recommendation by the professional paleontologist and approval by the
Community Development Director, paleontological monitoring shall be implemented.
Paleontological Monitoring. A project that requires grading plans and is located in an
area of known fossil occurrence or that has been demonstrated to have fossils present in
a paleontological field survey or other appropriate assessment shall have all grading
monitored by trained paleontological crews working under the direction of a qualified
professional, so that fossils exposed during grading can be recovered and preserved.
Should any potentially unique fossils be encountered during development activities, work
shall be halted immediately within 50 feet of the discovery, the City of Burlingame
Planning Department shall be immediately notified, and a qualified paleontologist shall
be retained to determine the significance of the discovery.
Paleontological Recovery, Identification, and Curation. The City and a project
applicant shall consider the mitigation recommendations of the qualified paleontologist
for any unanticipated discoveries. The City and the project applicant shall consult and
agree upon implementation of measures that the City and project applicant deem
feasible and appropriate. Such measures may include avoidance, preservation in place,
excavation, documentation, curation, data recovery, or other appropriate measures. The
project applicant shall be required to implement any mitigation necessary for the
protection of paleontological resources.
Paleontological Findings. Qualified paleontological personnel shall prepare a report of
findings (with an itemized appendix of specimens) subsequent to implementation of
paleontological recovery, identification, and curation. A preliminary report shall be
submitted, subject to approval by the Community Development Director before granting
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 12. Historic and Cultural Resources June 28, 2018 Page 12-7
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 12_Cultural_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
of building permits, and a final report shall be submitted, subject to approval by the
Community Development Director before granting of occupancy permits.
This impact would be less than significant with this mitigation.
Table 12-1: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Cultural Resources
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
Existing Regulations
National Historic
Preservation Act of
1966 (16 U.S.C. 470
et seq.).
This law was enacted to
prevent unnecessary harm to
historic properties. The
National Historic
Preservation Act (NHPA)
includes regulations that
apply specifically to Federal
land-holding agencies, but
also includes regulations
(Section 106) that pertain to
all projects funded,
permitted, or approved by
any Federal agency that has
the potential to affect cultural
resources.
Helps ensure
preservation of
Burlingame’s historic
resources.
(a) Change to
historic resource
(b) Change to
archaeological
resource
California Register of
Historical Resources.
On September 27, 1992,
Assembly Bill 2881 (Statutes
of 1992, Chapter 1075) was
signed into law amending the
Public Resources Code as it
affects historical resources
(Public Resources Code
§4850 et seq.) This
legislation, which became
effective on January 1, 1993,
also creates the California
Register of Historical
Resources, informally the
CRHR.
Helps ensure
preservation of
Burlingame’s historic
resources.
(a) Change to
historic resource
City of Burlingame
Tree Preservation
Ordinance
Burlingame Municipal Code
Title 11 provides for the
protection and preservation
of significant trees by
designating what types of
trees located on what types
of development or properties
are “protected” and would
require a permit before
removal or pruning (aside
from routine maintenance) as
well as determining when
removed or disfigured trees
would require replacement.
Helps ensure protection
and maintenance of
Burlingame’s historic
Eucalyptus groves and
other heritage trees.
(a) Change to
historic resource
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 12. Historic and Cultural Resources June 28, 2018 Page 12-8
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 12_Cultural_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 12-1: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Cultural Resources
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
City of Burlingame
Historic Resource
Preservation
Ordinance
Burlingame Municipal Code
Title 21 implements the
historic preservation policies
in the Downtown Specific
Plan through a voluntary
program that provides
property owners with fiscal
benefits or zoning and code
incentives to preserve
historic properties in the
Downtown area.
Helps ensure protection
and maintenance of
historic resources within
the Downtown Specific
Plan area.
(a) Change to
historic resource
Community Character Element
Goal CC-3: Historical
Resources
Protect the character and
quality of Burlingame’s
historical buildings, tree
groves, neighborhoods and
districts
Helps ensure
preservation of
Burlingame’s historic
resources.
Helps ensure that
archaeological sites and
resources will be
protected.
(a) Change to
historic resource
(b) Change to
archaeological
resource
Policy CC-3.1:
Comprehensive
Historic Surveys
Require the applicant for any
discretionary permit that
involves remodeling,
removing or substantially
altering any structure older
than 50 years old at the time
of the application to prepare
a Historic Resources Survey
consistent with State CEQA
requirements to identify the
historical significance of the
property.
Helps ensure
preservation of
Burlingame’s historic
resources.
Helps ensure that
archaeological resources
are professionally
documented to enable
their protection.
Helps ensure that
archaeological resources
are professionally
documented to enable
their protection.
(a) Change to
historic resource
(b) Change to
archaeological
resource
(c) Disturb human
remains
Policy CC-3.3: Historic
Preservation Standards
and Guidelines
When a structure is deemed
to have historic significance,
use the Secretary of the
Interior's Standards for the
Treatment of Historic
Properties with Guidelines
for Preserving,
Rehabilitating, Restoring,
and Reconstructing Historic
Buildings when evaluating
development applications
and City projects, or
development applications
that may affect scenic views
or the historic context of
nearby historic resources.
Helps ensure
preservation of
Burlingame’s historic
resources.
Helps ensure that
archaeological sites and
resources will be
protected.
Helps ensure that
archaeological sites and
resources will be
protected.
(a) Change to
historic resource
(b) Change to
archaeological
resource
(c) Disturb human
remains
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 12. Historic and Cultural Resources June 28, 2018 Page 12-9
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 12_Cultural_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 12-1: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Cultural Resources
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
Policy CC-3.4: Flexible
Land Use Standards
Maintain flexible land use
standards to allow the
adaptive reuse of identified
historic buildings with a
variety of economically-
viable uses, while minimizing
impacts to the historic value
and character of sites and
structures.
Helps ensure
preservation of
Burlingame’s historic
resources. Helps
preserve historic
resources within the
surrounding context.
Implements historic
preservation within the
context of the
professionally
recognized Secretary of
the Interior’s Standards.
(a) Change to
historic resource
(b) Change to
archaeological
resource
Policy CC-3.5: Historic
Districts
Identify opportunities to
establish National Park
Service Certified Historic
Districts to encourage the
preservation of Burlingame’s
historic neighborhoods and
districts, and to qualify
property owners for the
Federal Preservation Tax
Incentives Program.
Helps ensure
preservation of
Burlingame’s historic
resources.
Increases opportunities
to preserve and enhance
potential historic
resources.
(a) Change to
historic resource
Policy CC-3.6: State
Historic Building Code
Promote the use of the State
Historic Building Code to
facilitate the reuse and
conversion of historical
buildings to alternative uses.
Helps ensure
preservation of
Burlingame’s historic
resources.
Increases opportunities
to preserve and enhance
potential historic
resources.
(a) Change to
historic resource
Policy CC-3.7: Mills Act Participate in the California
Mills Act Property Tax
Abatement Program to
provide property owners of
historical resources an
economic incentive (property
tax relief) to restore,
preserve, and maintain
qualified historic properties.
Helps ensure
preservation of
Burlingame’s historic
resources.
Increases opportunities
to preserve and enhance
potential historic
resources.
(a) Change to
historic resource
Policy CC-3.8: Federal
Historic Preservation
Tax Incentives
Promote the use of the
Federal Historic Preservation
Tax Incentives Program to
encourage the rehabilitation
of income-producing
historical structures in
Burlingame.
Helps ensure
preservation of
Burlingame’s historic
resources.
Increases opportunities
to preserve and enhance
potential historic
resources.
(a) Change to
historic resource
Policy CC-3.9: Federal
Historic Preservation
Promote the Federal Historic
Preservation Tax Credit
Helps ensure
preservation of
(a) Change to
historic resource
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 12. Historic and Cultural Resources June 28, 2018 Page 12-10
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 12_Cultural_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 12-1: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Cultural Resources
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
Tax Credit Program Program to encourage the
charitable contribution of
historical resources and the
establishment of
conservation easements for
historic preservation
purposes.
Burlingame’s historic
resources.
Increases opportunities
to preserve and enhance
potential historic
resources.
Policy CC-3.10:
Demolition of Historic
Resources
Prohibit the demolition of
historic resources unless one
of the following findings can
be made:
1) The rehabilitation and
reuse of the resource is
not structurally or
economically feasible.
2) The demolition is
necessary to protect the
health, safety, and welfare
of the public.
3) The public benefits of
demolition outweigh the
loss of the historic
resource.
Helps ensure that
opportunities for historic
preservation will be
thoroughly evaluated
before any demolition of
a historic resource
occurs.
(a) Change to
historic resource
Policy CC-1.11:
Heritage Trees
Protect and maintain
Burlingame’s historic
Eucalyptus groves and other
heritage trees in a healthy,
safe and efficient manner so
they remain an important
part of the community.
Helps ensure protection
and maintenance of
Burlingame’s historic
Eucalyptus groves and
other heritage trees.
(a) Change to
historic resource
Conclusions
In most cases, no one goal, policy, or implementation measure is expected to completely avoid
or reduce an identified potential environmental impact. However, the collective, cumulative
mitigating benefits of the policies listed in each table will result in a less-than-significant impact
related to the identified significance criterion and the corresponding environmental topic listed in
the table name. This conclusion is consistent with the purpose and use of a program EIR for a
general plan (see EIR Introduction, Chapter 1).
Based on the methodology described above, 2040 General Plan impacts related to historic and
cultural resources would be less than significant (see criteria [a], [b] and [d] in subsection
12.2.1, “Significance Criteria,” above). Impacts on paleontological resources (criteria [c])
would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 13. Hydrology and Water Quality June 28, 2018 Page 13-1
13. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
This chapter describes existing hydrology and water quality conditions in the planning area.
The chapter includes the regulatory framework necessary to evaluate potential environmental
impacts resulting from the 2040 General Plan, describes potential impacts that could result from
the General Plan, and discusses General Plan goals, policies, and implementation programs
that would avoid or reduce those potential impacts.
13.1 SETTING
The environmental and regulatory setting of the Burlingame planning area with respect to
hydrology and water quality is described in detail in Section 6.12 (Natural Resources: Hydrology
and Water Quality) and Section 5.5 (Utilities: Stormwater Drainage and Flood Control) of the
General Plan Existing Conditions Report (City of Burlingame, 2015). Pursuant to Section 15150
of the State CEQA Guidelines, the Existing Conditions Report is incorporated into the Draft
Program EIR by reference. The Existing Conditions Report is available at the City of Burlingame
2040 General Plan website at:
http://www.Burlingame.org/GENERALPLAN/
Copies of the Existing Conditions Report may be viewed during regular business hours (8:00
a.m. to 5:00 p.m.), Monday through Friday, at the City of Burlingame Planning Division, 501
Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA 94010.
13.1.1 Environmental Setting
The Existing Conditions Report describes the existing (2015) hydrology and water quality setting
information for the planning area. Improving water quality and stream function, and protecting
the health of the City’s and the Bay’s water resources, are matters of regional concern, and
more often than not key challenges that extend beyond municipal boundaries and require
collaborative solutions. Also, in many cases, the best or most recent data are available at the
regional level. For these reasons, the major findings presented below discuss major themes
impacting Burlingame and the region as a whole.
The major findings of the Existing Conditions Report relevant to hydrology and water quality are
described below.
• The majority of rainfall and runoff in Bay Area watersheds occurs on average during the
wet season months of October through April. Rainfall data collected for Burlingame as
part of the Regional Monitoring Program also generally follows this pattern. However,
most available data reflects years prior to 2012.
• Burlingame is located in the Santa Clara Valley Groundwater Basin and within the San
Mateo Subbasin. The San Mateo Subbasin is composed of alluvial fan deposits formed
by tributaries to San Francisco Bay, which drain the basin. Precipitation in the subbasin
ranges from less than 16 inches in the southeast to more than 24 inches in the
northwest.
• Several creeks and storm drains pass through Burlingame. The City does not contain
any dams or open reservoirs. None of Burlingame's tributaries to San Francisco Bay are
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 13. Hydrology and Water Quality June 28, 2018 Page 13-2
listed as impaired on the Clean Water Act Section 303(d) list of threatened and impaired
waters.
• Stormwater management for Burlingame was once regulated according to the San
Mateo Countywide National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Municipal
Regonal Stormwater Permit. This county-based permit was replaced with a new NPDES
permit for the entire San Francisco Bay Area. The San Francisco Bay Region NPDES
Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit was adopted in October 2009 and revised in
November 2011.
• Key pollutants of concern for the San Francisco Bay region include copper, mercury,
pesticides and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). Trash has emerged as a major surface
water quality issue in the Bay and its tributaries. Central and South Bay shorelines were
added to the 2010 Clean Water Act 303(d) list due to the increased presence of trash.
• The San Mateo Countywide Clean Water Program is an active participant in the RMP for
the San Francisco Estuary. Some data looking at key pollutants of concern have been
collected in Burlingame. Monitoring required by the Regional Monitoring Program also
includes assessment of human impacts on habitats in or adjacent to creeks.
• A number of agencies and organizations are involved in water management and
conservation in the West Bay. Water resource conservation partners for Burlingame
include San Mateo County, San Mateo County Flood Control District, and all local
agency members of the San Mateo Countywide Water Pollution Program.
13.1.2 Regulatory Setting
The Existing Conditions Report discusses the following regulatory setting relevant to hydrology
and water quality. Water in California is managed by a complex network of Federal and State
regulations. This section outlines and briefly summarizes the various Federal, State, and
regional laws and regulatory policies related to domestic water management, water quality, and
water resource protection.
See EIR Chapter 8 (Biological Resources) for additional federal and State regulations. EIR
Chapter 20 (Utilities and Service Systems) discusses water supply-related issues.
Federal
Federal Clean Water Act. The Federal Clean Water Act (1972) (CWA) is the primary Federal
law that protects the quality of the nation’s surface waters, including lakes, rivers, aquifers, and
coastal areas. The CWA focuses on the protection of surface water, but certain sections also
apply to groundwater.
Under the CWA, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) sets national standards and
effluent limitations, and delegates many regulatory responsibilities to the California State Water
Resources Control Board (SWRCB, or State Water Board). The CWA established a permit
system based on the concept that all discharges into the nation’s waters are unlawful unless
specifically authorized.
The CWA contains several provisions to protect water quality, including Sections 303(c)(2)(B),
303(d), 401, 402(p), and 404, and the Toxics Rule. Section 303(d), as discussed briefly below.
CWA Section 303(d). Section 303(d) of the 1972 Federal Clean Water Act requires that states
develop a list of water bodies that do not meet water quality standards, establish priority
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 13. Hydrology and Water Quality June 28, 2018 Page 13-3
rankings for waters on the list, and develop action plans, called Total Maximum Daily Loads
(TMDLs), to improve water quality. The list of impaired water bodies is revised periodically
(typically every two years). Many entities provide data to the SWRCB to compile the 303(d) List
and to develop TMDLs.
The process for developing the 303(d) List for the San Francisco Bay includes the following
steps:
• Development of a draft List by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control
Board (Regional Water Board);
• Adoption by the State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board); and
• Approval by US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
In August 2010, the State Water Board adopted the 2010 303(d) List. The 2010 List was
approved by the EPA in October 2011.
State
State Department of Water Resources. The Department of Water Resources (DWR) is
responsible for the management and regulation of water usage, including the delivery of water
to two-thirds of California’s population through the nation’s largest state-built water development
and conveyance system, the State Water Project. Working with other agencies and the public,
DWR develops strategic goals, and near-term and long-term actions, to conserve, manage,
develop, and sustain California's watersheds, water resources, and management systems.
DWR also works to prevent and respond to floods, droughts, and catastrophic events that would
threaten public safety, water resources and management systems, the environment, and
property.
State Water Resources Control Board. The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB,
or State Water Board) and the nine regional boards protect water quality and allocate surface
water rights in the State of California. The City of Burlingame is under jurisdiction of RWQCB
Region 2 (San Francisco Bay Region).
Regional and Local
Regional Water Quality Control Board Region 2. RWQCB Region 2 (San Francisco Bay
Region) regulates stormwater quality under authorities of the Federal Clean Water Act and
California’s Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. The RWQCB issues NPDES permits to
dischargers of municipal and industrial stormwater runoff and operators of large construction
sites. In coordination with permittees of the San Francisco Bay Municipal Regional Stormwater
Permit, including Burlingame, RWQCB staff performs an annual performance review and
evaluation of the County’s stormwater management program and NPDES compliance activities.
The San Francisco Bay Water Board also protects groundwater through implementation of its
regulatory and planning programs.
San Francisco Bay Region NPDES Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit. Adopted in
October 2009 and revised in November 2011, the San Francisco Bay Municipal Regional
Stormwater Permit (MRP) issues the Waste Discharge Requirements and National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit for the discharge of stormwater runoff from the
municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4s) of over 70 municipalities and local agencies in
five Bay Area counties, including the City of Burlingame. The MRP replaces the former county-
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 13. Hydrology and Water Quality June 28, 2018 Page 13-4
by-county permits, including the former San Mateo Countywide Municipal Stormwater Permit,
which once fulfilled this role.
Based on monitoring previously conducted by the Clean Water Program and in other counties,
the MRP identifies key Pollutants of Concern in urban runoff from Bay Area municipalities.
Monitoring required by the MRP also includes assessment of human impacts on habitats in or
adjacent to creeks. In the past, the San Mateo County Water Pollution Program (2015) has
done this type of assessment in Mills Creek. Future regulatory changes are expected regarding
this topic, but at present the MRP has no explicit controls beyond the hydromodification
management provisions, which include on-site and regional control design criteria, reasonable
costs and practicability, record keeping, hydromodification control areas, and potential
exceptions to map designations.
San Mateo County Flood Control District Hydrology and Hydraulic Manual. The current
storm drain design manual is the Bay Area Hydrology Model User Manual, 2007 edition. This
manual is generally sufficient for most small and medium size developments. However, the
District has been developing an expanded and updated version internally. While the internal
manual has not been officially adopted, the District applies drainage requirements and criteria
developed in 1994 and onwards when reviewing and designing facilities.
13.2 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
This section describes potential impacts related to hydrology and water quality that could result
from the General Plan, and discusses General Plan goals, policies, and implementation
programs that would avoid or reduce those potential impacts.
13.2.1 Significance Criteria
Based on the CEQA Guidelines, implementation of the City of Burlingame 2040 General Plan
would have a significant impact related to hydrology and water quality if it would:
(a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements;
(b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater
recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the
local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would
drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which
permits have been granted);
(c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the planning area or vicinity, including
through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result
in substantial erosion or siltation in or outside the planning area;
(d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the planning area or vicinity, including
through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate
of amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding in or outside the
planning area;
(e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff;
(f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality;
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 13. Hydrology and Water Quality June 28, 2018 Page 13-5
(g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood
Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map;
(h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect
flood flows;
(i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving
flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam;
(j) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death resulting from
inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow; or
(k) Require or result in the construction of new stormwater drainage facilities or expansion
of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental
effects.
13.2.2 Analysis Methodology
The methodology for evaluating potential environmental impacts related to hydrology and water
quality followed this basic sequence:
(a) The General Plan Existing Conditions Report was evaluated to identify existing
environmental conditions and problems related to hydrology and water quality, including
the regulatory framework that applies to these issues.
(b) The CEQA Statute and Guidelines (2017), including Appendix G (Environmental
Checklist Form), were consulted to identify environmental impact topics and issues that
should be addressed in the program EIR. In part, this process resulted in the
significance criteria listed in subsection 13.2.1 above.
(c) The General Plan Policy Document, including the associated development capacity
assumptions (see EIR Section 3.4), was analyzed to identify goals, policies,
implementation programs (“policies” for short), and potential outcomes that address the
significance criteria. This analysis resulted in two basic conclusions regarding policies
and outcomes: (a) many policies would avoid or reduce potential environmental impacts,
and (b) some policies or outcomes could result in new environmental impacts or
increase the severity of existing environmental problems.
(d) For potential environmental impacts that would result from the 2040 General Plan,
mitigations were designed to avoid or reduce each impact to a less-than-significant level.
If implementation of all identified feasible mitigations cannot reduce the impact to a less-
than-significant level, then the impact is considered significant and unavoidable.
13.2.3 Environmental Impacts
Potential Impacts of Future Development Pursuant to the 2040 General Plan
There are two major classes of pollutants: point source and non-point source. Point-source
pollutants can be traced to their original source. Point-source pollutants are discharged directly
from pipes or spills. Raw sewage draining from a pipe directly into a stream is an example of a
point-source water pollutant. Non-point-source pollutants (NPS) cannot be traced to a specific
original source. NPS pollution is caused by rainfall or snowmelt moving over and through the
ground. As the runoff moves, it picks up and carries away natural and human-made pollutants,
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 13. Hydrology and Water Quality June 28, 2018 Page 13-6
finally depositing them into lakes, rivers, wetlands, coastal waters, and even underground
sources of drinking water. NPS pollutants include:
• Excess fertilizers, herbicides, and insecticides from agricultural lands and residential
areas
• Oil, grease, and toxic chemicals from urban runoff and energy production
• Sediment from improperly managed construction sites, crop and forest lands, and
eroding stream banks
• Salt from irrigation practices and acid drainage from abandoned mines
• Bacteria and nutrients from livestock, pet wastes, and faulty septic systems
• Atmospheric deposition and hydromodification
Impacts associated with water pollution include ecological disruption and injury or death to flora
and fauna, increased need and cost for water purification, sickness or injury to people, and
degradation or elimination of water bodies as recreational opportunities. Future development
consistent with General Plan land use policy has the potential to increase urban runoff from
residential, commercial, industrial, utility, and roadway sources. This can impact stormwater
systems, causing soil erosion and siltation off site. New development could increase pollutant
loading in downstream waters. Additionally, accidents, poor site management, or negligence by
property owners and tenants can result in accumulation of pollutant substances on parking lots
and loading and storage areas, or result in contaminated discharges directly into the storm drain
system. (Significance Criteria 13.2.1 [a], [b)], and [f])
Future development within the planning area is likely to change drainage patterns, which could
have the potential to result in on- or off-site erosion and siltation. Short-term and long-term
development activities could result in erosion and siltation impacts due to alteration of natural
drainage patterns. Siltation is the introduction of increased sediment flows into a water body.
This can result in the shrinking of the water body, rising surface waters, habitat destruction,
faunal injury or death, and flooding as sediments change the natural character of the water
body. Siltation is generally associated with activities such as site grading and deforestation.
During grading activities, extensive earth-moving activities and vegetation removal could alter
existing natural drainage patterns. These short-term changes in natural drainage patterns could
result in erosion and siltation because water movement across the affected area is increased
without natural barriers in place. Vegetation stabilizes soil, reducing its ability to be washed
downstream. If sufficient energy-reducing mechanisms such as rock rip-rap or detention basins
are not provided, or if runoff is not diverted effectively through landscaped areas or other places
where runoff can settle prior to discharge, there is a potential for runoff to cause scouring and
erosion of open land that could generate silt and sediments that could negatively affect
downstream waters. 9Significance Criteria 13.2.1 [c], [d], and [e])
Impacts associated with flooding are primarily related to the construction or placement of
structures in areas prone to flooding, including within a 100-year flood zone and in areas
susceptible to high tides, tsunamis, seiches, mudflows or sea level rise. Specifically, structures
placed in flood prone areas, if flooded, would be damaged, and could subject people to injury or
death. (Significance Criteria 13.2.1 [g] to [j])
How Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies Reduce Impacts
Table 13-1 is aligned with relevant Existing Regulations and General Plan policies that relate to
hydrology and water quality. Column 1 (Objective) lists each Regulation and General Plan goal,
policy, and implementation program (“policy” for short), organized by General Plan element, that
addresses the potential impact identified in Table 13-1. Column 2 is a summary of the regulation
and the text of the policy. Column 3 answers the question, “How does the regulation/policy
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 13. Hydrology and Water Quality June 28, 2018 Page 13-7
avoid or reduce the potential impact?” Column 4 identifies the applicable significance criteria
that is addressed by the regulation/policy.
The verbs in Column 3 are intended to be applied consistently. The verb “ensures” means that
the policy is sufficient to guarantee the result identified in the policy. The verb “helps” means
that the policy contributes to avoiding or reducing the identified potential impact; in many cases,
“helps” is used for a policy that can be applied to avoid or reduce a wide range of potential
impacts.
Referring to Column 3 in the following tables, a reference to “requires construction” means that
implementation of the policy might result in construction-related impacts related to, for example,
construction traffic, noise, or dust. These potential impacts are addressed below.
Table 13-1: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Hydrology and Water Quality
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
Existing Regulations
Federal Clean
Water Act
The Federal Clean Water Act
(1972) is the primary Federal law
that protects the quality of the
nation’s surface waters, including
lakes, rivers, aquifers, and
coastal areas. The Clean Water
Act (CWA) focuses on the
protection of surface water, but
certain sections also apply to
groundwater.
Ensures that
municipalities protect
water quality.
(a) Violate any water
quality
(f) Otherwise
substantially
degrade water
quality
State Water
Resources Control
Board
The State Water Resources
Control Board and the nine
regional boards protect water
quality and allocate surface
water rights in California. The
City of Burlingame is under
jurisdiction of the Regional Water
Quality Control Board (RWQCB)
Region 2 (San Francisco Bay
Region).
Ensures that
municipalities protect
water quality.
(a) Violate any water
quality
(f) Otherwise
substantially
degrade water
quality
Regional Water
Quality Control
Board Region 2
Regional Water Quality Control
Board Region 2 (San Francisco
Bay Region) regulates
stormwater quality under
authorities of the Federal Clean
Water Act and California’s
Porter-Cologne Water Quality
Control Act.
Ensures that
municipalities protect
water quality.
(a) Violate any water
quality
(f) Otherwise
substantially
degrade water
quality
San Francisco Bay
Region NPDES
Municipal Regional
Stormwater Permit
Adopted in October 2009 and
revised in November 2011, the
San Francisco Bay Municipal
Regional Stormwater Permit
(MRP) issues the Waste
Discharge Requirements and
National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES)
Permit for the discharge of
stormwater runoff from the
Ensures compliance
with regional
stormwater
requirements.
(a) Violate any water
quality
(f) Otherwise
substantially
degrade water
quality
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 13. Hydrology and Water Quality June 28, 2018 Page 13-8
Table 13-1: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Hydrology and Water Quality
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
municipal separate storm sewer
systems (MS4s) of over 70
municipalities and local agencies
in five Bay Area counties,
including the City of Burlingame.
San Mateo County
Flood Control
District Hydrology
and Hydraulic
Manual
The current storm drain design
manual is the Bay Area
Hydrology Model User Manual
(2007) edition. While not officially
adopted, the District applies
drainage requirements and
criteria developed in 1994 and
onwards when reviewing and
designing facilities.
Promotes sustainable
stormwater
management, which
reduces flood risks.
(e) Create or
contribute runoff
water
(i) Expose people or
structures to a
significant flood risk
2040 General Plan Healthy People and Healthy Places Element – Water Resources
Goal HP-6: Protect local and regional water
resources through conservation,
preservation, and management
practices.
Promotes sustainability,
which reduces water
consumption and
reliance on
groundwater supplies.
Improves water quality
through protection,
restoration, and
conservation.
(a) Violate any water
quality
(b) Substantially
deplete groundwater
(f) Otherwise
substantially
degrade water
quality
HP-6.1: Waterway
Protection
Protect and maintain the water
quality of the four creek systems
and watersheds (Burlingame
Creek, Easton Creek, Mills
Creek, and Sanchez Creek) that
course through the City and drain
into San Francisco Bay.
Participate in regional efforts,
such as the Bay Area Integrated
Regional Water Management
Plan, to protect Burlingame’s
waterways and maintain water
quality.
Improves water quality
through protection,
restoration, and
conservation.
(a) Violate any water
quality
(f) Otherwise
substantially
degrade water
quality
HP-6.3: Water
Quality
Regularly measure and monitor
water quality in Burlingame’s
surface water to ensure
maintenance of high quality
water for consumption.
Improves water quality (a) Violate any water
quality
(f) Otherwise
substantially
degrade water
quality
HP-6.5: Local
Stormwater
Management
Work with public and private
property owners to reduce
stormwater runoff in urban areas
and to protect water quality in
creeks and the Bay. Require
implementation of best
management practices to reduce
accumulation of non-point source
pollutants in the drainage system
originating from streets, parking
Promotes sustainable
stormwater
management, which
improves water quality
and reduces
stormwater flow and
polluted runoff.
(a) Violate any water
quality
(c) Substantially alter
existing drainage
substantial erosion
or siltation
(d) Substantially alter
the existing drainage
pattern increase the
rate of amount of
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 13. Hydrology and Water Quality June 28, 2018 Page 13-9
Table 13-1: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Hydrology and Water Quality
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
lots, residential areas,
businesses, and industrial
operations.
surface runoff
(e) Create or
contribute runoff
water that affects
drainage system
capacity and
pollution
(f) Otherwise
substantially
degrade water
quality
(k) Construction of
new stormwater
drainage facilities
HP-6.6: Regional
Stormwater
Management
Continue to follow requirements
for the Municipal Regional
Stormwater and National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) Permit to
monitor stormwater activities,
and provide annual reports on
compliance activities.
Promotes sustainable
stormwater
management, which
improves water quality
and reduces
stormwater flow and
polluted runoff.
(a) Violate any water
quality
(c) Substantially alter
existing drainage
substantial erosion
or siltation
(d) Substantially alter
the existing drainage
pattern increase the
rate of amount of
surface runoff
(e) Create or
contribute runoff
water that affects
drainage system
capacity and
pollution
(f) Otherwise
substantially
degrade water
quality
(k) Construction of
new stormwater
drainage facilities
HP-6.7:
Stormwater
Conveyance
System
Identify opportunities to upgrade
and improve the City’s
stormwater conveyance system.
Promotes sustainable
stormwater
management, which
improves water quality
and reduces
stormwater flow and
polluted runoff.
(c) Substantially alter
existing drainage
substantial erosion
or siltation
(d) Substantially alter
the existing drainage
pattern increase the
rate of amount of
surface runoff
(e) Create or
contribute runoff
water that affects
drainage system
capacity and
pollution
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 13. Hydrology and Water Quality June 28, 2018 Page 13-10
Table 13-1: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Hydrology and Water Quality
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
(f) Otherwise
substantially
degrade water
quality
2040 General Plan Infrastructure Element – Stormwater Drainage and Flood Control
Goal IF-4: Protect people and property from
the adverse effects of flooding
through a stormwater system
that adequately moves runoff
from existing and future
development, prevents property
damage due to flooding, and
improves environmental quality.
Promotes sustainable
stormwater
management, which
reduces flood risks.
(c) Substantially alter
existing drainage
substantial erosion
or siltation
(d) Substantially alter
the existing drainage
pattern increase the
rate of amount of
surface runoff
(e) Create or
contribute runoff
water that affects
drainage system
capacity and
pollution
(k) Construction of
new stormwater
drainage facilities.
IF-4.1: Storm Drain
Infrastructure
Maintenance
Ensure that local storm drain
infrastructure is sufficiently
maintained to minimize flood
hazards.
Ensures that
stormwater volume will
not exceed the
drainage system’s
capacity.
(c) Substantially alter
existing drainage
substantial erosion
or siltation
(d) Substantially alter
the existing drainage
pattern increase the
rate of amount of
surface runoff
(e) Create or
contribute runoff
water that affects
drainage system
capacity and
pollution
(k) Construction of
new stormwater
drainage facilities
IF-4.2: Localized
Flooding
Identify and correct problems of
localized flooding. Promote the
use of green infrastructure,
whenever feasible, to mimic a
natural hydrologic system that
uses stormwater as a resource.
Minimizes flood risks.
Mitigates localized
flooding problems.
(a) Violate any water
quality
(b) Substantially
deplete groundwater
(c) Substantially alter
existing drainage
substantial erosion
or siltation
(d) Substantially alter
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 13. Hydrology and Water Quality June 28, 2018 Page 13-11
Table 13-1: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Hydrology and Water Quality
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
the existing drainage
pattern increase the
rate of amount of
surface runoff
(e) Create or
contribute runoff
water that affects
drainage system
capacity and
pollution
(f) Otherwise
substantially
degrade water
quality
(j) Expose people or
structures to
tsunami, mudflow
risk
(k) Construction of
new stormwater
drainage facilities
IF-4.4: Green
Stormwater
Infrastructure
Encourage Low Impact
Development (LID) techniques,
such as green infrastructure
which uses vegetation and soil to
capture, treat, and retain
stormwater runoff. Promote the
use of pervious surfaces, green
streets, and rainwater harvesting
to achieve multiple benefits, such
as creating open space,
improving stormwater quality,
and increasing groundwater
recharge. Avoid or minimize the
impact of stormwater discharges
on local receiving waters,
including the San Francisco Bay.
Promotes green
building and
landscaping practices,
which reduce surface
runoff and improve
water quality.
(a) Violate any water
quality
(b) Substantially
deplete groundwater
(e) Create or
contribute runoff
water that affects
drainage system
capacity and
pollution
(f) Otherwise
substantially
degrade water
quality
(k)construction of
new stormwater
drainage facilities
IF-4.5:
Improvement to
Public Places
Design smart improvements to
public spaces including streets,
parks, and plazas for stormwater
retention and groundwater
infiltration by diverting urban
runoff to bioretention systems
and implementing LID
techniques. Integrate green
infrastructure that restores a
natural hydrologic system such
as trees, rain gardens, and
vegetated swales into the urban
environment. Encourage
stormwater facilities that are
Ensures sustainable
stormwater
management in public
improvements, which
reduces erosion and
siltation and improves
water quality. Reduces
the need for municipal
stormwater drainage
improvements by
implementing on-site
stormwater
management
(a) Violate any water
quality
(b) Substantially
deplete groundwater
(c) Substantially alter
existing drainage
substantial erosion
or siltation
(e) Create or
contribute runoff
water that affects
drainage system
capacity and
pollution
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 13. Hydrology and Water Quality June 28, 2018 Page 13-12
Table 13-1: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Hydrology and Water Quality
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
designed to be a functional and
attractive element of public
spaces.
(f) Otherwise
substantially
degrade water
quality
(k) Construction of
new stormwater
drainage facilities
IF-4.6: Grading
Projects
Impose appropriate conditions on
grading projects performed
during the rainy season to
ensure that silt is not conveyed
to storm drainage systems.
Avoids eroded soil and
silt entering the storm
drainage system.
(c) Substantially alter
existing drainage
substantial erosion
or siltation
(e) Create or
contribute runoff
water that affects
drainage system
capacity and
pollution
IF-4.7: Diversion Require new development to be
designed to prevent the diversion
of stormwater onto neighboring
parcels.
Reduces flood risks.
Ensures that new
development mitigates
its own stormwater
drainage impacts.
Requires construction
of new or expanded
facilities as needed.
(d) Substantially alter
the existing drainage
pattern increase the
rate of amount of
surface runoff
(e) Create or
contribute runoff
water that affects
drainage system
capacity and
pollution
(k) Construction of
new stormwater
drainage facilities
2040 General Plan Community Safety Element – Sea Level Rise
Goal CS-5: Protect vulnerable areas and
infrastructure from flooding
related to rising sea levels in the
San Francisco Bay.
Protects areas
vulnerable to sea level
rise.
(g) Place housing
within a 100-year
flood hazard
(h) Place within a
100-year flood
hazard structures
that impede or
redirect flood flows
(i) Expose people or
structures to a
significant risk of
flooding
(j) Expose people or
structures to
tsunami, mudflow
risk
CS-5.1: Monitor
Rising Sea Level
Regularly coordinate with
regional, State, and Federal
agencies on rising sea levels in
San Francisco Bay and major
tributaries to determine if
Ensures up-to-date
planning for sea level
rise.
(g) Place housing
within a 100-year
flood hazard
(h) Place within a
100-year flood
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 13. Hydrology and Water Quality June 28, 2018 Page 13-13
Table 13-1: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Hydrology and Water Quality
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
additional adaptation strategies
should be implemented to
address flooding hazards.
hazard structures
that impede or
redirect flood flows
(i) Expose people or
structures to a
significant risk of
flooding
(j) Expose people or
structures to
tsunami, mudflow
risk
CS-5.3: New
Development in
Vulnerable Areas
Continue to require appropriate
setback and building elevation
requirements for properties
located along the Bayshore,
lagoons, and in other low-laying
areas that are susceptible to the
effects of sea level rise. Consider
other strategies to support
resiliency through design.
Protects areas
vulnerable to sea level
rise.
(g) Place housing
within a 100-year
flood hazard
(h) Place within a
100-year flood
hazard structures
that impede or
redirect flood flows
(i) Expose people or
structures to a
significant risk of
flooding
(j) Expose people or
structures to
tsunami, mudflow
risk
CS-5.5: Flood
Insurance Rate
Maps
Provide to the public, as
available, up-to-date Flood
Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM)
that identify rising sea levels and
changing flood conditions.
Ensures accurate
mapping of flood
hazards to help protect
vulnerable areas.
(g) Place housing
within a 100-year
flood hazard
(h) Place within a
100-year flood
hazard structures
that impede or
redirect flood flows
(i) Expose people or
structures to a
significant risk of
flooding
(j) Expose people or
structures to
tsunami, mudflow
risk
CS-5.6: Regional
Hazard Risk
Reduction Planning
Coordinate with San Mateo
County and other local agencies
to implement the Multi-
Jurisdictional Local Hazard
Mitigation Plan
Minimizes the
placement of structures
in flood hazard areas.
Minimizes potential
impacts from floods.
(g) Place housing
within a 100-year
flood hazard
(h) Place within a
100-year flood
hazard structures
that impede or
redirect flood flows;
(i) Expose people or
structures to a
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 13. Hydrology and Water Quality June 28, 2018 Page 13-14
Table 13-1: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Hydrology and Water Quality
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
significant risk of
flooding
(j) Expose people or
structures to
tsunami, mudflow
risk
CS-5.7: Hazard
Mitigation Plan
Continue to support San Mateo
County in its role as the lead
agency preparing and regularly
updating the countywide Local
Hazard Mitigation Plan.
Minimizes the
placement of structures
in flood hazard areas.
Minimizes potential
impacts from floods.
(g) Place housing
within a 100-year
flood hazard
(h) Place within a
100-year flood
hazard structures
that impede or
redirect flood flows;
(i) Expose people or
structures to a
significant risk of
flooding
(j) Expose people or
structures to
tsunami, mudflow
risk
Conclusions
Violations of water quality standards due to urban runoff can be prevented through continued
implementation of existing regional water quality regulations and through successful
implementation of the City’s local water quality control standards imposed on new development
over the long term. The proposed General Plan would not interfere with the implementation of
water quality regulations and standards. The Infrastructure Element addresses hydrology and
water quality and includes policies that address these issues. They are listed in Table 13-1. The
Healthy People and Healthy Places Element includes policies that address water quality and
urban runoff; these are also listed in Table 13-1. The policies are geared toward reducing
stormwater runoff and ensuring that runoff that does enter the storm drain system is free of
pollutants. Therefore, long-term water quality impacts due to non-point sources would be less
than significant.
The City currently inspects all residential, commercial, institutional, and industrial development
and enforces structural and non-structural BMPs to ensure compliance with the City’s MS4 and
eliminate such discharges. Future commercial and other development supported by the
proposed General Plan would be subject to the same monitoring and enforcement procedures.
NPDES regulations applicable to the planning area are designed to reduce non-point-source
pollutant loading through implementation of BMPs and other control measures that minimize or
eliminate pollutants from urban runoff, thereby protecting downstream water resources. The City
implements NPDES provisions through the requirements of its MS4 permit, which is applicable
to all portions of the city. BMPs implemented to address residential pollutant sources generally
revolve around educational programs. Commercial and industrial development is subject to
annual inspections to ensure implementation of BMPs and educational programs.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 13. Hydrology and Water Quality June 28, 2018 Page 13-15
All significant structures built within the City pursuant to the 2040 General Plan would be subject
to floodplain management regulations and policies that require hydrological evaluation to ensure
that minimal diversion of floodwaters occurs and development standards are implemented to
prevent flooding of on- and off-site uses. These regulations specifically prohibit construction of
structures that could cause or divert floodwaters, and mandate appropriate site planning and
structural design. Implementation of existing regulations would reduce impacts associated with
the potential diversion of floodwaters to less-than-significant levels.
Construction Period Impacts. The construction of project-related stormwater drainage
facilities (Significance Criterion [k]) would be temporary and would occur within either existing
public rights-of-way, City property, a project development site, or private property subject to a
municipal easement. Construction period traffic interruption, noise, and air emissions (dust)
typically associated with such infrastructure construction would be mitigated through standard
City of Burlingame construction mitigation procedures and policies (e.g., see chapters 7 [Air
Quality], 15 [Noise], and 18 [Transportation and Circulation] of this EIR). No significant
environmental impact is anticipated with this construction activity. The potential environmental
impacts associated with construction of project drainage and water quality infrastructure would
therefore be less than significant (see Significance Criterion [k] in subsection 13.2.1,
"Significance Criteria," above). No mitigation is required.
In most cases, no one goal, policy, or implementation measure is expected to completely avoid
or reduce an identified potential environmental impact. However, the collective, cumulative
mitigating benefits of the policies listed in Table 13-1 will result in a less-than-significant impact
related to the identified significance criterion and the corresponding environmental topic listed in
the table name. This conclusion is consistent with the purpose and use of a program EIR for a
general plan (see EIR Introduction, Chapter 1).
Based on the methodology described above, 2040 General Plan impacts related to hydrology
and water quality would be less than significant (see criteria [a] through [k] in subsection
13.2.1, “Significance Criteria,” above). No mitigation is required.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 14. Land Use and Planning June 28, 2018 Page 14-1
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 14_Land Use_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
14. LAND USE AND PLANNING
This chapter describes existing land uses in and around the planning area. The chapter includes
the regulatory framework necessary to evaluate potential environmental impacts resulting from
the 2040 General Plan, describes potential impacts that could result from the General Plan, and
discusses General Plan goals, policies, and implementation programs that would avoid or
reduce those potential impacts.
14.1 SETTING
The environmental and regulatory setting of the Burlingame planning area with respect to land
use and planning is described in detail in chapter 2 (Land Use and Urban Form) of the General
Plan Existing Conditions Report (City of Burlingame, 2015). Pursuant to section 15150 of the
State CEQA Guidelines, the Existing Conditions Report is incorporated into the Draft Program
EIR by reference. The Existing Conditions Report is available at the City of Burlingame 2040
General Plan website at:
http://www.Burlingame.org/GENERALPLAN/
Copies of the Existing Conditions Report may be viewed during regular business hours (8:00
a.m. to 5:00 p.m.), Monday through Friday, at the City of Burlingame Planning Division, 501
Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA 94010.
14.1.1 Environmental Setting
The Land Use and Urban Form chapter of the Existing Conditions Report reviews the present
(2015) context for land use planning in the planning area. It provides a comprehensive overview
of how land resources are used and regulated within Burlingame and its immediate
surroundings. It also identifies potential challenges and opportunities related to the long-term
growth and development of the planning area, and analyzes the development potential of the
area under existing plans, policies, and regulations. The Land Use and Urban Form chapter
also discusses the plans and policies of other agencies that regulate or influence land use within
the Planning area.
Relevant to this EIR Land Use and Planning chapter, the Environmental Setting is organized
into the following sections:
• Existing Land Use
• Planning area
• Urban Structure and Form
• Community Character
• Existing General Plan
• Existing Zoning
The major findings of the Existing Conditions Report Land Use and Urban chapter relevant to
land use and planning are described below.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 14. Land Use and Planning June 28, 2018 Page 14-2
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 14_Land Use_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
(a) Existing Land Use. Figure 14-1 (Existing Land Use in Planning Area) shows how the
properties within the planning area were being used as of August 2015, and Table 14-1
(Existing Land Use in Planning area) summarizes the existing land uses and acreage dedicated
to each within the planning area. Note the existing land use of a property does not carry any
regulatory significance and may or may not be consistent with the current General Plan
designations or zoning. In many cases, existing land uses were established prior to adoption of
the current General Plan and zoning map.
Table 14-1: Existing Land Use in Planning Area
Land Use Acres
Auto Sales/Repair 38.45
Baylands 907.65
City Facility (Fire, Police, City Hall, Library) 7.66
Commercial Recreation 13.75
Gas Station 2.67
General Commercial 53.54
High Density Residential 4.99
Hospital 36.96
Hotel/Motel 50.81
Industrial - Manufacturing/Production 53.76
Industrial - Warehouse/Logistics 159.73
Low Density Residential 1,001.77
Medium Density Residential 37.79
Medium/High Density Residential 147.94
Mixed Use 8.35
Office 111.38
Open Space/Preserve 17.70
Parking Lot – Airport 22.60
Parking Lot – Public 10.40
Parks – Public 131.31
Rail ROW 58.83
Religious 14.02
Rental Car Lot 22.97
ROW 31.44
School - Public and Private 105.02
Utility/Infrastructure 4.49
Vacant 29.91
Total 3,085.97
Burlingame General Plan EIRFigure 14-1 Existing Land Use in Planning Area 1,500750 3,000 FT 0N
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 14. Land Use and Planning June 28, 2018 Page 14-4
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 14_Land Use_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
These major findings describe how land within the Burlingame planning area is currently being
used.
• The City of Burlingame is a mature and largely built-out community with well-established
residential neighborhoods. Out of all the land use categories, low density residential—
consisting primarily of single-family residential—covers the most land within Burlingame.
• Industrial uses are located in the northeastern part of Burlingame, adjacent to Highway
101 and Rollins Road.
• Burlingame has two Caltrain stations and is close to San Francisco International Airport.
A multimodal BART/Caltrain station located just to the north in Millbrae provides
additional regional rail access.
• Commercial uses are generally located within downtown Burlingame, along the
Broadway corridor, and in the Burlingame Plaza shopping center. The City also has an
auto row located on California Drive.
(b) Planning Area. These major findings from the Land Use and Urban Form chapter of the
Existing Conditions Report describe the major political and geographic boundaries that influence
the long-term growth and development of the planning area.
• The City of Burlingame covers approximately 5.8 square miles. About three-quarters (76
percent) of the City is considered developable land. The remaining 24 percent consists
of San Francisco Bay within the City limits and the Mills Canyon Preserve.
• The SOI for the City of Burlingame adopted by LAFCO in 1984 and consists of the
Burlingame Hills unincorporated area. Since Burlingame Hills is under the jurisdiction of
San Mateo County, the County’s role is to provide mandated municipal services, such as
health services and human services, to residents of the area.
(c) Urban Structure and Form.
• Burlingame originally developed as settlements focused around the two train stations.
The street patterns and land use patterns reflect these beginnings.
• Burlingame has two main retail streets: the Broadway Business District and Downtown.
The five-block Broadway Business District consists of a range of predominantly
independently owned boutiques, gift shops, antique stores and specialty retail.
Broadway is one of the main gateways into the City and as a result experiences a high
volume of traffic passing through the area to access other parts of Burlingame.
Downtown Burlingame is a retail district consisting of a mix of local, regional, and
national brand stores.
• Burlingame Plaza is a mid-century, automobile-oriented shopping center with a mix of
local and national businesses, located at the far north end of the City.
• El Camino Real and California Drive are the two north-south thoroughfares that intersect
Broadway and Burlingame Avenue. Although these streets are distinguished by sizable
Eucalyptus tree groves, functionally they are characterized by high-speed automobile
traffic, parking in front of many buildings, and minimal pedestrian and bicycle facilities.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 14. Land Use and Planning June 28, 2018 Page 14-5
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 14_Land Use_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
• The at-grade railroad crossing at Broadway significantly disrupts the movement of
people from one side of the tracks to the other, and the tracks form a barrier as well.
Caltrain anticipates that the number of trains traveling past Broadway will increase to
more than 220 a day by the year 2040, from 92 trains currently.
• The majority of Burlingame's housing stock was developed between the 1890s and
1960s. The city was largely built out by the 1970s.
• Highway 101 forms a significant visual and physical barrier between the historic town
center and development along the Bayfront.
(d) Community Character.
• The views to and from the Bayfront and the hillsides of Burlingame provide opportunities
for residents and visitors to enjoy nature, scenic beauty, and natural wildlife. These
resources provide scenic vistas of the surrounding San Francisco Bay area.
• Often referred to the "City of Trees," Burlingame has a deep relationship with its tree
history dating to 1908, with the adoption of a City ordinance protecting trees. As of May
2011, there were 14,783 City-maintained trees in Burlingame.
• The Bayfront, while home to many successful hotels and industrial businesses, lacks a
cohesive and attractive urban character. Several marginal uses exist within the Bayfront
areas that detract from this waterfront area.
• Many residential neighborhoods display architectural styles representing different eras of
development, including the earliest periods of Burlingame's history. Homeowners take
great pride in home maintenance and neighborhood preservation.
(e) Existing General Plan. The current City of Burlingame General Plan was adopted in
1969, with an update to the Housing Element for the 2015-2023 period adopted in 2015.
(f) Existing Zoning. The City of Burlingame Zoning Ordinance was originally adopted in 1954
and amended substantially in 1988. There has not been a comprehensive update since, only
piecemeal updates. The Zoning Ordinance is used to regulate the use and development of
property within the City. It establishes 23 zoning districts. Each zoning district has development
standards designed to protect and promote the health, safety, and general welfare of the
community and to implement General Plan policies.
14.1.2 Regulatory Setting
The Existing Conditions Report Land Use and Community Character chapter discusses the
following regulatory setting relevant to land use and planning.
State
General Plan Law (California Government Code Section 65300). California Government
Code Section 65300 regulates the substantive and topical requirements of General Plans. State
law requires each city and county to adopt a General Plan “for the physical development of the
county or city, and any land outside its boundaries which bears relation to its planning.” The
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 14. Land Use and Planning June 28, 2018 Page 14-6
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 14_Land Use_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
California Supreme Court has called the General Plan the “constitution for future development.”
The General Plan expresses the community’s development goals and embodies public policy
relative to the distribution of future land uses, both public and private.
Since the General Plan affects the welfare of current and future generations, State law requires
that the plan take a long-term perspective (typically 15 to 25 years). The General Plan projects
conditions and needs into the future, and establishes long-term policy for day-to-day decision-
making.
Policies of the General Plan are intended to guide most land use decisions. Pursuant to State
law, subdivisions, capital improvements, development agreements, and many other land use
actions must be consistent with the adopted General Plan. In counties and general law cities,
zoning regulations and specific plans are required to conform to the General Plan. In addition,
by preparing, adopting, implementing, and maintaining the General Plan, a city or county puts in
place a policy framework that:
• Serves to identify the community’s land use, circulation, environmental, economic, and
social goals and policies as they relate to land use and development;
• Provides a basis for local government decision-making, including decisions on
development approvals and exactions;
• Provides residents and other community members with opportunities to participate in the
planning and decision-making processes of their communities; and
• Informs residents, developers, decision-makers, and other cities and counties of the
ground rules that guide development within a particular community.
State law requires General Plans to address seven mandatory elements (or topics): land use,
circulation, housing, conservation, open space, noise, and safety. Jurisdictions may also adopt
additional elements that cover topics outside the seven mandated elements (such as economic
development and historic preservation). In addition to including mandatory elements, a General
Plan must be internally consistent. As described by State law, internal consistency holds that no
policy conflicts can exist, either textual or diagrammatic, between the components of an
otherwise complete and adequate General Plan. Different policies must be balanced and
reconciled within the plan. The internal consistency requirement has five dimensions:
• Equal Status among Elements. All elements of the General Plan have equal legal status.
• Consistency between Elements. All elements of a General Plan, whether mandatory or
optional, must be consistent with one another.
• Consistency within Elements. Each element’s data, analyses, goals, policies, and
implementation programs must be consistent with and complement one another.
• Area Plan Consistency. All principles, goals, objectives, policies, and plan proposals set
forth in an area or community plan must be consistent with the overall General Plan.
• Text and Diagram Consistency. The General Plan’s text and its accompanying diagrams
are integral parts of the plan and they must be in agreement.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 14. Land Use and Planning June 28, 2018 Page 14-7
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 14_Land Use_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
General Plan Guidelines (California Government Code Section 65301). Section 65301 of
the California Government Code requires a General Plan to address the geographic territory of
the local jurisdiction and any other territory outside its boundaries that bears relation to the
planning of the jurisdiction. The jurisdiction may utilize judgment in determining what areas
outside of its boundaries to include in the planning area. The State of California General Plan
Guidelines state that the planning area for a city should include (at minimum) all land within the
city limits and all land within the city’s sphere of influence.
Burlingame’s sphere of influence includes the unincorporated residential neighborhood of
Burlingame Hills, generally located at the northwest corner of the city adjacent to the town of
Hillsborough. Because this neighborhood consists exclusively of large lot, hillside single-family
residences, residents of this neighborhood have long expressed their desire not to be part of an
incorporated city, and annexation could represent an additional infrastructure maintenance
burden.
Specific Plan Law (California Government Code Section 65451). California Government
Code Section 65451 regulates the substantive and topical requirements of specific plans. A
specific plan is a tool for the systematic implementation of the General Plan, similar to zoning
regulations, and establishes a link between implementing policies of the General Plan and
individual development proposals. A specific plan differs from zoning in that it applies to a
defined geographic area and has tailored development regulations. A specific plan may be as
general as setting forth broad policy concepts, or as detailed as providing direction on every
facet of development, from the type, location, and intensity of uses to the design and capacity of
infrastructure.
Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO). The Local Agency Formation Commissions
(LAFCOs) are independent regulatory commissions created to control the boundaries of cities
and most special districts. LAFCOs have a range of duties but fundamentally exist to function as
regulatory bodies to control city and special district boundaries and use their planning powers to
influence land use. LAFCOs are restricted to making indirect land use decisions primarily to
approve or deny logical and timely boundary changes in local governmental boundaries.
LAFCOs are also responsible for conducting special studies to review ways to reorganize,
simplify, and streamline governmental structure and preparing a sphere of influence for each
city and special district within each county.
Local
California State Lands Commission. The California State Lands Commission has authority
over all State-owned and sovereign lands, including tidelands, submerged lands, beds of
navigable rivers, streams, lakes, bay, estuaries, inlets, and straits. The Commission administers
surface leasing and other activities on these lands. The State Lands Commission owns several
properties within Burlingame.
San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission. The San Francisco Bay
Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) is responsible for ensuring that any
development along San Francisco Bay provides maximum public access to the shoreline.
BCDC’s jurisdiction extends 100 feet inland from the highest tide line along all waters that are
part of San Francisco Bay. In Burlingame, this includes all creeks draining to San Francisco Bay
as far inland as the east side of Old Bayshore Highway, Anza Lagoon, Sanchez Channel,
Burlingame Lagoon, and the Sanchez Marsh. Approximately 30% of the property in the Bayfront
is subject to review by the BCDC. In Burlingame, standards for providing shoreline access have
been adopted by both BCDC and the Burlingame City Council. These guidelines define how
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 14. Land Use and Planning June 28, 2018 Page 14-8
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 14_Land Use_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
public access is provided on shoreline properties and establish measurable standards for
implementation. Development within BCDC’s jurisdiction is required to conform to the
guidelines.
City of Burlingame Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances. The Burlingame Zoning and
Subdivision Ordinances (Municipal Code Titles 25 and 26, respectively) are the primary tools
used to regulate development. They establish how properties can be used, developed, and
subdivided, and they set forth permitting processes for discretionary project review. The Zoning
Ordinance divides the City into zoning districts that roughly correlate to the General Plan land
use categories.
14.2 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
This section describes potential impacts related to land use and planning that could result from
the General Plan, and discusses General Plan goals, policies, and implementation programs
that would avoid or reduce those potential impacts. The section also recommends mitigation
measures as needed to reduce significant impacts.
14.2.1 Significance Criteria
Based on the CEQA Guidelines, implementation of the City of Burlingame 2040 General Plan
would have a significant impact related to land use and planning if it would:
(a) Physically divide an established community; or
(b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with
jurisdiction over the project adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect.
14.2.2 Analysis Methodology
The methodology for evaluating potential environmental impacts related to land use and
planning followed this basic sequence:
(1) The General Plan Existing Conditions Report was evaluated to identify existing
environmental conditions and problems related to land use and planning, including the
regulatory framework that applies to these issues.
(2) The CEQA Statute and Guidelines (2017), including Appendix G (Environmental
Checklist Form), were consulted to identify environmental impact topics and issues that
should be addressed in the program EIR. In part, this process resulted in the
significance criteria listed in subsection 14.2.1 above.
(3) The General Plan Policy Document, including the associated development capacity
assumptions (see EIR section 3.6), was analyzed to identify goals, policies,
implementation programs (“policies” for short), and potential outcomes that address the
significance criteria. This analysis resulted in two basic conclusions regarding policies
and outcomes: (a) many policies would avoid or reduce potential environmental impacts,
and (b) some policies or outcomes could result in new environmental impacts or
increase the severity of existing environmental problems.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 14. Land Use and Planning June 28, 2018 Page 14-9
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 14_Land Use_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
(4) For potential environmental impacts that would result from the 2040 General Plan,
mitigation measures were designed to avoid or reduce each impact to a less-than-
significant level. If implementation of all identified feasible mitigations cannot reduce the
impact to a less-than-significant level, then the impact is considered significant and
unavoidable.
14.2.3 Environmental Impacts
Potential Impacts of Future Development under the 2040 General Plan
Table 14-2 indicates the acreages of 2040 General Plan land uses. As with the existing land use
(see Table 14-1 Existing Land Use in the Planning Area), low-density residential land use is the
predominant land use under the 2040 General Plan. The major changes in land uses from
existing to 2040 are the re-designation of existing industrial areas in the North Burlingame to
Innovative Industrial and the addition of Live/Work opportunities, also in North Burlingame.
Table 14-2: 2040 General Plan Land Use
Land Use Acres
Bayfront Commercial 179.04
Baylands 907.88
Broadway Mixed Use 6.12
California Mixed Use 9.62
Downtown Specific Plan 130.22
General Commercial 4.76
High Density Residential 16.39
Innovation Industrial 206.41
Live/Work 79.93
Low Density Residential 984.41
Medium Density Residential 49.85
Medium/High Density Residential 97.20
North Burlingame Mixed Use 38.44
Open Space 17.46
Parks and Recreation 131.31
Public/Institutional 137.57
Rail Corridor 57.83
Road 31.44
Total 3,085.97
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 14. Land Use and Planning June 28, 2018 Page 14-10
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 14_Land Use_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
The Bayfront area, which formerly consisted of several land use designations (office, parking lot,
hotel/motel, service and special sales) will be consolidated to a single designation: Bayfront
Commercial. Although uses will be similar to existing, the new designation emphasizes that new
development will prioritize public access to the waterfront, use of open space, and creating a
“welcoming environment for Burlingame residents and tourists alike to visit, shop, eat, bike and
walk, and enjoy nature.”
Some areas formerly designated as General Commercial are being re-designated as “mixed
use” to add higher density housing in areas of high mobility nodes, notably along Broadway,
California Drive, and in North Burlingame.
The General Plan represents a policy-level project designed to direct long-term growth within
the planning area. The City has many long-established residential neighborhoods as well as
newer commercial and industrial developments. The land use changes would not divide an
established community because they do not authorize any specific construction project,
development plan, or other land-altering activity. Neither would they indirectly lead to the
division of an established community, as the changes would not trigger the development of
major new infrastructure (such as major roads or freeways, power easements or water
conveyance facilities) which could physically divide existing developed areas of the City.
Additionally, General Plan proposed land use changes were designed to be compatible with
existing land uses. (Significance Criterion 14.2.1 [a])
The project involves the update of all General Plan elements, except the Housing Element.
None of the changes affect plans, policies, or regulations of other agencies that have jurisdiction
within the planning area. In fact, some of the changes in General Plan elements are proposed to
reflect and address new policies and regulations of other agencies, such as those relating to
climate change, tribal consultations, biological resources, public safety, and traffic.
With regard to review authority of the San Francisco Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC), the
proposed General Plan update does not involve any proposals that would allow for increased
building heights or high-occupancy buildings within any of the airport-influence zones of the San
Francisco International Airport. As required by State Public Utilities Code, the City will provide
for formal consultation with the ALUC regarding the proposed updated General Plan and over
time, any land use applications within the affected review areas.
Burlingame Hills is an unincorporated area within San Mateo County that is surrounded by lands
under the jurisdiction of the City of Burlingame. The County has jurisdiction over land uses
within the sphere of influence, but no changes are proposed on properties within the sphere of
influence. The planning area is subject to a variety of Federal, State, and locally adopted plans
designed to mitigate environmental impacts and to preserve important resources. Plans and
policies related to specific resource issues (e.g., biological resources, hydrology, public
services) are addressed in those specific sections of this EIR.
No conflicts between environmental resources and a policy or regulation of another agency
would result from the proposed General Plan Update. (Significance Criterion 14.2.1 [b])
How Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies Reduce Impacts
Table 14-3 is aligned with relevant Existing Regulations and General Plan policies that relate to
land use and planning. Column 1 (Objective) lists each Regulation and General Plan goal,
policy, and implementation program (“policy” for short), organized by General Plan element, that
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 14. Land Use and Planning June 28, 2018 Page 14-11
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 14_Land Use_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
addresses the potential impact identified in Table 14-3. Column 2 is a summary of the regulation
and the text of the policy. Column 3 answers the question, “How does the regulation/policy
avoid or reduce the potential impact?” Column 4 identifies the applicable significance criteria
that is addressed by the regulation/policy.
The verbs in Column 3 are intended to be applied consistently. The verb “ensures” means that
the policy is sufficient to guarantee the result identified in the policy. The verb “helps” means
that the policy contributes to avoiding or reducing the identified potential impact; in many cases,
“helps” is used for a policy that can be applied to avoid or reduce a wide range of potential
impacts.
Table 14-3: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Land Use and Planning
Regulation/Policy Description of Regulation/Policy How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
Existing Regulations
General Plan Law
(California
Government Code
Section 65300).
California Government Code
Section 65300 regulates the
substantive and topical
requirements of General Plans.
State law requires each city and
county to adopt a General Plan “for
the physical development of the
county or city, and any land
outside its boundaries which bears
relation to its planning.”
Helps ensure that the
design of new
development will be
compatible and
integrated with the
established land use
pattern.
(a) Physically
divide an
established
community
(b) Conflict with
land use plans
General Plan
Guidelines
(California
Government Code
Section 65301).
Section 65301 of the California
Government Code requires a
General Plan to address the
geographic territory of the local
jurisdiction and any other territory
outside its boundaries that bears
relation to the planning of the
jurisdiction.
Helps ensure that the
design of new
development will be
compatible and
integrated with the
established land use
pattern.
(a) Physically
divide an
established
community
(b) Conflict with
land use plans
Specific Plan Law
(California
Government Code
Section 65451).
California Government Code
Section 65451 regulates the
substantive and topical
requirements of specific plans
Ensures that specific
plans will be reviewed
for updates as
necessary as the 2040
General Plan is
implemented over time.
(a) Physically
divide an
established
community
(b) Conflict with
land use plans
Local Agency
Formation
Commission
(LAFCO).
The Local Agency Formation
Commissions (LAFCOs) are
independent regulatory
commissions created to control the
boundaries of cities and most
special districts.
Helps ensure that
potential annexations
will be incorporated into
the established land use
pattern and will not
physically divide the
community.
(a) Physically
divide an
established
community
(b) Conflict with
land use plans
California State
Lands Commission.
The California State Lands
Commission has authority over all
state-owned and sovereign lands,
including tidelands, submerged
lands, beds of navigable rivers,
streams, lakes, bay, estuaries,
inlets and straits. The Commission
Helps ensure that
coordinated regional
planning will be
consistent with the land
use goals and policies of
the Burlingame 2040
General Plan, especially
(b) Conflict with
land use plans
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 14. Land Use and Planning June 28, 2018 Page 14-12
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 14_Land Use_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 14-3: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Land Use and Planning
Regulation/Policy Description of Regulation/Policy How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
administers surface leasing and
other activities on these lands. The
State owns several properties
within Burlingame.
those identified in the
EIR Land Use and
Planning chapter.
San Francisco Bay
Conservation and
Development
Commission.
The San Francisco Bay
Conservation and Development
Commission (BCDC) is
responsible for ensuring that any
development along San Francisco
Bay provides maximum public
access to the shoreline. BCDC’s
jurisdiction extends 100 feet inland
from the highest tide line along all
waters that are part of San
Francisco Bay.
Helps ensure that
coordinated regional
planning will be
consistent with the land
use goals and policies of
the Burlingame 2040
General Plan, especially
those identified in the
EIR Land Use and
Planning chapter.
(b) Conflict with
land use plans
City of Burlingame
Zoning and
Subdivision
Ordinances.
The Burlingame Zoning and
Subdivision Ordinances (Municipal
Code Titles 25 and 26,
respectively) are the primary tools
used to regulate development in
the city. They establish how
properties can be used, developed
and subdivided, and they set forth
permitting processes for
discretionary project review.
Helps ensure that new
development will not
conflict with the General
Plan.
(b) Conflict with
land use plans
2040 General Plan Community Character – Land Use
Principle 1.a:
Balanced and
Smart Growth
Allow growth to occur in targeted
areas where supportive physical
and community infrastructure are
available or can readily be
provided, and where such growth
contributes to the positive qualities
and characteristics that define
Burlingame.
Helps ensure that new
development will occur
on infill sites to enhance
the established land use
pattern.
(a) Physically
divide an
established
community
(b) Conflict with
land use plans
Principle 1.b:
Balanced and
Smart Growth
Maintain a balance of ownership
and rental housing, with
opportunities for people of all
income ranges to live in
Burlingame.
Helps ensure there are
housing opportunities
available for people of all
income ranges.
(a) Physically
divide an
established
community
(b) Conflict with
land use plans
Principle 1.c:
Balanced and
Smart Growth
Base land use decisions on the
ability of the multimodal
transportation network to support
growth.
Connects various activity
centers through a multi-
modal transportation
system, instead of with
large-scale roadway
projects that can
physically divide a
community.
(a) Physically
divide an
established
community
Principle 1.d:
Balanced and
Smart Growth
Ensure that new commercial,
office, and industrial development
can accommodate the evolving
Encourages more
intensive use of the
existing corridor instead
(a) Physically
divide an
established
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 14. Land Use and Planning June 28, 2018 Page 14-13
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 14_Land Use_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 14-3: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Land Use and Planning
Regulation/Policy Description of Regulation/Policy How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
nature of how buildings are used
and business is conducted.
of creation of new large-
scale developments in
other locations that can
physically divide the
community.
community
Goal CC-4: Ensure high-quality, integrated and
appropriately-scaled residential
development within Burlingame’s
neighborhoods.
Encourages physical
connections and design
features that link
residential developments
to their existing
neighborhoods. Avoids
physically separated
developments that divide
the community.
(a)Physically
divide an
established
community
CC-4.1: Residential
Character and
Design
Encourage a diverse housing stock
while also ensuring that new
development and substantially
remodeled homes maintain the
architectural and massing
character of each unique
residential neighborhood in
Burlingame.
Encourages integration
of smaller scale,
compatible land uses
within individual
neighborhoods instead
of separation of land
uses into larger, distinct
locations that can
physically divide the
community.
(a) Physically
divide an
established
community
CC-4.3: Mass and
Scale
Ensure that the scale and
interrelationships of new and old
residential development
complement each other.
Encourages integration
of smaller scale,
compatible land uses
within individual
neighborhoods instead
of separation of land
uses into larger, distinct
locations that can
physically divide the
community.
(a) Physically
divide an
established
community
CC-4.4: Density
Compatibility
Ensure that the bulk and scale of
multifamily residential
developments are compatible with
homes and buildings in the
surrounding area.
Encourages compatible
land uses instead of
separation of land uses
into larger, distinct
locations that can
physically divide the
community.
(a) Physically
divide an
established
community
(b) Conflict with
land use plans
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 14. Land Use and Planning June 28, 2018 Page 14-14
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 14_Land Use_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Conclusions
In most cases, no one policy is expected to completely avoid or reduce an identified potential
environmental impact. However, the collective, cumulative mitigating benefits of the policies
listed in Table 14-3 will result in a less-than-significant impact related to the identified
significance criterion and the corresponding environmental topic. This conclusion is consistent
with the purpose and use of a program EIR for a general plan (see EIR Introduction, Chapter 1).
Based on the methodology described above, 2040 General Plan impacts related to land use
and planning would be less than significant (see criteria [a] and [b] in subsection 14.2.1,
“Significance Criteria,” above). No mitigation is required.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-1
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
15. NOISE AND VIBRATION
This chapter of the EIR provides pertinent background information on the nature of sound
transmission, describes the existing noise environment in the City of Burlingame, summarizes
applicable noise guidelines, standards, and regulations, and evaluates potential noise impacts
associated with the City’s proposed General Plan Update.
15.1 BACKGROUND INFORMATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
15.1.1 Fundamentals of Environmental Acoustics
Noise is generally defined as unwanted sound and is widely recognized as a form of
environmental degradation. Airborne sound is the rapid fluctuation of air pressure above and
below atmospheric pressure. The frequency (pitch), amplitude (intensity or loudness), and
duration of a sound all contribute to the effect on a listener, or receptor, and whether or not the
receptor perceives the sound as “noisy” or annoying.
Pitch is the height or depth of a tone or sound and depends on the frequency of the vibrations
by which it is produced. Sound frequency is expressed in terms of cycles per second, or Hertz
(Hz). Humans generally hear sounds with frequencies between 20 and 20,000 Hz and perceive
higher frequency sounds, or high pitch noise, as louder than low-frequency sound or sounds low
in pitch. Sound intensity or loudness is a function of the amplitude of the pressure wave
generated by a noise source combined with the reception characteristics of the human ear.
Atmospheric factors and obstructions between the noise source and receptor also affect the
loudness perceived by the receptor. Sound pressure levels are typically expressed on a
logarithmic scale in terms of decibels (dB). A dB is a unit of measurement that indicates the
relative amplitude (i.e., intensity or loudness) of a sound, with 0 dB corresponding roughly to the
threshold of hearing for the healthy, unimpaired human ear.
Sound levels in decibels are calculated on a logarithmic basis. An increase of 10 dBs represents
a ten-fold increase in acoustic energy, while 20 dBs is 100 times more intense, 30 dBs is 1,000
times more intense, etc. In general, there is a relationship between the subjective noisiness or
loudness of a sound and its intensity, with each 10 dB increase in sound level perceived as
approximately a doubling of loudness. Due to the logarithmic basis, decibels cannot be directly
added or subtracted together using common arithmetic operations:
Instead, the combined sound level from two or more sources must be combined logarithmically.
For example, if one noise source produces a sound power level of 50 dBA, two of the same
sources would combine to produce 53 dB as shown below.
In general, when one source is 10 dB higher than another source, the quieter source does not
add to the sound levels produced by the louder source because the louder source contains ten
times more sound energy than the quieter source.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-2
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
15.1.2 Sound Characterization
Although humans generally can hear sounds with frequencies between 20 and 20,000 Hz most
of the sounds humans are normally exposed to do not consist of a single frequency, but rather a
broad range of frequencies perceived differently by the human ear. In general, humans are most
sensitive to the frequency range of 1,000–8,000 Hz and perceive sounds within that range
better than sounds of the same amplitude in higher or lower frequencies. Instruments used to
measure sound, therefore, include an electrical filter that enables the instrument’s detectors to
replicate human hearing. This filter, known as the “A-weighting” or “A-weighted sound level”
filters low and very high frequencies, giving greater weight to the frequencies of sound to which
the human ear is typically most sensitive. Most environmental measurements are reported in
dBA, meaning decibels on the A-scale. See Table 15-1 for a list common noise sources and
their A-weighted noise levels.
Sound levels are usually not steady and vary over time. Therefore, a method for describing
either the average character of the sound or the statistical behavior of the variations over a
period of time is necessary. The continuous equivalent noise level (Leq) descriptor is used to
represent the average character of the sound over a period of time. The Leq represents the
level of steady-state noise that would have the same acoustical energy as the sum of the time-
varying noise measured over a given time period. Leq is useful for evaluating shorter time
periods over the course of a day. The most common Leq averaging period is hourly, but Leq
can describe any series of noise events over a given time period.
Variable noise levels are the values that are exceed for a portion of the measured time period.
Thus, the L1, L10, L50, and L90 descriptors represent the sound levels exceeded 1%, 10%,
50%, and 90% of the time the measurement was performed. The L90 value usually corresponds
to the background sound level at the measurement location.
When considering environmental noise, it is important to account for the different responses
people have to daytime and nighttime noise. In general, during the nighttime, background noise
levels are generally quieter than during the daytime but also more noticeable due to the fact that
household noise has decreased as people begin to retire and sleep. Noise exposure over the
course of an entire day is described by the day/night average sound level, Ldn (or DNL), and
the community noise equivalent level, or CNEL, descriptors. Both descriptors represent the 24-
hour noise exposure in a community or area. For DNL, the 24-hour day is divided into a 15-hour
daytime period (7 AM to 10 PM) and a 9-hour nighttime period (10 PM to 7 AM) and a 10 dB
“penalty” is added to measure nighttime noise levels when calculating the 24-hour average
noise level. For example, a 45 dBA nighttime sound level would contribute as much to the
overall day-night average as a 55 dBA daytime sound level. The CNEL descriptor is similar to
Ldn, except that it includes an additional 5 dBA penalty for noise events that occur during the
evening time period (7 PM to 10 PM). The artificial penalties imposed during Ldn and CNEL
calculations are intended to account for a receptor’s increased sensitivity to noise levels during
quieter nighttime periods.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-3
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 15-1: Typical Outdoor and Indoor Noise Levels
Common Outdoor Activities
Noise
Level
(dBA)
Common Indoor Activities
-110- Rock Band
Jet flyover at 1,000 feet
-100-
Gas lawn mower at 3 feet
-90-
Diesel truck at 50 feet at 50 mph Food blender at 3 feet
-80- Garbage disposal at 3 feet
Noise urban area, daytime
Gas lawnmower, 100 feet -70- Vacuum cleaner at 10 feet
Commercial area Normal speech at 3 feet
Heavy traffic at 300 feet -60-
Large business office
Quiet urban daytime -50 Dishwasher next room
Quite urban nighttime -40- Theater, large conference room (background)
Quiet suburban nighttime
-30- Library
Quite rural nighttime Bedroom at night
-20-
Broadcast/recording studio
-10-
Typical threshold of human hearing -0- Typical threshold of human hearing
Source: Caltrans 1
15.1.3 Sound Propagation
The energy contained in a sound pressure wave dissipates and is absorbed by the surrounding
environment as the sound wave spreads out and travels away from the noise generating
source. The strength of the source is often characterized by its “sound power level.” Sound
power level is independent of the distance a receiver is from the source and is a property of the
source alone. Knowing the sound power level of an idealized source and its distance from a
receiver, sound pressure level at the receiver point can be calculated based on geometrical
spreading and attenuation (noise reduction) as a result of distance and environmental factors,
1 California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) 2013. Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Analysis
Protocol. Sacramento, CA. September 2013.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-4
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
such as ground cover (asphalt vs. grass or trees), atmospheric absorption, and shielding by
terrain or barriers.
For an ideal “point” source of sound, the energy contained in a sound pressure wave dissipates
and is absorbed by the surrounding environment as the sound wave spreads out in a spherical
pattern and travels away from the point source. Theoretically, the sound level attenuates, or
decreases, by 6 dB with each doubling of distance from the point source. In contrast, a “line”
source of sound, such as a roadway or traffic, spreads out in a cylindrical pattern and
theoretically attenuates by 3 dB with each doubling of distance from the line source; however,
the sound level at a receptor location can be modified further by additional factors. The first is
the presence of a reflecting plane such as the ground. For hard ground, a reflecting plane
typically increases A-weighted sound pressure levels by 3 dB. If some of the reflected sound is
absorbed by the surface, this increase will be less than 3 dB. Other factors affecting the
predicted sound pressure level are often lumped together into a term called “excess
attenuation.” Excess attenuation is the amount of additional attenuation that occurs beyond
simple spherical spreading. For sound propagation outdoors, there is almost always excess
attenuation, producing lower levels than what would be predicted by spherical spreading. Some
examples include attenuation by sound absorption in air; attenuation by barriers; attenuation by
rain, sleet, snow, or fog; attenuation by grass, shrubbery, and trees; and attenuation from
shadow zones created by wind and temperature gradients. Under certain meteorological
conditions, like fog and low-level clouds, some of these excess attenuation mechanisms are
reduced or eliminated due to noise reflection.
15.1.4 Noise Effects
Noise effects on human beings are generally categorized as:
• Subjective effects of annoyance, nuisance, and/or dissatisfaction
• Interference with activities such as speech, sleep, learning, or relaxing
• Physiological effects such as startling and hearing loss
Most environmental noise levels produce subjective or interference effects; physiological effects
are usually limited to high noise environments such as industrial manufacturing facilities or
airports.
Predicting the subjective and interference effects of noise is difficult due to the wide variation in
individual thresholds of annoyance and past experiences with noise; however, an accepted
method to determine a person’s subjective reaction to a new noise source is to compare it the
existing environment without the noise source, or the “ambient” noise environment. In general,
the more a new noise source exceeds the ambient noise level, the more likely it is to be
considered annoying and to disturb normal activities.
Under controlled conditions in an acoustical laboratory, the trained, healthy human ear is able to
discern 1‐dB changes in sound levels when exposed to steady, single‐frequency (“pure‐tone”)
signals in the mid‐frequency (1,000–8,000 Hz) range. In typical noisy environments, changes in
noise of 1 to 2 dB are generally not perceptible. However, it is widely accepted that people are
able to begin to detect sound level increases of 3 dB in typical noisy environments. Further, a 5
dB increase is generally perceived as a distinctly noticeable increase, and a 10 dB increase is
generally perceived as a doubling of loudness that would almost certainly cause an adverse
response from community noise receptors.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-5
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
15.1.5 Groundborne Vibration and Noise
Vibration is the movement of particles within a medium or object such as the ground or a
building. Vibration may be caused by natural phenomena (e.g., earthquakes, volcanic eruptions,
sea waves, landslides) or humans (e.g., explosions, machinery, traffic, trains, construction
equipment). Vibration sources are usually characterized as continuous, such as factory
machinery, or transient, such as explosions.
As is the case with airborne sound, groundborne vibrations may be described by amplitude and
frequency; however, unlike airborne sound, there is no standard way of measuring and reporting
amplitude. Vibration amplitudes can be expressed in terms of velocity (inches per second) or
discussed in dB units in order to compress the range of numbers required to describe vibration.
Vibration impacts to buildings are usually discussed in terms of peak particle velocity (PPV) in
inches per second (in/sec). PPV represents the maximum instantaneous positive or negative
peak of a vibration signal and is most appropriate for evaluating the potential for building
damage. Vibration can impact people, structures, and sensitive equipment. The primary concern
related to vibration and people is the potential to annoy those working and residing in the area.
Vibration with high enough amplitudes can damage structures (such as crack plaster or destroy
windows). Ground-borne vibration can also disrupt the use of sensitive medical and scientific
instruments, such as electron microscopes.
Common sources of vibration within communities include construction activities and railroads.
Ground-borne vibration generated by construction projects is usually highest during pile driving,
rock blasting, soil compacting, jack hammering, and demolition-related activities. Next to pile
driving, grading activity has the greatest potential for vibration impacts if large bulldozers, large
trucks, or other heavy equipment are used.
15.1.6 Existing Noise Environment
The Noise section (Section 6.13) of the General Plan Existing Conditions Report includes
relevant information on the City’s noise setting. Pursuant to Section 15150 of the CEQA
Guidelines, this document is incorporated into the Draft EIR by reference. The Existing
Conditions Report is available for download from the City of Burlingame General Plan website
at:
http://www.Burlingame.org/GENERALPLAN/
Copies of the Existing Conditions Report may be viewed during regular business hours (8:00
a.m. to 5:00 p.m.), Monday through Friday, at the City of Burlingame Planning Division, 501
Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA 94010.
The relevant findings of the existing conditions report include:
Roadway traffic is the most pervasive source of noise in the City, with U.S. 101 and
Interstate-280 (I-280), but more so the City’s major arterial roads such as El Camino Real
(State Route [SR] 82), Trousdale Drive, and California Drive serving as significant sources
of community noise. Existing roadway traffic noise modeling conducted for the EIR is
summarized in subsection 15.1.6.2 and indicates existing residential areas along main City
roads, especially California Drive, El Camino Real, and Trousdale Drive, are exposed to
traffic noise levels between 60 and 70 CNEL.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-6
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
In addition to traffic noise on local roadways, commuter and freight trains operating on the
Caltrain corridor (adjacent to California Drive) contribute to the City’s ambient noise
environment and are also a source of ground-borne vibration. Information on railroad noise
is summarized in section 15.1.6.3 and indicates existing residential areas along the
Caltrain corridor are exposed to noise levels of approximately 70 DNL.
Burlingame is located within two miles of San Francisco International Airport. According to
the Comprehensive Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan for the Environs of San Francisco
International Airport, a small part of the City’s industrial area located west of Rollins Road
and northwest of Mitten Road is within the 65 CNEL contour associated with airport
operations.
Commercial, industrial, and manufacturing operations produce noise from equipment, truck
loading, and other activities. Commercial operations are generally located along or near El
Camino Real and other arterial roads, while industrial, warehouse, and manufacturing
uses are concentrated in the northwestern portion of the City. Noise generated by
industrial facilities and other stationary sources contribute to the ambient noise
environment in their immediate vicinities.
The City’s existing noise environment is described in more detail below.
15.1.6.1 Measured Ambient Noise Levels
Existing ambient noise levels in the Planning Area were monitored in October 2017 (see
Appendix C). Ambient noise levels were measured with two Larson Davis SoundTrack LxT Type
1 sound level meters. The ambient noise monitoring conducted for this EIR included seven
short-term (ST) measurements and three long-term (LT) measurements at locations selected to:
• Provide direct observations of existing noise sources at and near the City;
• Determine typical ambient noise levels in the City; and
• Evaluate project noise levels at specific land uses throughout the City, including
sensitive land uses (see Section 15.1.7).
The ambient noise monitoring locations are shown on Figure 15-1 and described below:
• Location ST-1 was at the southwest corner of Bayswater Avenue and California Drive, in
the southern part of the City, approximately 275 feet from the center of the Caltrain
corridor. Ambient noise levels at location ST-1 are considered to be representative of
background daytime noise levels associated with commercial and multi-family residential
land uses in the southern part of the City.
• Location ST-2 was at the southwest corner of El Camino Real and Trousdale Drive, in
the northern part of the City, near the Mills Peninsula Medical Center. Ambient noise
levels at location ST-2 are considered to be representative of background daytime noise
levels associated with commercial land uses in the City along El Camino Real.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-7
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
• Location ST-3 was at the southeast corner of Palm Drive and Acacia Drive, in the central
part of the City. Ambient noise levels at location ST-3 are considered to be
representative of background daytime noise levels associated with single-family
residential land uses in the City that are located east of El Camino Real.
• Location ST-4 was on Benito Avenue between Adeline Drive and Hillside Drive, in the
central-western part of the City. Ambient noise levels at location ST-4 are considered to
be representative of background daytime noise levels associated with single-family
residential land uses in the City that are located west of El Camino Real.
• Location ST-5 was on Airport Boulevard to the east of Anza Boulevard, in the eastern
part of the City. Ambient noise levels at location ST-5 are considered to be
representative of background daytime noise levels associated with commercial hotel and
airport-related (parking) land uses in the City.
• Location ST-6 was on El Camino Real between Easton Drive and Broadway, in the
center of the City. Ambient noise levels at location ST-6 are considered to be
representative of background daytime noise levels associated with single and multi-
family residential land uses in the City that are located along El Camino Real and other
main arterials.
• Location ST-7 was on Hinckley Road between Bayshore Highway and Gilbreth Road, in
the northeastern part of the City. Ambient noise levels at location ST-7 are considered
to be representative of background daytime noise levels associated with office/light
industrial and commercial land uses in the City.
• Location LT-1 was at the north corner of Washington Park (near the Helen D’Arcy
Fragrance Garden), which is near Burlingame High School in the southeastern part of
the City. Ambient noise levels at location LT-1 are considered to be representative of
background daytime noise levels associated with single family residential land uses in
the eastern part of the City.
• Location LT-2 was located at the Burlingame Library Easton Branch, at the intersection
of Easton Drive and Cabrillo Avenue, near the central part of the City. Ambient noise
levels at location LT-2 are considered to be representative of background daytime noise
levels associated with single family residential land uses near the central part of the City.
• Location LT-3 was at Cuernavaca Park on Alcazar Drive, in the western part of the City.
Ambient noise levels at location LT-2 are considered to be representative of background
daytime noise levels associated with land uses in the western part of the City.
!!!!!!!!!!§¨¦101§¨¦280California DrEl Camino RealBroadwayTrousdale DrBernal AvePeninsula AveHoward AveAdeline DrEaston DrCity of MilllbraeCity of HillsboroughCity of San Mateo7511362432BurlingameIntermediateSchoolFranklinElementaryMercy HighSchoolLincolnElementaryOur Lady of Angels ElementaryRooseveltElementaryHooverElementaryMckinleyElementaryBurlingame High SchoolWashingtonElementarySt. Catherine ofSiena ElementarySan Franciso BayBurlingame General Plan EIRFigure 15-1 Noise Measurement Locations1,500750 3,000 FT 0N!Noise Measurement Locations (Long Term)!Noise Measurement Locations (Short Term)Burlingame BoundarySchoolsStreet CenterlinesRailroads##
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-9
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Based on observations made during the ambient noise monitoring, the existing noise
environment in Burlingame consists primarily of transportation noise sources, including
vehicular traffic on City roads, rail activity and SFO airport operations. Table 15-2 summarizes
the results of the ambient noise monitoring conducted for the EIR.
Table 15-2: Existing Ambient Noise Levels (dBA)
Monitoring
Location
Associated
Land Use
Monitoring
Duration
Leq Range
CNEL Daytime
7AM-7 PM
Evening 7PM-
10PM
Nighttime
10PM-7AM
LT-1 Residential,
Park, School 24 hours 49.6 – 61.5 57.2 – 59.9 53.4 – 65.6 59.3
LT-2 Residential,
Institution 24 hours 51.4 – 57.9 60.1 – 61.2 57.9 – 70.3 61.7
LT-3 Residential,
Park 24 hours 46.6 – 55.8 58.7 – 59.6 51.8 – 63.1 57.2
ST-1 Residential,
Commercial 30 minutes 66.9 – 67.2 -- -- --
ST-2 Commercial 30 minutes 63.3 – 64.9 -- -- --
ST-3 Residential 30 minutes 53.8 – 56.6 -- -- --
ST-4 Residential 30 minutes 50.1 – 55.1 -- -- --
ST-5 Commercial 30 minutes 64.2 – 65.2 -- -- --
ST-6 Residential 30 minutes 69.7 – 74.4 -- -- --
ST-7 Industrial,
Commercial 30 minutes 58.4 – 59.1 -- -- --
Source: MIG, 2017 (see Appendix C)
(A)Leq range reflects hourly Leq for LT measurements and 10-minute interval Leq for ST measurements.
As seen in Table 15-2, daytime noise levels were generally lowest in lower-density residential
areas of the City (ST-3, ST-4, LT-1, LT-2, and LT-3), and highest in the commercial and
industrial areas of the City (ST-2, ST-3, ST-4, ST-6, and ST-7). Measured noise levels were
highest along arterial roadways such as California Drive (ST-1), El Camino Real (ST-2 and ST-
6), and Trousdale Drive (ST-5). In general, the long-term noise monitoring indicates most lower-
density residential areas in the City experience a noise exposure between approximately 57 and
62 CNEL, while the short-term noise monitoring indicates noise exposure is likely 5 to 10 dB
higher in most other parts of the City.
15.1.6.2 Existing Traffic Noise Levels
Existing (Year 2017) traffic noise levels were computed using the U.S. Department of
Transportation Federal Highway Administration’s Traffic Noise Model (TNM), Version 2.5, and
project-specific average daily traffic (ADT) data provided by Hexagon Transportation
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-10
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Consultants 2 (see Appendix C). The model uses traffic volume, vehicle mix, vehicle speed,
roadway geometry, and other variables to compute 24-hour traffic noise levels at user-defined
receptor distances from the roadway center. The TNM modeling conducted for this EIR
incorporates worst-case assumptions about motor vehicle traffic and noise levels; specifically,
calculations are based on “hard” site conditions and do not incorporate any natural or artificial
shielding with the exception of modeling for U.S. 101, which included shielding associated with
the sound barrier wall present on the southbound side of the freeway (between Howard Avenue
and Toyon Road). Traffic noise levels were estimated on a 24-hour, CNEL exposure basis
assuming equal hourly distribution of vehicle traffic. The mix of automobiles (95%), medium
(2%) and heavy duty trucks (1%), and motorcycles (2%) assigned to the roadway system was
generated using the California Air Resources Board’s (CARB) EMFAC2014 model, which
contains vehicle population data by different geographic regions. Vehicles were assumed to
travel the posted speed limit on each modeled roadway segment.
Existing traffic noise contours are shown in Figure 15-2 (Existing Transportation Noise
Contours). The distances to the CNEL contours for the roadway are shown in Table 15-3Table
15-3: Existing (2017) Traffic Noise Level Contour Distances. Please refer to Appendix C for
detailed information on existing traffic noise modeling assumptions.
The results of the traffic noise modeling indicate that existing traffic noise levels within the City
are highest along California Drive, El Camino Real, Murchison Drive, Skyline Boulevard, and
certain segments of Broadway. Specifically, the modeling shows:
• Traffic noise levels along the segment of Broadway from US 101 to California Drive are
estimated to be 69.8 CNEL at a distance of 100 feet from the center of this roadway
segment. These noise levels do not exceed the City’s existing maximum outdoor noise
levels contained in the existing General Plan for the predominantly industrial (75 CNEL)
land uses present along this roadway segment.
• Traffic noise levels along California Drive are estimated to be between 67.5 and 68.9
CNEL at a distance of 100 from the center of this roadway. These noise levels generally
exceed the City’s existing maximum outdoor noise levels contained in the existing
General Plan for the residential (60 CNEL) and commercial (65 CNEL) land uses
present along this roadway.
• Traffic noise levels along El Camino Real are estimated to be between 68 and 70 CNEL
100 feet from the center of this roadway. These noise levels generally exceed the City’s
existing maximum outdoor noise levels contained in the existing General Plan for the
residential (60 CNEL) and commercial (65 CNEL) land uses present along this roadway.
• Traffic noise levels along Murchison Drive are estimated to be between 60 and 65 CNEL
approximately 100 feet from the center of this roadway. These noise levels exceed the
maximum outdoor noise levels for residential (60 CNEL) uses (located in the western
part of the City), but do not exceed maximum noise levels for commercial (65 CNEL)
land uses along most of Murchison Drive.
2 Hexagon Transportation Consultants (Hexagon) 2018. Burlingame 2040 General Plan ADT Plots. San Jose, CA.
April 2018.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-11
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
• Traffic noise levels along Trousdale Drive are estimated to be above 60 CNEL up to 100
feet from the center of this roadway. These noise levels generally exceed the City’s
existing maximum outdoor noise levels contained in the existing General Plan for the
residential (60 CNEL) land uses along this roadway.
Table 15-3: Existing (2017) Traffic Noise Level Contour Distances
ID Road Segment
CNEL at
100 Feet
(dBA)(A)
CNEL Contour and Distance from
Roadway Center in Feet
70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
1 Adeline Dr. El Camino Real to Bernal 56.6 5 14 46 145
2A Broadway US101 to California 69.8 95 302 955 3,020
2B Broadway California to El Camino Real 57.8 6 19 60 191
2C Broadway El Camino Real to Bernal 48.7 1 2 7 23
3A California Dr Peninsula to Highland 68.2 66 209 661 2,089
3B California Dr Highland to Oak Grove 68.9 78 245 776 2,455
3C California Dr Oak Grove to Mills 68.3 68 214 676 2,138
3D California Dr Mills to Trousdale 67.5 56 178 562 1,778
4 Easton Dr El Camino Real to Bernal 57.6 6 18 58 182
5A El Camino Real Peninsula to Bellevue 68.3 68 214 676 2,138
5B El Camino Real Bellevue to Sanchez 69.6 91 288 912 2,884
5C El Camino Real Sanchez to Trousdale 69.4 87 275 871 2,754
5D El Camino Real Trousdale to Murchison 69.5 89 282 891 2,818
6 Hillside Dr El Camino Real to Bernal 57.2 5 17 52 166
7A Howard Ave N. Amphlett to Anita 49.6 1 3 9 29
7B Howard Ave Anita to El Camino Real 54.9 3 10 31 98
8A Murchison Dr California to El Camino Real 65.3 34 93 339 1,072
8B Murchison Dr El Camino Real to Sequoia 61.5 14 45 141 447
8C Murchison Dr City Limit to Trousdale 60.7 12 37 117 372
9 Rollins Road Broadway to North City Limit 64 25 79 251 794
10A Skyline Blvd South City Limit to 280 NB Exit 68.3 68 214 676 2,138
10B Skyline Blvd 280 NB Exit to Trousdale 69.2 83 263 832 2,630
11A Trousdale Dr El Camino Real to Loyola 65.7 37 117 372 1,175
11B Trousdale Dr Loyola to Sebastian 62.8 19 60 191 603
11C Trousdale Dr Sebastian to West City Limit 67.8 60 191 603 1,905
12A 101 NB Within City Limits 83.1 2,042 6,457 --(B) --(B)
12A 101 NB (w/ wall) Howard to Toyon 70.3 107 339 1,072 3,388
12B 101 SB Within City Limits 83.1 2,042 6,457 --(B) --(B)
12B 101 SB (w/ wall) Toyon to Howard 70.4 110 347 1,096 3,467
13A 280 NB Adjacent to City Limits 82.7 1,862 5,888 --(B) --(B)
13B 280 SB Adjacent to City Limits 82.8 1,905 6,026 --(B) --(B)
Source: Hexagon, 2018 and MIG, 2018 (see Appendix C)
(A)All CNEL values at listed distances are measured from the center of the modeled roadway.
(B)Distances to these contours are more than 1.5 miles and are not presumed to be representative due to effects on
propagation at these distances.
§¨¦101§¨¦28075 CNEL70 CNELCity of MilllbraeCity of HillsboroughCity of San MateoSan Franciso BayCalifornia DrTrousdale DrBernal AveAdeline DrEaston DrPeninsula AveHoward AveBurlingame General Plan EIRFigure 15-2 Existing (2017) Transportation Noise Contours 1,500750 3,000 FT 0N65 CNEL60 CNELBurlingame BoundaryStreet CenterlinesRailroads75 CNEL70 CNEL
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-13
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
15.1.6.3 Existing Railroad Noise and Vibration Levels
Rail-related noise comes from several potential sources. A locomotive engine’s propulsion
system generates noise from mechanical and electrical systems as well as exhaust pipes. The
interaction of wheels with the track produces various noises, particularly where the wheel
encounters a flaw or defect along smooth wheel / track surfaces. Finally, train horns and railroad
crossing warning devices generate short but loud (up to 110 dBs for train horns) alerts pursuant
to federal safety regulations.
Within Burlingame, the predominant rail noise source is train travel along the Caltrain corridor.
Caltrain is a commuter rail line that operates on the San Francisco Peninsula and in the Santa
Clara Valley. Caltrain provides commuter rail service from San Francisco down to Gilroy and
currently operates 32 stations. Within Burlingame, the Caltrain corridor generally consists of two
tracks that run parallel to California Drive, adjacent to existing industrial, commercial, and
residential land uses, and two stations near Broadway (weekend operation only) and
Burlingame Avenue. Buildings adjacent to the Caltrain corridor are generally set back
approximately 135 to 140 feet from the edge of the closest track. The total length of each track
is approximately 2.9 miles. There are six at-grade railroad crossings within the City (Broadway,
Oak Grove Avenue, North Lane, Howard Avenue, Bayswater Avenue, and Peninsula Avenue).
The Caltrain corridor is also used by freight rail service providers (e.g., Union Pacific Railroad),
primarily at night, and may be used to support future high speed rail service on the Peninsula.
Information on existing Caltrain and freight operations and the noise and vibration levels
associated with Caltrain and freight rail operations is available from the Peninsula Corridor Joint
Powers Board’s (PCJPB) Peninsula Corridor Electrification Project (PCEP) Final EIR.3
According to the PCEP Final EIR (pg. ES-1), “Caltrain trains presently consist of diesel
locomotive-hauled, bi-level passenger cars. As of mid- 2013, Caltrain operates 46 northbound
and 46 southbound (for a total of 92) trains per day between San Jose and San Francisco
during the week. Three of these trains start in Gilroy during the morning commute period, and
three terminate in Gilroy during the evening commute period. Eleven trains in each direction are
“Baby Bullet” express service trains that make the trip between San Francisco and San Jose in
less than 1 hour. Service is frequent during the peak periods (five trains per peak hour per
direction) and is provided every hour in both directions during the midday. Caltrain provides
hourly service in both directions on Saturdays and Sundays (36 trains on Saturdays and 32
trains on Sundays) between San Jose and San Francisco only. Weekend service includes two
“Baby Bullet” express service trains per day in each direction. Caltrain also provides extra
service for special events such as San Jose Sharks San Francisco Giants games. In addition to
Caltrain commuter rail service, Union Pacific Rail Road (UPRR) operates approximately six
daily freight trains between Santa Clara and San Francisco under a ‘Trackage Rights
Agreement’ with Caltrain.”
Existing rail noise and vibration levels in and near the City of Burlingame are summarized in
Table 15-4 and 15-5.
3 Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board 2015. Peninsula Corridor Electrification Project Final Environmental Impact
Report. San Carlos, CA. January 2015.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-14
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 15-4: Existing (2013) Caltrain and Freight Rail Noise Exposure Level
PCEP EIR
Measurement Location
Distance to
Measurement
(in Feet)
DNL Noise Exposure (dBA)(A)
Non-Rail
Noise
Level(B)
Caltrain
Noise
Level(C)
Freight
Train Noise
Level
Total
Noise
Level
California Dr and Dufferin Ave 140 65 61 63 68
California Dr and Mills Ave 155 66 66 64 70
California Dr and Palm Dr 145 66 64 66 70
Park Ave and Carolan Ave 145 67 66 66 71
Source: PCJPB 4
(A)DNL is the same as CNEL except that it does not include weighting for noise exposure during the 7 PM to 10
PM evening period (see Section 15.1.2). As a result, CNEL values are normally 0.5 dB higher than DNL for the
same set of 24-hour data.5
(B)The PCEP EIR estimated noise from existing Caltrain trains using approved FTA methods.
(C)The PCEP EIR estimated non-rail exposure by removing noise from existing diesel-locomotive trains from the
total ambient noise level by decibel subtraction (energy basis).
Table 15-5: Existing (2013) Caltrain and Freight Rail Vibration Exposure Level
Measurement Address Distance from
Track Centerline Rail Activity Vibration
Velocity (vDB)
1289 Herman Street, San Bruno 115 Feet Caltrain, 57 to 65 mph 71
1101 Oxford Road, Burlingame 100 Feet Caltrain(A) 69
1051 Park Ave, Burlingame 150 Feet Caltrain(A) 61
140 N. Railroad Ave, San Mateo 115 Feet Caltrain, 75 mph 67
240 Monroe Drive, Mountain View 100 Feet Freight train 75 to 81(B)
Source: PCJPB 6
(A)The PCEP EIR did not provide speed information for these vibration measurements.
(B)This measurement location reflects the closest freight train vibration measurement in the PCEP EIR.
Although operating service and associated noise and vibration levels from the PCEP EIR are
from approximately 2013, they are still considered representative of existing conditions because
no substantial service changes have occurred and short-term monitoring on California Avenue
conducted for this EIR (ST-1, see Table 15-2) indicates noise levels are generally consistent
with the PCEP EIR noise monitoring. Thus, the information contained in the PCEP EIR is
considered the best available information pertaining to rail noise levels in the City.
4 Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board 2015. Peninsula Corridor Electrification Project Final Environmental Impact
Report, Table 3.11-6. San Carlos, CA. January 2015.
5 California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) 2013. Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Analysis
Protocol. Sacramento, CA. September 2013
6 Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board 2015. Peninsula Corridor Electrification Project Final Environmental Impact
Report, Table 3.11-4 and 5. San Carlos, CA. January 2015.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-15
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
15.1.6.4 Existing Airport- and Heliport-Related Noise Levels
SFO, located to the north of the City, generates noise from flight operations. According to the
Comprehensive Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan for the Environs of San Francisco
International Airport, no portions of the City are within the Airport’s 70 CNEL contour boundary
identified for 2015 or 2020 operating conditions; however, a small area in the northeast part of
the City is located within the 65 CNEL contour boundary. This area is generally located east of
Rollins Road and north of Mitten Road. Existing land uses in the 65 CNEL contour area consist
of commercial and industrial uses (see Figure 15-2). A slightly larger portion of the City is
located within the 60 CNEL contour boundary for 2015 and 2020 operating conditions. This area
is generally located east of the Caltrain corridor and north of Burlway Road; however, land uses
immediately adjacent to El Camino Real at the City’s northern limit are also within the 60 CNEL
contour.
In addition to SFO, the Mills Peninsula Medical Center operates an emergency helipad for
patient transport purposes. Operations are contingent on the need for emergency and other
medical care and transport needs; however, the helipad would influence noise levels in the
vicinity of the medical center, which is in close proximity to commercial and single- and multi-
family residential land uses.
15.1.6.4 Other Non-Transportation Noise Sources
Non-transportation sources also contribute to the City’s existing noise environment. Commercial
and industrial land uses located throughout the City (but primarily along key roadways like El
Camino Real and California Drive, as well as in the eastern and northern parts of the City),
schools and outdoor park and recreation facilities, and residential land uses generate noise from
daily operations of landscaping equipment, stationary sources such as heating, ventilation, and
air conditioning (HVAC) equipment, business deliveries, solid waste pickup services, etc. Such
sources are considered local source of noise that only influence the immediate surroundings.
15.1.7 Noise Sensitive Uses
Noise sensitive receptors are buildings or areas where unwanted sound or increases in sound
may have an adverse effect on people or land uses. Residential areas, motels and hotels,
hospitals and health care facilities, school facilities, and parks are examples of noise receptors
that could be sensitive to changes in existing environmental noise levels. In general, the noise
sensitive receptors within the City of Burlingame include:
• Low-density, medium-density, high-density, and mixed-use residential receptors within
the City
• Existing elementary, middle, and high schools in the City
• City parks
• Hospital and care facilities
• Places of worship
• Libraries
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-16
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
The proposed 2040 General Plan would increase development density throughout the City and
would provide for new residential and mixed-use residential and commercial opportunities.
15.2 REGULATORY SETTING
15.2.1 Federal Noise and Vibration Regulations and Guidelines
Federal Noise Control Act of 1972. The Federal Noise Control Act of 1972 established a
requirement that all Federal agencies must comply with applicable Federal, State, interstate,
and local noise control regulations. Federal agencies also are directed to administer their
programs in a manner that promotes an environment free from noise that jeopardizes public
health or welfare.
Federal Transit Administration (FTA). No federal regulations apply to noise or vibration from
the proposed project, but the FTA’s 2006 Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment
document sets ground-borne vibration annoyance criteria for general assessments. The criteria
vary by the type of building being subjected to the vibrations, and the overall number of vibration
events occurring each day. Category 1 buildings are considered buildings where vibration would
interfere with operation, even at levels that are below human detection. These include buildings
with sensitive equipment, such as research facilities and hospitals. Category 2 buildings include
residential lands and buildings were people sleep, such as residential lands, hotels, hospitals,
etc. Category 3 buildings consist of institutional land uses such as schools, places of worship,
and other institutions where vibration could interfere with activities. The FTA standards vary for
“frequent” events (occurring more than 70 times per day such as a rapid transit project),
“occasional” events (occurring between 30 to 70 times per day) and “infrequent” events
(occurring less than 30 times per day). The FTA’s vibration annoyance criteria are summarized
in Table 15-6.
Table 15-6: FTA Ground-Borne Vibration Impact Criteria for General Assessment
Vibration Land Use Category/Type Frequent
Events
Occasional
Events
Infrequent
Events
Category 1 – Buildings with sensitive equipment 65 VdB 65 VdB 65 VdB
Category 2 – Buildings where people sleep 72 VdB 75 VdB 80 VdB
Category 3 – Institutional buildings 75 VdB 78 VdB 83 VdB
Source: FTA7
15.2.2 State Noise and Vibration Regulations and Guidelines
State General Plan Guidelines. The California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research
(OPR) publishes the State of California General Plan Guidelines, which provide guidance for the
acceptability of projects within specific CNEL contours. Generally, residential uses are
considered to be acceptable in areas where exterior noise levels do not exceed a CNEL type
standard. Residential uses are normally unacceptable in areas exceeding 70 dBA CNEL and
conditionally acceptable within 55-70 dBA CNEL. Schools, libraries, churches, hospital and
nursing homes are normally unacceptable in areas exceeding 70 dBA CNEL and conditionally
7 U.S. Federal Transit Administration (FTA) 2006. Transit Noise and Vibration Assessment. FTA-VA-90-1003-06.
Washington, DC. May 2006.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-17
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
acceptable within 60-70 dBA CNEL. Commercial uses are normally acceptable in areas up to 70
dBA CNEL. Between 67.5 and 77.5 dBA CNEL, commercial uses are conditionally acceptable,
depending on the noise insulation features and the noise reduction requirements. The
guidelines also present adjustment factors that may be used to arrive at noise-acceptability
standards that reflect the particular community’s noise-control goals, sensitivity to noise, and
assessment of the relative importance of noise issues. The City of Burlingame has used these
guidelines to develop the 2040 General Plan community noise exposure levels.
California Noise Insulation Standards (CCR Title 24). In 1974, the California Commission on
Housing and Community Development adopted noise insulation standards for multi-family
residential buildings (Title 24, Part 2, California Code of Regulations). The noise insulation
standards set forth an interior standard of 45 dBA – Ldn or CNEL – for any habitable room. The
regulations also specify that acoustical studies must be prepared whenever a residential
building or structure is proposed to be located near an existing or adopted freeway route,
expressway, parkway, major street, thoroughfare, rail line, rapid transit line, or industrial noise
source, and where such noise source or sources create an exterior CNEL (or Ldn) of 60 dBA or
greater. Such acoustical analysis must demonstrate that the residence has been designed to
limit intruding noise to an interior CNEL (or Ldn) of 45 dBA or below (California's Title 24 Noise
Standards, Chap. 2-35).
Part 11 of Title 24 is known as the California Green Building Code (CalGreen). Section 5.507,
Environmental Comfort, establishes interior noise level standards for non-residential structures.
Section 5.507.4.2 establishes a performance standard of 50 dBA is established for non-
residential interior hourly Leq noise levels.
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). The California Department of
Transportation’ (Caltrans) Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual provides
a summary of vibration criteria that have been reported by researchers, organizations, and
governmental agencies. Chapters six and seven of this manual summarize vibration detection
and annoyance criteria from various agencies and provide Caltrans’ recommended guidelines
and thresholds for evaluating potential vibration impacts on buildings and humans from
transportation and construction projects. These thresholds are summarized in Table 15-7 and
Table 15-8.
Table 15-7: Caltrans’ Vibration Threshold Criteria for Building Damage
Structural Integrity Maximum PPV (in/sec)
Transient Continuous
Extremely fragile buildings, ruins, monuments 0.12 0.08
Fragile buildings 0.2 0.1
Historic and some older buildings 0.50 0.25
Older residential structures 0.50 0.30
New residential structures 1.00 0.50
Modern industrial and commercial structures 2.00 0.50
Source: Caltrans.8
8 California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) 2013. Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance
Manual. Prepared by the California Department of Transportation: Division of Environmental Analysis Environmental
Engineering – Hazardous Waste, Air, Noise, Paleontology Office. Report No. CT-HWANP-RT-13-069.25.3.
Sacramento, CA. September 2013.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-18
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 15-8: Caltrans’ Vibration Threshold Criteria for Human Response
Human Response Maximum PPV (in/sec)
Transient Continuous
Barely perceptible 0.035 0.012
Distinctly perceptible 0.24 0.035
Strongly perceptible 0.90 0.10
Severely perceptible 2.00 0.40
Source: Caltrans 9
15.2.3 Regional Noise and Vibration Regulations and Guidelines
The City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County (C/CAG) acts as the Airport
Land Use Commission (ALUC) and implements state-mandated airport planning processes,
including the preparation of the Comprehensive Airport Land Use Plan for the Environs of San
Francisco International Airport.10 This plan is intended to protect the long-term viability of the
airport by ensuring only compatible land uses are built in the vicinity of the airport, ensuring
adoption of land use regulations which minimize exposure of people to hazards associated with
airport operations, and providing a set of policies and criteria to assist the ALUC in evaluating
the compatibility of proposed actions of local agencies with present and future operations at the
Airport. Section 4 of the Plan identifies airport/land use compatibility policies for the airport,
including noise compatibility policies that set 65, 70, and 75 CNEL noise compatibility zones and
compatibility criteria for these different zones.
15.2.4 Local Noise and Vibration Regulations and Guidelines
The City of Burlingame’s existing General Plan and Municipal Code establish standards related
to noise and vibration control. Municipal code standards are presented below; however, future
development within the City during the next approximately 20 years would be subject to the
policies contained in the proposed 2040 General Plan Update should the City approve the 2040
General Plan. Therefore, since existing General Plan policies and standards would cease to
apply if the 2040 General Plan is adopted, they are not presented below. The City’s 2040
General Plan land use and noise compatibility standards are presented below for ease of
reference; Community Safety Element policies pertaining to noise and vibration are presented
and analyzed in the impacts section of this chapter (see Section 15.3.3).
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Land Use and Noise Compatibility Standards. Table 15-9
shows the land use and noise compatibility standards established by the Burlingame 2040
General Plan.
9 California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) 2013. Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance
Manual. Prepared by the California Department of Transportation: Division of Environmental Analysis Environmental
Engineering – Hazardous Waste, Air, Noise, Paleontology Office. Report No. CT-HWANP-RT-13-069.25.3.
Sacramento, CA. September 2013
10 City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County (C/CAG) 2012. Comprehensive Airport Land Use
Compatibility Plan for the Environs of San Francisco International Airport. Prepared for C/CAG, San Mateo, CA.
Prepared by Ricondo & Associates. November 2012.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-19
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 15-9: Proposed Burlingame 2040 General Plan Exterior Land Use Compatibility Standards
Burlingame 2040 General Plan
Land Use Category
Community Noise Equivalent Level (in dBA, CNEL)
Normally
Acceptable
Conditionally
Acceptable
Normally
Unacceptable
Clearly
Unacceptable
Residential – Low Density Single Family,
Duplex, Mobile homes < 55 < 65 < 75 > 75
Residential – Multi Family < 60 < 70 < 75 > 75
Transient Lodging – Motels, Hotels < 60 < 70 < 80 > 80
Schools, Libraries, Churches, Hospitals,
Nursing Homes < 60 < 70 < 80 > 80
Auditoriums, Concert Halls,
Amphitheaters -- < 65 -- > 80
Sports Arenas, Outdoor Spectator Sports -- < 70 -- > 80
Playground, Neighborhood Parks < 70 -- < 80 > 80
Golf Course, Riding Stables, Water
Recreation, Cemeteries < 70 -- >70 --
Office Buildings, Business Commercial
and Professional < 60 < 75 > 75 --
Industrial, Manufacturing, Utilities,
Agriculture < 70 < 75 > 75 --
Land Use Compatibility Definitions:
Normally Acceptable: Specific land use is satisfactory based upon the assumption buildings involved are of
normal conventional construction, without any special noise insulation requirements.
Conditionally Acceptable:
New construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analyses
of noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features included
in the design. Conventional construction, but with closed windows and fresh air supply
systems or air conditioning will normally suffice.
Normally Unacceptable:
New construction or development should be generally discouraged. If new construction
or development does proceed, a detailed analysis of noise reduction requirements must
be made and needed noise insulation features included in the design.
Clearly Unacceptable: New development should generally not be undertaken.
Source: City of Burlingame, 2017. Public Draft Burlingame 2040 General Plan (Figure CS-2)
Burlingame Municipal Code. The City’s Municipal Code regulates unnecessary noises and
establishes certain noise and vibration performance standards.
Title 10, Public Peace, Morals and Safety, Chapter 10.40, Radio Interference, Loudspeakers,
Etc. sets forth the following standards:
• Section 10.40.020, Loudspeakers disturbing peace, sets forth it is unlawful for any
person to operate equipment that intensifies or amplifies any sound or noise, in any
public or private place, in a manner that disturbs the peace or good order or annoys
people owning, using, or occupying property in the surrounding neighborhood.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-20
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
• Section 10.40.035, General Noise Regulations, sets forth it is unlawful for any person to
willfully to make or cause any loud, unnecessary, or unusual noise which disturbs the
peace of any neighborhood or which causes discomfort or annoyance to any reasonable
person of normal sensitivity residing in the area.
• Section 10.40.037, Powered equipment, sets forth it is unlawful for any person to
operate any lawnmower, lawn edger, riding tractor, or other mechanical or electrical
equipment which creates a loud, raucous, or impulsive sound, within any residential
district except between the hours of 8 AM to 7 PM, Monday thru Saturday, and 10 AM to
6 PM on Sunday and holidays.
• Section 10.40.038, Leaf blowers, sets forth that leaf blowers operated in the City are
limited to a noise level of 65 dBA or less. This section also requires leaf blowers to be
labeled and certified to this standard, and to be operated pursuant the time limits set
forth by the code, which are generally 8 AM to 5 PM on certain days depending on the
location of the leaf blower operations.
• Section 10.40.039, Loading and unloading limited, sets forth it is unlawful to unload,
load, open, close, or handle boxes, crates, containers, building materials, or similar
objects in a manner that causes a noise disturbance across a property line into property
located in a residential district between the following hours:
oBetween the hours of 10:00 p.m. on a Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, or
Thursday and 7:00 a.m. of the following day;
oBetween the hours of 10:00 p.m. on a Friday and 8:00 a.m. on the following
Saturday;
oBetween the hours of 10:00 p.m. on a Saturday and 8:00 a.m. on the following
Sunday; and
oBetween the hours of 10:00 p.m. on a day before a holiday and 8:00 a.m. on the
holiday
The limitations above do not apply to certain emergency deliveries, deliveries of goods
required for use in the next 24 hours, deliveries permitted pursuant to CCR Title 25, and
solid waste collected pursuant to City franchise.
Title 25, Zoning, Chapter 25.58, General Use Provisions, sets forth the following standards:
• Section 25.58.050, Mechanical Equipment, sets forth newly installed mechanical
equipment such as HVAC units and generators on new or existing residential units shall
not exceed a maximum outdoor noise level of 60 dBA during the daytime (7 AM to 7 PM)
and 50 dBA during the nighttime (10 PM to 7 AM), as measured from the property line.
The Burlingame Municipal Code also generally limits construction activities (including
excavation and grading) to the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., Monday to Friday, and 9:00 a.m.
to 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays. Construction is prohibited on Sundays and holidays.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-21
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
15.3 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
Noise-related impacts from future development pursuant to general plans can be divided into
potential short-term construction-related impacts and long-term noise exposure impacts.
Construction-related impacts are associated with construction activities likely to occur in
conjunction with future development allocated by the plan. Long-term noise exposure is
associated with major noise sources (e.g., traffic, trains, other transit, aircraft, and stationary
sources) and changes in noise levels that may occur in the City as a result of implementation of
the General Plan.
For the purposes of this EIR, this impact analysis evaluates the change in existing conditions
that would occur with build-out of the General Plan (Year 2040), not the change in conditions
that would occur under a future no project scenario (i.e., Year 2040 no General Plan Update)
versus a future project scenario (i.e., Year 2040 with General Plan). In this regard, the analyses
below are considered a conservative (i.e., likely to overestimate) evaluation of potential impacts
as some level of development would likely occur even without implementation of the General
Plan update. Please refer to Chapter 21, Alternatives, for a discussion of potential effects
associated with the “No Project Alternative”.
15.3.1 Significance Criteria
Based on Appendix G to the State CEQA Guidelines, a significant impact from noise or vibration
would occur if implementation of the proposed General Plan would result in any of the following:
(a) Expose people to or generate noise levels in excess of standards established in the
City’s municipal code, proposed General Plan, or applicable standards of other
agencies;
(b) Expose people to or generate excessive ground vibration or ground-borne noise levels;
(c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above
levels existing without the project. For the purposes of this EIR, a substantial permanent
increase in ambient noise is defined as: 1) An increase of 5 dB or more where the
ambient noise level would remain normally acceptable; 2) An increase of 3 dB or more
that causes the existing ambient noise level to change from normally acceptable to
normally unacceptable or worse; or 3) an increase of 3 dB or more in areas where the
ambient noise level exceeds normally acceptable limits;
(d) Create a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project
vicinity above levels existing without the project;
(e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would expose people
residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels; or
(f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would expose people residing or
working in the project area to excessive noise levels.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-22
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
15.3.2 Environmental Impacts
Impact 15-1: Short-Term Construction Noise Levels. Implementation of projects under the
proposed Burlingame 2040 General Plan would involve construction that would result in
temporary noise generation primarily from the use of heavy-duty construction equipment. Based
on the noise levels generated by typical construction equipment and activities, temporary
construction noise levels could result in a temporary substantial increase in noise levels above
ambient conditions. This would represent a potentially significant impact (see criteria [a] and
[d] in subsection 15.3.1, "Significance Criteria," above).
The proposed General Plan would result in more, higher-density residential, commercial, and
mixed-use land uses as compared to the City’s existing General Plan and zoning code and
generally increase the overall amount of development (both residential units and non-residential
square footage) within the City. The General Plan focuses growth and development into certain
areas of change as identified during the General Plan development process with input from the
community. While low density residential land uses would remain the predominant land use
under the 2040 General Plan, major changes in land uses include the re-designation of existing
industrial areas in the North Burlingame to Innovative Industrial and the addition of Live/Work
opportunities, also in North Burlingame (see Chapter 14, Land Use and Planning). In addition,,
some areas currently designated as General Commercial are being re-designated as “mixed
use” to add higher density housing in areas of high mobility nodes, notably along Broadway,
California Drive, and in North Burlingame. Although the General Plan focuses on specific growth
and development in certain areas, future construction and development projects could occur
through the City over an approximately 20-year period. These projects could occur on any
property and affect existing or future land uses, including potentially-sensitive residential,
commercial, park, and/or school land uses that may or may not be present near future
development areas. Thus, this analysis generally addresses the potential for the propose of the
General Plan Update to result in temporary construction noise impacts.
Since project specific information is not available at this time, potential short-term (construction-
related) noise impacts can only be evaluated based on the typical construction activities
associated with the residential, commercial, and industrial development. Potential construction
source noise and vibration levels were developed based on methodologies, reference noise
levels, and equipment usage and other operating factors documented and contained in the
Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) Construction Noise Handbook,11 Federal Transit
Administration’s (FTA) Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment document,12 and
Caltrans’ Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual.13 Reference levels are
noise emissions for specific equipment or activity types that are well documented and for which
their usage is common practice in the field of acoustics.
11 U.S. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) 2006. “Construction Noise Handbook.” U.S. Department of
Transportation FHWA. August
2006.http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/noise/construction_noise/handbook/handbook09.cfm
12 U.S. Federal Transit Administration (FTA) 2006. Transit Noise and Vibration Assessment. FTA-VA-90-1003-06.
Washington, DC. May 2006.
13 California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) 2013. Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance
Manual. Prepared by the California Department of Transportation: Division of Environmental Analysis Environmental
Engineering – Hazardous Waste, Air, Noise, Paleontology Office. Report No. CT-HWANP-RT-13-069.25.3.
Sacramento, CA. September 2013
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-23
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Construction activities associated with future development projects could include: staging,
demolition, site preparation (e.g., land clearing), grading, utility trenching, foundation work (e.g.,
excavation, pouring concrete pads, drilling for piers), material deliveries (requiring travel along
City roads), building construction (e.g., framing, concrete pouring, welding), paving, coating
application, and site finishing work. In general, these activities would involve the use of worker
vehicles, delivery trucks, dump trucks, and heavy-duty construction equipment such as (but not
limited to) backhoes, tractors, loaders, graders, excavators, rollers, cranes, material lifts,
generators, and air compressors. Table 15-10 presents the noise levels associated with typical
types of construction equipment that could be used in the City to develop future projects.
Table 15-10: Typical Construction Equipment Noise Levels (dBA)
Equipment
Reference Noise
Level at 50 Feet
(Lmax)(A)
Percent
Usage
Factor(B)
Predicted Noise Levels (Leq) at Distance(C)
50
Feet
100
Feet
150
Feet
250
Feet
350
Feet
450
Feet
Bulldozer 85 40 81 75 71 67 64 62
Backhoe 80 40 76 70 66 62 59 57
Compact Roller 80 20 73 67 63 59 56 54
Concrete Mixer 85 40 81 75 71 67 64 62
Crane 85 16 77 71 67 63 60 58
Excavator 85 40 81 75 71 67 64 62
Generator 82 50 79 73 69 65 62 60
Pneumatic tools 85 50 82 76 72 68 65 63
Scraper 85 40 82 76 72 68 64 62
Delivery Truck 85 40 81 75 71 67 64 62
Vibratory Roller 80 20 73 67 63 59 56 54
Sources: Caltrans 14 and FHWA 15.
(A) Lmax noise levels based on manufacturer’s specifications.
(B) Usage factor refers to the amount of time the equipment produces noise over the time period.
(C) Estimate does not account for any atmospheric or ground attenuation factors. Calculated noise levels based
on Caltrans, 2009: Leq (hourly) = Lmax at 50 feet – 20log (D/50) + 10log (UF), where: Lmax = reference Lmax from
manufacturer or other source; D = distance of interest; UF = usage fraction or fraction of time period of interest
equipment is in use.
With regards to construction noise, demolition, site preparation, and grading phases typically
result in the highest temporary noise levels due to the use of heavy-duty equipment such as
dozers, excavators, graders, loaders, scrapers, and trucks. As shown in Table 15-10, the worst-
case Leq and Lmax noise levels associated with the operation of a dozer, excavator, scraper,
etc. are predicted to be approximately 82 and 85 dBA, respectively, at a distance of 50 feet from
the equipment operating area. At an active construction site, it is not uncommon for two or more
pieces of construction equipment to operate at the same time and in close proximity. The
concurrent operation of two or more pieces of construction equipment would result in noise
14 California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) 2013. Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Analysis
Protocol. Sacramento, CA. September 2013.
15 U.S. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) 2010. “Construction Noise Handbook, Chapter 9 Construction
Equipment Noise Levels and Ranges.” U.S. Department of Transportation FHWA. August 24, 2017. Accessed April 1,
2018 at: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/noise/construction_noise/handbook/handbook09.cfm
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-24
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
levels of approximately 85 to 88 dBA at a distance of 50 feet from equipment operating areas.16
The magnitude of each individual future project’s temporary and periodic increase in ambient
noise levels would be dependent upon a number of project-specific factors that are not known at
this time, including: the amount and type of equipment being used; the distance between the
area where equipment is being operated and the location of the specific land use, receptor, etc.
where noise levels are being evaluated; the time of day construction activities are occurring; the
presence or absence of any walls, buildings, or other barriers that may absorb or reflect sound
waves, the total duration of the construction activities, and the existing ambient noise levels
near construction areas. For example, a noise level of 88 dBA Lmax would be similar to typical
Lmax levels measured throughout the City (see Appendix C), but sustained Leq levels of 85
dBA would range from approximately 18 to 39 dBA above ambient conditions in most low to
medium density residential areas of the City (e.g. ST-1, ST-3, ST-4, and LT-1 to LT-3; see Table
15-2) to 11 to 28 dBA above ambient conditions in higher density residential, commercial and
industrial areas of the City (e.g. ST-2, ST-5, ST-6, and ST-7; see Table 15-2). Typically,
sustained construction noise levels of 80 to 85 dBA or higher would require the implementation
of construction noise control practices such as staging area restrictions (e.g., siting staging
areas away from sensitive receptors), equipment controls (e.g., covered engines and use of
electrical hook-ups instead of generators), and/or the installation of temporary noise barriers of
sufficient height, size (length or width), and density to achieve targeted noise reductions.
The City’s proposed General Plan Update focuses on protecting Burlingame citizens from
excessive noise levels (including construction noise) that could disturb and disrupt human
activities and affect the physical and psychological health of individuals. Table 15-11
summarizes the proposed Burlingame 2040 General Plan goals and policies that address
construction noise within the City.
Table 15-11: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Construction Noise
Regulation/Policy Description of Regulation/Policy How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance Criteria
Existing Regulations
Burlingame
Municipal Code
The Burlingame Municipal Code
generally limits construction
activities (including excavation and
grading) to the hours of 8:00 a.m.
to 7:00 p.m., Monday to Friday,
and 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on
Saturdays. Construction is
prohibited on Sundays and
holidays.
Limits construction
noise to daytime hours
only, Monday to
Saturday.
(a) Generate or
expose people to
noise levels that
exceed standards
in the City’s
municipal code
(d) Result in a
substantial,
temporary increase
in noise
Community Safety Element
16 As shown in Table 15-10, a single bulldozer provides a sound level of 81 dBA Leq at a distance of 50 feet; when
two identical sound levels are combined, the noise level increases to 84 dBA Leq and when three identical sound
levels are combined, the noise level increases to 86 dBA Leq. These estimates assume no shielding or other noise
control measures are in place at or near the work areas.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-25
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 15-11: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Construction Noise
Regulation/Policy Description of Regulation/Policy How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance Criteria
Goal CS-4 Protect residents and visitors to
Burlingame from excessive noise
and disruptive ground vibration.
States the overall goal
of the City to protect
the overall welfare of
the residents from
adverse levels of
noise.
(a) Generate or
expose people to
noise levels that
exceed standards
in the City’s
municipal code
(d) Result in a
substantial,
temporary increase
in noise
Policy CS-4.10
Construction Noise
Study
Require development projects
subject to discretionary approval to
assess potential construction noise
impacts on nearby sensitive uses
and to minimize impacts on those
uses consistent with Municipal
Code provisions.
Ensures sensitive land
uses near construction
sites are not impacted
by temporary,
construction-related
noise.
(a) Generate or
expose people to
noise levels that
exceed standards
in the City’s
municipal code
(d) Result in a
substantial,
temporary increase
in noise
Proposed General Plan Goal CS-4 and Policy CS-4.10 establish the overall goal and intent of
the City to protect residents from excessive construction noise by requiring the assessment and
minimization of potential construction noise impacts on sensitive noise receptors. As noted in
Section 15.2.4, the City’s Municipal Code does not have specific, numeric noise standards (e.g.,
90 dB, Leq) for construction noise. Although the proposed General Plan sets forth a requirement
to assess and minimize noise levels for certain projects, specifically discretionary projects that
are most likely to require and result in prolonged use of heavy-duty construction equipment, it
does not specifically address construction noise for non-discretionary projects or stipulate a
requirement for project proponents to minimize potential construction noise levels (e.g., through
the use of best management practices or noise control measures such as sound barriers). While
all projects in the City would be subject to the permissible construction hours established by the
Municipal Code, some could be approved that would not be subject to specific noise studies
(e.g., non-discretionary projects) and it is possible that some discretionary and non-discretionary
construction activities could result in temporary increases in noise levels above ambient
conditions of 10 to 30 dBs or more during permissible time frames, which would be perceived by
noise-sensitive land uses as doubling or quadrupling and of loudness, respectively. This
situation is most likely to occur in areas where the 2040 General Plan would permit increased
development density and a mix of land uses (e.g., Broadway, California Drive, and North
Burlingame Mixed Use Areas, Live/Work areas). Temporary construction-related noise
increases of 10 to 30 dB could be potentially significant, depending on how long the
construction activity lasts, and require Mitigation Measure 15-1.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-26
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Mitigation Measure 15-1. To ensure that future development projects implement
appropriate construction noise controls, General Plan Policy CS-4.10 shall be revised to
state:
Policy CS-4.10 Construction Noise Study: All development projects shall be subject to
the applicable construction hour limitations established by the City’s Municipal Code.
Development projects that are subject to discretionary review and that are located near
noise-sensitive land uses shall assess potential construction noise levels and minimize
substantial adverse impacts by implementing feasible construction noise control
measures that reduce construction noise levels at sensitive receptor locations. Such
measures may include, but are not limited to: 1) Construction management techniques
(e.g., siting staging areas away from noise-sensitive land uses, phasing activities to take
advantage of shielding/attenuation provided by topographic features or buildings,
monitoring construction n); 2) Construction equipment controls (e.g., ensuring equipment
has mufflers, use of electric hook-ups instead of generators); 3) Use of temporary sound
barriers (equipment enclosures, berms, walls, blankets, or other devices) when
necessary; and 4) Monitoring of actual construction noise levels to verify the need for
noise controls.
Although specific construction activities and noise levels associated with future development
projects are not known at this time, Mitigation Measure 15-1 revises the proposed General Plan
to require the implementation of feasible construction noise control measures when
development occurs near noise-sensitive land uses and, therefore, would render potential
construction noise impacts from future development projects a less than significant impact
with mitigation.
Impact 15-2: Short-term Construction Vibration Levels. Implementation of projects under
the proposed Burlingame 2040 General Plan would involve construction activities that could
result in ground-borne vibration at sensitive receptor locations; however, proposed 2040
General Plan policies would ensure construction-vibration levels do not exceed standards
recommended by the Federal Transit Administration or Caltrans. This would represent a less
than significant impact (see criterion [b] in subsection 15.3.1, "Significance Criteria," above).
Construction activities have the potential to result in varying degrees of temporary ground
vibration, depending on the specific construction equipment used and activities involved.
Vibration generated by construction equipment spreads through the ground and diminishes with
increases in distance. The effects of ground vibration may be imperceptible at the lowest levels,
result in low rumbling sounds and detectable vibrations at moderate levels, and high levels of
vibration can cause sleep disturbance in places where people normally sleep or annoyance in
buildings that are primarily used for daytime functions and sleeping. Ground vibration can also
potentially damage the foundations and exteriors of existing structures even if it does not result
in a negative human response. Pile drivers and other pieces of high impact construction
equipment are generally the primary cause of construction-related vibration impacts. The use of
such equipment is generally limited to sites where there are extensive layers of very hard
materials (e.g., compacted soils, bedrock) that must be loosened and/or penetrated to achieve
grading and foundation design requirements. The need for such methods is usually determined
through site-specific geotechnical investigations that identify the subsurface materials within the
grading envelope, along with foundation design recommendations and the construction methods
needed to safely permit development of a site.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-27
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Construction equipment and activities are categorized by the nature of the vibration it produces.
Equipment or activities typical of continuous vibration include excavation equipment, static
compaction equipment, vibratory pile drivers, and pile-extraction equipment. Equipment or
activities typical of transient (single-impact) or low-rate repeated impact vibration include impact
pile drivers, and crack-and-seat equipment. Pile driving and blasting activities produce the
highest levels of ground vibration, and can result in structural damage to existing buildings.
Since project specific information is not available at this time, potential short-term construction-
related vibration impacts can only be evaluated based on the typical construction activities
associated with the residential, commercial, and industrial development. Potential construction
source vibration levels were developed based on methodologies, reference noise levels, and
equipment usage and other operating factors documented and contained in the FHWA’s
Construction Noise Handbook,17 FTA’s Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment
document,18 and Caltrans’ Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manua.19
Reference levels are vibration emissions for specific equipment or activity types that are well
documented and for which their usage is common practice in the field of acoustics.
Future development as a result of the proposed General Plan would occur in primarily urban
settings where land is already disturbed and, therefore, are not likely to require blasting, which
is typically used to remove unwanted rock or earth; however, it is possible that pile driving could
occur during building construction under the proposed General Plan. Standard construction
equipment (e.g., bulldozers, trucks, jackhammers, etc.) generally does not cause vibration that
could cause structural or cosmetic damage, but may be felt my nearby receptors. Table 15-12
presents the typical types of equipment that could be used for future development and
redevelopment activities in the City.
Table 15-12: Ground-Borne Vibration and Noise from Typical Construction Equipment
Equipment Peak Particle Velocity (in/sec) (A) Velocity Decibels (VdB) (B)
25 feet 50 feet 100 feet 25 feet 50 feet 100 feet
Small bulldozer 0.003 0.001 0.001 58 49 40
Jackhammer 0.035 0.016 0.008 79 70 61
Rock Breaker 0.059 0.028 0.013 83 74 65
Loaded truck 0.076 0.035 0.017 86 77 68
Auger Drill Rig 0.089 0.042 0.019 87 78 69
Large bulldozer 0.089 0.042 0.019 87 78 69
17 U.S. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) 2006. “Construction Noise Handbook.” U.S. Department of
Transportation FHWA. August 2006.
18 U.S. Federal Transit Administration (FTA) 2006. Transit Noise and Vibration Assessment. FTA-VA-90-1003-06.
Washington, DC. May 2006.
19 California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) 2013. Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance
Manual. Prepared by the California Department of Transportation: Division of Environmental Analysis Environmental
Engineering – Hazardous Waste, Air, Noise, Paleontology Office. Report No. CT-HWANP-RT-13-069.25.3.
Sacramento, CA. September 2013.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-28
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 15-12: Ground-Borne Vibration and Noise from Typical Construction Equipment
Equipment Peak Particle Velocity (in/sec) (A) Velocity Decibels (VdB) (B)
25 feet 50 feet 100 feet 25 feet 50 feet 100 feet
Vibratory Roller 0.210 0.098 0.046 94 85 76
Impact Pile Driver
(upper range) 1.518 0.708 0.330 112 103 94
Impact Pile Driver
(typical) 0.644 0.300 0.140 104 95 86
Sonic Pile Driver
(upper range) 0.734 0.42 0.160 105 96 87
Sonic Pile Driver
(typical) 0.170 0.079 0.037 93 84 75
Sources: Caltrans 2013 20 and FTA 21
(A) Estimated PPV calculated as: PPV(D)=PPV(ref)*(25/D)^1.1 where PPV(D)= Estimated PPV at distance;
PPVref= Reference PPV at 25 ft; D= Distance from equipment to receiver; and n= ground attenuation rate (1.1
for dense compacted hard soils).
(B) Estimated Lv calculated as: Lv(D)=Lv(25 feet)-30Log(D/25) where Lv(D)= estimated velocity level in decibels
at distance, Lv(25 feet)= RMS velocity amplitude at 25 ft; and D= distance from equipment to receiver.
As shown in Table 15-12, specific vibration levels associated with typical construction
equipment are highly dependent on the type of equipment used. Vibration levels dissipate
rapidly with distance, such that even maximum impact pile driving activities would result in
vibration levels below Caltrans’ recommended 0.5 PPV threshold for transient vibration-induced
damage in historic, older buildings at a distance 100 feet; all other activities would be below
Caltrans’ 0.25 PPV threshold for continuous vibration-induced damage in historic, older
buildings at a distance of 100 feet. For human responses, maximum impact pile driving activities
would result in groundborne vibration and noise levels below Caltrans’ threshold for a distinctly
perceptible response (0.24 PPV) and the FTA’s vibration standard for infrequent events at
residential lands (80 VdB) at a distance of approximately 150 feet and 300 feet, respectively; all
other activities may be barely to distinctly perceptible when occurring within approximately 150
feet of sensitive land uses. Most construction equipment does not operate in the same location
for prolonged periods of time. Therefore, even if construction equipment were to operate near a
building where receptors may feel vibration, it would only be for a temporary amount of time.
Nonetheless, depending the specific equipment in use and proximity of the equipment to
vibration sensitive land uses, vibration levels may exceed accepted levels at which building
damage may occur or which may be perceived by sensitive receptors as excessive.
The City’s proposed General Plan Update focuses on protecting Burlingame citizens from
excessive construction vibration levels that could disturb and disrupt human activities and affect
the physical and psychological health of individuals. Table 15-13 summarizes the proposed
Burlingame 2040 General Plan goals and policies that address construction vibration within the
City.
20 California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) 2013. Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance
Manual. Prepared by the California Department of Transportation: Division of Environmental Analysis Environmental
Engineering – Hazardous Waste, Air, Noise, Paleontology Office. Report No. CT-HWANP-RT-13-069.25.3.
Sacramento, CA. September 2013.
21 U.S. Federal Transit Administration (FTA) 2006. Transit Noise and Vibration Assessment. FTA-VA-90-1003-06.
Washington, DC. May 2006.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-29
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 15-13: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Construction Vibration
Regulation/Policy Description of Regulation/Policy How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
Existing Regulations
U.S. Department of
Transportation
To address the human response
to ground borne vibration, the
Federal Transit Administration
(FTA) has set forth guidelines for
maximum-acceptable vibration
criteria for different types of land
uses.
Establishes standards
and guidelines on
ground borne vibrations
for state agencies to
follow to protect public
health and welfare.
(b) Expose
people to
excessive ground
borne vibration
Caltrans
In 2013, Caltrans published its
Transportation and Construction
Vibration Guidance Manual,
which provides general guidance
on vibration issues associated
with construction and operation of
projects in relation to human
perception and structural
damage.
Establishes guidelines
for ensuring ground
borne vibration is
considered when siting
new development and
during construction
activities.
(b) Expose
people to
excessive ground
borne vibration
Community Safety Element
Goal CS-4 Protect residents and visitors to
Burlingame from excessive noise
and disruptive ground vibration
States the overall goal
of the City to protect the
overall welfare of the
residents from adverse
levels of noise.
(b) Expose
people to
excessive ground
borne vibration
Policy CS-4.12
Vibration Impact
Assessment
Require a vibration impact
assessment for proposed projects
in which heavy-duty construction
equipment would be used (e.g.,
pile driving, bulldozing) within 200
feet of an existing structure or
sensitive receptor. If applicable,
require all feasible mitigation
measures to be implemented to
ensure that no damage or
disturbance to structures or
sensitive receptors would occur.
Requires an evaluation
of construction vibration
levels and the
application of feasible
vibration control
measures, as
necessary, to avoid
structural damage and
human disturbance.
(b) Expose
people to
excessive ground
borne vibration
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-30
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Although project-specific construction activities and noise levels associated with future
development projects are not known at this time, proposed General Plan Policy CS-4.12
requires an assessment of potential impacts and the application of vibration control measures to
avoid damage to structures and disturbance of sensitive receptors. The implementation of this
policy would render potential construction vibration impacts from future development projects a
less than significant impact.
Impact 15-3: Increases in Traffic Noise Levels. Implementation of the proposed General
Plan would increase noise levels along roadways with nearby sensitive receptors. Proposed
policies would establish noise standards for new development and require that site-specific
noise studies be conducted to reduce noise exposure; however, traffic-related noise increases
are predicted to exceed 3 dB, the level typically audible to the human ear and, therefore,
considered a substantial increase in noise. This would represent a significant impact (see
criteria [a] and [c] in subsection 15.3.1, "Significance Criteria," above).
The implementation of the Burlingame 2040 General Plan would have the potential to change
the existing amounts and types of land uses within the City. These potential land use changes
would increase residents and employees within the City. This increase in population and
employment would lead to increased vehicle traffic on the local roadway system, which could
result in traffic-related noise levels that pose land use compatibility issues and/or result in a
substantial permanent increase in traffic-related noise levels throughout the City. As explained
below, the information collected and analyzed as part of the EIR development process indicates
that some of the proposed land use compatibility standards included in the General Plan update
(see Table 15-9) may not be achievable given existing ambient noise levels and projected future
increases in noise levels, particular as the City transitions to more mixed-use land uses.
Accordingly, the EIR analysis below identifies recommended changes to Table 15-9, even
though the analysis is based on the current proposed compatibility standards.
Although the General Plan does not authorize any specific development project or increase in
existing vehicular traffic levels, the City has contracted with a qualified transportation
engineering firm to prepare estimates of the potential total net increase in trips associated with
the land use changes contained in the proposed General Plan (Fehr & Peers, 2018; see
Chapter 18, Transportation, and Appendix C). The vehicle trip estimates prepared for the Plan
provide a sufficient level of detail to generally evaluate the potential future increases in traffic-
related noise levels associated with build-out of the 2040 General Plan. Future planned
development could be exposed to incompatible traffic noise levels. In addition, existing
development within the Planning Area may also be exposed to increases in traffic noise as a
result of potential land use changes resulting from the 2040 General Plan. Single-family
residential development, schools, libraries, hospitals, convalescent homes, and places of
worship are considered the most noise-sensitive land uses with regards to community noise.
High-density and mixed-use residential, commercial, and industrial development is less noise-
sensitive because uses are primarily indoors, and typically noise exposure can be reduced
through design and material choice (e.g., outdoor activity areas are located in courtyards
surrounded by structures, materials with greater insulation are used).
Future traffic noise levels were computed using the same methodology (TNM Version 2.5) and
data sources used to calculate existing traffic noise levels (see Section 15.1.6.2) except that
build-out traffic levels were obtained from the General Plan traffic consultant and entered into
the traffic model. In addition, the 2040 mix of automobiles (91%), medium (5%) and heavy duty
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-31
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
trucks (1%), and motorcycles (3%) assigned to the roadway system was generated using the
CARB’s EMFAC2014 model. Future traffic noise contours are shown in Figure 15-3 (Future
Build-out (2040) Transportation Noise Contours). The distances to the modeled CNEL contours
for the roadway are shown in Table 15-14. In addition, Table 15-15 summarizes the net change
in ADT and traffic noise levels (at a distance of 100 feet) that would occur with implementation
of the Burlingame 2040 General Plan. Please refer to Appendix C for detailed existing and
future traffic noise modeling results.
The results of the traffic noise modeling indicate that existing traffic noise levels within the City
would continue to be highest along major travel corridors such as Broadway (east of El Camino
Real), California Drive, El Camino Real, Trousdale Drive, I-280 and U.S. 101. Specifically, the
modeling shows:
Traffic noise levels along the segment of Broadway from US 101 to California Drive are
estimated to increase from 69.8 to 71 CNEL at a distance of 100 feet from the center of
this roadway segment. This noise level would be within the City’s conditionally
acceptable level (up to 75 CNEL) for office buildings, commercial business and
professional uses, and industrial and manufacturing uses. In addition, future projected
traffic volumes on the segment of Broadway between El Camino Real and Bernal
Avenue would increase traffic noise levels by 4.7 dB, to a level that exceeds the
normally acceptable noise compatibility standard of 55 CNEL. For the purposes of this
analysis, a 3 dB increase or more where noise levels change from normally acceptable
to normally unacceptable or worse is considered a substantial increase in noise above
levels existing without the project.
Traffic noise levels along California Drive are not estimated to substantially change from
existing conditions. Noise levels on California Drive would continue to exceed normally
acceptable levels for single family (55 CNEL) and multi-family (60 CNEL), and office and
business commercial/professional (65 CNEL) land uses located along this roadway.
Traffic noise levels along El Camino Real are estimated to increase by approximately 2
dBA, to levels above 70 CNEL 100 feet from the center of this roadway. Noise exposure
levels above 70 CNEL are generally considered normally unacceptable for most land
uses except office buildings, commercial business and professional uses, and industrial
and manufacturing uses.
Traffic noise levels along Murchison Drive are not anticipated to substantially change.
Future noise levels would continue to exceed normally acceptable levels for single family
(55 CNEL) and multi-family (60 CNEL located along this roadway.
Traffic noise levels along Trousdale Drive are not anticipated to substantially change.
Future noise levels would continue to exceed normally acceptable levels for single family
(55 CNEL) and multi-family (60 CNEL located along this roadway.
§¨¦101§¨¦280City of MilllbraeCity of HillsboroughCity of San MateoSan Franciso BayCalifornia DrTrousdale DrBernal AveAdeline DrEaston DrPeninsula AveHoward AveBurlingame General Plan EIRFigure 15-3 Future (2040) Transportation Noise Contours 1,500750 3,000 FT 0N65 CNEL60 CNELBurlingame BoundaryStreet CenterlinesRailroads75 CNEL70 CNEL
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-33
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 15-14: Future Build-out 2040 Traffic Noise Level Contour Distances
ID Road Segment
CNEL at
100 Feet
(dBA)(A)
CNEL Contour and Distance from
Roadway Center in Feet
70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
1 Adeline Dr. El Camino Real to Bernal 57.7 6 19 59 186
2A Broadway US101 to California 71 126 398 1,259 3,981
2B Broadway California to El Camino Real 60.7 12 37 117 372
2C Broadway El Camino Real to Bernal 53.4 2 7 22 145
3A California Dr Peninsula to Highland 68.8 76 240 759 2,399
3B California Dr Highland to Oak Grove 68.5 71 224 708 2,239
3C California Dr Oak Grove to Mills 67.8 60 191 603 1,905
3D California Dr Mills to Trousdale 68.7 74 234 741 2,344
4 Easton Dr El Camino Real to Bernal 59.2 8 26 83 263
5A El Camino Real Peninsula to Bellevue 70.2 105 331 1,047 3,311
5B El Camino Real Bellevue to Sanchez 71.9 155 490 1,549 4,898
5C El Camino Real Sanchez to Trousdale 71.7 148 468 1,479 4,677
5D El Camino Real Trousdale to Murchison 71.8 151 479 1,514 4,786
6 Hillside Dr El Camino Real to Bernal 57 5 16 50 158
7A Howard Ave N. Amphlett to Anita 51.5 1 4 14 45
7B Howard Ave Anita to El Camino Real 57.3 5 17 54 170
8A Murchison Dr California to El Camino Real 65.3 34 107 339 1,072
8B Murchison Dr El Camino Real to Sequoia 62.1 16 51 162 513
8C Murchison Dr City Limit to Trousdale 62 16 50 158 501
9 Rollins Road Broadway to North City Limit 65.2 33 105 331 1,047
10A Skyline Blvd South City Limit to 280 NB Exit 69.9 102 309 977 3,090
10B Skyline Blvd 280 NB Exit to Trousdale 70.5 112 355 1,122 3,548
11A Trousdale Dr El Camino Real to Loyola 66.9 49 155 490 1,549
11B Trousdale Dr Loyola to Sebastian 63.8 24 76 240 759
11C Trousdale Dr Sebastian to West City Limit 68.4 69 219 692 2,188
12A 101 NB Within City Limits 83.9 2,455 7,762 --(B) --(B)
12A 101 NB (w/ wall) Howard to Toyon 71.1 129 407 1,288 4,074
12B 101 SB Within City Limits 83.8 2,399 7,586 --(B) --(B)
12B 101 SB (w/ wall) Toyon to Howard 71.3 135 427 1,349 4,266
13A 280 NB Adjacent to City Limits 83.4 2,188 6,918 --(B) --(B)
13B 280 SB Adjacent to City Limits 83.6 2,291 7,244 --(B) --(B)
Source: Hexagon, 2018 and MIG, 2018 (see Appendix C)
(A)All CNEL values at listed distances are measured from the center of the modeled roadway.
(B)Distances to these contours are more than 1.5 miles and are not presumed to be representative due to effects on
propagation at these distances.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-34
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 15-15: Net Change in ADT and Traffic Noise Levels
ID Road Segment Existing Future Net Change
ADT CNEL(A) ADT CNEL(A) ADT CNEL(A)
1 Adeline Dr. El Camino Real to Bernal 2,963 56.6 3,044 57.7 81 1.1
2A Broadway US 101 to California 33,220 69.8 36,852 71 3,633 1.2
2B Broadway California to El Camino Real 4,060 57.8 6,206 60.7(B) 2,146 2.9
2C Broadway El Camino Real to Bernal 483 48.7 1,128 53.4(C) 645 4.7(C)(D)
3A California Dr Peninsula to Highland 20,676 68.2 19,890 68.8 -786 0.6
3B California Dr Highland to Oak Grove 23,503 68.9 17,921 68.5 -5,582 -0.4
3C California Dr Oak Grove to Mills 20,298 68.3 14,596 67.8 -5,702 -0.5
3D California Dr Mills to Trousdale 16,787 67.5 18,688 68.7 1,901 1.2
4 Easton Dr El Camino Real to Bernal 3,766 57.6 4,302 59.2 536 1.6
5A El Camino Real Peninsula to Bellevue 20,392 68.3 29,391 70.2 8,999 1.9
5B El Camino Rea Bellevue to Sanchez 27,173 69.6 38,662 71.9 11,489 2.3
5C El Camino Real Sanchez to Trousdale 25,925 69.4 37,267 71.7 11,343 2.3
5D El Camino Real Trousdale to Murchison 28,913 69.5 41,024 71.8 12,111 2.3
6 Hillside Dr El Camino Real to Bernal 1,621 57.2 1,298 57 -323 -0.2
7A Howard Ave N. Amphlett to Anita 579 49.6 704 51.5 125 1.9
7B Howard Ave Anita to El Camino Real 1,991 54.9 2,789 57.3(B) 798 2.4
8A Murchison Dr California to El Camino Real 13,205 65.3 13,261 65.3 56 0
8B Murchison Dr El Camino Real to Sequoia 4,321 61.5 4,147 62.1 -174 0.6
8E Murchison Dr City Limit to Trousdale 7,431 60.7 7,932 62 501 1.3
9 Rollins Road Broadway to North City Limit 7,456 64 8,203 65.2 746 1.2
10A Skyline Blvd South City Limit to 280 NB Exit 14,018 68.3 17,341 69.9 3,323 1.6
10B Skyline Blvd 280 NB Exit to Trousdale 19,665 69.2 22,468 70.5 2,803 1.3
11A Trousdale Dr El Camino Real to Loyola 11,128 65.7 12,131 66.9 1,003 1.2
11B Trousdale Dr Loyola to Sebastian 5,846 62.8 6,100 63.8 254 1
11C Trousdale Dr Sebastian to West City Limit 18,314 67.8 17,815 68.4 -499 0.6
12A 101 NB Within City Limits 103,561 83.1 103,747 83.9 186 0.8
12A 101 NB (w/ wall) Within City Limits 103,561 70.3 103,747 71.1 186 0.8
12B 101 SB Within City Limits 103,191 83.1 107,733 83.8 4,542 0.7
12B 101 SB (w/ wall) Within City Limits 103,191 70.4 107,733 71.3 4,542 0.9
13A 280 NB Adjacent to City Limits 92,657 82.7 98,236 83.4 5,579 0.7
13B 280 SB Adjacent to City Limits 95,048 82.8 101,057 83.6 6,009 0.8
Source: MIG, 2018 (See Appendix C).
(A)All CNEL values are presented at a distance of 100 feet from the center of the modeled roadway.
(B)Italicized text indicates future ambient noise levels at residential receptor locations (at a distance of either 50 feet or
100 feet from the roadway center) would change from normally acceptable to conditionally acceptable or higher, or
from conditionally acceptable to normally unacceptable, etc., with implementation of the proposed General Plan
(using the proposed 2040 General Plan land use compatibility standards), but would not increase ambient noise
levels by more than 3.0 dB.
(C)Although the increase on this roadway segment is 4.7 dB, the modeling indicates the CNEL at a distance of 50 feet
from the roadway center would exceed the City’s 55 CNEL standard and is thus a potentially significant impact.
(D)Bold and italicized text indicates a net increase of 5.0 dB or more (where noise levels remain below normally
acceptable levels, or a net increase of 3.0 dB or more where noise levels change from normally acceptable to
normally unacceptable or worse or already exceed normally acceptable levels (using the proposed 2040 General
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-35
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 15-15: Net Change in ADT and Traffic Noise Levels
ID Road Segment Existing Future Net Change
ADT CNEL(A) ADT CNEL(A) ADT CNEL(A)
Plan land use compatibility standards). These increases are considered a potentially significant impact
Pursuant to the State noise standards, new residential structures would be required to be
constructed such that interior noise levels do not exceed an hourly Leq value of 45 dBA.
Standard construction techniques and materials are commonly accepted to provide a minimum
exterior to interior noise attenuation (i.e., reduction) of 22 – 25 dBA with all windows and doors
closed.22,23,24 These reductions would be adequate for most developments occurring under
implementation of the General Plan update with respect to interior noise, with the possible
exception of new residential developments on El Camino Real (where future noise levels may
exceed 70 CNEL. Adherence to these mandatory reductions would ensure residential structures
within the City meet or exceed the 45 dBA Leq standard.
As indicated, the proposed Burlingame 2040 General Plan Update focuses on protecting
Burlingame citizens from excessive noise levels (including traffic noise) that could disturb and
disrupt human activities and affect the physical and psychological health of individuals. Table
15-16 summarizes the proposed Burlingame 2040 General Plan goals and policies that address
long-term increases in traffic noise within the City.
Table 15-16: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Traffic Noise
Regulation/Policy Description of Regulation/Policy How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
Existing Regulations
State of California
General Plan
Guidelines
The California Governor’s Office of
Planning and Research (OPR)
publishes the State of California
General Plan Guidelines, which
provide guidance for the
acceptability of projects within
specific CNEL contours.
Establishes guidelines
for ensuring noise is
considered when siting
new development.
(a) Generate or
expose people to
noise levels that
exceed standards
in the City’s
municipal code
(c) Result in a
substantial,
permanent
increase in noise
(d) Result in a
substantial,
temporary
increase in noise
22 The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Noise Guidebook and supplement (2009a,
2009b) includes information on noise attenuation provided by building materials and different construction techniques.
As a reference, a standard exterior wall consisting of 5/8-inch siding, wall sheathing, fiberglass insulation, two by four
wall studs on 16-inch centers, and 1/2-inch gypsum wall board with single strength windows provides approximately
35 dBs of attenuation between exterior and interior noise levels. This reduction may be slightly lower (2-3 dBs) for
traffic noise due to the specific frequencies associated with traffic noise. Increasing window space may also decrease
attenuation, with a reduction of 10 dBs possible if windows occupy 30% of the exterior wall façade.
23 HUD. 2009a.HUD Noise Guidebook. Prepared by the Environmental Planning Division, Office of Environment and
Energy. March 2009.
24 HUD. 2009b. HUD Noise Guidebook, Chapter 4 Supplement: Sound Transmission Class Guidance. Prepared by
the Environmental Planning Division, Office of Environment and Energy. March 2009.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-36
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 15-16: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Traffic Noise
Regulation/Policy Description of Regulation/Policy How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
Community Safety Element
Goal CS-4 Protect residents and visitors to
Burlingame from excessive noise
and disruptive ground vibration
States the overall goal of
the City to protect the
overall welfare of the
residents from adverse
levels of noise.
(a) Generate or
expose people to
noise levels that
exceed standards
in the City’s
municipal code
(c) Result in a
substantial,
permanent
increase in noise
(d) Result in a
substantial,
temporary
increase in noise
Policy CS-4.1
Locating Noise-
sensitive Uses
Locate noise-sensitive uses such
as homes, schools, hospitals,
libraries, religious institutions and
convalescent homes away from
major sources of noise.
Requires the City to
closely consider the
siting of new sensitive
land uses to reduce
long-term noise
exposure.
(a) Generate or
expose people to
noise levels that
exceed standards
in the City’s
municipal code
(c) Result in a
substantial,
permanent
increase in noise
(d) Result in a
substantial,
temporary
increase in noise
Policy CS-4.2
Residential Noise
Standards
Require the design of new
residential development to comply
with the following standards
• The maximum acceptable
interior noise level for all new
residential units (single-family,
duplex, mobile home, multi-
family, and mixed-use units)
shall be an Ldn of 45 dB with
windows closed.
• For project locations that are
primarily exposed to noise from
aircraft, Caltrain, and Bart
operations, the maximum
instantaneous noise level in
bedrooms shall not exceed 50
dBA at night (10:00 P.M. to
7:00 A.M) and the maximum
Requires all new
residential development
to comply with
established interior and
exterior noise standards.
Compliance with these
standards is intended to
reduce noise exposure
to humans.
(a) Generate or
expose people to
noise levels that
exceed standards
in the City’s
municipal code
(c) Result in a
substantial,
permanent
increase in noise
(d) Result in a
substantial,
temporary
increase in noise
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-37
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 15-16: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Traffic Noise
Regulation/Policy Description of Regulation/Policy How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
instantaneous noise level in all
interior rooms shall not exceed
55 dBA during the day (7:00 am
to 10:00 pm) with windows
closed.
Policy CS-4.3
Office Noise-Level
Standards
Require the design of new office
developments and similar uses to
achieve a maximum interior noise
standard of 45 dBA Leq (peak
hour).
Requires all new
development to comply
with established interior
noise standards.
(a) Generate or
expose people to
noise levels that
exceed standards
in the City’s
municipal code
(c) Result in a
substantial,
permanent
increase in noise
(d) Result in a
substantial,
temporary
increase in noise
Policy CS-4.4
Motel, Hotel,
Nursing Home and
Hospital Noise
Standards
Require the design of new motels,
hotels, nursing homes, hospitals
and other similar uses to comply
with the following noise standards:
• The maximum acceptable
interior noise level for sleeping
areas shall be an LDN of 45 dB
with windows closed.
• For project locations that are
primarily exposed to noise from
aircraft, Caltrain, and Bart
operations, the maximum
instantaneous noise level in
bedrooms shall not exceed 50
dBA at night (10:00 P.M. to
7:00 A.M) and the maximum
instantaneous noise level in all
interior rooms shall not exceed
55 dBA during the day (7:00 am
to 10:00 pm) with windows
closed.
Requires all new
development to comply
with established interior
and exterior noise
standards based on
various land uses types.
Compliance with these
standards is intended to
reduce noise exposure
to humans.
(a) Expose
people to
excessive noise
(c) Permanently
increase ambient
noise levels
(d) Temporarily
increase ambient
noise levels
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-38
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 15-16: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Traffic Noise
Regulation/Policy Description of Regulation/Policy How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
Policy CS-4.5:
Noise Mitigation
and Urban Design
Consider the visual impact of noise
mitigation measures; require
solutions that do not conflict with
urban design goals and policies
included in the General Plan.
(a) Generate or
expose people to
noise levels that
exceed standards
in the City’s
municipal code
(c) Result in a
substantial,
permanent
increase in noise
(d) Result in a
substantial,
temporary
increase in noise
Policy CS-4.6:
Freeway Sound
Walls
Coordinate with Caltrans to ensure
new sound walls and landscaping
strips are attractive along State
Route 101 to protect adjacent
areas from excessive freeway
noise in conjunction with any new
freeway project.
(a) Generate or
expose people to
noise levels that
exceed standards
in the City’s
municipal code
(c) Result in a
substantial,
permanent
increase in noise
(d) Result in a
substantial,
temporary
increase in noise
Proposed General Plan Goal CS-4 and Policies CS-4.1 to 4.6 establish the overall goal and
intent of the City to protect residents from excessive noise by requiring the City to review the
location of new noise-sensitive land uses, locate such land uses away from major noise
sources, and ensure new land uses meet the City’s noise standards (see Section 15.2.4)
through evaluation and design considerations. In addition, the proposed General Plan’s
Circulation Element goals and policies include a number of actions to reduce vehicle trips on the
City’s roads, which would lower traffic-related noise levels. Although these policies require noise
to be addressed for new development, existing development could be exposed to increased
noise levels that result in a change in terms of compatibility (i.e., from normally acceptable to
conditionally acceptable), and as shown in Table 15-15, traffic-related noise levels would
increase by more than 3 dB along Broadway between El Camino Real and Bernal Avenue.
The 2040 General Plan’s proposed exterior land use compatibility standards are shown in Table
15-9. In some cases the proposed compatibility standards are lower than the City’s existing
compatibility standards, despite the fact that traffic noise levels are generally above 60 CNEL in
most areas of the City (see Table 15-3). For example, the General Plan update’s proposed
normally acceptable and conditionally acceptable noise levels for low density residential land
uses is 55 and 65 CNEL, respectively, while existing traffic noise levels along Adeline Drive,
Broadway, Easton Drive, and Hillside Drive, which contain low density residential land uses are
above 55 CNEL currently and predicted to increase to up to approximately 60 CNEL under
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-39
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
future conditions, which would be conditionally acceptable. In addition, the 2040 General Plan’s
proposed exterior land use compatibility standards do not reflect the California Office of
Planning and Research’s latest General Plan guidelines, which propose different land use
compatibility standards that are more representative of current urban and suburban
environments, and some policies reflect standards that use different metrics than the General
Plan’s noise and land use compatibility standards and the California Building Code. The change
in compatibility standards is not a physical change to the environment that produces a physical
environmental impact requiring mitigation; however, in light of the measured ambient noise
levels in the City, the results of the existing and future traffic noise modeling conducted for the
EIR, and the General Plan’s increase in mixed-use development, Mitigation Measures 15-3A
and 15-3B are incorporated into the EIR to revise the proposed exterior land use compatibility
standards to better take into account the actual existing conditions in the City.
Mitigation Measure 15-3A. The City shall revise the 2040 General Plan land use and
noise compatibility standards (Table CS-2) to better incorporate the City’s existing
ambient noise environment and the Office of Planning and Research’s 2017 General
Plan Guidelines, as follows:
Burlingame 2040 General Plan
Land Use Category
Community Noise Equivalent Level (in dBA, CNEL)
Normally
Acceptable
Conditionally
Acceptable
Normally
Unacceptable
Clearly
Unacceptable
Residential – Low Density Single Family,
Duplex, Mobile homes < 60 < 70 < 75 > 75
Residential – Multi Family < 65 < 70 < 75 > 75
Transient Lodging – Motels, Hotels < 65 < 70 < 80 > 80
Schools, Libraries, Churches, Hospitals,
Nursing Homes < 65 < 70 < 80 > 80
Auditoriums, Concert Halls,
Amphitheaters -- < 65 -- > 80
Sports Arenas, Outdoor Spectator Sports -- < 75 -- >75
Playground, Neighborhood Parks < 70 -- < 75 > 75
Golf Course, Riding Stables, Water
Recreation, Cemeteries < 75 -- < 80 > 80
Office Buildings, Business Commercial
and Professional < 70 < 77.5 > 77.5 --
Industrial, Manufacturing, Utilities,
Agriculture < 75 < 80 > 80 --
Land Use Compatibility Definitions:
Normally Acceptable: Specific land use is satisfactory based upon the assumption buildings involved are of
normal conventional construction, without any special noise insulation requirements.
Conditionally Acceptable:
New construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analyses
of noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features included
in the design. Conventional construction, but with closed windows and fresh air supply
systems or air conditioning will normally suffice.
Normally Unacceptable:
New construction or development should be generally discouraged. If new construction
or development does proceed, a detailed analysis of noise reduction requirements must
be made and needed noise insulation features included in the design.
Clearly Unacceptable: New development should generally not be undertaken.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-40
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Mitigation Measure 15-3B. The City shall revise Public Draft General Plan Policies CS-
4.2 and CS-4.4 to use the CNEL metric when describing the allowable 24-hour interior
noise standard for new residential, motel, hotel, nursing home, and hotel development
(instead of the LDN) metric).
The application of the policies and objectives outlined in the City’s General Plan update would
reduce the amount of future vehicle trips generated from implementation of the General Plan,
however, the potential level of reduction is uncertain at this time and would be contingent on the
characteristic of each individual future development project. Since a reduction in vehicle trips
cannot be guaranteed, and future noise levels would increase by 3 dB or more and/or potentially
expose noise-sensitive land uses to conditionally acceptable or higher noise levels (e.g.,
Broadway between El Camino Real and Bernal Avenue), this impact would remain significant
and unavoidable.
Mitigation. No additional feasible mitigation is available.
Impact 15-4: Increases in Rail Noise Levels. Implementation of the Burlingame 2040 General
Plan could result in exposure of new receptors to Caltrain and freight rail operations that
generate noise; however, proposed 2040 General Plan policies would ensure new development
projects are not subjected to excessive rail-related noise levels. This would represent a less
than significant impact (see criterion [a] and [c] in subsection 15.3.1, "Significance Criteria,"
above).
The proposed 2040 General Plan does not authorize any specific development project nor does
it increase any Caltrain or freight rail operation because such operations are outside the
jurisdictional authority of the City. As shown in Table 15-4, existing Caltrain and freight train
noise levels in the City range from 61 to 66 DNL (61.5 to 66.5 CNEL), which exceeds the City’s
normally acceptable noise levels for single-family (55 CNEL) and multi-family (60 CNEL) land
uses; however, as identified in the PCEP Final EIR, 2040 Caltrain and freight train noise levels
are not expected to significantly change with implementation of the PCEP project. The
maximum increase in noise levels associated with full implementation of the PCEP project is
estimated to be 0.1 DNL.25
As indicated, the proposed Burlingame 2040 General Plan Update focuses on protecting
Burlingame citizens from excessive noise levels (including rail noise) that could disturb and
disrupt human activities and affect the physical and psychological health of individuals.
Table 15-17 summarizes the proposed Burlingame 2040 General Plan goals and policies that
address rail noise impacts within the City.
25 Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board 2015. Peninsula Corridor Electrification Project Final Environmental Impact
Report, Table 3.11-15. San Carlos, CA. January 2015.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-41
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 15-17: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Rail Noise
Regulation/Policy Description of Regulation/Policy How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance Criteria
Existing Regulations
State of California
General Plan
Guidelines
The California Governor’s Office of
Planning and Research (OPR)
publishes the State of California
General Plan Guidelines, which
provide guidance for the
acceptability of projects within
specific CNEL contours.
Establishes guidelines
for ensuring noise is
considered when siting
new development.
(a) Generate or
expose people to
noise levels that
exceed standards
in the City’s
municipal code
(c) Result in a
substantial,
permanent increase
in noise
(d) Result in a
substantial,
temporary increase
in noise
Community Safety Element
Goal CS-4 Protect residents and visitors to
Burlingame from excessive noise
and disruptive ground vibration
States the overall goal
of the City to protect
the overall welfare of
the residents from
adverse levels of
noise.
(a) Generate or
expose people to
noise levels that
exceed standards
in the City’s
municipal code
(c) Result in a
substantial,
permanent increase
in noise
(d) Result in a
substantial,
temporary increase
in noise
Policy CS-4.1
Locating Noise-
sensitive Uses
Locate noise-sensitive uses such
as homes, schools, hospitals,
libraries, religious institutions and
convalescent homes away from
major sources of noise.
Requires the City to
closely consider the
siting of new sensitive
land uses to reduce
long-term noise
exposure.
(a) Generate or
expose people to
noise levels that
exceed standards
in the City’s
municipal code
(c) Result in a
substantial,
permanent increase
in noise
(d) Result in a
substantial,
temporary increase
in noise
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-42
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 15-17: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Rail Noise
Regulation/Policy Description of Regulation/Policy How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance Criteria
Policy CS-4.2
Residential Noise
Standards
Require the design of new
residential development to comply
with the following standards
• The maximum acceptable
interior noise level for all new
residential units (single-family,
duplex, mobile home, multi-
family, and mixed-use units)
shall be an Ldn of 45 dB with
windows closed.
• For project locations that are
primarily exposed to noise from
aircraft, Caltrain, and Bart
operations, the maximum
instantaneous noise level in
bedrooms shall not exceed 50
dBA at night (10:00 P.M. to
7:00 A.M) and the maximum
instantaneous noise level in all
interior rooms shall not exceed
55 dBA during the day (7:00 am
to 10:00 pm) with windows
closed.
Requires all new
residential
development to
comply with
established interior
and exterior noise
standards. Compliance
with these standards is
intended to reduce
noise exposure to
humans.
(a) Expose people
to excessive noise
(c) Permanently
increase ambient
noise levels
(d) Temporarily
increase ambient
noise levels
Policy CS-4.3
Office Noise-Level
Standards
Require the design of new office
developments and similar uses to
achieve a maximum interior noise
standard of 45 dBA Leq (peak
hour).
Requires all new
development to
comply with
established interior
noise standards.
(a) Expose people
to excessive noise
(c) Permanently
increase ambient
noise levels
(d) Temporarily
increase ambient
noise levels
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-43
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 15-17: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Rail Noise
Regulation/Policy Description of Regulation/Policy How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance Criteria
Policy CS-4.4
Motel, Hotel,
Nursing Home and
Hospital Noise
Standards
Require the design of new motels,
hotels, nursing homes, hospitals
and other similar uses to comply
with the following noise standards:
• The maximum acceptable
interior noise level for sleeping
areas shall be an LDN of 45 dB
with windows closed.
• For project locations that are
primarily exposed to noise from
aircraft, Caltrain, and Bart
operations, the maximum
instantaneous noise level in
bedrooms shall not exceed 50
dBA at night (10:00 P.M. to
7:00 A.M) and the maximum
instantaneous noise level in all
interior rooms shall not exceed
55 dBA during the day (7:00 am
to 10:00 pm) with windows
closed.
Requires all new
development to
comply with
established interior
and exterior noise
standards based on
various land uses
types. Compliance
with these standards is
intended to reduce
noise exposure to
humans.
(a) Generate or
expose people to
noise levels that
exceed standards
in the City’s
municipal code
(c) Result in a
substantial,
permanent increase
in noise
(d) Result in a
substantial,
temporary increase
in noise
Policy CS-4.11
Train Noise
Require that all new development
within 1,000 feet of the rail line to
provide deed notices disclosing
noise impacts upon transfer of title
to residents and property owners.
Ensures landowners
and tenants are aware
of noise from train
noise
(a) Generate or
expose people to
noise levels that
exceed standards
in the City’s
municipal code
(c) Result in a
substantial,
permanent increase
in noise
(d) Result in a
substantial,
temporary increase
in noise
Proposed General Plan Goal CS-4 and Policies CS-4.1 to 4.3 and 4.11 establish the overall
goal and intent of the City to protect residents from excessive noise by requiring the City to
review the location of new noise-sensitive land uses, locate such land uses away from major
noise sources, and ensure new land uses meet the City’s noise standards (see Section 15.2.4)
through evaluation, design considerations, and notification/disclosure of potential train noise
levels. Although potential rail noise impacts on specific future development projects are not
known at this time, proposed General Plan Policies CS-4.1 to 4.3 and 4.11 require an
assessment of potential impacts, the application of measures to meet noise standard, and
notification of future residents regarding train noise levels. The implementation of these policies
would render potential rail-related noise impacts on future development projects a less than
significant impact.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-44
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Impact 15-5: Increases in Traffic and Rail Vibration Levels. Implementation of projects under
the proposed Burlingame 2040 General Plan would involve increases in traffic that could result
in ground-borne vibration at sensitive receptor locations. Implementation of the Burlingame
2040 General Plan could also result in exposure of new receptors to Caltrain and freight rail
operations that produce ground-borne vibration levels that exceed standards. Proposed 2040
General Plan policies, however, would ensure potential traffic- and rail-generated vibration
levels do not exceed standards recommended by the Federal Transit Administration or Caltrans.
This would represent a less than significant impact (see criterion [b] in subsection 15.3.1,
"Significance Criteria," above).
As shown in Table 15-12, a single loaded truck pass by generates groundborne vibration values
of 0.035 inches/second PPV and 77 vDB at a distance of 50 feet. These vibration levels do not
exceed any threshold recommended for use by the FTA or Caltrans’ for infrequent or
intermittent events (see Table 15-6 and Table 15-8). Thus, potential increases in traffic-related
vibration levels have little to no potential to be excessive along City roadways. In addition, buses
and other transit vehicles are not anticipated to to generate excessive vibration levels that would
disturb new sensitive receptors because these vehicles are travelling at lower speeds and do
not generate substantial vibrations.
The proposed 2040 General Plan could facilitate the construction of sensitive land uses along
the City’s Caltrain corridor. With regards to vibration impacts on new development near
railroads, human disturbance is the primary concern. It is extremely rare for vibration levels from
trains passing to result in structural damage to buildings. The proposed 2040 General Plan does
not authorize any specific development project nor does it increase any Caltrain or freight rail
operation because such operations are outside the jurisdictional authority of the City. As shown
in Table 15-5, existing Caltrain and freight train trips generate a groundborne vibration level of
approximately 69 and 81 vDB, respectively, at a distance of 100 feet. At a distance of 135 feet,
which is how far buildings are typically setback from the closest rail track in the Caltrain corridor,
vibration levels would be approximately 63 vDB for Caltrain and 75 vDB for a freight train. While
Caltrain vibration levels (63 vDB) would be below FTA recommended thresholds, freight train
operations could generate vibration levels (75 vDB) that are above the FTA’s recommended
thresholds for frequent events (occurring more than 70 times a day), but not occasional or
infrequent events. Although freight trains would pass by only several times at night, total rail
activity on the Caltrain corridor would exceed 70 events per day.
The PCEP Project would add 22 trains per day to the San Francisco to San Jose Diridon
segment of the Caltrain Corridor and concluded this increase in operations would not double
existing rail activity nor result in more than a 3 dB increase in groundborne vibration levels. The
PCEP EIR concluded vibration impacts from the electrification project would be less than
significant.
Table 15-18 summarizes the proposed Burlingame 2040 General Plan goals and policies that
address traffic and rail vibration impacts within the City.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-45
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 15-18: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts from Traffic and Rail Vibration
Regulation/Policy Description of Regulation/Policy How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance Criteria
Existing Regulations
U.S. Department of
Transportation
To address the human response to
ground borne vibration, the
Federal Transit Administration
(FTA) has set forth guidelines for
maximum-acceptable vibration
criteria for different types of land
uses.
Establishes standards
and guidelines on
ground borne
vibrations for state
agencies to follow to
protect public health
and welfare.
(b) Expose people
to excessive ground
borne vibration
Caltrans
In 2013, Caltrans published its
Transportation and Construction
Vibration Guidance Manual, which
provides general guidance on
vibration issues associated with
construction and operation of
projects in relation to human
perception and structural damage.
Establishes guidelines
for ensuring ground
borne vibration is
considered when siting
new development and
during construction
activities.
(b) Expose people
to excessive ground
borne vibration
Community Safety Element
Goal CS-4 Protect residents and visitors to
Burlingame from excessive noise
and disruptive ground vibration
States the overall goal
of the City to protect
the overall welfare of
the residents from
adverse levels of
noise.
(b) Expose people
to excessive ground
borne vibration
Policy CS-4.13
Transportation
Vibration
Require new residential and
commercial projects located within
200 feet of existing major freeways
and railroad lines to conduct a
ground vibration and vibration
noise evaluation consistent with
City approved methodologies.
Ensures vibration and
vibration noise near
new residential and
commercial land uses
are considered.
(b) Expose people
to excessive ground
borne vibration
Proposed General Plan Goal CS-4 and Policy CS-4.13 establish the overall goal and intent of
the City to protect residents from excessive noise by requiring the City to review the location of
new, potentially vibration-sensitive land uses, evaluate and determine groundborne vibration
levels, and consider whether the potential vibration effects would be excessive for new projects.
The implementation of proposed General Plan Policy CS-4.13 would render potential traffic and
rail-related noise impacts on future development projects a less than significant impact.
Impact 15-6: Increases in Stationary and Other Sources of Noise. Implementation of the
proposed Burlingame 2040 General Plan could involve increases in stationary and other
sources of noise at sensitive receptor locations; however, proposed 2040 General Plan policies
would ensure noise from these sources do not exceed City standards. This would represent a
less than significant impact (see criterion [a] and [c] in subsection 15.3.1, "Significance
Criteria," above).
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-46
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Stationary and other sources of noise in Burlingame include those associated with the standard
operation of land uses. These sources could include, but are not limited to, landscape and
building maintenance activities, stationary mechanical equipment (e.g., pumps, generators,
HVAC units), garbage collection activities, commercial and industrial activities, and other
stationary and area sources such as people's voices, amplified music, and public address
systems.
Noise generated by residential or commercial uses are generally short-term and intermittent in
nature. Industrial uses may generate noise on a more continual basis due to the nature of their
activities. The proposed General Plan would provide for increase in residential and commercial
development within City, and would also provide for mixed use development in which residential
and commercial uses are integrated into a single development project. These types of
developments tend to have higher noise levels associated with the mix of land uses contained
within them. Future planned development could also result in new stationary and area sources
as well as exposure of new sensitive land uses to existing stationary and area sources.
Table 15-19 summarizes the proposed 2040 Burlingame General Plan goals and policies that
address potential long-term increases in noise associated with stationary and other sources of
noise.
Table 15-19: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Stationary and Other Noise Sources
Regulation/Policy Description of Regulation/Policy How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance Criteria
Existing Regulations
State of California
General Plan
Guidelines
The California Governor’s Office of
Planning and Research (OPR)
publishes the State of California
General Plan Guidelines, which
provide guidance for the
acceptability of projects within
specific CNEL contours.
Establishes guidelines
for ensuring noise is
considered when siting
new development.
(a) Generate or
expose people to
noise levels that
exceed standards
in the City’s
municipal code
(c) Result in a
substantial,
permanent increase
in noise
(d) Result in a
substantial,
temporary increase
in noise
Burlingame
Municipal Code
The Burlingame Municipal Code
generally limits noise from certain
common stationary and other
sources such as speakers (Section
10.40.020), lawnmowers (Section
10.40.037), leaf blowers (Section
10.40.038), loading and unloading
activities (Section 10.40.039), and
mechanical equipment including
HVAC and generators (Section
25.58.050).
Controls noise levels
from common
stationary and other
noise sources
prevalent in the City.
(a) Generate or
expose people to
noise levels that
exceed standards
in the City’s
municipal code
(c) Result in a
substantial,
permanent increase
in noise
(d) Result in a
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-47
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 15-19: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Stationary and Other Noise Sources
Regulation/Policy Description of Regulation/Policy How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance Criteria
substantial,
temporary increase
in noise
Community Safety Element
Goal CS-4 Protect residents and visitors to
Burlingame from excessive noise
and disruptive ground vibration
States the overall goal
of the City to protect
the overall welfare of
the residents from
adverse levels of
noise.
(a) Generate or
expose people to
noise levels that
exceed standards
in the City’s
municipal code
(c) Result in a
substantial,
permanent increase
in noise
(d) Result in a
substantial,
temporary increase
in noise
Policy CS-4.1
Locating Noise-
sensitive Uses
Locate noise-sensitive uses such
as homes, schools, hospitals,
libraries, religious institutions and
convalescent homes away from
major sources of noise.
Requires the City to
closely consider the
siting of new sensitive
land uses to reduce
long-term noise
exposure.
(a) Generate or
expose people to
noise levels that
exceed standards
in the City’s
municipal code
(c) Result in a
substantial,
permanent increase
in noise
(d) Result in a
substantial,
temporary increase
in noise
Policy CS-4.2
Residential Noise
Standards
Require the design of new
residential development to comply
with the following standards
• The maximum acceptable
interior noise level for all new
residential units (single-family,
duplex, mobile home, multi-
family, and mixed-use units)
shall be a Ldn of 45 dB with
windows closed.
• For project locations that are
primarily exposed to noise from
aircraft, Caltrain, and Bart
operations, the maximum
instantaneous noise level in
Requires all new
residential
development to
comply with
established interior
and exterior noise
standards. Compliance
with these standards is
intended to reduce
noise exposure to
humans.
(a) Generate or
expose people to
noise levels that
exceed standards
in the City’s
municipal code
(c) Result in a
substantial,
permanent increase
in noise
(d) Result in a
substantial,
temporary increase
in noise
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-48
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 15-19: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Stationary and Other Noise Sources
Regulation/Policy Description of Regulation/Policy How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance Criteria
bedrooms shall not exceed 50
dBA at night (10:00 P.M. to
7:00 A.M) and the maximum
instantaneous noise level in all
interior rooms shall not exceed
55 dBA during the day (7:00 am
to 10:00 pm) with windows
closed.
Policy CS-4.3
Office Noise-Level
Standards
Require the design of new office
developments and similar uses to
achieve a maximum interior noise
standard of 45dBA Leq (peak
hour).
Requires all new
development to
comply with
established interior
noise standards.
(a) Generate or
expose people to
noise levels that
exceed standards
in the City’s
municipal code
(c) Result in a
substantial,
permanent increase
in noise
(d) Result in a
substantial,
temporary increase
in noise
Policy CS-4.4
Motel, Hotel,
Nursing Home
and Hospital
Noise Standards
Require the design of new motels,
hotels, nursing homes, hospitals
and other similar uses to comply
with the following noise standards:
• The maximum acceptable
interior noise level for sleeping
areas shall be an LDN of 45 dB
with windows closed.
• For project locations that are
primarily exposed to noise from
aircraft, Caltrain, and Bart
operations, the maximum
instantaneous noise level in
bedrooms shall not exceed 50
dBA at night (10:00 P.M. to
7:00 A.M) and the maximum
instantaneous noise level in all
interior rooms shall not exceed
55 dBA during the day (7:00 am
to 10:00 pm) with windows
closed.
Requires all new
development to
comply with
established interior
and exterior noise
standards based on
various land uses
types. Compliance
with these standards is
intended to reduce
noise exposure to
humans.
(a) Expose people
to excessive noise
(c) Permanently
increase ambient
noise levels
(d) Temporarily
increase ambient
noise levels
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-49
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Proposed General Plan Goal CS-1 and Policies CS-4.1 to CS-4.3 establish the overall goal and
intent of the City to protect residents from excessive noise by requiring the City to review the
location of new noise-sensitive land uses, locate such land uses away from major noise
sources, and ensure new land uses meet the City’s noise standards (see Section 15.2.4)
through evaluation and design considerations. Thus, stationary and other sources of noise
would be controlled by the proposed General Plan goals and policies, as well as the City’s
Municipal Code, which provide requirements for limiting certain specific non-transportation noise
source impacts such as HVAC and leaf blower noise. Therefore, future stationary noise sources
would comply with City standards and would not expose people to excessive noise levels. This
would be a less-than-significant impact (see criteria [a] and [c] in subsection 15.2.1,
"Significance Criteria," above).
Impact 15-7: Airport and Heliport Noise Impacts. Implementation of the proposed
Burlingame 2040 General Plan could expose sensitive receptors to airport and heliport noise;
however, proposed 2040 General Plan policies would ensure noise from these sources do not
exceed City or other applicable standards. This would represent a less than significant impact
(see criterion [a] and [c] in subsection 15.3.1, "Significance Criteria," above).
As explained in Section 15.1.6.4, small areas of the northeastern most parts of the City lay
within the 60 CNEL and 65 CNEL noise contours associated with SFO operations (see Figure
15-3), and the recent renewal of helicopter operations at Mills-Peninsula Medical Center
generates noise that impacts existing residential and commercial land uses surrounding the
hospital. These areas are close to the proposed 2040 General Plan’s North Burlingame Mixed
Use re-designation, which permits residential and mixed use development, and thus could result
in the siting of new receptors within defined SFO airport contour areas and in close proximity to
hospital heliport operations.
Table 15-20 summarizes the proposed 2040 Burlingame General Plan goals and policies that
address potential long-term increases in noise associated with stationary and other sources of
noise.
Table 15-20: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Noise
Regulation/Policy Description of Regulation/Policy How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance Criteria
Existing Regulations
City/County
Association of
Governments of
San Mateo
County
The 2012 Comprehensive Airport
Land Use Plan for the Environs of
San Francisco International Airport
establishes noise and other
airport-related compatibility
policies for certain land uses
surrounding the airport.
Sets incompatible
airport noise level for
housing units of 70
CNEL and noise
abatement and
mitigation procedures
for housing units in
conditionally
compatible (65 to 70
CNEL) noise contour
areas.
(e), (f) expose
people residing or
working in the
project area to
excessive public or
private airport-
related noise levels
Community Safety Element
Goal CS-4 Protect residents and visitors to
Burlingame from excessive noise
States the overall goal
of the City to protect
(e), (f) expose
people residing or
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 15. Noise and Vibration June 28, 2018 Page 15-50
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 15_Noise_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 15-20: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Noise
Regulation/Policy Description of Regulation/Policy How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance Criteria
and disruptive ground vibration the overall welfare of
the residents from
adverse levels of
noise.
working in the
project area to
excessive public or
private airport-
related noise levels
Policy CS-4.7
Airport and
Heliport Noise
Monitor noise impacts from aircraft
operations at San Francisco
International Airport and Mills-
Peninsula Medical Center, and
implement applicable noise
abatement policies and procedures
as outlined in the Airport Noise
Ordinance and Airport Land Use
Compatibility Plan.
Ensures that sensitive
land uses are
protected from airport
related noise.
(e), (f) expose
people residing or
working in the
project area to
excessive public or
private airport-
related noise levels
Policy CS-4.8
Airport Noise
Evaluation and
Mitigation
Require project applicants to
evaluate potential airport noise
impacts if the project is located
within the 60 CNEL contour line of
San Francisco International Airport
(as mapped in the Airport Land
Use Compatibility Plan). All
projects shall be required to
mitigate impacts to comply with the
interior and exterior noise
standards established by the
Airport Land Use Compatibility
Plan.
Ensures that all land
uses are protected
from airport related
noise.
(e), (f) expose
people residing or
working in the
project area to
excessive public or
private airport-
related noise levels
Policy CS-4.9
Airport Disclosure
Notices
Require that all new development
within an airport-defined over-flight
zone provide deed notices
disclosing airport over-flights and
noise upon transfer of title to
residents and property owners.
Ensures landowners
and tenants are aware
of noise from aircraft
over-flights
(e), (f) expose
people residing or
working in the
project area to
excessive public or
private airport-
related noise levels
Proposed General Plan Goal CS-1 and Policies CS-4.7 to CS-4.9 establish the overall goal and
intent of the City to protect residents from excessive airport and heliport noise by requiring the
City to monitor these operations and implement applicable noise abatement procedures,
evaluate the potential for new development projects to meet applicable City and airport-related
noise standards, and provide disclosure and notification of airport over-flights to new property
owners. The implementation of proposed General Plan Policies CS-4.7 to 4.9 would render
potential airport and heliport noise impacts on existing and future development projects a less
than significant impact (see criteria [a], [c], [d] and [e] in subsection 15.2.1, "Significance
Criteria," above).
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 16. Population and Housing June 28, 2018 Page 16-1
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 16_Pop and Housing_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018.doc
16. POPULATION AND HOUSING
This EIR chapter describes existing population and housing conditions in the planning Area. It
includes the regulatory framework necessary to evaluate potential environmental impacts
resulting from the 2040 General Plan, describes potential impacts that could result from the
General Plan, and discusses General Plan goals, policies and implementation programs that
would avoid or reduce potential impacts.
16.1 SETTING
The environmental and regulatory settings of the Burlingame planning area with respect to
population and housing are described in Chapter 2. Land Use and Urban Form (City of
Burlingame, 2015). Pursuant to section 15150 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the Background
Report is incorporated into the Draft Program EIR by reference. The Background Report is
available at the City of Burlingame 2040 General Plan website at:
http://www.Burlingame.org/GENERALPLAN
Copies of the Background Report may be viewed during regular business hours (8:00 a.m. to
5:00 p.m.), Monday through Friday, at the City of Burlingame Planning Division, 501 Primrose
Road, Burlingame, CA 94010.
Existing housing and future housing growth information is taken from the 2015-2023 Housing
Element and the Initial Study and Environmental Checklist Form for the 2015-2023 Housing
Element Update.
16.1.1 Environmental Setting
Burlingame’s residential population has experienced only a modest growth over the past 20
years. The 2010 population was 28,806, which represented only a 2.3 percent increase from the
2000 population of 28,158 and a 7.48 percent increase from the population in 1990 of 26,801.
The 2017 population of Burlingame is approximately 29,700.
The Bay area region is projected to continue more robust growth in the coming decades, with a
share of this growth accommodated in Burlingame. The Association of Bay Area Governments
(ABAG) projects an increase in the Burlingame population to 31,700 in 2020, 34,800 in 2030,
and 38,800 in 2040. This would mean an approximate 23 percent population increase between
2017 and 2040 (29,700 to 38,800). Note the projected 2040 General Plan population is less
than the ABAG projection (approximately 36,500), which the City believes better represents the
future development scenario.
Most of Burlingame’s housing stock was developed between the 1890s and the 1960s. The City
was largely built out by the 1970s. Burlingame is a mature community, with very little vacant
land available for development. Most of the sites selected for housing are infill sites which are
currently underdeveloped and could be redeveloped at higher densities. Three areas of the City
have experienced recent development: Downtown Burlingame, North Burlingame, and sites
along Carolan Avenue.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 16. Population and Housing June 28, 2018 Page 16-2
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 16_Pop and Housing_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018.doc
The City of Burlingame updated the Housing Element in January 2015. The element, which
covers the 2015-2023 planning period, includes policies to address both local and regional
demand for affordable and market-rate housing. Implementation of the 2015-2023 Housing
Element would allow development of up to 863 housing units citywide. The Housing Element
includes programs and policies that address the housing needs of the community. New policies
and programs include recommendations for the creation of incentives to encourage
development of a variety of housing types, allowing fee waivers for affordable rehabilitation, and
consideration of residential and commercial in-lieu fees to contribute toward the supply of low-
and moderate-income housing.
Any future changes in regulations and development of housing will be subject to environmental
review per the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, and subject to public
review and hearings prior to implementation. None of the housing sites identified in the updated
Housing Element require rezoning to allow the proposed residential uses. The specific
recommendations for implementation of the goals and policies are outlined in the 2015-2023
Housing Element.
16.1.2 Regulatory Setting
Housing Element Law (California Government Code Article 10.6). State law requires each
city and county to prepare and maintain a current housing element as part of the community's
General Plan to attain a statewide goal of providing "decent housing and a suitable living
environment for every California family." Under state law, housing elements must be updated
every eight years and reviewed by the State Department of Housing and Community
Development.
16.2 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
This section describes potential impacts related to population and housing that could result from
the General Plan, and discusses General Plan goals, policies, and implementation programs
that would avoid or reduce those potential impacts. The section also recommends mitigation
measures as needed to reduce significant impacts.
16.2.1 Significance Criteria
Based on the CEQA Guidelines, implementation of the City of Burlingame 2040 General Plan
would have a significant impact related to population and housing if it would:
a) Induce substantial population growth either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through extension of roads or other infrastructure); or
b) Displace substantial numbers of people or existing housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 16. Population and Housing June 28, 2018 Page 16-3
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 16_Pop and Housing_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018.doc
16.2.2 Analysis Methodology
The methodology for evaluating potential environmental impacts related to population and
housing followed this sequence:
1) The General Plan Background Report and Housing Element were evaluated to identify
existing environmental conditions and problems related to population and housing,
including the regulatory framework that applies to these issues.
2) The CEQA Statute and Guidelines (2013), including appendix G (Environmental
Checklist Form), were consulted to identify environmental impact topics and issues that
should be addressed in the program EIR. In part, this process resulted in the
significance criteria listed in subsection 16.2.1 above.
3) The General Plan Policy Document, including the associated development capacity
assumptions (see EIR section 3.4), was analyzed to identify goals, policies and
implementation programs (“policies” for short), and potential outcomes that address the
significance criteria. This analysis resulted in two basic conclusions regarding policies
and outcomes: (a) many policies would avoid or reduce potential environmental impacts,
and (b) some policies or outcomes could result in new environmental impacts or
increase the severity of existing environmental problems.
4) For potential environmental impacts that would result from the 2040 General Plan,
mitigations were designed to avoid or reduce each impact to a less-than-significant level.
If implementation of all identified feasible mitigations cannot reduce the impact to a less-
than-significant level, then the impact is considered significant and unavoidable.
16.2.3 Environmental Impacts
Potential Impacts of Future Development Pursuant to the 2040 General Plan
Induced population growth may result in impacts if a project induces growth in an area not
otherwise planned for growth or in an area that cannot adequately accommodate such growth.
Growth may be induced directly by proposals for new residential uses or indirectly by proposals
for new roadways, other infrastructure, or employment opportunities.
Population growth is complex and caused by the interplay of many factors, including
immigration, employment and economic opportunities, births, deaths, and other influences. The
2040 General Plan would not directly induce population growth because it does not authorize a
specific construction project, development plan, or other land-altering activity. Neither would the
General Plan designate formerly undeveloped lands needing major infrastructure expansions
(water, sewer, wastewater) for development. Instead, the 2040 General Plan has been drafted
to: 1) accommodate a share of regional growth in areas adequately served by infrastructure, 2)
encourage reuse of underutilized parcels and uses, and 3) preserve well-established residential
neighborhoods, and 4) create opportunities for new types of housing for all income ranges.
The General Plan Community Character chapter (chapter 4) establishes an overall development
capacity for the planning area and serves as a policy guide for determining the appropriate
physical development and character for properties within the City’s jurisdiction. The
development capacity of the proposed Land Use Plan is estimated at 16,065 dwelling units
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 16. Population and Housing June 28, 2018 Page 16-4
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 16_Pop and Housing_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018.doc
housing approximately 36,500 residents. The plan supports approximately 4.7 million square
feet of office space, 3.0 million square feet of commercial space, and 4.3 million square feet of
industrial space (in this EIR, see Table 3.0-2, Existing Developed and Proposed Build-Out
Summary and Figure 3.0-4, Draft Land Use Plan).
The General Plan accommodates an additional 2,951 housing units more than current
conditions, which translates to a projected population at 2040 General Plan buildout is 36,493
residents, or 6,769 residents than the existing population.
The projected buildout population is what can be accomplished within existing urban areas that
already support urban infrastructure. None of this would be accommodated on undeveloped
land that requires the expansion of urban infrastructure. Additionally, should population growth
be greater than what the buildout can accommodate, then residential development would also
be greater. Projected buildout population is just that, a projection; actual development and
population growth in the City will be based on market conditions and, for the most part, will be
completed in accordance with the 2040 General Plan Land Use Plan. (Significance Criterion
16.2.1 [a])
New housing anticipated by the 2040 General Plan is not likely to displace existing housing or
residents since most of 2040 General Plan new housing opportunity sites identified are currently
developed with commercial buildings. In addition, the 2015-2023 Housing Element includes
goals and policies that discourage the displacement of tenants in existing rental units (see Table
16-1 below under Program H(F-11) – Anti-Displacement Strategies). (Significance Criterion
16.2.1 [b])
How Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies Reduce Impacts
Table 16-1 is aligned with relevant Existing Regulations and General Plan policies that relate to
population and housing. Column 1 (Objective) lists each Regulation and General Plan goal,
policy, and implementation program (“policy” for short), organized by General Plan element, that
addresses the potential impact identified in Table 16-1. Column 2 is a summary of the
regulation/policy and the text of the policy. Column 3 answers the question, “How does the
regulation/policy avoid or reduce the potential impact?” Column 4 identifies the applicable
significance criteria that is addressed by the regulation/goal/policy.
The verbs in Column 3 are intended to be applied consistently. The verb “ensures” means that
the policy is sufficient to guarantee the result identified in the policy. The verb “helps” means
that the policy contributes to avoiding or reducing the identified potential impact; in many cases,
“helps” is used for a policy that can be applied to avoid or reduce a wide range of potential
impacts.
Table 16-1: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Population and Housing
Regulation/Policy Description of Regulation/Policy How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
Existing Regulations
Housing Element
Law (California
Government Code
State law requires each city and
county to prepare and maintain a
current housing element as part of
Ensures that the future
housing elements
address housing needs
(a) Induce
substantial
population growth
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 16. Population and Housing June 28, 2018 Page 16-5
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 16_Pop and Housing_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018.doc
Table 16-1: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Population and Housing
Regulation/Policy Description of Regulation/Policy How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
Article 10.6). the community's General Plan to
attain a statewide goal of providing
"decent housing and a suitable
living environment for every
California family."
based on population
growth.
(b) Displace
substantial
numbers of
people or existing
housing
2015-2023 Housing Element
Program H (A-5)
Prevent conversion
of residential units
to non-residential
use
Amend zoning code to require a
conditional use permit for
any project where residential units
are proposed to be replaced by
non-residential use.
Ensures existing
residential land uses are
not displaced by non-
residential uses.
(b) Displace
substantial
numbers of
people or existing
housing
Program H(F-1) -
Encourage
development of
housing on
selected sites to
serve all income
levels
Amend the zoning code to create
zoning incentives that encourage
the consolidation of smaller lots
identified as Housing Inventory
Sites, such as development review
streamlining, reduction in required
parking for smaller units, setback
modifications, or increases in
building height.
Helps ensure that
growth is maintained
within the established
land use pattern.
(b) Displace
substantial
numbers of
people or existing
housing
Program H(F-2) -
Promote
development of
potential housing
sites
Maintain and update the area-by-
area land use surveys, note
changes in vacant and
underutilized sites; share
information with potential
residential developers.
Helps ensure that
growth is maintained
within the established
land use pattern.
(b) Displace
substantial
numbers of
people or existing
housing
Program H(F-4) -
Identify sites for
affordable, mixed
use
residential, live-
work and small
one-bedroom or
studio
apartments.
a. Encourage development of sites
in C-R zone and where there is
commercial zoning with a
residential overlay or residential
mixed use zoning.
b. Promote development within the
new mixed-use zoning districts
within the Downtown Specific Plan
area, which allow for mixed uses
and high density residential uses,
and include incentives to keep
units affordable such as reduced
parking requirements, increased
heights, and modified setbacks.
Helps ensure that
growth is maintained
within the established
land use pattern.
(b) Displace
substantial
numbers of
people or existing
housing
Program H(F-11) –
Anti-Displacement
Strategies
Acknowledge the problem of
tenant displacement and convene
a process to investigate mitigations
and the obstacles to deploying
them, including legislative barriers
such as the Burlingame Fair
Property Rights Ordinance
(“Measure T”) and establish or
modify strategies as appropriate.
Discourages the
displacement of tenants
based on income levels.
(b) Displace
substantial
numbers of
people or existing
housing
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 16. Population and Housing June 28, 2018 Page 16-6
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 16_Pop and Housing_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018.doc
Table 16-1: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Population and Housing
Regulation/Policy Description of Regulation/Policy How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
2040 General Plan Community Character Element
CC-1.2: Mixed-Use,
Transit-Oriented
Infill Development
Promote higher-density infill
development with a mix of uses on
underutilized parcels, particularly
near transit stations and stops.
Directs growth toward
infill sites, which limits
the potential for
substantial population
growth.
(a) Induce
substantial
population growth
(b) Displace
substantial
numbers of
people or existing
housing
Goal CC-4: Ensure high-quality, integrated,
and appropriately scaled
residential development within
Burlingame’s neighborhoods.
Encourages new
housing within
established land use
patterns and in
compatible mixed-use
developments. Avoids
large-scale displacement
of people and housing.
(a) Induce
substantial
population growth
(b) Displace
substantial
numbers of
people or existing
housing
CC-4.1: Residential
Character and
Design
Encourage a diverse housing stock
while also ensuring that new
development and substantially
remodeled homes maintain the
architectural and massing
character of each unique
residential neighborhood in
Burlingame.
Helps ensure that
growth is maintained
within the established
land use pattern.
(a) Induce
substantial
population growth
(b) Displace
substantial
numbers of
people or existing
housing
CC-4.3: Mass and
Scale
Ensure that the scale and
interrelationships of new and old
residential development
complement each other.
Helps ensure that
growth is maintained
within the established
land use pattern.
(a) Induce
substantial
population growth
(b) Displace
substantial
numbers of
people or existing
housing
CC-4.4: Density
Compatibility
Ensure that the bulk and scale of
multifamily residential
developments are compatible with
homes and buildings in the
surrounding area.
Helps ensure that new
residential development
is consistent with the
land use policies of the
2040 General Plan,
which promote
neighborhood
preservation.
(a) Induce
substantial
population growth
(b) Displace
substantial
numbers of
people or existing
housing
CC-4.9:
Preservation of
Older Residences
Consider protection of older single-
family and multifamily residences
that, although they may not have
historical significance, define and
contribute to the character of a
neighborhood.
Provides incentives to
encourage preservation
of older residences.
(a) Induce
substantial
population growth
(b) Displace
substantial
numbers of
people or existing
housing
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 16. Population and Housing June 28, 2018 Page 16-7
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 16_Pop and Housing_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018.doc
Table 16-1: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Population and Housing
Regulation/Policy Description of Regulation/Policy How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
CC-8.4:
Residential
Development
Ensure that the Burlingame
Downtown Specific Plan maintains
use regulations and standards that
accommodate a diversity of
housing types and affordability.
Provides realistic
incentives for affordable
housing that is well
integrated into
development projects
and throughout
Downtown.
(a) Induce
substantial
population growth
(b) Displace
substantial
numbers of
people or existing
housing
CC-9.2: Stand-
alone Residential
Allow stand-alone residential
development to remain at locations
where historically established.
Avoids large-scale
displacement of people
and housing.
(a) Induce
substantial
population growth
(b) Displace
substantial
numbers of
people or existing
housing
CC-10.1:
Residential
Character
.
Maintain El Camino Real as a
finely scaled, medium/high-density
residential corridor, with supportive
institutional uses
Avoids large-scale
displacement of people
and housing.
(a) Induce
substantial
population growth
(b) Displace
substantial
numbers of
people or existing
housing
CC-11.3 Housing
Encourage and support the
development of new housing in
North Burlingame. Ensure that new
residential development provides a
range of housing types available to
different income levels and meets
or exceeds minimum requirements
for affordable housing.
Helps ensure that
growth is maintained
within the established
land use pattern, which
limits the potential for
substantial population
growth.
(a) Induce
substantial
population growth
(b) Displace
substantial
numbers of
people or existing
housing
CC-12.3: Live/Work
District
Establish a creative Live/Work
district at the north end of the
Rollins Road corridor within
approximately one-half mile of the
Millbrae multimodal transit station;
accommodate medium-density
residential uses either as stand-
alone development or as
integrated live/work environments.
Encourages more
intensive use of the
existing corridor. Avoids
potential displacement of
people and housing if
new development were
located elsewhere.
(a) Induce
substantial
population growth
(b) Displace
substantial
numbers of
people or existing
housing
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 16. Population and Housing June 28, 2018 Page 16-8
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 16_Pop and Housing_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018.doc
Conclusions
The City would ensure that existing regulations and land use goals and policies are used to
avoid or reduce an identified potential environmental impact. Such regulations, goals and
policies that relate to population and housing are listed in Table 16-1 above. In most cases, no
one regulation, goal, policy, or implementation program is expected to completely avoid or
reduce an identified potential environmental impact. However, the collective, cumulative
mitigating benefits of the policies listed in Table 16-1 will result in a less-than-significant impact
related to population and housing. This conclusion is consistent with the purpose and use of a
program EIR for a general plan (see EIR Introduction, chapter 1).
Based on the methodology described above, 2040 General Plan impacts related to population
and housing would be less than significant (see criteria [a] and [b] in subsection 16.2.1,
“Significance Criteria,” above). No mitigation is required.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 17. Public Services June 28, 2018 Page 17-1
17. PUBLIC SERVICES
This EIR chapter describes existing conditions for fire protection and emergency medical
service, police protection, public schools, and parks and recreational facilities in the planning
area. The chapter includes the regulatory framework necessary to evaluate potential
environmental impacts resulting from the 2040 General Plan, describes potential impacts that
could result from the General Plan, and discusses General Plan goals, policies, and
implementation programs that would avoid or reduce those potential impacts.
17.1 SETTING
The environmental and regulatory settings with respect to fire protection and emergency
services, police protection, schools, and libraries were obtained from their respective websites.
The environmental and regulatory settings for parks and recreation are described in detail in
Chapter 7 (Open Space, Parks and Recreation) of the General Plan Existing Conditions Report
(City of Burlingame, 2015). Pursuant to section 15150 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the
Existing Conditions Report is incorporated into the Draft Program EIR by reference. The
Existing Conditions Report is available at the City of Burlingame 2040 General Plan website at:
http://www.Burlingame.org/GENERALPLAN/
Copies of the Existing Conditions Report may be viewed during regular business hours (8:00
a.m. to 5:00 p.m.), Monday through Friday, at the City of Burlingame Planning Division, 501
Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA 94010.
17.1.1 Environmental Setting
Relevant to this EIR Public Services chapter, the environmental setting is organized into the
following sections:
• Fire Protection and Emergency Medical Services
• Police Protection
• Schools
• Parks and Recreation
• Libraries
(a) Fire Protection and Emergency Medical Services
The Central County Fire Department (CCFD)—which serves the communities of Burlingame,
Hillsborough, and Millbrae—provides emergency and non-emergency services to residents,
businesses, and visitors of its service area. Formed in April 2004, the CCFD provides all-risk
services, with members playing integral roles in fire suppression, rescue, emergency medicine,
operational training, fire prevention and investigation, and community education.
The service area encompasses approximately 15 square miles, with a population of about
70,000. Within the service area are a wildland urban interface area and neighborhoods
consisting of single-family homes, multi-residential buildings, retail and business districts, hotels,
a regional hospital, care facilities, numerous schools, and an industrial area.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 17. Public Services June 28, 2018 Page 17-2
The CCFD maintains six strategically located and professionally staffed fire stations, in addition
to an administrative headquarters and training tower. The CCFD staffs six fire engines and one
ladder truck. A heavy-duty urban search and rescue unit is also housed at one of the fire
stations and is cross-staffed with on-duty personnel.
(b) Police Protection
The City of Burlingame Police Department (BPD) serves the Planning area which covers
approximately 4.4 square miles and supports approximately 30,000 residents. The BPD is
divided into two divisions: 1) Operations and Support Services and 2) Administration. The force
currently consists of 37 police officers, made up of the Chief of Police, one captain, two
lieutenants, six sergeants, six corporals, two Inspectors, two traffic officers, one school resource
officer and 21 patrol officers. There are also 25 professional staff employed at BPD.
(c) Schools
The Burlingame School District (BSD) services elementary and intermediate students in the
planning area. The BSD comprises six elementary schools and one intermediate school.
According to the 2016 BSD Facilities Master Plan, “demographic projections for Burlingame
show total student enrollment numbers levelling in the next 5-10 years, with no significant
growth.” Although no new schools were warranted to serve future student enrollment, many
improvements to existing schools were identified in the Facilities Master Plan.
Burlingame High School (BHS), located in Burlingame and one of seven high schools in the San
Mateo Union High School District (SMUHSD), is a four-year public high school. Since SMUHSD
is a district with open enrollment, BHS students come from the entire SMUHSD boundary area.
Approximately 1,330 students attend BHS.
A 2016 Developer Fee Justification Study was completed for the SMUHSD to assess the need
to raise developer fees to pay for new high school facilities. The study concluded that a
“relationship exists between residential, commercial/industrial development and the need for
additional school facilities in the SMUHSD.” The analysis determined that growth throughout
SMUHSD’s service area will require additional school facilities over time. The district has
recently raised developer fees to fund additional and reconstructed school facilities.
(d) Parks and Recreation
These major findings are taken from Chapter 7 of the Existing Conditions Report.
• Burlingame has 21 open space facilities that encompass about 106.6 acres of land. The
eight neighborhood parks range in size from 0.4 to 18.9 acres.
• City residents have access to several indoor and outdoor recreational facilities, including
a recreation center and an aquatic center. The aquatic center is owned by SMUHSD the
San and is jointly used and maintained by the City for community and competitive
aquatics programming.
(e) Libraries
Burlingame has two libraries: the Main Library and the Easton Branch Library. Both libraries are
part of the Peninsula Library System which serves residents of San Mateo County. There are 35
libraries in the Peninsula Library System, three of which are college libraries.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 17. Public Services June 28, 2018 Page 17-3
17.1.2 Regulatory Setting
(a) Fire Protection and Emergency Medical Services
California Fire Code (Title 24, Part 9, California Code of Regulations). The California Fire
Code incorporates the Uniform Fire Code with necessary California amendments. This code
prescribes regulations consistent with nationally recognized good practices for the safeguarding,
to a reasonable degree, of life and property from the hazards of fire explosion. It also addresses
dangerous conditions arising from the storage, handling, and use of hazardous materials and
devices; conditions hazardous to life or property in the use or occupancy of buildings or
premises; and provisions to assist emergency response personnel.
California Building Code. The 2010 California Building Code (CBC) became effective January
1, 2011, including Part 9 of Title 24, the California Fire Code. Section 701A.3.2 of the CBC
requires that new buildings located in any Fire Hazard Severity Zone within State Responsibility
Areas, any Local Agency Very-High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, or any Wildland-Urban Interface
Fire Area designated by the enforcing agency for which an application for a building permit is
submitted, comply with all sections of the chapter.
California Health and Safety Code (Sections 13000 et seq.). This code establishes State fire
regulations, including regulations for building standards (also set forth in the California Building
Code), fire protection and notification systems, fire protection devices such as extinguishers and
smoke alarms, high-rise building and childcare facility standards, and fire suppression training.
City of Burlingame Municipal Code. The Burlingame Municipal Code includes the following
regulations related to fire protection:
Section 105.8. Fees and Special Requirements. a. The fees for the permits and other
services shall be as established by resolution of the Central County Fire Department Fire
Board as amended from time to time. The fee shall be set to cover the cost of the Fire
Department to review and inspect the intended activities, operations or functions. The
fees must be applied to the appropriate agency, City of Burlingame or Central County
Fire Department, depending on the type of service.
(b) Police Protection
238 Bypass Fiscal Impact Analysis (2008). The 238 Bypass Fiscal Impact Analysis
established an optimum service ratio of 1.5 sworn police officers per 1,000 residents.
(c) Schools
Education Code Section 17620 allows school districts to assess fees on new residential and
commercial construction within their respective boundaries. These fees can be collected without
special city or county approval, to fund the construction of new school facilities necessitated by
the impact of residential and commercial development activity. In addition, these fees can also
be used to fund the reconstruction of school facilities or reopening of schools to accommodate
development-related enrollment growth. Fees are collected immediately prior to the time of the
issuance of a building permit by the city or county.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 17. Public Services June 28, 2018 Page 17-4
(d) Parks and Recreation
State
State Public Park Preservation Act (California Public Resource Code Section 5400 –
5409). The State Public Park Preservation Act is the primary instrument for protecting and
preserving parkland in California. Under the act cities and counties may not acquire any real
property that is in use as a public park for any non-park use unless compensation or land, or
both, are provided to replace the parkland acquired. This ensures a no net loss of parkland and
facilities.
Quimby Act (1975). The Quimby Act allows cities and counties to adopt park dedication
standards/ordinances requiring developers to set aside land, donate conservation easements,
or pay fees towards parkland.
Local
Standards and Guidelines for Open Space in Development Projects. The City’s zoning
standards and design guidelines include provisions for including landscaping and open space in
projects. This includes requirements for front, side and rear yards; guidelines to address
impacts on neighbors; standards to address the mass, bulk and scale of buildings; and
standards and guidelines for landscaping and site design. The Burlingame General Plan, North
Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan, Bayfront Specific Plan, Hillside Design Review Permit
Process, and the Burlingame Downtown Specific Plan all have specifications that pertain to
open space.
The North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan stipulates guidelines for establishing
creekside open space in the Rollins Road and North Burlingame areas. These guidelines apply
to new buildings on parcels adjacent to Mills Creek and Easton Creek.
The Bayfront Specific Plan outlines goals and design standards for open space in the Bayfront.
This Specific Plan includes goals to establishing connections between trails and open spaces,
create landscape features as open space amenities, and define setback standards for buildings.
The Streetscapes and Open Space chapter in the Burlingame Downtown Specific Plan contains
design concepts for creating open spaces in downtown areas. The open spaces proposed
include a centrally located “signature” open space, a circle at the Civic Center between the
Library and City Hall, a small open space at the Lorton Avenue/ California Drive intersection,
and an expanded train station plaza. The primary purpose of the signature open space is to
create a central community gathering space similar to a town square. The concept includes a
water feature or, as a more ambitious undertaking, “daylighting” a portion of Burlingame Creek
where it travels underground through downtown. The other open spaces are intended to provide
smaller-scale, more modest opportunities for recreation and respite.
Burlingame Municipal Code Chapter 10.55, Regulations for Park and Recreational Areas.
This code section limits the types of activities, equipment, and number of people, and sets hours
for public access. It applies to City parks, pools, recreation centers, the golf center,
playgrounds, fields, open spaces, and school facilities (in certain circumstances). In addition,
this code also stipulates permitting requirements for special events.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 17. Public Services June 28, 2018 Page 17-5
17.2 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
This section describes potential impacts related to public services that could result from the
General Plan, and discusses General Plan goals, policies, and implementation programs that
would avoid or reduce those potential impacts. The section also recommends mitigation
measures as needed to reduce significant impacts.
17.2.1 Significance Criteria
Based on the CEQA Guidelines, implementation of the City of Burlingame 2040 General Plan
would have a significant impact related to public services if it would:
a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or
physically altered governmental facilities, or the need for new or physically altered
governmental facilities, the construction of which would cause significant environmental
impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other
performance objectives for any of the following public services:
• Fire protection and emergency medical services
• Police protection
• Public schools
• Parks
• Other public facilities such as libraries
b) Result in an increased use of existing neighborhood or regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would
occur or be accelerated; or
c) Include recreational facilities, or require the construction or expansion of recreational
facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment.
17.2.2 Analysis Methodology
The methodology for evaluating potential environmental impacts related to public services
followed this basic sequence:
1) The General Plan Existing Conditions Report was evaluated to identify existing
environmental conditions and problems related to public services, including the
regulatory framework that applies to these issues.
2) The CEQA Statute and Guidelines (2017), including Appendix G (Environmental
Checklist Form), were consulted to identify environmental impact topics and issues that
should be addressed in the program EIR. In part, this process resulted in the
significance criteria listed in subsection 17.2.1 above.
3) The General Plan Policy Document, including the associated development capacity
assumptions (see EIR Section 3.4), was analyzed to identify goals, policies,
implementation programs (“policies” for short), and potential outcomes that address the
significance criteria. This analysis resulted in two basic conclusions regarding policies
and outcomes: (a) many policies would avoid or reduce potential environmental impacts,
and (b) some policies or outcomes could result in new environmental impacts or
increase the severity of existing environmental problems.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 17. Public Services June 28, 2018 Page 17-6
4) For potential environmental impacts that would result from the 2040 General Plan,
mitigation measures were designed to avoid or reduce each impact to a less-than-
significant level. If implementation of all identified feasible mitigations cannot reduce the
impact to a less-than-significant level, then the impact is considered significant and
unavoidable.
17.2.3 Environmental Impacts
Potential Impacts of Future Development under the 2040 General Plan
(a) Fire Protection and Emergency Medical Services. Adoption of the proposed General
Plan would not directly create the need for any new or expanded facilities because approval of
the General Plan does not authorize any particular development project or construction
activities. No fire facilities are planned as part of the project. While build-out under the proposed
General Plan would create incremental increases in population and demand for fire services,
the proposed Safety Element includes the following goal and policy to address long-term needs:
Goal CS-2.1: Ensure coordinated and effective fire and emergency medical services to
maintain the health, safety, and well-being of the Burlingame community.
Policy CS-2.3 Development Review: Requires that the Central County Fire Department
review development proposals to ensure projects adequately address fire access and
building standards.
Additionally, if an existing fire facility is to be expanded or a new facility is constructed to meet
demand over the long term, the fire facility would undergo a development review process and
be subject to environmental review pursuant to CEQA. That environmental review would identify
site-specific conditions and physical changes resulting from a fire station expansion,
construction of a new fire station, and/or infrastructure improvements needed for fire flow and
water supply. Mitigation would be identified, as necessary, to reduce impacts related to fire and
emergency service facilities expansion or new construction, as mandated by CEQA and
implemented by the City through its review procedures. Impacts related to the expansion and
new construction of fire protection and emergency service facilities would be less than
significant with implementation of General Plan policies and environmental review standards.
(Significance Criterion 17.2.1 [a])
(b) Police Protection. Adoption of the proposed General Plan would not directly create the
need for any new or expanded police protection facilities because approval of the General Plan
does not authorize any particular development project or construction activities. Policy CS-1.3 of
the proposed General Plan Safety Element emphasizes the provision of a high level of response
to incidents. Ensuring that police protection services are adequate to serve the community over
time can be achieved through the hiring of sworn officers and support personnel, purchasing
new and replacement equipment, and constructing new or expanded facilities. The Police
Department has not identified the need for any new or expanded facilities to meet service
needs.
Additionally, if a police facility is to be expanded or to meet demand over the long term, the
police facility would undergo a development review process and be subject to environmental
review pursuant to CEQA. That environmental review would identify site-specific conditions and
physical changes resulting from a facility expansion, construction of a new fire station, and/or
infrastructure improvements needed for fire flow and water supply. Mitigation would be
identified, as necessary, to reduce impacts related to fire and emergency service facilities
expansion or new construction, as mandated by CEQA and implemented by the City through its
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 17. Public Services June 28, 2018 Page 17-7
review procedures. Impacts related to the expansion and new construction of police protection
facilities would be less than significant with implementation of General Plan policies and
environmental review standards. (Significance Criterion 17.2.1 [a])
(c) School Services. New housing would be constructed over the long term as population
growth occurs pursuant to new land use policy. New homes would be occupied by a variety of
households, including those with school-aged children. Both the BUSD and SMUHSD monitor
growth in Burlingame and updates its facilities plans as needed to identify new facility needs,
including locations, timing, and funding for expanded or new classrooms and related facilities.
BUSD will continue to collect development impact fees as provided for in State law to fund
expanded facilities. Moreover, all new non-residential development would be required to pay
appropriate impact fees established by the BUSD and SMUHSD Boards. Pursuant to State law,
collection of fees by school districts is sufficient for mitigating for any potential impacts to school
facilities resulting from long-term growth in the community.
Any required expansion or construction of school facilities would be subject to environmental
review pursuant to State law and CEQA. Environmental review would identify site-specific
conditions and physical changes resulting from school expansion or new construction. Typical
impacts associated with new and modernized schools includes short-term construction activities
related to air quality pollutant emissions, temporary traffic detours, changes in traffic distribution,
and noise. (Significance Criterion 17.2.1 [a])
(d) Parks and Recreation. According to the General Plan, Chapter 9 Healthy People Healthy
Places, the Easton Addition neighborhood lacks ready access to park space, with the exception
of fields at Roosevelt Elementary School. Open space in Downtown, where land use policy will
allow for construction of up to1,200 new units (from baseline year 2016), is limited to a small
playground on Primrose Road within Downtown itself; otherwise, the nearest park is
Washington Park to the east. With the addition of residences at the north end of town—on El
Camino Real and Rollins Road—additional open space amenities will be needed to create
complete communities and respond to new residents’ desires for gathering and recreation
spaces. However, because Burlingame has virtually no vacant land, creating new public park
and recreation facilities will be a challenge. In the absence of provision of new park and open
space, demands on existing facilities could increase.
Regardless of the lack of designated land for parks, the City is committed to providing public
recreation places that meet the needs of residents of all ages and income levels (Goal Heal HP-
4). This commitment includes planning creatively to establish public space in Downtown—which
could consist of plazas and outdoor performance spaces—and requiring that new residential
development in north Burlingame incorporate publicly accessible green space and gathering
spots (Policies HP-4.1, HP-4.4, and HP-4.8). The overarching goal is to ensure that every
Burlingame resident can walk or bike to a public open space. With the City’s commitment to
providing new and/or improved open spaces for new residents and requiring that these
requirements be imposed on private development projects, increased demand on existing
facilities would be reduced. With implementation of General Plan policies and programs,
impacts would be less than significant.
Any required expansion or construction of recreational facilities would be subject to
environmental review pursuant to State law and CEQA. Environmental review would identify
site-specific conditions and physical changes resulting from recreational facilities expansion or
new construction. Typical impacts associated with new or expanded parks or recreational
facilities includes short-term construction activities related to air quality pollutant emissions,
temporary traffic detours, changes in traffic distribution, and noise. (Significance Criteria 17.2.1
[a], [b], and [c])
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 17. Public Services June 28, 2018 Page 17-8
(e) Land Use Designation. It may appear that 2040 General Plan impacts on public services
(fire, police, schools, parks and recreation) are potentially significant because the 2040 General
Plan designates no additional land for institutional uses (e.g., schools whose recreational
facilities can be used by the public) or for public parks. Under the 2040 General Plan Land Use
Diagram, the land area designated for institutional uses has been reduced relative to existing
conditions. However, this is due to how land has been reclassified (e.g., religious institutions
designated to match surrounding land use, such as Low Density Residential or Downtown
Specific Plan).
The need for new services is typically based on population and job growth. Similarly, the need
for construction of new facilities is aligned with the number of residents living in the City and the
number of employees. Most service providers rely on providing a standard level of service for its
residents. General examples of these are listed below.
Police: Number of police officers per 1,000 residents. The officer-to-resident ratios is just one
standard that can be used to measure performance. Other sources include crime statistics,
response times, number and basis of citizen complaints, and employee performance
evaluations.
Fire: Ability to serve a particular emergency site within a certain time frame after notification of
an emergency incident, as well as having a certain number of staff and equipment type to meet
emergency needs.
Schools: Number of students per classroom.
Parks: Proximity of parks/park facilities near residential and employment areas.
Libraries: Ability to provide computer resources, books and periodicals (hard copies and
periodicals), staff, and other associated facilities when population and/or employment growth
results in the need for new public facilities.
New facilities would be funded through programs such as development fees, in-lieu fees, and
property taxes. A new public facility would then be built on an appropriate site—one which
meets the needs of the service provider and the community. Once the facility is built the land
use designation on which the facility was built (whether it be, for example, mixed use,
commercial, or residential) would be re-designated as institutional or as a public park (if a new
park is created). As such, the limited acreage of public park land and reduction of institutional
land does not in itself significantly impact the provision of public services in the planning area.
How Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies Reduce Impacts
Table 17-1 is aligned with relevant Existing Regulations and General Plan policies that relate to
public services. Column 1 (Objective) lists each Regulation and General Plan goal, policy, and
implementation program (“policy” for short), organized by General Plan element, that addresses
the potential impact identified in Table 17-1. Column 2 is a summary of the regulation and the
text of the policy. Column 3 answers the question, “How does the regulation/policy avoid or
reduce the potential impact?” Column 4 identifies the applicable significance criteria that is
addressed by the regulation/policy.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 17. Public Services June 28, 2018 Page 17-9
The verbs in Column 3 are intended to be applied consistently. The verb “ensures” means that
the policy is sufficient to guarantee the result identified in the policy. The verb “helps” means
that the policy contributes to avoiding or reducing the identified potential impact; in many cases,
“helps” is used for a policy that can be applied to avoid or reduce a wide range of potential
impacts.
Table 17-1: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Public Services
Regulation/Policy Description of Regulation/Policy How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
Existing Regulations – Fire Services
California Fire
Code
This code prescribes regulations
consistent with nationally
recognized good practices for the
safeguarding, to a reasonable
degree, of life and property from
the fire hazards.
Protects people and
property from fire
hazards, and ensures
fire and medical services
will be provided.
(a) adverse
physical impacts -
fire protection
California Building
Code
Section 701A.3.2 of the CBC
requires that new buildings located
in any Fire Hazard Severity Zone
within State Responsibility Areas,
any Local Agency Very-High Fire
Hazard Severity Zone, or any
Wildland-Urban Interface.
Protects people and
property from fire
hazards and ensures fire
and medical services will
be provided.
(a) adverse
physical impacts -
fire protection
California Health
and Safety Code
This code establishes State fire
regulations, including regulations
for building standards (also set
forth in the California Building
Code), fire protection and
notification systems, fire protection
devices such as extinguishers and
smoke alarms, high-rise building
and childcare facility standards,
and fire suppression training.
Protects people and
property from fire
hazards, and ensures
fire and medical services
will be provided.
(a) adverse
physical impacts -
fire protection
City of Burlingame
Municipal Code.
Section 105.8.
Fees and Special
Requirements.
The fee shall be set to cover the
cost of the Central County Fire
Department to review and inspect
the intended activities, operations,
and functions.
Protects people and
property from fire
hazards, and ensures
fire and medical services
will be provided.
(a) adverse
physical impacts -
fire protection
Existing Regulations – Police Protection
238 Bypass Fiscal
Impact Analysis
(2008).
The 238 Bypass Fiscal Impact
Analysis established an optimum
service ratio of 1.5 sworn police
officers per 1,000 residents.
Helps ensures that
Burlingame’s police
protection needs will be
met.
(a) adverse
physical impacts -
police protection
Existing Regulations – Schools
Education Code
Section 17620
Allows school districts to assess
fees on new residential and
commercial construction within
their respective boundaries.
Ensures coordinated
planning between the
City and school districts
for new school sites.
May require new
construction if new
schools are needed.
(a) adverse
physical impacts -
schools
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 17. Public Services June 28, 2018 Page 17-10
Table 17-1: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Public Services
Regulation/Policy Description of Regulation/Policy How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
Existing Regulations – Parks and Recreation
State Public Park
Preservation Act
The State Public Park Preservation
Act is the primary instrument for
protecting and preserving parkland
in California.
Promotes increasing
parkland and
recreational facilities,
which reduces the
potential for physical
deterioration of existing
facilities.
(a) adverse
physical impacts -
parks
(b) physical
deterioration of
existing parks
Quimby Act (1975). The Quimby Act allows cities and
counties to adopt park dedication
standards/ordinances requiring
developers to set aside land,
donate conservation easements,
or pay fees towards parkland.
Promotes increasing
parkland and
recreational facilities,
which reduces the
potential for physical
deterioration of existing
facilities.
(a) adverse
physical impacts -
parks
(b) physical
deterioration of
existing parks
Standards and
Guidelines for
Open Space in
Development
Projects.
The City’s zoning standards and
design guidelines include
provisions for including
landscaping and open space in
projects.
Encourages community
space as part of new
development.
(a) adverse
physical impacts -
parks
(b) physical
deterioration of
existing parks
2040 General Plan Community Safety Element – Fire Protection and Emergency Medical Services
Goal CS-2: Ensure coordinated and effective
fire and emergency medical
services to maintain the health,
safety, and well-being of the
Burlingame community.
Protects people and
property from fire
hazards, and ensures
fire and medical services
will be provided.
(a) adverse
physical impacts -
fire protection
CS-2.1: Contract
for Services
Continue to contract and
coordinate with the Central County
Fire Department to ensure
Burlingame is optimally served
through fire suppression,
emergency medical services,
incident response, fire prevention,
public education and emergency
management and preparedness.
Ensures that the
planning area’s fire
protection and
emergency service
needs will be met.
(a) adverse
physical impacts -
fire protection
CS-2.3:
Development
Review
Continue to include the Central
County Fire Department in the
review of development proposals
to ensure projects adequately
address fire access and building
standards.
Helps mitigate potential
impacts of new
development on fire
protection/EMS. Ensures
more efficient fire
protection/EMS.
(a) adverse
physical impacts -
fire protection
2040 General Plan Community Safety Element – Police Protection
Goal CS-1: Ensure high-quality, responsive
police services necessary to deter
crime and support a safe and
secure community.
Ensures that police
protection needs will be
met.
(a) adverse
physical impacts -
police protection
CS-1.1: Staffing
Levels
Maintain optimal police staffing
levels, including sworn officers and
civilian support, necessary to
meeting current and projected
community needs.
Helps ensure adequate
police services through
optimum staffing levels.
May require new
construction if
(a) adverse
physical impacts -
police protection
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 17. Public Services June 28, 2018 Page 17-11
Table 17-1: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Public Services
Regulation/Policy Description of Regulation/Policy How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
new/expanded facilities
are needed to
accommodate new staff.
CS-1.2: Facilities
Planning
Develop, maintain, and implement
a Police Department Master Plan
that guides the provision of
equipment, facilities, training, and
operations centers.
Ensures effective and
efficient police services
through coordinated
planning. May require
new construction if
new/expanded facilities
are needed to implement
the Master Plan.
(a) adverse
physical impacts -
police protection
CS-1.3: Response
Times
Identify, monitor, and achieve
appropriate minimum police
response times for all call priority
levels.
Strives to meet an
optimum response time.
May require new
construction if
new/expanded facilities
are needed to meet the
response time goal.
(a) adverse
physical impacts -
police protection
2040 General Plan Education and Enrichment Element – Schools and Libraries
EE-1.3: Public
Schools
Support Burlingame’s well-
regarded public school system,
working with the Burlingame
School District and the San Mateo
Union High School District as
appropriate to ensure program and
facility needs are met.
Encourages school
facility upgrades. Will
require new construction
when new/expanded
facilities are needed.
(a) adverse
physical impacts -
schools
EE-1.4: School
Facilities Master
Plan
Support the efforts of the
Burlingame School District to
implement the School District
Facility Master Plan, and ensure
timely renovations and
reconstructions of aging facilities
by including street improvement
needs in the City’s Capital
Improvement Program.
Ensures coordinated
planning between the
City and school districts
for new school sites. Will
require new construction
as new schools are
needed.
(a) adverse
physical impacts -
schools
EE-1.10: Library
Facilities
Provide public library facilities that
are inviting, accessible, and
comfortable for residents of all
ages. Support facility and research
technology improvements as
needed.
Strives to expand library
space. Will require new
construction as new
library space is needed.
(a) adverse
physical impacts -
libraries
EE-1.13: Library
Funding
Pursue funding for library facility
maintenance and enhancement of
programs and services through a
variety of mechanisms, including
developer fees, general fund
resources, special service districts,
user fees, bond initiatives, and
grants. Include funds in the Capital
Improvement Program for timely
facility improvements.
Would help ensure that
libraries are adequately
sized, staffed,
maintained, and have
the most up to date
technology.
(a) adverse
physical impacts -
libraries
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 17. Public Services June 28, 2018 Page 17-12
Table 17-1: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Public Services
Regulation/Policy Description of Regulation/Policy How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
2040 General Plan Community Healthy People and Healthy Places Element – Parks and Recreation
Goal HP-4: Provide a diversity of City-owned
parks, recreation facilities, natural
open spaces, and public gathering
places citywide, and ensure that
every Burlingame residents lives
within one-half mile of such a
resource
Promotes increasing
parkland and
recreational facilities,
which reduces the
potential for physical
deterioration of existing
facilities.
(a) adverse
physical impacts -
parks
(b) physical
deterioration of
existing parks
(c) construction of
recreational
facilities adverse
physical effects
HP-4.1: Parks,
Recreation, and
Trail Master Plan
Develop and implement a parks,
recreation, and trails master plan
to guide open space investments
and ensure a comprehensive and
integrated system of parks, plazas,
playgrounds, trails, and open
space.
Ensures coordinated
planning though the
adopted Master Plan.
May require new
construction if
new/expanded facilities
are needed to implement
the Master Plan.
(a) adverse
physical impacts -
parks
(b) physical
deterioration of
existing parks
(c) construction of
recreational
facilities adverse
physical effects
HP-4.4: Potential
New Open Spaces
In concert with development
proposals in the North Burlingame
and North Rollins Road districts,
require plans for publicly
accessible open spaces. Design
and develop these spaces to fit
within the overall parks and
recreation system in Burlingame.
Encourages community
space as part of new
development.
(b) physical
deterioration of
existing parks
(c) construction of
recreational
facilities adverse
physical effects
HP-4.6: Community
Center
Continue to pursue plans for
development of a new Burlingame
Community Center that provides a
variety of community services,
recreational activities, and cultural
amenities that are accessible to
and benefit a broad cross-section
of the community. Continue to
engage residents and other
stakeholders in planning and
developing the new center.
Encourages the
development of a new
community center. May
require new
construction.
(b) increased use
of existing parks
(c) construction of
recreational
facilities adverse
physical effects
HP-4.8:
Recreational and
Multi-Purpose
Facilities
Provide a range of quality
recreational and multi-purpose
facilities that are suited to
community needs. Provide space
for fitness classes, sports leagues,
continuing education opportunities,
community events, and other
functions. Ensure facilities are well
maintained and have adequate
lighting, signage, and hours of
operations.
Helps ensure that
existing parks and
recreational facilities are
well-maintained. Helps
ensure that new facilities
are located where they
are needed, which
reduces the potential for
physical deterioration of
existing facilities.
(a) adverse
physical impacts -
parks
(b) physical
deterioration of
existing parks
(c) construction of
recreational
facilities adverse
physical effects
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 17. Public Services June 28, 2018 Page 17-13
Conclusions
In most cases, no one goal, policy, or implementation measure is expected to completely avoid
or reduce an identified potential environmental impact. However, the collective, cumulative
mitigating benefits of the policies listed in Table 17-1 will result in a less-than-significant impact
related to the identified significance criterion and the corresponding public service. This
conclusion is consistent with the purpose and use of a program EIR for a general plan (see EIR
Introduction, Chapter 1).
Based on the methodology described above, 2040 General Plan impacts related to public
services would be less than significant (see criteria [a] through [c] in subsection 17.2.1,
“Significance Criteria,” above). No mitigation is required.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 18. Transportation and CirculationJune 28, 2018 Page 18-1
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 18_Transportation_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018_rev.doc
18. TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
This EIR chapter describes the existing circulation, transportation, and traffic conditions in the
planning area. The chapter includes the regulatory framework necessary to evaluate potential
environmental impacts resulting from the 2040 General Plan, describes potential impacts that
could result from the General Plan, and discusses General Plan goals, policies, and
implementation programs and/or mitigation measures that would avoid or reduce those potential
impacts. Impact analysis information for this chapter came primarily from two sources: Hexagon
Transportation Consultants, Inc. completed the supporting analysis and data for the Burlingame
General Plan Transportation Impact Assessment1, and Nelson\Nygaard completed the
supporting analysis on VMT (vehicle miles traveled). This document is included as Appendix D.
18.1 SETTING
The environmental and regulatory setting of the Burlingame planning area with respect to
transportation and traffic is described in detail in Chapter 4 (Transportation and Mobility) of the
General Plan Existing Conditions Report (City of Burlingame, 2015). Pursuant to Section 15150
of the State CEQA Guidelines, the Existing Conditions Report is incorporated into the Draft
Program EIR by reference. The Existing Conditions Report is available on the City of
Burlingame 2040 General Plan website at:
http://www.Burlingame.org/GENERALPLAN/
Copies of the Existing Conditions Report may be viewed during regular business hours (8:00
a.m. to 5:00 p.m.), Monday through Friday, at the City of Burlingame Planning Division, 501
Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA 94010.
18.1.1 Environmental Setting
The Existing Conditions Report for transportation and mobility describes the transportation and
circulation systems moving people and goods through and around the city. Centrally located in
San Mateo County, the transportation system in Burlingame serves both regional and local
travel needs. The Existing Conditions Report focuses on vehicular travel, but also presents
mobility in a multimodal perspective including the following areas:
Travel and Commute Patterns
Streets and Highways
Bicycle Facilities
Pedestrian Facilities
Transit
Transportation Demand Management
Aviation Facilities
The major findings of the Existing Conditions Report with respect to mobility are set forth below.
1 Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc., Burlingame General Plan TIA Hexagon Supporting Analysis
and Data, April 18, 2018
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 18. Transportation and Circulation June 28, 2018 Page 18-2
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 18_Transportation_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018_rev.doc
The majority of Burlingame commuters are drivers.
Most of Burlingame's intersections operate with acceptable levels of service. The
exception is at the Broadway/California Drive intersection, where the most significant
delays occur during the morning weekday peak hours.
While the percentage of bicyclists commuting in Burlingame is low, the percentage is
growing and Burlingame does have bike infrastructure for those getting around and
through the city. Bicyclists are served primarily by Class III bicycle routes marked by
sharrows or signage. Class II bike lanes are also offered for bicyclists on several
established bike routes. Further improvements to bicycle infrastructure could include
dedicated right-of-way and increased visibility for cyclists.
Burlingame has prioritized creating walkable, attractive streetscapes citywide.
A high incidence of collisions are prevalent near the California Drive/Bellevue
Avenue/Lorton Avenue intersection, near the Burlingame Station; and, along California
Drive, and portions of El Camino Real.
Highway US101 is difficult to cross and presents a major barrier to pedestrians with only
two pedestrian crossing points (at Broadway and Peninsula Avenue) to serve as a
connection between the western side of Burlingame and the eastern bay front areas.
Burlingame is well served by a variety of local and regional transit options, with Caltrain
connections to San Francisco and San Jose, BART connections to San Francisco
International Airport, San Francisco and the East Bay; and SamTrans bus service
through the primary north-south corridors.
Burlingame also has four local shuttle services: North Burlingame Shuttle, Bayside
Shuttle, Broadway/Burlingame/BART Shuttle, and Burlingame Trolley.
Burlingame's proximity to San Francisco International Airport contributes to visitors to the
city. Proximity to the airport also creates trips that do not follow more predictable
patterns of commuter and local transportation movement.
Figure 18-1 shows the major roadway system in Burlingame, Figure 18-2 shows the transit
routes serving the planning area, and Figure 18-3 shows the bike facilities in the planning area.
18.1.2 Regulatory Setting
The Existing Conditions Report includes the following table (Table 18-1), which provides context
for the transportation infrastructure and service in Burlingame.
BalboaHowardPalomaDrakeMagnolia BernalCortezEastonLagunaBayswaterAdelineSummi
t
SequoiaDavisAnzaCarmelitaShermanEastonLoyolaToyonDwig htHun tVancouverSebastianOak GroveVernonPlymouthConcordCapuchinoParkHaleChapinPep p erChapin
ArguelloLort o nBloomfield A ru n de lDwigh tGil brethColumbusW alnutBenitoCrescentPrimroseOccidental
RiveraHighla nd
PoppyCastenadaS tanleyMariposaEdgehillChan n ing
Acaci
a
AtwaterAlcazarVictoria
De SotoQuesadaClaren don
MillsChula VistaLexingtonMittenCarlosMar inMartinezBancr oftSanchezSanchezGroveCowanEastMyr tleAlvaradoMarco PoloEscalanteStantonAviadorAlbemarleLangMorrellLarkspurFairfieldCrosswayMahlerWestmoorHinckleyCastilloValdiviaMonteroDevereuxOg denBurlwayDavidLassenLa Mesa
Alturas
Los M
o
nt
e
s Newlandsh LindenLaurelLos
Alt
o
sBeachMarstenOxfordArcAlmerCambridge
DoloresSkyviewDufferinDonnellyCorbittEl QuanitoLas PiedrasMajillaKenmarEdwardsMcdonaldEastwoodCarolAnsel
AzaleaMargaritaCos ta Rica
JuanitaCadillacCu mberland
RhinetteMeadowMont ecitoSummerBay ViewKillarneyWhitehornNeuchatelBelvedereMarquitaBellevueRiveraTiberonLincolnAnita
PalmCarolanLindenParkCabrilloBroderickIngoldGuittardTrousdale Dr.E. Poplar Ave.Old Bayshore HighwayMillbrae Ave.Hillcrest Blvd.California Dr.Carolan Ave.Airport Blvd.Peninsula Dr.Burlingame Ave.San Mateo Dr.El Camino Real Rollins Rd.BroadwayHillside Dr.Ralston Ave.City ofCCffofofCCofofofofofofMateoananananSaaSaSaHillsboroughborborugugslsghghorooroHHHHhhghghrorohhHHHilHilHHbbououhhilHillououhhggggty ofty ofiitytffCityityfftytyaebMillbblbralbraSan Francisco BaySan Francisco InternationalAirportEC280101USBurlingame General Plan EIR Figure 18-1 Multimodal Circulation NetworkCity LimitsSOICommercial ArterialCommercial CollectorCommercial AccessMixed-Use El Camino RealMixed-Use ArterialMixed-Use CollectorMixed-Use AccessNeighborhood Arterial, El Camino RealNeighborhood ArterialNeighborhood CollectorNeighborhood Access(All unmarked streets)1,500750 3,000 FT 0N
BalboaHowardPalomaDrakeMagnolia BernalCortezEastonLagunaBayswaterAdelineSummi
t
SequoiaDavisAnzaCarmelitaShermanEastonLoyolaToyonDwig htHun tVancouverSebastianOak GroveVernonPlymouthConcordCapuchinoParkHaleChapinPep p erChapin
ArguelloLort o nBloomfield A ru n de lDwigh tGil brethColumbusW alnutBenitoCrescentPrimroseOccidental
RiveraHighla nd
PoppyCastenadaS tanleyMariposaEdgehillChan n ing
Acaci
a
AtwaterAlcazarVictoria
De SotoQuesadaClaren don
MillsChula VistaLexingtonMittenCarlosMar inMartinezBancr oftSanchezSanchezGroveCowanEastMyr tleAlvaradoMarco PoloEscalanteStantonAviadorAlbemarleLangMorrellLarkspurFairfieldCrosswayMahlerWestmoorHinckleyCastilloValdiviaMonteroDevereuxOg denBurlwayDavidLassenLa Mesa
Alturas
Los M
o
nt
e
s Newlandsh LindenLaurelLos
Alt
o
sBeachMarstenOxfordArcAlmerCambridge
DoloresSkyviewDufferinDonnellyCorbittEl QuanitoLas PiedrasMajillaKenmarEdwardsMcdonaldEastwoodCarolAnsel
AzaleaMargaritaCos ta Rica
JuanitaCadillacCu mberland
RhinetteMeadowMont ecitoSummerBay ViewKillarneyWhitehornNeuchatelBelvedereMarquitaBellevueRiveraTiberonLincolnAnita
PalmCarolanLindenParkCabrilloBroderickIngoldGuittardTrousdale Dr.E. Poplar Ave.Old Bayshore HighwayMillbrae Ave.Hillcrest Blvd.California Dr.Carolan Ave.Airport Blvd.Peninsula Dr.Burlingame Ave.San Mateo Dr.El Camino Real Rollins Rd.BroadwayHillside Dr.Ralston Ave.FranklinElementaryMercy HighSchoolHooverElementaryOur Lady of Angels ElementaryRooseveltElementaryBurlingame High SchoolAquaticCenterMckinleyElementaryWashingtonElementarySt. Catherine Of Siena ElementaryLincolnElementaryBurlingame IntermediateSchoolCity offfooofofofofofofyoyoMateoSaaSaSaHillsboroughghghhhghghhhghghHHHHhhhhggty ofty ofiitytffCityityfftytyaebeeMillbbeelbralbraeeeeSan Francisco BaySan Francisco InternationalAirportEEECCC280101US1,500750 3,000 FT 0NBurlingame General Plan EIR Figure 18-2 Transit Network City LimitsSOISamtrans Route 292Samtrans Route ECRSamtrans Route 46Burlingame TrolleyNorth Burlingame ShuttleBurlingame Bayside ShuttleProposed High Speed RailSamtrans Route 397
BalboaHowardPalomaDrakeMagnolia BernalCortezEastonLagunaBayswaterAdelineSummi
t
SequoiaDavisAnzaCarmelitaShermanEastonLoyolaToyonDwig htHun tVancouverSebastianOak GroveVernonPlymouthConcordCapuchinoParkHaleChapinPep p erChapin
ArguelloLort o nBloomfield A ru n de lDwigh tGil brethColumbusW alnutBenitoCrescentPrimroseOccidental
RiveraHighla nd
PoppyCastenadaS tanleyMariposaEdgehillChan n ing
Acaci
a
AtwaterAlcazarVictoria
De SotoQuesadaClaren don
MillsChula VistaLexingtonMittenCarlosMar inMartinezBancr oftSanchezSanchezGroveCowanEastMyr tleAlvaradoMarco PoloEscalanteStantonAviadorAlbemarleLangMorrellLarkspurFairfieldCrosswayMahlerWestmoorHinckleyCastilloValdiviaMonteroDevereuxOg denBurlwayDavidLassenLa Mesa
Alturas
Los M
o
nt
e
s Newlandsh LindenLaurelLos
Alt
o
sBeachMarstenOxfordArcAlmerCambridge
DoloresSkyviewDufferinDonnellyCorbittEl QuanitoLas PiedrasMajillaKenmarEdwardsMcdonaldEastwoodCarolAnsel
AzaleaMargaritaCos ta Rica
JuanitaCadillacCu mberland
RhinetteMeadowMont ecitoSummerBay ViewKillarneyWhitehornNeuchatelBelvedereMarquitaBellevueRiveraTiberonLincolnAnita
PalmCarolanLindenParkCabrilloBroderickIngoldGuittardTrousdale Dr.E. Poplar Ave.Old Bayshore HighwayMillbrae Ave.Hillcrest Blvd.California Dr.Carolan Ave.Airport Blvd.Peninsula Dr.Burlingame Ave.San Mateo Dr.El Camino Real Rollins Rd.BroadwayHillside Dr.Ralston Ave.Poplar CreekGolf CourseMills CanyonWildlife RefugeCurenvauaca ParkVillage ParkLaguna ParkRay ParkBayfront ParkBayside DogExercise ParkBaysideFieldsCommunityGardenBurlingame Soccer Complex (Murray Field)Burlingame Golf Center WashingtonParkRecreationCenter“J” Lot PlaygroundTrentonParkPalomaPlaygroundBurlingameCountry ClubVictoriaParkAlpinePlaygroundPershingParkHeritageParkCoyote PointRecreation AreaFranklinElementaryMercy HighSchoolHooverElementaryOur Lady of Angels ElementaryRooseveltElementaryBurlingame High SchoolAquaticCenterMckinleyElementaryWashingtonElementarySt. Catherine of Siena ElementaryLincolnElementaryBurlingame IntermediateSchoolffooofofofofofofyoyoMateoSaaSaSaHillsboroughghghhhghghhhghghHHHHhhhhggty ofty ofiitytffCityityfftytyaebeeMillbbeelbralbraeeeeSan Francisco BaySan Francisco InternationalAirportEEEECCC280101US1,500750 3,000 FT 0NBurlingame General Plan EIR Figure 18-3 Bicycle Network City LimitsSOITrail (existing)Trail (planned)Bike Path (Class I)Bike Path (Class III/Sharrows)Bike Path (Class II)
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 18. Transportation and Circulation June 28, 2018 Page 18-3
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 18_Transportation_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018_rev.doc
Table 18-1 Relevant Plans and Policies Related to Transportation Systems
Plan, Year Overview Relevant Plans and Policies
County and State Plans
San Mateo County
Congestion
Management
Program, Final
2013
The purpose of the CMP is to
identify strategies to respond to
future transportation needs,
develop procedures to alleviate
and control congestion, and
promote countywide solutions.
The CMP is required to be
consistent with the Metropolitan
Transportation Commission
(MTC) planning process that
includes regional goals,
policies, and projects for the
Regional Transportation
Improvement Program (RTIP).
The 2013 CMP, which is
developed to be consistent with
MTC‟s Plan Bay Area, provides
updated program information
and performance monitoring
results for the CMP roadway
system.
Due to their potential safety and delay impacts,
14 signalized intersections have been
preliminarily identified as key Burlingame
intersections for analysis in the General Plan
process, which includes one CMP intersection
in Burlingame. Two additional CMP
intersections adjacent to Burlingame are also
included, as they are considered important in
determining the overall capacity of the City’s
street system. The three CMP intersections
are:
El Camino Real and Broadway in
Burlingame
El Camino Real and Peninsula Avenue in
San Mateo
El Camino Real and Millbrae Avenue in
Millbrae
San Mateo County
Comprehensive
Bicycle and
Pedestrian Plan,
2011
Outlines recommendations and
design guidelines for “safe,
convenient, and universally
accessible” bicycle and
pedestrian facilities throughout
the county
Funded by the City/County
Association of Governments of
San Mateo County and the San
Mateo County Transportation
Authority
The plan examines:
Existing bicycle and pedestrian conditions
Connections to transit
Areas with high incidents of collisions
Areas with high demand for more or better
facilities.
Pedestrian and Bicycle Focus Areas are
highlighted to prioritize funding in areas with
high demand or need, including roadways with
high occurrences of bicycle and pedestrian
injuries, and the El Camino Real corridor.
San Mateo County
Transportation
Authority Short-
Range Highway
Plan, 2011-2021
Outlines how funding has been
and will be allocated to highway
improvement projects
throughout San Mateo County
Burlingame area projects include:
Reconstruction of Broadway at Highway 101
interchange
Modification of the interchange at Peninsula
Avenue and Highway 101
The plan also identifies the existing funding gap
that limits completion of all desired highway
improvements and ranks the proposed and
completed projects by funding priority.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 18. Transportation and Circulation June 28, 2018 Page 18-4
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 18_Transportation_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018_rev.doc
Table 18-1 Relevant Plans and Policies Related to Transportation Systems
Plan, Year Overview Relevant Plans and Policies
San Mateo County
Transportation Plan
for Low-Income
Populations, 2012
Examines mobility needs in
transportation-disadvantaged
communities in San Mateo
County and develops strategies
to bridge gaps in service
delivery
Transportation strategies to
address the divide in service
include education, free services
to low-income persons and
auto loan and repair assistance
programs
Recommends reinstating emergency
transportation assistance through a partnership
between San Mateo County Health Services
Agency and Burlingame Yellow Cab
San Mateo County
Transportation
Authority Draft
Strategic Plan
2015-2019, 2014
Policy, investment and service
plan to improve bus service
and expand ridership
throughout the SamTrans
service area
Identifies five-year goals of
increase weekday fixed-route
ridership and farebox revenue,
reduce debt service, improve
organizational performance,
and manage workforce change
Outlines trends and forecasts for regional
transit:
35% of all system boardings are on El
Camino Real
50% of boardings are in the morning and
evening commute peaks
Metropolitan Transportation Commission
projects an increasing shift in growth toward
El Camino Real that will lead to
opportunities for cost-effective increases in
service
Focused on service and investment strategies
to support and expand a transit culture in San
Mateo County
City of Burlingame
Bicycle
Transportation Plan,
Amendment to the
Circulation Element,
October 18, 2004
Plan that identifies the regional
and local bicycle routes through
Burlingame for commuters,
recreational riders and local
shopping trips.
Provides a framework for making physical
improvements to the bicycle route system to
make it safer and more accessible.
VMT Per Capita Evaluation
In addition to the local and regional regulatory framework outlined above, recent direction from
the state level provides guidance about how to respond to Senate Bill 743 (SB743), which was
signed by Governor Brown in 2013 and proposes changes to the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA), which will become mandatory after adoption by the Natural Resources
Agency. In response to this legislative direction, which requires that vehicle level of service
(LOS) may no longer be considered a significant impact under CEQA, the Governor’s Office of
Planning and Research (OPR) has recommended that CEQA review consider vehicle miles
traveled (VMT) per capita to measure significant impacts for transportation. In the interest of
preparing for this upcoming transition away from LOS as a measure of environmental impacts,
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 18. Transportation and Circulation June 28, 2018 Page 18-5
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 18_Transportation_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018_rev.doc
this General Plan EIR presents an introductory VMT per capita evaluation as a supplement to
the standard existing LOS-based evaluation.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 18. Transportation and Circulation June 28, 2018 Page 18-6
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 18_Transportation_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018_rev.doc
18.2 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
This section lists the significance criteria for assessing level of impacts (including both the
current CEQA Checklist criteria and criteria recommended by OPR for a VMT Per Capita
Evaluation), describes potential impacts related to transportation and traffic that could result
from the General Plan, and discusses General Plan goals, policies, and implementation
programs that would avoid or reduce those potential impacts. The section also recommends
mitigation measures as needed to reduce significant impacts, and includes an introductory
summary of impacts on VMT per capita.
18.2.1 Significance Criteria
The City of Burlingame follows the Transportation Impact Assessment guidelines established by
the City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County (C/CAG)’s Congestion
Management Plan (CMP), which applies to all General Plan updates (the same goes for the
cities of San Mateo and Millbrae). As noted above in section 18.1.2, Senate Bill 743 was signed
into law in 2013 and proposes that CEQA review replace the vehicle delay based traffic LOS
metric with VMT per capita. C/CAG has not yet amended the existing CMP, and continues to
call for the use of the LOS metric. However, in anticipation of OPR’s adoption of the new SB
743 guidelines, this General Plan transportation analysis also provides a summary of VMT per
capita significance criteria, impacts and mitigations.
CEQA Checklist Criteria
The following criteria from the existing CEQA checklist are used in this analysis to quantify the
level of significance of an adverse impact:
(a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness
for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation
including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation
system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian
and bicycle paths, and mass transit;
The threshold used to determine whether project-related impacts at signalized intersections
would be considered significant is if the additional traffic associated with the project would:
Degrade the AM or PM peak hour from an acceptable LOS D (55 seconds/vehicle) or
better under Existing or No Project Conditions to an unacceptable LOS E or worse under
Project Conditions except when LOS E is determined by the City of Burlingame as
acceptable due to costs of mitigation or when there would be other unacceptable
impacts; or
Degrade the AM or PM peak hour operating at LOS E or F under Existing or No Project
Conditions by increasing the delay per vehicle by five (5) seconds or more.
Since the proposed General Plan is a long-range plan, the intersection impacts were
determined comparing the future (2040) cumulative with project condition to the baseline
(existing) condition.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 18. Transportation and Circulation June 28, 2018 Page 18-7
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 18_Transportation_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018_rev.doc
(b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to
level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the
county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways;
For CEQA purposes, a roadway segment is considered to operate at an acceptable level if the
segment operates at the level of service standard identified for that segment by the county
congestion management agency. According to the C/CAG Congestion Management Program
(SMC CMP), the following LOS standards were selected for the roadway segments:
If the existing (1990/91) level of service was F, then the standard was set to be
LOS F.
If the existing or future level of service was or will be E, then the standard was set to be
LOS E.
On SR 82 (El Camino Real), the standard was set to be LOS E.
For the remaining roadway segments, the standard was set to be one letter designation
worse than the LOS projected for the year 2000.
The City of Burlingame does not have established impact criteria for transit facilities. For transit
facilities, the proposed General Plan notes that a transit impact may be significant if:
The project is expected to generate increased transit demand that may not be
accommodated by the existing transit services; or
The project is expected to reduce transit availability or access to transit facilities.
The City of Burlingame does not have established impact criteria for pedestrian or bicycle
facilities. For pedestrian or bicycle facilities, the proposed General Plan notes that a pedestrian
or bicycle impact may be significant if:
The project proposes modifications to the existing pedestrian or bicycle facilities that are
not in conformance with adopted plans; or
The project reduces, severs, or eliminates existing or planned pedestrian or bicycle
facilities; or
The project creates demand for pedestrian or bicycle facilities that do not currently exist.
(c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a
change in location that results in substantial safety risks;
(d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment);
(e) Result in inadequate emergency access; or
(f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or
pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 18. Transportation and Circulation June 28, 2018 Page 18-8
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 18_Transportation_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018_rev.doc
VMT Per Capita Evaluation Criteria
As noted above, C/CAG has not defined significance impacts for VMT per capita, so OPR’s
current recommendations are presented for consideration in addition to the official intersection
operations impact criteria:
(g) Agencies should analyze VMT outcomes of land use plans over the full area over which the
plan may substantively affect travel patterns, including beyond the boundary of the plan or
jurisdiction’s geography. Analysis of specific plans may employ the same thresholds described
for projects. A general plan, area plan, or community plan may have a significant impact on
transportation if it is not consistent with the relevant Regional Transportation Plan/ Sustainable
Communities Strategy (RTP-SCS).1
General Plan policy impacts on VMT per capita are included along with impacts on intersection
LOS, roadways, transit and active transportation modes.
18.2.2 Analysis Methodology
The methodology for evaluating potential environmental impacts related to transportation and
circulation followed this basic sequence:
(1) Intersection Analysis. The impact analysis included AM and PM peak hour traffic
conditions at 25 key intersections. The following scenarios were analyzed for the intersection
analysis:
Existing Conditions: represents peak hour traffic volumes on the existing (2017)
roadway network.
2040 Project Conditions: represents a cumulative (2040) analysis that includes
anticipated future cumulative growth under the proposed General Plan as well as future
planned local and regional transportation improvements (listed below).
o 2040 General Plan Goal M-10: California Drive will be redesigned to support
multimodal access, with facilities that encourage active transportation and improved
linkages to commercial and residential areas.
o 2040 General Plan Goal M-14: Reinvent Old Bayshore Highway and Airport
Boulevard as multimodal streets, and enhance connections between the Bayfront
and the balance of the City.
o SMCTA Highway Plan: Modification of the interchange at Peninsula Avenue and
Highway 101 (in the Conceptional Design Phase)
o Caltrans/SMCTA Managed Lanes Project: Caltrans is proposing to build an express
land in both directions on Highway 101 in San Mateo County beginning in spring
2019. The express lanes would connect with existing carpool lanes at Whipple
Avenue creating new continuous express lanes that extend from I-380 in San Bruno
to San Antonio Road in Mountain View.2
1 http://opr.ca.gov/docs/20171127_Transportation_Analysis_TA_Nov_2017.pdf
2 http://www.dot.ca.gov/d4/101managedlanes/docs/factsheet_page-1.pdf
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 18. Transportation and Circulation June 28, 2018 Page 18-9
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 18_Transportation_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018_rev.doc
Traffic conditions at key study intersections were analyzed for the AM and PM peak hours using
the HCM 2000 and HCM 2010 software. Intersections, rather than roadway segments between
intersections, are the capacity controlling locations for an urban circulation system. Intersections
are almost always the critical capacity-controlling locations for vehicular travel on urban and
suburban roadway networks. Twenty-five (25) "study intersections" were selected by the City
and the EIR transportation consultant as those most likely to be affected by the project and
warranting study. The 25 study intersections are mapped on Figure 18-4.
Both the2000 and 2010 Highway Capacity Manual methodologies were used to analyze
signalized and unsignalized intersections.1
“Level of service” describes the operating conditions experienced by motorists. Level of service
is a qualitative measure of the effect of a number of factors, including speed and travel time,
traffic interruptions, freedom to maneuver, driving comfort and convenience. Levels of service
are designated "A" through "F" from best to worst, which cover the entire range of traffic
operations that might occur. Level of Service (LOS) "A" through "D" generally represent traffic
volumes at less than intersection capacity with minimal to tolerable delays, while LOS "E and F"
represent volumes greater than capacity and/or significant delays for motorists.
Signalized Intersection Methodology. The analysis for the 24 signalized study intersections
has been conducted using the LOS methodology set forth in chapter 16 of the Transportation
Research Board's 2000 Highway Capacity Manual. This methodology correlates LOS to
average delay at each intersection, calculated in seconds per vehicle. Table 18-2 summarizes
the relationship between LOS and average delay for signalized intersections.
Unsignalized Intersection Methodology. The analysis for the one unsignalized study
intersection was conducted using the methodology set forth in chapter 17 of the 2000 Highway
Capacity Manual. At all-way stop controlled intersections, LOS is based on the average delay
experienced on all approaches. At two-way stop intersections, LOS is calculated for each
controlled movement. For approaches comprised of a single lane, the delay is computed as an
average of all movements in that lane. Table 18-3 summarizes the relationship between LOS
and average delay for unsignalized intersections.
Table 18-2: Signalized Intersection Level of Service (Los) Definitions
Level of
Service Description of Operations
Average
Control Delay
(seconds/vehicle)
A Insignificant Delays: No approach phase is fully used and no vehicle
waits longer than one red indication. < 10
B Minimal Delays: An occasional approach phase is fully used. Drivers
begin to feel restricted. > 10 to 20
C Acceptable Delays: Major approach phase may become fully used.
Most drivers feel somewhat restricted. > 20 to 35
D
Tolerable Delays: Drivers may wait through no more than one red
indication. Queues may develop but dissipate rapidly without
excessive delays.
> 35 to 55
1While the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual is available, it presents limitations for certain intersection
analysis applications. For this General Plan update, the City selected the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual
methodology as the preferred method for intersection LOS analysis.
hillcrest blvd.trousdale dr.e. poplar ave.old bayshore highw a y
millbrae ave.california dr.carolan ave.airport blvd.peninsula ave.burlingame ave.san ma teo dr.el camino real rollins rd.broadwayhillside dr.ralston ave.balboahowardpalomadrakemagnolia bernalcortezeastonlagunaadrianbayswateradelinesummi
tsequoiadavisanzacarmelitashermaneaston
loyolatoyondwi g hthuntvancouversebastianoak grovevernonplymouthconcordcapuchinoparkhalechapinpepperchapin
arguellolortonbloomfieldarunde ldwight
gilbrethcolumbuswalnutbenitocrescentprimrose occidental
riverahighland
poppycastenadastanleymariposaedgehillchanningacaci
a
atwateralcazarvictoriade sotoquesadaclarendon
millschula vistaelxnigtonmittencarlosmarin
martinezbanc roftsanchezsanchezgrovecowaneastmyrtle
alvaradomarco poloescalantestantonaviadoralbemarlelangmorrelllarkspurfairfieldcrosswaymahlerwestmoorhinckleycastillovaldiviamonterodevereuxogdenburlwaydavidraylassenla mesa
alturaslos m
o
nt
es newlandsh lindenlaurellos alt
osbeachmarstenhatchoxfordarcalmercambridge
doloreshooverskyviewdufferindonnellycorbittel quanitolas piedrasmajillakenmaredwardsmcdonaldeastwoodcarol
anselazaleamargaritacost a rica
guittardjuanitabroderickcadillaccumbe rlandrhinettemeadowmontecitosummerbay viewkillarneywhitehornneuchatelbelvederemarquitabellevueriveratiberonlincolnanitapalmcarolanlindenparkcabrillosan mateon n oonntetettnnmamaannmmmmmmmamanmnmmmanansasahillsboroughououhhhhhhhghghghghhillhillrorougughhhhsbsbbooeraeaeeeaeeeeeeeaeaeaemillbrmillbrabrabrasan francisco internationalairportsan francisco bay1012801,500 TF 000,30570Ncity limitsfreewaymajor roadrail lineparcels - burlingameparcels - surrounding areaburlingame general planproposed study intersectionsfreeway interchangescmp intersectionsnon-cmp intersections1,500750 3,000 FT 0NBurlingame General Plan EIRFigure 18-4 Proposed Intersections
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 18. Transportation and Circulation June 28, 2018 Page 18-10
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 18_Transportation_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018_rev.doc
E Significant Delays: Volumes approaching capacity. Vehicles may wait
through several signal cycles and long vehicle queues from upstream. > 55 to 80
F Excessive Delays: Represents conditions at capacity, with extremely
long delays. Queues may block upstream intersections. > 80
Source: Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, 2000.
Table 18-3: Unsignalized Intersection Level of Service Definitions
Level of
Service Description of Operations
Average
Control Delay
(seconds/vehicle)
A No delay for stop-controlled approaches. 0 to 10
B Operations with minor delays. > 10 to 15
C Operations with moderate delays. > 15 to 25
D Operations with some delays. > 25 to 35
E Operations with high delays and long queues. > 35 to 50
F Operation with extreme congestion, with very high delays and long
queues unacceptable to most drivers. > 50
Source: Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, 2000.
(2) The General Plan Policy Evaluation. The 2040 General Plan, including the associated
development capacity assumptions (see EIR Section 3.6), was analyzed to identify goals,
policies, implementation programs (“policies” for short), and potential outcomes that address the
significance criteria.
For potential environmental impacts that would result from the 2040 General Plan, mitigation
measures were designed to avoid or reduce each impact to a less-than-significant level. If
implementation of all identified feasible mitigations cannot reduce the impact to a less-than-
significant level, then the impact is considered significant and unavoidable.
(3) VMT Analysis. VMT estimates are based on a local travel model, which considers land uses
and regional transportation infrastructure to forecast travel patterns. For projects and specific
plans, impacts would be measured by VMT per capita, and the threshold of significance would
be defined by the regional or local City average VMT per capita. However, for a general plan,
the state OPR recommends that transportation impacts are evaluated for consistency with the
RTP/SCS; for Burlingame this is Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and the
Association of Bay Area Governments’ (ABAG’s) Plan Bay Area 2040, which was updated and
adopted in 2017.
18.2.3 Environmental Impacts
Potential Impacts of Future Development under the 2040 General Plan
(a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy related to intersections, streets,
highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit
Intersection Operations. Existing intersection level of service is summarized in Table 18-4. As
shown on Table 18-4, all intersections, but one, are operating at acceptable levels under
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 18. Transportation and Circulation June 28, 2018 Page 18-11
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 18_Transportation_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018_rev.doc
existing conditions; California Drive and Broadway is operating at LOS E during the AM peak
hour.
Decreased LOS: Intersection level of service under 2040 Proposed GP Conditions is
summarized in Table 18-5. As shown on Table 18-5, all study intersections are expected to
operate at acceptable levels under the 2040 Proposed GP conditions, except the intersection at
California Drive and Broadway is expected to operate at unacceptable LOS F during both the
AM and PM peak hours.
Increased Delays: The implementation of the General Plan would result in an increase in delay
of five or more seconds at one intersection that already operates at LOS E or F under Existing
Conditions: Intersection 8: California Dr and Broadway– AM.
Impact 18-1: Project Intersection Impacts. While the increased traffic associated with the
proposed General Plan at the California Dr/Broadway intersection may be considerable, the
proposed General Plan includes policies and implementation programs to reduce the LOS
impact by updating the LOS standard to consider other modes, and encourages strategies to
enhance travel modes other than the single occupant auto. Table 18-6 identifies these policies
and programs. In addition to the General Plan policies, the following mitigation measure is
recommended to reduce impacts on the California Drive and Broadway intersection to less than
significant.
Mitigation 18-1.
At the intersection of California Drive and Broadway, the proposed 2040 GP would worsen the
intersection level of service to unacceptable LOS F and add more than 5 seconds of average
delay during both the AM and PM peak hours. The draft 2040 GP identifies a policy (M-12.2) to
“coordinate with Caltrain and Caltrans to design and construct a grade-separated intersection at
Broadway and the rail tracks.” It is assumed that the proposed grade separation project would
restore intersection level of service at California Drive and Broadway to acceptable conditions.
Table 18-4: Existing Intersection Level of Service Summary
# Intersection Jurisdiction LOS
Standard
Peak
Hour
Count
Date Notes
Existing
Avg.
Delay
(sec)
LOS
1 US 101 NB Ramps
and Millbrae Ave
City of
Millbrae D AM 5/23/2017 11 B
PM 5/23/2017 7.4 A
2 US 101 SB Ramps
and Millbrae Ave
City of
Millbrae D AM 5/23/2017 * 14.9 B
PM 5/23/2017 * 13.7 B
3 Rollins Rd
and Millbrae Ave
City of
Millbrae D AM 5/23/2017 21.3 C
PM 5/23/2017 36 D
4 El Camino Real
and Millbrae Ave CMP E AM 5/23/2017 67.6 E
PM 5/23/2017 69.2 E
5 El Camino Real
and Trousdale Dr
City of
Burlingame D AM 5/23/2017 * 37.9 D
PM 5/23/2017 * 40.4 D
6 El Camino Real
and Hillside Dr
City of
Burlingame D AM 5/23/2017 5.4 A
PM 5/23/2017 3.5 A
7 El Camino Real
and Broadway CMP E AM 5/23/2017 * 12.4 B
PM 5/23/2017 * 11.7 B
8 California Dr
and Broadway
City of
Burlingame D AM 5/23/2017 61.2 E
PM 5/23/2017 45 D
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 18. Transportation and Circulation June 28, 2018 Page 18-12
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 18_Transportation_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018_rev.doc
Table 18-4: Existing Intersection Level of Service Summary
# Intersection Jurisdiction LOS
Standard
Peak
Hour
Count
Date Notes
Existing
Avg.
Delay
(sec)
LOS
9 Carolan Ave
and Broadway
City of
Burlingame D AM 5/23/2017 25.9 C
PM 5/23/2017 24.8 C
10 Rollins Rd
and Cadillac
City of
Burlingame D AM 6/20/2017 5.6 A
PM 6/20/2017 4.4 A
11 Rollins Rd
and Broadway
City of
Burlingame D AM 6/20/2017 33.2 C
PM 6/20/2017 33.9 C
12 US 101 SB Ramps
and Broadway
City of
Burlingame D AM 6/20/2017 * 26.5 C
PM 6/20/2017 * 17.7 B
13 Bayshore Hwy
and Broadway
City of
Burlingame D AM 6/20/2017 * 18.2 B
PM 6/20/2017 * 18.6 B
14 Bayshore Hwy and
US 101 NB Ramps
City of
Burlingame D AM 6/20/2017 * 34.4 C
PM 6/20/2017 * 38.3 D
15 Airport Blvd
and Anza Blvd
City of
Burlingame D AM 5/23/2017 * 14.9 B
PM 5/23/2017 * 23.2 C
16 California Dr
and Oak Grove Ave
City of
Burlingame D AM 5/23/2017 20.3 C
PM 5/23/2017 15.9 B
17
Carolan Ave and
Oak Grove Ave
(unsignalized)
City of
Burlingame
N/A AM 5/23/2017 2, 3 13.3 B
PM 5/23/2017 11.3 B
18 El Camino Real and
Burlingame Ave
City of
Burlingame D AM 5/23/2017 8.9 A
PM 5/23/2017 9.9 A
19 California Dr and
Burlingame Ave
City of
Burlingame D AM 5/23/2017 6 A
PM 5/23/2017 6.7 A
20 El Camino Real and
Peninsula Ave
City of San
Mateo mid D 1 AM 5/23/2017 * 15.1 B
PM 5/23/2017 * 15.9 B
21
California Dr/San
Mateo Dr and
Peninsula Ave
City of San
Mateo
mid D 1 AM 5/23/2017 16.1 B
PM 5/23/2017 17.7 B
22 Humboldt St and
Peninsula Ave
City of San
Mateo mid D 1 AM 5/23/2017 16.5 B
PM 5/23/2017 18.5 B
23 Bayshore Blvd and
Peninsula Ave
City of San
Mateo mid D 1 AM 5/23/2017 8.4 A
PM 5/23/2017 12.1 B
24 Airport Blvd and US
101 NB Ramps
City of San
Mateo mid D 1 AM 5/23/2017 * 12.8 B
PM 5/23/2017 * 16.5 B
25 Humboldt Rd and
Poplar Ave
City of San
Mateo mid D 1 AM 5/23/2017 17.7 B
PM 5/23/2017 18.4 B
Notes:
Bold indicates unacceptable level of serviceBold and boxindicates a significant impact
* indicates the intersection level of service is calculated using the HCM 2000 methodology. These
intersections have unusual lane geometries and/or signal operations that cannot be supported by
Synchro HCM 2010.
CMP intersections are evaluated using the C/CAG CMP standard of LOS E.
1. All intersections within the City of San Mateo are evaluated using City's standard of mid LOS D (45
seconds of average delay).
2. The intersection of Carolan Avenue and Oak Grove Avenue has unusual intersection controls that
cannot be supported by either HCM 2000 or HCM 2010 methodology. The reported delay and LOS
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 18. Transportation and Circulation June 28, 2018 Page 18-13
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 18_Transportation_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018_rev.doc
Table 18-4: Existing Intersection Level of Service Summary
# Intersection Jurisdiction LOS
Standard
Peak
Hour
Count
Date Notes
Existing
Avg.
Delay
(sec)
LOS
are estimated using the Synchro delay calculation methodology.
3. The City is planning to install a traffic signal at this unsignalized intersection.
Table 18-5: 2040 Proposed General Plan Intersection Level of Service Summary
# Intersection Jurisdiction LOS
Standard
Peak
Hour
Count
Date Notes
Existing
Avg.
Delay
(sec)
LOS
Proposed
GP Avg.
Delay
(sec)
LOS
1 US 101 NB Ramps
and Millbrae Ave
City of
Millbrae D AM 5/23/2017 11 B 11.6 B
PM 5/23/2017 7.4 A 7.6 A
2 US 101 SB Ramps
and Millbrae Ave
City of
Millbrae D AM 5/23/2017 * 14.9 B 16.6 B
PM 5/23/2017 * 13.7 B 14.5 B
3 Rollins Rd
and Millbrae Ave
City of
Millbrae D AM 5/23/2017 21.3 C 46.8 D
PM 5/23/2017 36 D 48.9 D
4 El Camino Real
and Millbrae Ave CMP E AM 5/23/2017 67.6 E 77.2 E
PM 5/23/2017 69.2 E 64.2 E
5 El Camino Real
and Trousdale Dr
City of
Burlingame D AM 5/23/2017 * 37.9 D 40.2 D
PM 5/23/2017 * 40.4 D 49 D
6 El Camino Real
and Hillside Dr
City of
Burlingame D AM 5/23/2017 5.4 A 19.4 B
PM 5/23/2017 3.5 A 12.3 B
7 El Camino Real
and Broadway CMP E AM 5/23/2017 * 12.4 B 16.6 B
PM 5/23/2017 * 11.7 B 59.6 E
8 California Dr
and Broadway
City of
Burlingame D AM 5/23/2017 61.2 E 76 E
PM 5/23/2017 45 D 66.2 E
9 Carolan Ave
and Broadway
City of
Burlingame D AM 5/23/2017 25.9 C 37.1 D
PM 5/23/2017 24.8 C 37.2 D
10 Rollins Rd
and Cadillac
City of
Burlingame D AM 6/20/2017 5.6 A 5.6 A
PM 6/20/2017 4.4 A 4.3 A
11 Rollins Rd
and Broadway
City of
Burlingame D AM 6/20/2017 33.2 C 34.1 C
PM 6/20/2017 33.9 C 40.4 D
12 US 101 SB Ramps
and Broadway
City of
Burlingame D AM 6/20/2017 * 26.5 C 28.4 C
PM 6/20/2017 * 17.7 B 20.3 C
13 Bayshore Hwy
and Broadway
City of
Burlingame D AM 6/20/2017 * 18.2 B 20.3 C
PM 6/20/2017 * 18.6 B 21 C
14 Bayshore Hwy and
US 101 NB Ramps
City of
Burlingame D AM 6/20/2017 * 34.4 C 35.5 D
PM 6/20/2017 * 38.3 D 40 D
15 Airport Blvd
and Anza Blvd
City of
Burlingame D AM 5/23/2017 * 14.9 B 25.4 C
PM 5/23/2017 * 23.2 C 45.5 D
16 California Dr
and Oak Grove Ave
City of
Burlingame D AM 5/23/2017 20.3 C 26.6 C
PM 5/23/2017 15.9 B 22.8 C
17
Carolan Ave and
Oak Grove Ave
(unsignalized)
City of
Burlingame
N/A AM 5/23/2017 2 13.3 B >60 F
PM 5/23/2017 11.3 B >60 F
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 18. Transportation and Circulation June 28, 2018 Page 18-14
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 18_Transportation_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018_rev.doc
Table 18-5: 2040 Proposed General Plan Intersection Level of Service Summary
# Intersection Jurisdiction LOS
Standard
Peak
Hour
Count
Date Notes
Existing
Avg.
Delay
(sec)
LOS
Proposed
GP Avg.
Delay
(sec)
LOS
18 El Camino Real and
Burlingame Ave
City of
Burlingame D AM 5/23/2017 8.9 A 13.5 B
PM 5/23/2017 9.9 A 16.5 B
19 California Dr and
Burlingame Ave
City of
Burlingame D AM 5/23/2017 6 A 17.7 B
PM 5/23/2017 6.7 A 34.5 C
20 El Camino Real and
Peninsula Ave
City of San
Mateo mid D 1 AM 5/23/2017 * 15.1 B 29.8 C
PM 5/23/2017 * 15.9 B 37.3 D
21 San Mateo Dr and
Peninsula Ave
City of San
Mateo mid D 1 AM 5/23/2017 16.1 B 16.2 B
PM 5/23/2017 17.7 B 17.7 B
22 Humboldt St and
Peninsula Ave
City of San
Mateo mid D 1 AM 5/23/2017 16.5 B 24.7 C
PM 5/23/2017 18.5 B 43.7 D
23 Bayshore Blvd and
Peninsula Ave
City of San
Mateo mid D 1 AM 5/23/2017 8.4 A 10.3 B
PM 5/23/2017 12.1 B 16.5 B
24 Airport Blvd and US
101 NB Ramps
City of San
Mateo mid D 1 AM 5/23/2017 * 12.8 B 20.1 C
PM 5/23/2017 * 16.5 B 18.2 B
25 Humboldt St and
Poplar Ave
City of San
Mateo mid D 1 AM 5/23/2017 17.7 B 19.9 B
PM 5/23/2017 18.4 B 24.3 C
Notes:
Bold indicates unacceptable level of service. Bold Shaded boxes indicates a significant impact
* indicates the intersection level of service is calculated using the HCM 2000 methodology. These intersections have
unusual lane geometries and/or signal operations that cannot be supported by Synchro HCM 2010.
CMP intersections are evaluated using the C/CAG CMP standard of LOS E.
1. All intersections within the City of San Mateo are evaluated using City's standard of mid LOS D (45 seconds of average
delay).
2. The intersection of Carolan Avenue and Oak Grove Avenue has unusual intersection controls that cannot be supported
by either HCM 2000 or HCM 2010 methodology. The reported delay and LOS are estimated using the Synchro delay
calculation methodology.
(b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program. The project would not cause
a conflict with the San Mateo County Transit Authority CMP because the one CMP intersection
in Burlingame (El Camino Real and Broadway) will remain at LOS E, (for El Camino Real the
CMP standard was set to be LOS E). Therefore, the General Plan has no impact, and no
mitigation is required.
(c) Air Traffic Patterns. The proposed General Plan would not directly result in a change to air
traffic patterns. The impact would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
(d) Design Feature Hazard. Implementation of the proposed General Plan could result in an
increase in traffic hazards due to a design feature or incompatible uses. However, the General
Plan is a policy document and includes policies and program to avoid or reduce future hazards
(see Table 18-6). At the point of detailed designs, projects would be required to meet the
design standards at time of project approval and any potentially adverse or hazardous impact to
the transportation network would be identified and addressed during project design review.
Therefore, the General Plan has no impact, and no mitigation is required.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 18. Transportation and Circulation June 28, 2018 Page 18-15
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 18_Transportation_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018_rev.doc
(e) Emergency Access. Adopted City standards require adequate roadway accommodation
for emergency vehicles, and the impacts on emergency access by a given project are evaluated
through the City’s design review process. The requirement to maintain emergency access is
handled on a project-by-project basis. The proposed General Plan would not result in
inadequate emergency access. Therefore, the General Plan has no impact, and no mitigation
is required.
(f) Alternative Modes. Alternative transportation includes travel modes that can move people
to their destinations through means other than a private automobile or light duty truck. Bus
transit and rail service, for example, provide an important travel alternative for those who cannot
rely on the use of private automobiles, such as the elderly and the disabled. Some commuters
will use the local and regional transit system to travel to work, particularly SamTrans buses,
Caltrain trains between San Francisco and San Jose, and BART to San Francisco and the East
Bay.
The proposed 2040 General Plan has the potential to generate increases in systemwide
ridership for SamTrans buses, Caltrain trains, and BART due to the increase in population and
the emphasis on multi-modal transportation systems. However, the increase in ridership would
be gradual as build out occurs and each transit agency (BART, Caltrain, SamTrans) would
provide new trains/buses as ridership increases. In particular, the San Mateo County Transit
District develops strategic plans every five years that shapes the agency’s direction for the next
five years (the current Strategic Plan is for the period of 2015-2019). The Strategic Plan lays
down the foundation from which policy, investment and service decisions are made in the future.
The General Plan would not interfere with any adopted plan or policy related to alternative
transportation. The proposed General Plan includes policies and programs to support transit,
and promote bicycling and walking, which are noted below (see Table 18-6). Burlingame aims to
develop a complete multimodal transportation network (Complete Streets network). This
network will be designed to encourage people to use non-automobile modes for as many trips
as possible, as high use of these alternative modes enables the system to move more people
with less delay, cost, and environmental impacts.
Because the proposed General Plan policies and programs to support transit and to encourage
and support alternative modes and the development of facilities to accommodate alternative
modes, this impact would improve alternative modes, and either has no impact or is less than
significant (see Table 18-6 for additional details).
(g) VMT. New development under the proposed General Plan could affect travel patterns, and
individual development projects and specific plans in certain locations may induce vehicle travel
or register impacts with above threshold VMT per capita. However, the General Plan is
consistent with Plan Bay Area 2040, the RTP/SCS. Therefore, the General Plan has no impact,
and no mitigation is required.
How Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies Reduce Impacts
Table 18-6 is aligned with the relevant Existing Regulations and General Plan policies that
relate to transportation and circulation. Column 1 (Objective) lists each General Plan goal,
policy, and implementation program (“policy” for short), organized by General Plan element, that
addresses the potential impact identified in Table 18-6. Column 2 is a summary of the regulation
and the text of the policy. Column 3 answers the question, “How does the regulation/policy
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 18. Transportation and Circulation June 28, 2018 Page 18-16
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 18_Transportation_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018_rev.doc
avoid or reduce the potential impact?” Column 4 identifies the applicable significance criteria
that is addressed by the regulation/policy.
The verbs in Column 3 are intended to be applied consistently. The verb “ensures” means that
the policy is sufficient to guarantee the result identified in the policy. The verb “helps” means
that the policy contributes to avoiding or reducing the identified potential impact; in many cases,
“helps” is used for a policy that can be applied to avoid or reduce a wide range of potential
impacts. The verb “implements” is used for General Plan implementation programs to indicate
that the program provides the details to put the associated policy into action.
Table 18-6: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Transportation and Circulation
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable CEQA
Significance
Criteria from
Section 18.2.1
Existing Regulation
San Mateo County
Congestion
Management
Program, Final 2013
The purpose of the CMP is
to identify strategies to
respond to future
transportation needs,
develop procedures to
alleviate and control
congestion, and promote
countywide solutions.
Ensures that the City will
be proactive in addressing
potential increases in
demand on its
transportation system by
regional and through traffic.
(a) Impacts on
Intersection LOS
(a) Reduce Impacts
on Roadways
(f) Reduce Impacts
on Transit
San Mateo County
Comprehensive
Bicycle and
Pedestrian Plan, 2011
Outlines recommendations
and design guidelines for
“safe, convenient, and
universally accessible”
bicycle and pedestrian
facilities throughout the
county
Ensures that planning and
system changes
incorporate safety features
to address all modes.
(d) Safety Related
Impacts
(f) Impacts Related
to Alternative Modes
San Mateo County
Transportation Plan
for Low-Income
Populations, 2012
Examines mobility needs
in transportation-
disadvantaged
communities in San Mateo
County and develops
strategies to bridge gaps in
service delivery
Enhances transit as a
viable alternative to travel
in a personal vehicle.
(a) Reduce Impacts
on Roadways
(f) Reduce Impacts
on Transit
(f) Impacts Related
to Alternative Modes
San Mateo County
Transportation
Authority Draft
Strategic Plan 2015-
2019, 2014
Policy, investment and
service plan to improve
bus service and expand
ridership throughout the
SamTrans service area
Ensures that the City will
be proactive in addressing
potential increases in
demand on its
transportation system by
regional and through traffic.
(a) Impacts on
Intersection LOS
(a) Reduce Impacts
on Roadways
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 18. Transportation and Circulation June 28, 2018 Page 18-17
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 18_Transportation_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018_rev.doc
Table 18-6: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Transportation and Circulation
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable CEQA
Significance
Criteria from
Section 18.2.1
2018 Bicycle and
Pedestrian Master
Plan
Develop or identify a safe,
convenient, and integrated
bicycle and pedestrian
network that connects
residential neighborhoods
to employment, education,
recreation, and
commercial destinations
throughout Burlingame
Ensures that planning and
system changes
incorporate safety features
to address all modes.
Encourages development
and expansion of transit
and active transportation
options to reduce drive-
alone trips.
(d) Safety Related
Impacts
(f) Impacts Related
to Alternative Modes
Mobility Element
Goal M-1 Achieve and maintain a
citywide circulation
network that provides safe,
efficient, and convenient
mobility for all users and
modes of transportation.
Ensures that future
development is evaluated
for its impacts on all
transportation modes.
Encourages development
and expansion of transit
and active transportation
options to reduce drive-
alone trips.
(a) Impacts on
Intersection LOS
(a) Reduce Impacts
on Roadways
(f) Reduce Impacts
on Transit
(d) Safety Related
Impacts
(f) Impacts Related
to Alternative Modes
(g) Reduce impacts
on VMT per capita
Policy M-1.1
Complete Streets
Define and develop a well-
connected network of
Complete Streets that can
move all modes safely,
efficiently, and comfortably
to promote efficient
circulation while also
improving public health
and safety.
Ensures that future
development is evaluated
for its impacts on all
transportation modes.
Encourages development
and expansion of transit
and active transportation
options to reduce drive-
alone trips.
(a) Impacts on
Intersection LOS
(a) Reduce Impacts
on Roadways
(f) Reduce Impacts
on Transit
(d) Safety Related
Impacts
(f) Impacts Related
to Alternative Modes
(g) Reduce impacts
on VMT per capita
Policy M-3.1
Uninterrupted Bicycle
Network
Develop a safe,
convenient, and integrated
bicycle network that
connects residential
neighborhoods to
employment, education,
recreation, and
commercial destinations
throughout Burlingame,
Ensures that planning and
system changes
incorporate safety features
to address all modes.
Encourages development
and expansion of transit
and active transportation
options to reduce drive-
alone trips.
(f) Impacts Related
to Alternative Modes
(g) Reduce impacts
on VMT per capita
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 18. Transportation and Circulation June 28, 2018 Page 18-18
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 18_Transportation_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018_rev.doc
Table 18-6: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Transportation and Circulation
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable CEQA
Significance
Criteria from
Section 18.2.1
Goal M-4 Improve transit access,
frequency, connectivity,
and amenities to increase
transit ridership and
convenience.
Enhances transit as a
viable alternative to travel
in a personal vehicle.
Encourages development
and expansion of transit
and active transportation
options to reduce drive-
alone trips.
(f) Reduce Impacts
on Transit
(f) Impacts Related
to Alternative Modes
(g) Reduce impacts
on VMT per capita
Policy M-4.1
Interagency
Collaboration
Collaborate with regional
and local transit service
providers to support
improved transit service
frequency and connections
between routes operated
by different agencies.
Ensures that the City will
be proactive in addressing
potential increases in
demand on its
transportation system by
regional and through traffic.
Encourages development
and expansion of transit
and active transportation
options to reduce drive-
alone trips.
(a) Impacts on
Intersection LOS
(b) Reduce Impacts
on Roadways
(f) Reduce Impacts
on Transit
(d) Safety Related
Impacts
(f) Impacts Related
to Alternative Modes
(g) Reduce impacts
on VMT per capita
Goal M-5 Implement TDM strategies
that reduce overall vehicle
trips and encourage the
use of transportation
modes that reduce VMT
and greenhouse gas
emissions.
Ensures that the City will
be proactive in addressing
potential increases in
demand on its
transportation system by
regional and through traffic.
Encourages development
and expansion of transit
and active transportation
options to reduce drive-
alone trips.
(a) Impacts on
Intersection LOS
(a) Reduce Impacts
on Roadways
(f) Reduce Impacts
on Transit
(d) Safety Related
Impacts
(f) Impacts Related
to Alternative Modes
(g) Reduce impacts
on VMT per capita
M-5.1 TDM
Guidelines and
Programs
Establish specific TDM
guidelines and
requirements within the
Zoning Ordinance that
encourage travel by a
variety of modes for both
individuals and employees,
focusing different
strategies in different parts
of the community as
appropriate to promote
sustainability and
economic development.
Ensures that the City will
be proactive in addressing
potential increases in
demand on its
transportation system by
regional and through traffic.
Encourages development
and expansion of transit
and active transportation
options to reduce drive-
alone trips.
(a) Impacts on
Intersection LOS
(a) Reduce Impacts
on Roadways
(f) Reduce Impacts
on Transit
(f) Impacts Related
to Alternative Modes
(g) Reduce impacts
on VMT per capita
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 18. Transportation and Circulation June 28, 2018 Page 18-19
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 18_Transportation_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018_rev.doc
Table 18-6: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Transportation and Circulation
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable CEQA
Significance
Criteria from
Section 18.2.1
M-9.2 Multimodal
Transportation Impact
Fee
Establish a transportation
impact fee for new
development that
generates funds for
improving all modes of
transportation. Recognize
that this ties into the
update of performance
measures, as developer
fees and improvements
will no longer be tied to
intersection operations.
Ensures that future
development is evaluated
for its impacts on all
transportation modes.
Encourages development
and expansion of transit
and active transportation
options to reduce drive-
alone trips.
(a) Impacts on
Intersection LOS
(a) Reduce Impacts
on Roadways
(f) Reduce Impacts
on Transit
(f) Impacts Related
to Alternative Modes
(g) Reduce impacts
on VMT per capita
Conclusions
In most cases, no one goal, policy, or implementation measure is expected to completely avoid
or reduce an identified potential environmental impact. However, the collective, cumulative
mitigating benefits of the policies listed in Table 18-6 will result in a less-than-significant
impact related to the identified significance criterion, except for criteria a), specifically impacts
on LOS at the California Drive and Broadway intersection. However, with implementation of
Mitigation Measure 18-1, LOS intersection impacts at California Drive and Broadway would be
less-than-significant impact with mitigation. This conclusion is consistent with the purpose
and use of a program EIR for a general plan (see EIR Introduction, Chapter 1).
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 19. Tribal Cultural Resources June 28, 2018 Page 19-1
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 19_Tribal Cultural_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018.doc
19. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
This EIR chapter describes tribal cultural resources conditions in the planning area. The chapter
includes the regulatory framework necessary to evaluate potential environmental impacts
resulting from the 2040 General Plan, describes potential impacts that could result from the
General Plan, and discusses General Plan goals, policies, and implementation programs that
would avoid or reduce those potential impacts.
19.1 SETTING
The environmental and regulatory setting of the planning area with respect to tribal cultural
resources is described in chapter 6.8 (Cultural Resources and Urban Forests) of the General
Plan Existing Conditions Report (City of Burlingame, 2015). Pursuant to section 15150 of the
State CEQA Guidelines, the Existing Conditions Report is incorporated into the Draft Program
EIR by reference. The Existing Conditions Report is available at the City of Burlingame 2040
General Plan website at:
http://www.Burlingame.org/GENERALPLAN/
Copies of the Existing Conditions Report may be viewed during regular business hours (8:00
a.m. to 5:00 p.m.), Monday through Friday, at the City of Burlingame Planning Division, 501
Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA 94010.
19.1.1 Environmental Setting
The Cultural Resources and Urban Forest Chapter (Section 6.8) of the Existing Conditions
Report describes tribal cultural resources within the planning area. The major findings below
describe the tribal cultural resources present or potentially present in the planning area.
Burlingame is situated within the historic territory of many discrete tribes of Native Americans
known collectively as the Ohlone (also known as Costanoans). The Ohlone inhabited a natural
environment of grasslands and oak forests in the Burlingame area. The planning area contains
10 recorded Native American sites; 31 historic-period buildings, structures, or objects; and one
other historic-period resource. Additionally, the State Office of Historic Preservation Historic
Property Directory (OHP HPD) lists 32 recorded buildings or structures within the planning area,
and Caltrans lists six San Mateo County bridges eligible for National Register of Historic Places
(NRHP) listing.
19.1.2 Regulatory Setting
The laws and policies that pertain to the tribal cultural resources potentially present in the
planning area or affected by the General Plan are discussed below.
State
Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990. The Native American
Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) of 1990 sets provisions for the intentional
removal and inadvertent discovery of human remains and other cultural items from federal and
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 19. Tribal Cultural Resources June 28, 2018 Page 19-2
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 19_Tribal Cultural_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018.doc
tribal lands. It clarifies the ownership of human remains and sets forth a process for repatriation
of human remains and associated funerary objects and sacred religious objects to the Native
American groups claiming to be lineal descendants or culturally affiliated with the remains or
objects. It requires any federally funded institution housing Native American remains or artifacts
to compile an inventory of all cultural items within the museum or with its agency and to provide
a summary to any Native American tribe claiming affiliation.
Native American Heritage Commission, Public Resources Code Sections 5097.9 –
5097.991. Section 5097.91 of the Public Resources Code (PRC) established the Native
American Heritage Commission (NAHC), whose duties include the inventory of places of
religious or social significance to Native Americans and the identification of known graves and
cemeteries of Native Americans on private lands. Under Section 5097.9 of the PRC, a State
policy of noninterference with the free expression or exercise of Native American religion was
articulated along with a prohibition of severe or irreparable damage to Native American
sanctified cemeteries, places of worship, religious or ceremonial sites or sacred shrines located
on public property. Section 5097.98 of the PRC specifies a protocol to be followed when the
NAHC receives notification of a discovery of Native American human remains from a county
coroner. Section 5097.5 defines as a misdemeanor the unauthorized disturbance or removal of
archaeological, historic, or paleontological resources located on public lands.
California Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 2001. Codified in the
California Health and Safety Code Sections 8010–8030, the California Native American Graves
Protection Act (NAGPRA) is consistent with the federal NAGPRA. Intended to “provide a
seamless and consistent state policy to ensure that all California Indian human remains and
cultural items be treated with dignity and respect,” the California NAGPRA also encourages and
provides a mechanism for the return of remains and cultural items to lineal descendants.
Section 8025 established a Repatriation Oversight Commission to oversee this process. The act
also provides a process for non–federally recognized tribes to file claims with agencies and
museums for repatriation of human remains and cultural items.
Senate Bill 18. Senate Bill (SB) 18 (California Government Code, Section 65352.3)
incorporates the protection of California traditional tribal cultural places into land use planning
for cities, counties, and agencies by establishing responsibilities for local governments to
contact, refer plans to, and consult with California Native American tribes as part of the adoption
or amendment of any general or specific plan proposed on or after March 1, 2005. SB18
requires public notice to be sent to tribes listed on the Native American Heritage Commission’s
SB18 Tribal Consultation list within the geographical areas affected by the proposed changes.
Tribes must respond to a local government notice within 90 days (unless a shorter time frame
has been agreed upon by the tribe), indicating whether or not they want to consult with the local
government. Consultations are for the purpose of preserving or mitigating impacts to places,
features, and objects described in the Public Resources Code that may be affected by the
proposed adoption or amendment to a general or specific plan.
Assembly Bill 52. Assembly Bill (AB) 52 specifies that a project with an effect that may cause a
substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, as defined, is a
project that may have a significant effect on the environment. AB 52 requires a lead agency to
begin consultation with a California Native American tribe that is traditionally and culturally
affiliated with the geographic area of the proposed project, if the tribe requested to the lead
agency, in writing, to be informed by the lead agency of proposed projects in that geographic
area and the tribe requests consultation, prior to determining whether a negative declaration,
mitigated negative declaration, or environmental impact report is required for a project. AB 52
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 19. Tribal Cultural Resources June 28, 2018 Page 19-3
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 19_Tribal Cultural_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018.doc
specifies examples of mitigation measures that may be considered to avoid or minimize impacts
on tribal cultural resources. The bill makes the above provisions applicable to projects that have
a notice of preparation or a notice of negative declaration filed or mitigated negative declaration
on or after July 1, 2015.
19.2 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
This section describes potential impacts related to tribal cultural resources that could result from
the General Plan, and discusses General Plan goals, policies, and implementation programs
that would avoid or reduce those potential impacts.
19.2.1 Significance Criteria
Based on the CEQA Guidelines, implementation of the City of Burlingame 2040 General Plan
would have a significant impact related to tribal cultural resources if it would:
(a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resources,
defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 1 as either a site, feature, place cultural
landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred
place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
i) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a
local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section
5020.1(k)?
ii) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by
substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c)
of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1? In applying the criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall
consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American Tribe.
19.2.2 Analysis Methodology
The methodology for evaluating potential environmental impacts related to tribal cultural
resources followed this basic sequence:
1 California Public Resources Code 21074. (a) “Tribal cultural resources” are either of the following: (1) Sites,
features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American
tribe that are either of the following: (A) Included or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the California Register of
Historical Resources. (B) Included in a local register of historical resources as defined in subdivision (k) of Section
5020.1. (2) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be
significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Section 5024.1 for the purposes of this paragraph, the lead agency shall consider the significance
of the resource to a California Native American tribe. (b) A cultural landscape that meets the criteria of subdivision (a)
is a tribal cultural resource to the extent that the landscape is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of
the landscape. (c) A historical resource described in Section 21084.1, a unique archaeological resource as defined in
subdivision (g) of Section 21083.2, or a “nonunique archaeological resource” as defined in subdivision (h) of Section
21083.2 may also be a tribal cultural resource if it conforms with the criteria of subdivision (a) (Added by Stats. 2014,
Ch. 532, Sec. 4. Effective January 1, 2015.)
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 19. Tribal Cultural Resources June 28, 2018 Page 19-4
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 19_Tribal Cultural_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018.doc
1) The General Plan Existing Conditions Report was evaluated to identify existing
environmental conditions and problems related to tribal cultural resources, including the
regulatory framework that applies to these issues.
2) The CEQA Statute and Guidelines (2017), including Appendix G (Environmental
Checklist Form), were consulted to identify environmental impact topics and issues that
should be addressed in the program EIR. In part, this process resulted in the
significance criteria listed in subsection 19.2.1 above.
3) The General Plan Policy Document, including the associated development capacity
assumptions (see EIR Section 3.6), was analyzed to identify goals, policies,
implementation programs (“policies” for short), and potential outcomes that address the
significance criteria. This analysis resulted in two basic conclusions regarding policies
and outcomes: (a) many policies would avoid or reduce potential environmental impacts,
and (b) some policies or outcomes could result in new environmental impacts or
increase the severity of existing environmental problems.
4) For potential environmental impacts that would result from the 2040 General Plan,
mitigations were designed to avoid or reduce each impact to a less-than-significant level.
If implementation of all identified feasible mitigations cannot reduce the impact to a less-
than-significant level, then the impact is considered significant and unavoidable.
19.2.3 Environmental Impacts
Potential Impacts of Future Development Pursuant to the 2040 General Plan
Future development, where new development supplants older development, subject to the goals
and policies of the General Plan could impact tribal cultural resources with cultural value to a
California Native American tribe, and which are listed or eligible for listing in the California
Register of Historical Resources or in a local register of historical resources. Impacts associated
with the destruction or alteration of tribal cultural resources can affect a city’s sense of place and
lose important information relevant to the city, the region, and/or State history. (Significance
Criteria 19.2.1 [a. i])
Future development could impact tribal cultural resources that are of concern to a California
Native American tribe where excavation and other earthmoving activities are required. Failure to
properly survey development sites and, if necessary, monitor earthmoving activities to ensure
identification and recovery of tribal cultural resources could result in a significant impact due to
the loss of information related to tribal cultural resources of local Native American tribes.
(Significance Criteria 19.2.1 [a. ii])
As described under the Regulatory Framework above, AB 52 requires a lead agency to begin
consultation with a California Native American tribe that is traditionally and culturally affiliated
with the geographic area of the proposed project, if the tribe requested to the lead agency, in
writing, to be informed of proposed projects in that geographic area, and if the tribe requests
consultation prior to determining whether a negative declaration, mitigated negative declaration,
or environmental impact report is required for a project. Since the General Plan is not
authorizing the development of a specific project where ground-disturbing activities would take
place, the requirement under AB52 for tribal consultation is not applicable in this case. However,
as part of the CEQA process, the City initiated the consultation process pursuant to SB 18. Five
tribes that are active in San Mateo County were sent letters and the NOP for the General Plan
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 19. Tribal Cultural Resources June 28, 2018 Page 19-5
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 19_Tribal Cultural_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018.doc
EIR by City staff. No tribes responded to the NOP. Tribes affiliated with the planning area will be
notified by the City when specific development proposals are submitted to the City. (Significance
Criteria 19.2.1 [a. i and a. ii])
How Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies Reduce Impacts
Table 19-1 is aligned with relevant Existing Regulations and General Plan policies that relate to
tribal cultural resources. Column 1 (Objective) lists each Regulation and General Plan goal,
policy, and implementation program (“policy” for short), organized by General Plan element, that
addresses the potential impact identified in Table 19-1. Column 2 is a summary of the
regulation/policy and the text of the policy. Column 3 answers the question, “How does the
regulation/policy avoid or reduce the potential impact?” Column 4 identifies the applicable
significance criteria that is addressed by the regulation/goal/policy.
The verbs in Column 3 are intended to be applied consistently. The verb “ensures” means that
the policy is sufficient to guarantee the result identified in the policy. The verb “helps” means
that the policy contributes to avoiding or reducing the identified potential impact; in many cases,
“helps” is used for a policy that can be applied to avoid or reduce a wide range of potential
impacts.
Table 19-1: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Tribal Cultural Resources
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
Existing Regulations
Native American
Heritage Commission,
Public Resources Code
Sections 5097.9 –
5097.991.
Section 5097.91 of the Public
Resources Code (PRC)
established the Native
American Heritage
Commission (NAHC), whose
duties include the inventory
of places of religious or
social significance to Native
Americans and the
identification of known
graves and cemeteries of
Native Americans on private
lands.
Helps ensure
preservation of
Burlingame’s listed or
eligible tribal cultural
resources.
(a. i) Cause a
substantial
adverse
change in the
significance
of a state
listed or
eligible tribal
cultural
resource
(a. ii) Cause a
substantial
adverse
change in the
significance
of a local
tribal cultural
resource
Native American
Graves Protection and
Repatriation Act of
1990.
The Native American Graves
Protection and Repatriation
Act (NAGPRA) of 1990 sets
provisions for the intentional
removal and inadvertent
discovery of human remains
and other cultural items from
federal and tribal lands.
Helps ensure
preservation of any
buried tribal human
remains.
(a. i) Cause a
substantial
adverse
change in the
significance
of a state
listed or
eligible tribal
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 19. Tribal Cultural Resources June 28, 2018 Page 19-6
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 19_Tribal Cultural_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018.doc
Table 19-1: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Tribal Cultural Resources
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
cultural
resource
(a. ii) Cause a
substantial
adverse
change in the
significance
of a local
tribal cultural
resource
California Native
American Graves
Protection and
Repatriation Act of
2001.
The California Native
American Graves Protection
Act (NAGPRA) is intended to
“provide a seamless and
consistent state policy to
ensure that all California
Indian human remains and
cultural items be treated with
dignity and respect,” the
California NAGPRA also
encourages and provides a
mechanism for the return of
remains and cultural items to
lineal descendants.
Helps ensure
preservation of any
buried tribal human
remains and provides
a way to return
remains or cultural
items to lineal
descendants.
(a. i) Cause a
substantial
adverse
change in the
significance
of a state
listed or
eligible tribal
cultural
resource
(a. ii) Cause a
substantial
adverse
change in the
significance
of a local
tribal cultural
resource
Senate Bill (SB) 18
(California Government
Code, Section
65352.3)
SB 18 incorporates the
protection of California
traditional tribal cultural
places into land use planning
for cities, counties, and
agencies by establishing
responsibilities for local
governments to contact, refer
plans to, and consult with
California Native American
tribes as part of the adoption
or amendment of any
general or specific plan.
SB18 requires public notice
to be sent to tribes listed on
the Native American
Heritage Commission’s SB18
Tribal Consultation list within
the geographical areas
affected by the proposed
changes.
Ensures that local
Native American tribes
are consulted on any
City-authorized land
use changes that
could affect a tribal
cultural resource.
Required as part of the
adoption or
amendment of the
General Plan or any
specific plan.
(a. ii) Cause a
substantial
adverse
change in the
significance
of a local
tribal cultural
resource
Assembly Bill (AB) 52 AB 52 specifies that a project
with an effect that may cause
Ensures that local
Native American tribes
(a.ii) Cause a
substantial
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 19. Tribal Cultural Resources June 28, 2018 Page 19-7
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 19_Tribal Cultural_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018.doc
Table 19-1: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Tribal Cultural Resources
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
a substantial adverse change
in the significance of a tribal
cultural resource, as defined,
is a project that may have a
significant effect on the
environment. AB 52 requires
a lead agency to begin
consultation with a California
Native American tribe that is
traditionally and culturally
affiliated with the geographic
area of the proposed project,
if the tribe requested to the
lead agency, in writing, to be
informed by the lead agency
of proposed projects.
are consulted on any
City-authorized land
use related
disturbance which
could affect a tribal
cultural resource.
adverse
change in the
significance
of a local
tribal cultural
resource
Conclusions
In most cases, no one goal, policy, or implementation measure is expected to completely avoid
or reduce an identified potential environmental impact. However, the collective, cumulative
mitigating benefits of the policies listed in Table 19-1 will result in a less-than-significant impact
related to the identified significance criterion and tribal cultural resources. This conclusion is
consistent with the purpose and use of a program EIR for a general plan (see EIR Introduction,
Chapter 1).
Based on the methodology described above, 2040 General Plan impacts related to tribal cultural
resources would be less than significant (see criteria [a. i], and [a. ii] in subsection 19.2.1,
“Significance Criteria,” above).
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 20. Utilities and Service Systems June 28, 2018 Page 20-1
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 20_Utilities_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
20. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
This EIR chapter describes existing conditions for water supply and distribution, wastewater
collection and treatment, and solid waste disposal and recycling in the planning area.
Stormwater management and flooding is addressed in Chapter 13 (Hydrology and Water
Quality). This chapter includes the regulatory framework necessary to evaluate potential
environmental impacts resulting from the 2040 General Plan, describes potential impacts that
could result from the General Plan, and discusses General Plan goals, policies, and
implementation programs that would avoid or reduce those potential impacts.
20.1 SETTING
The environmental and regulatory settings of the Burlingame planning area with respect to
utilities and service systems are described in Chapter 5 (Infrastructure) of the General Plan
Existing Conditions Report (City of Burlingame, 2015). Pursuant to section 15150 of the State
CEQA Guidelines, the Existing Conditions Report is incorporated into the Draft Program EIR by
reference. The Existing Conditions Report is available at the City of Burlingame 2040 General
Plan website at:
http://www.Burlingame.org/GENERALPLAN/
Copies of the Existing Conditions Report may be viewed during regular business hours (8:00
a.m. to 5:00 p.m.), Monday through Friday, at the City of Burlingame Planning Division, 501
Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA 94010.
20.1.1 Environmental Setting
The Infrastructure chapter of the Existing Conditions Report presents an overview of the public
utilities and service systems provided by the City of Burlingame and other agencies within the
planning area. Issues addressed relevant to this EIR chapter include water supply and delivery
and wastewater collection and treatment. Stormwater management is addressed in Chapter 13
(Hydrology and Water Quality). Much of the information in this section comes from the 2015
Urban Water Management Plan for the City of Burlingame (June 2016) prepared by Erler &
Kalinowski, Inc.
(a) Water Supply and Distribution.
These major findings describe the existing (2015) water supply and distribution systems in the
planning area.
Burlingame is a member of Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency (BAWSCA) and
purchases all of its potable water from the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission Regional
Water System (SFPUC RWS). Water distribution, wastewater collection, water conservation,
and maintenance of water quality are Burlingame’s main water resource functions, as treated
water purchased from the SFPUC RWS does not require further treatment.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 20. Utilities and Service Systems June 28, 2018 Page 20-2
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 20_Utilities_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
The City's Public Works Department provides water service to approximately 30,000 people
through 9,000 service connections throughout the City. Total water demand within the
Burlingame service area was approximately 1,283 million gallons in 2015. The residential sector
accounted for an average of 58% of the potable water demand in the Burlingame service area
between 2011 and 2015. Single family residential demands were approximately 41% of the total
demand, while multi-family residential demands accounted for the remaining 17%. Burlingame
has a moderate commercial, industrial, and institutional base, which together accounted for
approximately 30% of potable water demand for the 2011-2015 period.
The water distribution system consists of six pumping stations, seven water storage tanks, and
buried pipes of varying compositions, ages, and sizes. The distribution system provides water to
eight pressure zones within the City’s water service area. Water is stored in seven storage
tanks at five sites that provide an aggregate water storage volume of 2.94 million gallons (MG).
The largest water storage facility is the Hillsdale Tank, which holds 1.5 MG. The smallest water
storage facilities are the individual tanks at the Alcazar and Donnelly sites. There are two tanks
at each of these sites that hold 0.5 MG each.
The projected annual water demand for the City is 1,875 million gallons MG in 2025, 1,963 MG
in 2030, and 2,138 MG in 2040. Passive and active conservation would reduce the water
demand in 2025 to 1,756 MG, to 1,775 MG in 2030, and to 1,841 MG in 2040.
(b) Wastewater Collection and Treatment.
These major findings summarize existing (2015) information related to wastewater collection
and treatment facilities in the planning area.
The City owns, operates, and maintains local sanitary sewer collection facilities and the local
Burlingame Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP), which has a treatment capacity of 13 million
gallons per day. The average dry weather flow (ADWF) of wastewater treated at the WWTP has
remained fairly constant at approximately 3.0 to 3.5 MGD. The permit allows up to 5.5 MGD
ADWF, but the flow is not expected to increase significantly in the foreseeable future.
The WWTP was constructed in 1938, and there have been numerous upgrades in recent years.
The most recent upgrades include 1994 WWTP improvements ($10 million), 2006 WWTP
Improvements ($15 million), and the 2011 Retention Basin project ($8 million). The WWTP is
anticipated to require continuous upgrades with an average cost of $1 million per year to meet
future regulatory requirements. The WWTP effluent is discharged up to a maximum rate of 16
MGD to the San Francisco Bay via the North Bayside System Unit (NBSU) outfall, a jointly
owned outfall pipe shared by the cities of Burlingame, San Bruno, South San Francisco,
Millbrae, Colma, and the San Francisco Airport.
The City currently uses approximately 300,000 GPD of recycled water for internal use within the
WWTP. The City has not historically used recycled water outside of the WWTP and does not
currently have the treatment capabilities to meet the criteria for re-use of the recycled water for
non-potable uses such as irrigation.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 20. Utilities and Service Systems June 28, 2018 Page 20-3
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 20_Utilities_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
20.1.2 Regulatory Setting
The Existing Conditions Report Infrastructure chapter discusses the following regulatory setting
relevant to utilities and service systems.
(a) Water Supply and Distribution
California Safe Drinking Water Act. The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), administered by
the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in coordination with the California Department
of Public Health (CDPH), is the main Federal law that ensures the quality of drinking water.
Under SDWA, EPA sets standards for drinking water quality and oversees the states, localities,
and water suppliers who implement those standards.
Urban Water Management Planning Act. In 1983 the California Legislature enacted the
Urban Water Management Planning Act (Water Code Section 10610–10656). The Act states
that every urban water supplier that provides water to 3,000 or more customers, or that provides
over 3,000 acre-feet (AF) annually, should make every effort to ensure the appropriate level of
reliability in its water service sufficient to meet the needs of its various categories of customers
during normal, dry, and multiple dry years. The Act requires that urban water suppliers adopt an
urban water management plan (UWMP) at least once every five years and submit it to the
Department of Water Resources. Noncompliant urban water suppliers are ineligible to receive
funding pursuant to Division 24 or Division 26 of the California Water Code, or receive drought
assistance from the State, until the UWMP is submitted and deemed complete pursuant to the
Urban Water Management Planning Act.
Senate Bills 610 and 221, Water Supply Assessment and Verification. Senate Bills (SB)
610 and 221 amended State law to improve the link between the information on water supply
availability and certain land use decisions made by cities and counties. Both statutes require
detailed information regarding water availability (water supply assessment or WSA) to be
provided to city and county decision-makers prior to approval of specified large development
projects (projects greater than 500 dwelling units, or an equivalent water demand). Both statutes
require this detailed information to be included in the administrative record. Under SB 610,
WSAs must be furnished to local governments for inclusion in the environmental document for
certain projects, as defined in Water Code 10912, subject to the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA). Under SB 221, approval by a city or county of certain residential
subdivisions requires an affirmative written verification of sufficient water supply. General plans,
such as the City of Burlingame General Plan, do not require their own WSAs, but individual
future projects under the General Plan and subject to SB 610 and SB 221 will require WSAs.
Statewide Water Conservation Act of 2009 (Senate Bill X7-7). In November 2009, the
California State legislature passed, and the Governor approved, a comprehensive package of
water legislation, including Senate Bill (SB) X7-7 addressing water conservation. In general, SB
X7-7 requires a 20 percent reduction in per capita urban water use by 2020, with an interim 10
percent target in 2015. The legislation requires urban water users to develop consistent water
use targets and to use those targets in their UWMPs. SB X7-7 also requires certain agricultural
water suppliers to implement a variety of water conservation and management practices and to
submit Agricultural Water Management Plans.
Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency. The Bay Area Water Supply and
Conservation Agency (BAWSCA), of which Burlingame is a member agency, was created in
2003 to represent the interests of the 26 cities, water districts, a water company, and a
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 20. Utilities and Service Systems June 28, 2018 Page 20-4
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 20_Utilities_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
university that purchase water on a wholesale basis from SFPUC. The BAWSCA water
management objective is to ensure that a reliable, high-quality supply of water is available
where and when people within the BAWSCA service area need it. BAWSCA is developing the
Long-Term Reliable Water Supply Strategy to meet the projected water needs of its member
agencies and their customers through 2035 and to increase their water supply reliability under
normal and drought conditions.
(b) Wastewater Collection and Treatment
Clean Water Act. The Clean Water Act (CWA) is the cornerstone of surface water quality
protection in the United States. The statute employs a variety of regulatory and non-regulatory
tools to sharply reduce direct pollutant discharges into waterways, finance municipal wastewater
treatment facilities, and manage polluted runoff. The State Water Resources Control Board
(SWRCB) and the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) are responsible for ensuring
implementation and compliance with the provisions of the Federal CWA.
State Water Resources Control Board. The SWRCB, in coordination with nine RWQCBs,
performs functions related to water quality, including issuance and oversight of wastewater
discharge permits (e.g., NPDES), other programs regulating stormwater runoff, and
underground and above-ground storage tanks. The SWRCB has also issued statewide waste
discharge requirements for sanitary sewer systems, which include requirements for
development of a sewer system management plan (SSMP). The City of Burlingame Public
Works Department prepared its latest SSMP in June 2015. The current NPDES Permit
(#0037788) became effective on May 8, 2013.
Title 22 of California Code of Regulations. Title 22 regulates the use of reclaimed
wastewater. In most cases, only disinfected tertiary water may be used on food crops where
the recycled water would come into contact with the edible portion of the crop. Standards are
also prescribed for the use of treated wastewater for irrigation of parks, playgrounds,
landscaping, and other non-agricultural irrigation. Regulation of reclaimed water is governed by
the nine RWQCBs and the California Department of Public Health (CDPH).
(c) Solid Waste Disposal and Recycling
California Department of Resources, Recycling, and Recovery (CalRecycle; formerly the
California Integrated Waste Management Board). CalRecycle oversees, manages, and
monitors waste generated in California. It provides limited grants and loans to help California
cities, counties, businesses, and organizations meet the State waste reduction, reuse, and
recycling goals. It also provides funds to clean up solid waste disposal sites and co-disposal
sites, including facilities that accept hazardous waste substances and non-hazardous waste.
CalRecycle develops, manages, and enforces waste disposal and recycling regulations,
including AB 939 and SB 1016 (see below).
Assembly Bill 939. Assembly Bill 939 (AB 939) (Public Resources Code 41780) requires cities
and counties to prepare integrated waste management plans (IWMPs) and to divert 50 percent
of solid waste from landfills beginning in calendar year 2000 and each year thereafter. AB 939
also requires cities and counties to prepare Source Reduction and Recycling Elements (SRRE)
as part of the IWMP. These elements are designed to develop recycling services to achieve
diversion goals, stimulate local recycling in manufacturing, and stimulate the purchase of
recycled products.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 20. Utilities and Service Systems June 28, 2018 Page 20-5
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 20_Utilities_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Senate Bill 1016. Senate Bill (SB) 1016 requires that the 50 percent solid waste diversion
requirement established by AB 939 be expressed in pounds per person per day. SB 1016
changed the CalRecycle review process for each municipality’s IWMP. The CalRecycle Board
reviews a jurisdiction’s diversion rate compliance in accordance with a specified schedule.
Beginning January 1, 2018, the Board will be required to review a jurisdiction’s source reduction
and recycling element and hazardous waste element every two years.
20.2 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
This section describes potential impacts related to utilities and service systems that could result
from the General Plan, and discusses General Plan goals, policies, and implementation
programs that would avoid or reduce those potential impacts.
20.2.1 Significance Criteria
Based on the CEQA Guidelines, implementation of the City of Burlingame 2040 General Plan
would result in a significant impact related to utilities and service systems if it would:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control
Board;
b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater facilities, or expansion
of existing facilities, the construction of which would cause significant environmental
impacts;
c) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the planning area from existing
entitlements and resources, or result in a need for new or expanded water supply
entitlements;
d) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may
serve the planning area that it does not have adequate capacity to serve the planning
area’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments;
e) Be served by a landfill with insufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the planning
area’s solid waste disposal needs; or
f) Fail to comply with Federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid
waste.
20.2.2 Analysis Methodology
The methodology for evaluating potential environmental impacts related to utilities and service
systems followed this basic sequence:
1) The General Plan Existing Conditions Report was evaluated to identify existing
environmental conditions and problems related to utilities and service systems, including
the regulatory framework that applies to these issues.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 20. Utilities and Service Systems June 28, 2018 Page 20-6
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 20_Utilities_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
2) The CEQA Statute and Guidelines (2017), including Appendix G (Environmental
Checklist Form), were consulted to identify environmental impact topics and issues that
should be addressed in the program EIR. In part, this process resulted in the
significance criteria listed in subsection 20.2.1 above.
3) The General Plan Policy Document, including the associated development capacity
assumptions (see EIR Section 3.4), was analyzed to identify goals, policies,
implementation programs (“policies” for short), and potential outcomes that address the
significance criteria. This analysis resulted in two basic conclusions regarding policies
and outcomes: (a) many policies would avoid or reduce potential environmental impacts,
and (b) some policies or outcomes could result in new environmental impacts or
increase the severity of existing environmental problems.
4) For potential environmental impacts that would result from the 2040 General Plan,
mitigations were designed to avoid or reduce each impact to a less-than-significant level.
If implementation of all identified feasible mitigations cannot reduce the impact to a less-
than-significant level, then the impact is considered significant and unavoidable.
20.2.3 Environmental Impacts
Potential Impacts of Future Development under the 2040 General Plan
Future development within the planning area guided by the policies of the General Plan could
affect RWQCB treatment standards by increasing wastewater production. The Burlingame
WWTP has a total treatment capacity of 5.5 MGD (primary and secondary treatment), but the
current rate of wastewater treatment has remained constant at approximately 3.0 to 3.5 MGD,
which serves the population of about 30,000. Thus, the WWTP typically operates at rate that is
less than 70% of the plant’s capacity. The proposed General Plan projects a build-out
population of 38,778. Without expansion, the wastewater and treatment system would be
sufficient to provide for the projected 25% increase in the City’s population in 2040.
(Significance Criteria 20.2.1 [a, b, d])
Future development within the planning area could require expanded water and wastewater
facilities to meet the demand from anticipated population growth, including mainline or
backbone elements and local connections. Presently, no immediate changes to the system are
needed to meet the demands of immediate growth, as the water and wastewater master plans
anticipate growth consistent with the General Plan. To accommodate the level of long-term
development allowed by the General Plan, the City will continue to assess demand and to
update water and wastewater master plans as needed.
Expansion of water and wastewater facilities would be contingent upon the rate of growth and
deterioration of aging facilities. Thus, identifying the specific location of and timing for new
facilities is speculative at this time. Construction of new or expanded water and wastewater
treatment facilities could result in environmental impacts. Any future expansion of existing
facilities or construction of new facilities would be required to undergo environmental review
pursuant to CEQA. The review will either be conducted by project applicants for individual
projects or by the City for City-sponsored projects. Such impacts would be identified, along with
measures to mitigate any significant impacts, as part of the CEQA compliance process for future
project-specific planning actions. (Significance Criteria 20.2.1 [a, b, d])
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 20. Utilities and Service Systems June 28, 2018 Page 20-7
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 20_Utilities_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Future development within the planning area guided by the policies of the General Plan would
increase water demand in the planning area. The City's Public Works Department provides
water service to approximately 30,000 people through 9,000 service connections throughout the
City. According to the 2015 UWMP, the aggregate water storage volume is 2.94 MG. The
projected water demand for the City is 2,138 MG in 2040. Passive and active conservation
would reduce the water demand to 1,841 MG in 2040.
Burlingame purchases potable water from the SFPUC RWS to meet all its potable water
demands. In 2015, the City purchased approximately 3.5 MGD (1,283 MG per year). In the
future, Burlingame plans to continue to purchase wholesale water from the SFPUC RWS and
does not expect obtaining potable water from other sources. Water supplies from the RWS
through 2040 are projected to be equal to Burlingame’s individual supply guarantee (ISG) of
1,909 MG, which is its contractual entitlement to SFPUC wholesale water, which survives in
perpetuity. With continued water conservation and future expanded use of recycled water, the
ISG would meet the needs of the General Plan’s 2040 projected population of 38,778.
(Significance Criteria 20.2.1 [c])
The City will continue to implement a variety of solid waste reduction, recycling, and re-use
measures to meet its obligation under AB 939. These efforts will be coordinated with waste
management programs; therefore, future landfill diversion rates may improve. The policies and
programs of the General Plan would not interfere with implementation of existing solid waste
disposal regulations and would in fact support them. Under any circumstance, solid wastes must
be disposed of in accordance with Federal and State laws. (Significance Criteria 20.2.1 [e and
f])
How Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies Reduce Impacts
Table 20-1 is aligned with relevant Existing Regulations and General Plan policies that relate to
utilities and public services. Column 1 (Objective) lists each Regulation and General Plan goal,
policy, and implementation program (“policy” for short), organized by General Plan element, that
addresses the potential impact identified in Table 20-1. Column 2 is a summary of the regulation
and the text of the policy. Column 3 answers the question, “How does the regulation/policy
avoid or reduce the potential impact?” Column 4 identifies the applicable significance criteria
that is addressed by the regulation/policy.
The verbs in Column 3 are intended to be applied consistently. The verb “ensures” means that
the policy is sufficient to guarantee the result identified in the policy. The verb “helps” means
that the policy contributes to avoiding or reducing the identified potential impact; in many cases,
“helps” is used for a policy that can be applied to avoid or reduce a wide range of potential
impacts. The verb “implements” is used for General Plan implementation programs to indicate
that the program provides the details to put the associated policy into action.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 20. Utilities and Service Systems June 28, 2018 Page 20-8
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 20_Utilities_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 20-1: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Utilities and Public Services
Regulation/Policy Description of Regulation/Policy How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
Existing Regulations -- Water Supply and Distribution
California Safe
Drinking Water Act
Administered by EPA in
coordination with the California
Department of Public Health
(CDPH), is the main Federal law
that ensures the quality of drinking
water.
Helps track potential
need for new or
expanded safe drinking
water facilities.”
(b) Expansion of
facilities causing
construction
impacts
Urban Water
Management
Planning Act
In 1983 the California Legislature
enacted the Urban Water
Management Planning Act (Water
Code Section 10610–10656). The
Act states that every urban water
supplier that provides water to
3,000 or more customers, or that
provides over 3,000 acre-feet (AF)
annually, should make every effort
to ensure the appropriate level of
reliability in its water service
sufficient to meet the needs of its
various categories of customers
during normal, dry, and multiple
dry years.
Ensures water supply
planning, including
conservation strategies,
through an adopted plan
in accordance with State
law. Helps ensure
sufficient water supplies.
(b) Expansion of
facilities causing
construction
impacts
(c) Need for new
or expanded
water supply
Senate Bills 610
and 221, Water
Supply Assessment
and Verification
Senate Bills (SB) 610 and 221
amended State law to improve the
link between the information on
water supply availability and
certain land use decisions made
by cities and counties. Both
statutes require detailed
information regarding water
availability (water supply
assessment or WSA) to be
provided to city and county
decision-makers prior to approval
of specified large development
projects (projects greater than 500
dwelling units, or an equivalent
water demand).
Helps ensure sufficient
water supplies.
(c) Need for new
or expanded
water supply
Statewide Water
Conservation Act of
2009 (Senate Bill
X7-7)
In November 2009, the California
State legislature passed, and the
Governor approved, a
comprehensive package of water
legislation, including Senate Bill
(SB) X7-7 addressing water
conservation. In general SB X7-7
requires a 20 percent reduction in
per capita urban water use by
2020, with an interim 10 percent
target in 2015. The legislation
Helps ensure sufficient
water supplies.
(c) Need for new
or expanded
water supply
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 20. Utilities and Service Systems June 28, 2018 Page 20-9
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 20_Utilities_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
requires urban water users to
develop consistent water use
targets and to use those targets in
their UWMPs.
Bay Area Water
Supply and
Conservation
Agency
The Bay Area Water Supply and
Conservation Agency (BAWSCA),
of which Burlingame is a member
agency, was created in 2003 to
represent the interests of the 26
cities, water districts, a water
company, and a university that
purchase water on a wholesale
basis from SFPUC. The BAWSCA
water management objective is to
ensure that a reliable, high-quality
supply of water is available where
and when people within the
BAWSCA service area need it.
Helps ensure sufficient
water supplies.
(c) Need for new
or expanded
water supply
Existing Regulations – Wastewater Collection and Treatment
Clean Water Act The Clean Water Act (CWA) is the
cornerstone of surface water
quality protection in the United
States. The statute employs a
variety of regulatory and non-
regulatory tools to sharply reduce
direct pollutant discharges into
waterways, finance municipal
wastewater treatment facilities,
and manage polluted runoff. The
State Water Resources Control
Board (SWRCB) and the Regional
Water Quality Control Board
(RWQCB) are responsible for
ensuring implementation and
compliance with the provisions of
the Federal CWA.
Ensures that the Water
Pollution Control Facility
Master Plan is up-to-
date, effective, and
state-of-the-art.
Ensures that wastewater
discharge meets all pre-
treatment standards.
(a) Exceed
wastewater
treatment
requirements
(b) Expansion of
facilities causing
construction
impacts
(d) Inadequate
wastewater
treatment
capacity
State Water
Resources Control
Board (SWRCB)
The SWRCB, in coordination with
nine RWQCBs, performs functions
related to water quality, including
issuance and oversight of
wastewater discharge permits
(e.g., NPDES), other programs
regulating stormwater runoff, and
underground and above-ground
storage tanks. The SWRCB has
also issued statewide waste
discharge requirements for
sanitary sewer systems, which
include requirements for
development of a sewer system
management plan (SSMP).
Minimizes the risk, and
potential environmental
impacts, of wastewater
overflows.
Ensures that effluent
meets all wastewater
treatment requirements.
(a) Exceed
wastewater
treatment
requirements
(b) Expansion of
facilities causing
construction
impacts
(d) Inadequate
wastewater
treatment
capacity
Title 22 of
California Code of
Regulations
Title 22 regulates the use of
reclaimed wastewater. In most
cases, only disinfected tertiary
Minimizes the risk, and
potential environmental
impacts, of wastewater
(a) Exceed
wastewater
treatment
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 20. Utilities and Service Systems June 28, 2018 Page 20-10
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 20_Utilities_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
water may be used on food crops
where the recycled water would
come into contact with the edible
portion of the crop. Standards are
also prescribed for the use of
treated wastewater for irrigation of
parks, playgrounds, landscaping,
and other non-agricultural
irrigation. Regulation of reclaimed
water is governed by the nine
RWQCBs and the California
Department of Public Health
(CDPH).
overflows.
Ensures that effluent
meets all wastewater
treatment requirements.
requirements
(b) Expansion of
facilities causing
construction
impacts
(d) Inadequate
wastewater
treatment
capacity
Existing Regulations – Solid Waste Disposal and Recycling
California
Department of
Resources,
Recycling, and
Recovery
(CalRecycle)
CalRecycle oversees, manages,
and monitors waste generated in
California.
Supports solid waste
reduction, which reduces
the amount of waste that
enters landfills. Helps
ensure sufficient landfill
capacity.
Minimizes solid waste
and increases recycling,
which reduce the
amount of waste that
enters landfills. Helps
ensure sufficient landfill
capacity.
(e) Insufficient
landfill capacity
(f) Solid waste
regulation
noncompliance
Assembly Bill 939 Requires cities and counties to
prepare integrated waste
management plans (IWMPs) and
to divert 50 percent of solid waste
from landfills beginning in calendar
year 2000 and each year
thereafter. AB 939 also requires
cities and counties to prepare
Source Reduction and Recycling
Elements (SRRE) as part of the
IWMP.
Supports solid waste
reduction, which reduces
the amount of waste that
enters landfills. Helps
ensure sufficient landfill
capacity.
Minimizes solid waste
and increases recycling,
which reduce the
amount of waste that
enters landfills. Helps
ensure sufficient landfill
capacity.
(e) Insufficient
landfill capacity
(f) Solid waste
regulation
noncompliance
Senate Bill 1016 Requires that the 50 percent solid
waste diversion requirement
established by AB 939 be
expressed in pounds per person
per day.
Supports solid waste
reduction, which reduces
the amount of waste that
enters landfills. Helps
ensure sufficient landfill
capacity.
Minimizes solid waste
and increases recycling,
which reduce the
amount of waste that
enters landfills. Helps
ensure sufficient landfill
capacity.
(e) Insufficient
landfill capacity
(f) Solid waste
regulation
noncompliance
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 20. Utilities and Service Systems June 28, 2018 Page 20-11
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 20_Utilities_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
2040 General Plan Infrastructure – Water Delivery and Water Supply
Goal IF-2 Ensure the long-term availability of
water through conservation
methods and regular maintenance
and improvements to the overall
water supply delivery system.
Ensures sufficient water
supplies and adequate
operation of water
delivery infrastructure.
(b) Expansion of
facilities causing
construction
impacts
(c) Need for new
or expanded
water supply
IF-2.1: Water
System Reliability
Improve water system reliability by
replacing and repairing water lines
that are leaking or otherwise meet
the City’s criteria for replacement.
Ensures sufficient water
supplies and adequate
operation of water
delivery infrastructure.
(b) Expansion of
facilities causing
construction
impacts
(c) Need for new
or expanded
water supply
IF-2.3: New
Development
Ensure long-term water supply
capacity prior to granting building
permits for new development.
Require that new development
projects fund the full cost of
upgrading water storage and
supply infrastructure to meet their
specific needs.
Ensures adequate water
supply capacity prior to
new development.
Ensures adequate water
delivery infrastructure
(b) Expansion of
facilities causing
construction
impacts
(c) Need for new
or expanded
water supply
IF-2.4: Water
Agency
Participation
Continue to participate in the Bay
Area Water Supply and
Conservation Agency and
purchase water from the San
Francisco Public Utilities
Commission.
Ensures coordinated
water supply and
conservation planning.
Helps ensure sufficient
water supplies.
(c) Need for new
or expanded
water supply
IF-2.7: Water
Shortage Allocation
Plan
Prepare, maintain, and implement
a Water Shortage Allocation Plan
that distributes available water
from the regional water system
among San Francisco Public
Utilities Commission and
wholesale customers in the event
of a system-wide shortage of up to
20 percent.
Helps ensure adequate
water supplies during a
system-wide shortage.
(c) Need for new
or expanded
water supply
IF-2.10: Water
Conservation
Programs
Implement cost-effective
conservation strategies and
programs that increase water use
efficiency, including providing
incentives for adoption of water-
efficiency measures.
Implements water
conservation, which
helps ensure sufficient
water supplies.
(c) Need for new
or expanded
water supply
2040 General Plan Infrastructure – Wastewater Treatment and Distribution
Goal IF-3 Provide sufficient wastewater
collection and disposal
infrastructure to meet current and
future community needs.
Ensures adequate
wastewater treatment.
Requires construction of
new or expanded
facilities as needed.
(a) Exceed
wastewater
treatment
requirements
(b) Expansion of
facilities causing
construction
impacts
(d) Inadequate
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 20. Utilities and Service Systems June 28, 2018 Page 20-12
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 20_Utilities_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
wastewater
treatment
capacity
IF-3.1: Sewage
Collection System
Operate and maintain the sewage
collection system to minimize the
potential for system malfunction or
failure.
Minimizes the risk, and
potential environmental
impacts, of wastewater
overflows.
(b) Expansion of
facilities causing
construction
impacts
(d) Inadequate
wastewater
treatment
capacity
IF-3.2: Wastewater
Treatment Plant
Operations and
Maintenance
Operate and maintain the City’s
wastewater treatment plant to
ensure that wastewater discharge
meets all applicable federal and
regional permit provisions.
Ensures that the WPCF
meets wastewater
treatment requirements.
(a) Exceed
wastewater
treatment
requirements
(d) Inadequate
wastewater
treatment
capacity
IF-3.6: Service to
New Development
Requires new development
projects to fund the full cost of
upgrading sewage collection and
treatment infrastructure to meet
their specific needs.
Ensures that adequate
wastewater collection
and treatment services
for all new development
are available before
developments are
approved.
Ensures that needed
wastewater treatment
mitigation is funded by
the new development
responsible for the
impact.
(a) Exceed
wastewater
treatment
requirements
(b) Expansion of
facilities causing
construction
impacts
(d) Inadequate
wastewater
treatment
capacity
2040 General Plan Infrastructure – Solid Waste Disposal
Goal IF-5: Achieve waste reduction goals in
excess of State mandates.
Minimizes solid waste
and increases recycling,
which reduce the
amount of waste that
enters landfills. Helps
ensure sufficient landfill
capacity.
(e) Insufficient
landfill capacity
(f) Solid waste
regulation
noncompliance
IF-5.2: Landfill
Capacity
Coordinate with the City’s
contracted waste hauler/recycler to
ensure adequate landfill capacity
in the region exists for the contract
duration.
Helps ensure adequate
landfill capacity through
coordinated planning.
(e) Insufficient
landfill capacity
(f) Solid waste
regulation
noncompliance
IF-5.8: Regional
Coordination
Support regional efforts to develop
and implement effective waste
management strategies.
Ensures coordinated
inter-jurisdictional waste
management planning.
(e) Insufficient
landfill capacity
(f) Solid waste
regulation
noncompliance
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 20. Utilities and Service Systems June 28, 2018 Page 20-13
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 20_Utilities_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Conclusions
In most cases, no one goal, policy, or implementation measure is expected to completely avoid
or reduce an identified potential environmental impact. However, the collective, cumulative
mitigating benefits of the policies listed in Table 20-1 will result in a less-than-significant impact
related to the identified significance criterion and the corresponding utility. This conclusion is
consistent with the purpose and use of a program EIR for a general plan (see EIR Introduction,
Chapter 1).
Based on the methodology described above, 2040 General Plan impacts related to utilities and
service systems would be less than significant (see criteria [a] through [f] in subsection 20.2.1,
“Significance Criteria,” above). No mitigation is required.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 21. Alternatives June 28, 2018 Page 21-1
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 21_Alternatives_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
21. ALTERNATIVES
21.1 PURPOSE
Section 15126.6 of the CEQA Guidelines requires an EIR to "describe a range of reasonable
alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project, which would feasibly attain most of
the basic objectives of the project, but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant
effects of the project, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives.” The section also
states that the discussion of alternatives shall focus on alternatives to the project or its location
which can avoid or substantially lessen any significant effects of the project, even if those
alternatives would impede to some degree the attainment of the basic project objectives or
would be costlier.
Pursuant to Section 15126.6, this chapter describes three alternatives to the Burlingame 2040
General Plan, including the CEQA-mandated No Project Alternative, and compares the impacts
of each to those of the proposed General Plan. Pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines, the ability of
the alternatives to meet the basic project objectives is also described, and the “environmentally
superior” alternative among the three is identified.
21.2 RATIONALE FOR ALTERNATIVE SELECTION
In accordance with CEQA Guidelines section 15126.6(a), this EIR does not evaluate every
conceivable alternative. A feasible range of alternatives has been evaluated that will allow
decision-makers to make a reasoned choice and that meet most of the project objectives.
Relevant project objectives from section 3.4 of this EIR are:
Balanced and Smart Growth
Allow growth to occur in targeted areas where supportive physical and community
infrastructure are available or can readily be provided, and where such growth
contributes to the positive qualities and characteristics that define Burlingame.
Maintain a balance of ownership and rental housing, with opportunities for people of all
income ranges to live in Burlingame.
Base land use decisions on the ability of the multimodal transportation network to
support growth.
Ensure that new commercial, office, and industrial development can accommodate the
evolving nature of how buildings are used and business is conducted.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 21. Alternatives June 28, 2018 Page 21-2
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 21_Alternatives_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Connectivity
Ensure provision of a well-defined multimodal transportation network that
accommodates a range of travel choices and that connects Burlingame to the region.
Provide safe, convenient, and comfortable vehicular and pedestrian connections across
Highway 101, linking the Bayfront with the rest of the City.
Develop and maintain safe and easy-to-use bicycle and pedestrian travelways citywide,
with an emphasis on providing connections from neighborhoods to local schools, parks,
shopping, and entertainment.
Ensure the provision of “last-mile” connections from transit stations.
21.3 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
While selecting alternatives to be considered for analysis, the City focused on analyzing those
alternatives which could potentially reduce the significant unavoidable effects related to the
project and which would also achieve project objectives, including the key objective of ensuring
provision of a well-defined multimodal transportation network that accommodates a range of
travel choices and that connects Burlingame to the region. Since the DEIR analysis has not
identified any significant adverse impacts, no specific alternatives are needed to reduce adverse
impacts. As a result, only three alternatives are addressed:
Alternative 1: No Project--Existing General Plan
Alternative 2: Higher Development Density and Intensity in North Burlingame (120
du/acre to 140 du/acre)
Alternative 3: No Live/Work Designation in the Northerly One-third of the Rollins Road
Corridor
In accordance with CEQA Guidelines section 15126.6(d), the discussion in this chapter of the
impacts of the alternatives is less detailed than the discussions in chapters 5 through 20 of the
impacts of the 2040 General Plan. Table 21-1 summarizes impacts of the alternatives compared
to impacts of the proposed General Plan.
21.3.1 ALTERNATIVE 1: NO PROJECT--EXISTING GENERAL PLAN (1969, 1975, 1981)
Principal Characteristics
Alternative 1 consists of buildout of the Planning Area in accordance with the existing
Burlingame General Plan. The existing General Plan consists of elements that were adopted in
1969, with focused updates in 1975 and 1981. (Th Housing Element, which is not included in th
current proposed update, has been regularly updated as required by law.) In addition, three
Specific Plans have been adopted to implement the General Plan: Downtown (adopted 2010),
North Burlingame/Rollins Road (adopted 2004, amended 2007), and Bayfront (adopted 2004,
amended 2006 and 2012). Because much of the existing General Plan is over 40 years old and
contains little information about build out and land use intensities, Alternative 1 largely
represents the existing land use condition in Burlingame. Table 21-1 provides the existing
developed acres for residential, office, commercial, industrial, hotel, and institutional land uses.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 21. Alternatives June 28, 2018 Page 21-3
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 21_Alternatives_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Table 21-1: Existing Developed and Proposed Build-Out Summary
Dwelling Units
Nonresidential Development
(in 1,000 Square Feet) Pop. Emp.
SFR MFR Office Comm’l Ind’l Hotel Inst’l
Existing
Land Use 6,873 6,241 3,882 2,275 3,723 3,192 2,555 29,724 29,879
Proposed
Land Use 6,921 9,144 4,749 3,035 4,293 3,208 1,976 36,493 39,610
Change +48 +2,903 +867 +760 +570 +16 -579 +6,769 +9,731
Percent
Change 0.1% +32% +18% +25% +13% +0.1% -29% +19% +25%
Source: City of Burlingame, MIG and Hexagon Transportation Consultants, July 2017
Comparing data for existing conditions to 2040 General Plan build out, the comparison shows
that the 2040 General Plan would add 48 single family dwelling units (mostly along El Camino
Real) and 2,903 multi-family dwelling units, approximately 1,300,000 square feet of
office/commercial uses, and 570,000 square feet of industrial use. The potential increase in
employment is 9,731 jobs.
As indicated in Table 21-2, the proposed 2040 General Plan does not significantly alter existing
land use designations but creates more mixed-use options in areas designated for commercial
and industrial use in the current General Plan, including California Drive, Broadway, North
Burlingame, and North Rollins Road. The mixed-use designation allows multi-family dwellings to
be built close to shopping and regional transportation. The 2040 General Plan focuses on new
and revised policies and implementation programs, consistent with regional forecasts and
recently adopted City plans and initiatives, as described in chapter 3 (Project Description) of this
EIR.
Table 21-2: Existing and Future Land Use (in acres)
Land Use Type
Existing Land Use
Future Land Use
Existing 2040 General Plan
Community/School
Public/Institutional/Parks
265.6 268.88
High Density Residential 35.3 16.93
Industrial & Office Use
Innovative Industrial + Live/Work
299.9 286.34
Low Density Residential 1,130.5 1,140.33
Medium Density Residential 49.9 49.9
Medium High Density 117.4 97.20
Preserve 97.6 97.6
Restaurants 28.8 Mixed use/downtown
Sales & Special Service 33.8 Mixed use/downtown
Shopping & Service 59.2 Mixed use/downtown
Waterfront Commercial + hotel/motel + office use
Bayfront Commercial
201.7 179.04
Mixed Use (Broadway, California, North Burlingame) 54.18
Downtown Specific Plan 130.22
Total 2,320.00 2,320.00
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 21. Alternatives June 28, 2018 Page 21-4
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 21_Alternatives_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Comparative Impacts and Mitigating Effects
(a) Aesthetics and Visual Resources. With updated policies related to the design of new
development, an emphasis on enhanced visual character, identity, and cohesion, and
more emphasis on a pedestrian-, bicycle-, and transit-friendly community, the proposed
project would have positive impacts on aesthetics compared to No Project.
(b) Agricultural Resources. Since no agricultural resources exist in the Planning Area, the No
Project alternative would have no impacts to these resources.
(c) Air Quality. Because Alternative 1 would result less development, it would result in lower
air pollutant emissions and fewer sensitive receptors exposed to toxic air contaminants
(TACs), PM2.5, and odors. However, under the 2040 General Plan, regulations and policies
related to air quality would be implemented for any new projects built in the city. With
implementation of existing regulation and policies of the 2040 General Plan, impacts on air
quality would be less than significant.
(d) Biological Resources. Since the Planning Area is largely built out and contains an
insignificant area of undeveloped land, there are no areas of new development that could
significantly impact areas of sensitive biological resources. Areas that do support plant an
animal resources are designated for open space uses. Additionally, regulations and
policies related to projection of biological resources would be implemented for any new
projects built. Therefore, the impacts on biological resources would be similar under the
proposed project as it would with No Project.
(e) Geology, Soils, and Minerals. Since the Planning Area is already built out and contains an
insignificant area of undeveloped land, no areas of new development would be exposed to
geologic hazards, landslides, liquefaction, etc., nor would create soil erosion issues. With
no minerals currently being mined, potential impacts on mineral resources would be
similar.
(f) Global Climate Change and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions. Alternative 1 would result
in reduced GHG emissions compared to the 2040 General Plan since less development
would result. The proposed 2040 General Plan would result in GHG emissions that could
exceed the 2030 and 2040 GHG emission targets necessary to fully demonstrate progress
and consistency with long-term state GHG reduction goals, even after inclusion of all
policies contained within the General Plan. As a result, the existing General Plan would
have less impact on GHG than the Proposed Project. However, under the No Project
Alternative, the City would still have to demonstrate progress and consistency with long-
term state GHG reduction goals. The No Project Alternative would not reduce significant
unavoidable GHG impacts. The mitigation measure in this EIR that directs an update of
the City’s Climate Action Plan would apply to both the Proposed Project and the No
Project Alternative.
(g) Hazards and Hazardous Materials. With the application of State and Federal regulations
regarding the control of hazardous materials, under both the Proposed Project and No
Project alternatives, existing regulations would ensure that residents and local employees
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 21. Alternatives June 28, 2018 Page 21-5
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 21_Alternatives_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
would not be impacted by hazardous wastes or materials, including transport and existing
waste sites.
(h) Historic and Cultural Resources. Continued development under the existing General Plan
could have greater physical impacts on historic and cultural resources compared to the
2040 General Plan because the existing General Plan does not well address resource
protection. The updated Plan includes policies and implementation programs that
strengthen the City’s commitment to proactive historic resource preservation (see chapter
12 tables).
(i) Hydrology and Water Quality. Alternative 1 could have greater impacts on drainage and
water quality compared to the 2040 General Plan. From an engineering standpoint,
surface runoff is determined by a parcel's impervious surface area and not by land use or
density. Under the existing General Plan, the potential exists for fewer infrastructure
improvements associated with new development, with more of the existing drainage
system deficiencies remaining in place. Proactive sustainability policies in the 2040
General Plan (e.g., for on-site stormwater retention and natural filtering) would not be
implemented as extensively (see chapter 13 tables). With fewer infrastructure
improvements and fewer sustainability practices, occupants and buildings within the
Planning Area could be exposed to greater flooding risks.
(j) Land Use and Planning. The proposed 2040 General Plan includes numerous policies to
ensure that new development would be compatible and integrated with the established
land use pattern, and their implementation would be an additional benefit to land use and
planning compared to the existing General Plan (see chapter 14 tables).
(k) Noise. The noise analysis addressed in Chapter 15 found that under 2040 General Plan
Buildout, noise levels on one roadway segment, caused by increased traffic on the
roadways, would increase such that adjacent residences would experience significant
unavoidable noise impacts. The roadway segment is on Broadway between El Camino
Real and Bernal Avenue. Since there is no change in land use or zoning along the road
segment, the increase in traffic noise is not necessarily associated with the General Plan
buildout on the roadway segment, rather it is caused by a combination of regional and
local growth that results in that segment being easy access to new residential
development in the hillside neighborhood west of the road segment. This roadway
segment is particularly sensitive to traffic noise because it is predominantly a residential
roadway.
As a result, under the No Project Alternative, the impacted roadway segment would still
have the potential to experience increased traffic volumes that would cause a concurrent
increase in traffic noise. The No Project Alternative would not reduce significant
unavoidable noise impacts due to traffic.
(l) Population and Housing. The proposed project provides for additional multi-family
residences to be constructed, which helps meet regional housing needs in the Bay Area.
This is a more positive impact compared to the housing that would be generated from the
existing General Plan.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 21. Alternatives June 28, 2018 Page 21-6
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 21_Alternatives_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
(m) Public Services. Although the Proposed Project would increase development of multi-
family residences which requires expanded fire protection/emergency medical service,
police protection, public schools, libraries, and parks and recreation compared to the
existing General Plan. However, through impact fees and increased tax revenues, future
development would pay for the additional public services needed to serve development
under the 2040 General Plan.
(n) Transportation and Circulation. For the No Project alternative, trip generation and traffic
impacts from new development within the Planning Area would be less compared to the
2040 General Plan due to the lower level of development. The transportation and
circulation impacts of this alternative compared to the 2040 General Plan are evaluated in
chapter 18 (Transportation and Circulation). Buildout under the existing General Plan
would avoid the significant impacts of the 2040 General Plan at one study intersection
(see Table 18.5 in chapter 18). However, with mitigation, the impact at the California
Avenue and Broadway intersection would be mitigated to less than significant.
(o) Utilities and Service Systems. This alternative would result in reduced water demand,
wastewater generation, and solid waste compared to the 2040 General Plan. However,
the EIR analysis did not find any significant impacts related to the ability of existing service
providers to serve development under the 2040 General Plan. Additionally, the 2040
General Plan includes policies that require conservation measures to reduce the
consumption of gas, electricity, water, and to reduce waste going to landfills.
Attainment of Project Objectives
With fewer housing units, fewer employment opportunities, and more auto-oriented
development, Alternative 1: No Project--Existing General Plan would be less effective in
achieving the project objectives (listed at the beginning of this chapter) than the proposed
project.
21.3.2 ALTERNATIVE 2: HIGHER DEVELOPMENT DENSITY AND INTENSITY IN NORTH
BURLINGAME (120 DU/ACRE TO 140 DU/ACRE)
Principal Characteristics
Alternative 2 assumes adoption of a similar 2040 General Plan, but with increased density
allowed in the North Burlingame focus area. Under this alternative, the North Burlingame Mixed
Use (NBMU) designation would allow densities up to 140 units/acre, an increase of 20
units/acre relative to the proposed plan. The office FAR would remain at 2.0 and the commercial
FAR at 1.0.
The density increase would allow the development of 86 more multi-family units in the North
Burlingame area, bringing the capacity up to 701 units from 615 units.
The higher density is still consistent with City goas of creating a high-intensity development
node within walking distance of the Millbrae multimodal transit station. Permitted uses would still
include retail, service commercial, dining establishments, offices, and high-density residential.
Development could occur as mixed-use projects or single-purpose buildings, provided the node
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 21. Alternatives June 28, 2018 Page 21-7
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 21_Alternatives_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
includes a mix of uses. The design, scale, and massing of new buildings would still be required
to be sensitive to adjacent lower-intensity residential neighborhoods.
Comparative Impacts and Mitigating Effects
(a) Aesthetics and Visual Resources. Alternative 2 would have similar impacts to the 2040
General Plan with respect to aesthetics and visual resources since the scale of
development would be similar (e.g., multi-story).
(b) Agricultural Resources. As with the project alternative, this alternative would have no
impacts on agricultural resources since none exist in Burlingame.
(c) Air Quality. Alternative 2 would have similar impacts on air quality to the 2040 General
Plan because it only slightly increases residential development potential.
(d) Biological Resources. Since the area of developed land would not change under this
alternative, biological impacts of Alternative 2 would be similar to the Proposed Project.
(e) Geology and Soils. Since no proposed 2040 General Plan policies to relative to geology
and soil resources would be eliminated under this alternative, potential impacts regarding
geology and soil resources would be similar to the Proposed Project.
(f) Global Climate Change and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions. As with the Proposed
Project, Alternative 2 would result in GHG emissions that could exceed the 2030 and 2040
GHG emission targets necessary to fully demonstrate progress and consistency with long-
term state GHG reduction goals, even after inclusion of all policies contained within the
General Plan. Impacts would be similar to the Proposed Project.
(g) Hazards and Hazardous Materials. Since no proposed 2040 General Plan policies related
to hazards and hazardous materials would be eliminated under this alternative, potential
impacts regarding hazards and hazardous materials on would be similar to the Proposed
Project.
(h) Historic and Cultural Resources. Since no proposed 2040 General Plan policies related to
historic and cultural resources would be eliminated, potential impacts on historic and
cultural resources would be similar to the Proposed Project. Also, the mitigation measure
proposed to ensure that paleontological resources are not impacted by development under
the 2040 General Plan would apply to Alternative 2.
(i) Hydrology and Water Quality. Alternative 2 would have similar impacts on drainage and
water quality compared to the 2040 General Plan. From an engineering standpoint,
surface runoff is determined by a parcel's impervious surface area and not by land use or
density. Even with slightly more development, there would be limited change relative to
2040 General Plan conditions since the Alternative affects a limited area and the density
increase is small. In addition, the proactive sustainability policies in the 2040 General Plan
(e.g., for on-site stormwater retention and natural filtering) would continue to be
implemented (see chapter 13 tables).
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 21. Alternatives June 28, 2018 Page 21-8
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 21_Alternatives_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
(j) Land Use and Planning. Both Alternative 2 and the proposed 2040 General Plan include
numerous policies to ensure that new development be compatible and integrated with the
established land use pattern. Impact would be similar and less than significant.
(k) Noise. Buildout under this alternative would result in similar noise generation as under the
2040 General Plan due to the minor increase in dwelling units provided by this alternative.
This alternative would not reduce traffic noise impacts on the segment of Broadway
between El Camino and Bernal Avenue.
(l) Population and Housing. Alternative 2 would increase the City’s projected population by
237 residents (86 units at 2.75 persons per unit). The higher density units would allow up
to 86 additional housing units to be built in the North Burlingame focus area. This would
provide a slight increase in options for housing.
(m) Public Services. This alternative would result in similar impacts on fire
protection/emergency medical service, police protection, public schools, libraries, and
parks and recreation compared to the 2040 General Plan since the increase in residential
yield would be only 86 units.
(n) Transportation and Circulation. For this alternative, trip generation and traffic impacts from
new development within the Planning Area would be similar to the 2040 General Plan
because it since the alternative would add only 86 more multi-family dwelling units, and at
a location that encourages transit use. Alternative 2 would also implement the substantial
improvements proposed by the 2040 General Plan to bicycle, pedestrian, and transit
circulation and connectivity (see chapter 18 tables).
(o) Utilities and Service Systems. This alternative would result in similar water demand,
wastewater generation, and solid waste generation compared to the 2040 General Plan
given the similar build-out numbers citywide.
Attainment of Project Objectives
Alternative 2 would allow the development of 86 more multi-family units in the North Burlingame
area, bringing the capacity up to 701 units from 615 units. The increase in multi-family would
strengthen the City’s stand on meeting the following project objective to “maintain a balance of
ownership and rental housing, with opportunities for people of all income ranges to live in
Burlingame.”
21.3.3 ALTERNATIVE 3: NO LIVE/WORK DESIGNATION IN THE NORTHERLY ONE-THIRD
OF THE ROLLINS ROAD CORRIDOR
Principal Characteristics
Alternative 3 would remove the Live/Work designation from the General Plan that applies to the
northerly one-third of the Rollins Road Corridor. Instead, the designation would be Innovation
Industrial, at a maximum FAR of 0.75 for commercial and industrial uses and 3.0 for hospitality
uses.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 21. Alternatives June 28, 2018 Page 21-9
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 21_Alternatives_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
Removal of the Live/Work designation would eliminate the potential for 480 residential units in
this area, or about 17% of the total additional multi-family units projected citywide under
proposed General Plan land use policy. The Live/Work units are envisioned as providing
housing for people who run their own small businesses, such as artists, designers, and small
wholesale businesses, among others. Removal of the Live/Work designation would reduce the
number of potential new residents in close proximity to the Millbrae multi-model transit station.
Under the Innovative Industrial designation, permitted uses would include light industrial and
warehouse, limited commercial uses, creative industry businesses, design businesses, indoor
sports and recreation, and wholesale uses.
Comparative Impacts and Mitigating Effects
(a) Aesthetics and Visual Resources. Alternative 3 would have similar impacts to the 2040
General Plan with respect to aesthetics and visual resources since the scale of
development would be similar to that existing in the North Rollins Road area today.
(b) Agricultural Resources. Because the North Rollins Road area has no agricultural
resources, this alternative, like the Proposed Project, would have no impacts on
agricultural resources.
(c) Air Quality. Alternative 3 could have slightly reduced impacts on air quality due to the
reduced level of development and associated vehicle trips.
(d) Biological Resources. Because the North Rollins Road area has no biological resources,
this alternative, like the Proposed Project, would have no impacts on biological resources.
(e) Geology and Soils. Alternative 3 would result in new construction in the same area as the
Proposed Project and would be subject to the same development approaches to avoid
exposure to geologic hazards and soil erosion. Impacts would be the same.
(f) Global Climate Change and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions. As with the Proposed
Project, Alternative 3 would result in GHG emissions that could exceed the 2030 and 2040
GHG emission targets necessary to fully demonstrate progress and consistency with long-
term State GHG reduction goals, even after inclusion of all policies contained within the
General Plan.
(g) Hazards and Hazardous Materials. Since no proposed 2040 General Plan policies related
to hazards and hazardous materials would be eliminated under this alternative, potential
impacts would be similar to the Proposed Project.
(h) Historic and Cultural Resources. Since no proposed 2040 General Plan policies related to
historic and cultural resources would be eliminated, potential impacts on historic and
cultural resources would be similar to the Proposed Project. Alternative 3 would also not
eliminate the mitigation measure provided to avoid impacts on paleontological resources
under the 2040 General Plan.
(i) Hydrology and Water Quality. Alternative 3 would have similar impacts on drainage and
water quality compared to the 2040 General Plan since, from an engineering standpoint,
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 21. Alternatives June 28, 2018 Page 21-10
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 21_Alternatives_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
surface runoff is determined by a parcel's impervious surface area and not by land use or
density. In addition, the proactive sustainability policies in the 2040 General Plan (e.g., for
on-site stormwater retention and natural filtering) would continue to be implemented (see
chapter 13 tables).
(j) Land Use and Planning. Both Alternative 3 and the proposed 2040 General Plan include
numerous policies to ensure that new development would be compatible and integrated
with the established land use pattern, and their implementation would be an additional
benefit to land use and planning over existing conditions (see chapter 14 tables).
Alternative 3 would continue the existing types and patterns of development within the
entire Rollins Road planning area.
(k) Noise. Buildout under this alternative could result in higher noise levels at specific
locations due to industrial activity and associated truck traffic. This alternative would not
reduce traffic noise impacts on the segment of Broadway between El Camino and Bernal
Avenue.
(l) Population and Housing. Alternative 3 would decrease the projected 2040 population by
816 persons (assuming 1.7 persons per household for live\work units). It would also
decrease the projected potential number of multi-family by 480 units, or 17% of the total
increase in multi-family units accommodated by the updated General Plan (2,903 units
less 480 equals 2,423). The reduced number of multi-family units is still consistent with the
needs addressed in the Housing Element (see chapter 16).
(m) Public Services. Alternative 3 would result in similar impacts on fire protection/emergency
medical service, and police protection since new development would need to be served.
Impacts on schools, library services, and parks and recreation would be reduced since no
new residential units would be produced in the North Rollins Road area.
(n) Transportation and Circulation. For this alternative, trip generation and traffic impacts from
new development within the Planning Area would be similar to the 2040 General Plan
because new industrial and commercial development would still be anticipated.
Alternative 3 would also implement the substantial improvements proposed by the 2040
General Plan to bicycle, pedestrian, and transit circulation and connectivity (see chapter
18 tables).
(o) Utilities and Service Systems. This alternative would result in similar water demand,
wastewater generation, and solid waste generation compared to the 2040 General Plan
since new commercial and industrial development would use these services.
Attainment of Project Objectives
Alternative 3 would reduce the potential number of new multi-family units in Burlingame by 480
and would not create new living opportunities in an area close to the Millbrae multi-model transit
station. In this respect, the alternative would not support the project objective to “base land use
decisions on the ability of the multimodal transportation network to support growth.” Further it
would reduce the number of units that could help the City meet the objective to “maintain a
balance of ownership and rental housing, with opportunities for people of all income ranges to
live in Burlingame.”
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 21. Alternatives June 28, 2018 Page 21-11
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-26-2018\Chapter 21_Alternatives_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-2018.doc
21.4 ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE
The CEQA Guidelines (section 15126[e][2]) stipulate, "If the environmentally superior alternative
is the 'no project' alternative, the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative
among the other alternatives."
The Proposed Project would result in a significant, unavoidable noise impact on Broadway
between El Camino Real and Bernal Avenue due to the roadway providing access to new
residential units in the hillside neighborhood west of the road segment. None of the three
alternatives analyzed would substantially reduce vehicle trips along this roadway and thus
would not eliminate these significant, unavoidable impacts.
Additionally, the project would result in significant, unavoidable impacts related to the increase
in greenhouse emissions from future development and from the General Plan Update being
inconsistent with the 2017 Scoping Plan Update, the 2017 Clean Air Plan and the Plan Bay
Area 2040 as they related to reducing GHG emissions. This is due to the City not being able to
conclusively demonstrate that implementation of the Burlingame 2040 General Plan, including
Policy CC-1.1, would not generate GHG emissions that exceed the City’s existing Year 2020
and future Year 2030 and Year 2040 GHG reduction goals. None of the project alternatives
would eliminate these significant, unavoidable impacts.
Since the proposed project and Alternatives 2 and 3 have the same impact levels and none
would reduce significant unavoidable impacts, the proposed project is considered the superior
alternative as it meets all project objectives and is the blueprint that was generated through
significant research on land use trends, a series of public workshops generating a lot of public
input, and with significant input from the Planning Commission and City Council.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 22. CEQA-Mandated Section June 28, 2018 Page 22-1
22. CEQA MANDATED COMPONENTS
This chapter summarizes the EIR findings in terms of the various assessment categories
suggested by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines for EIR content. The
findings of this EIR are summarized below in terms of project-related potential cumulative
impacts, growth-inducing effects, significant unavoidable impacts, irreversible environmental
changes, effects not found to be significant, and energy conservation.
22.1 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Section 15130(a) of the CEQA Guidelines requires that the EIR "discuss cumulative impacts of
a project when the project's incremental effect is cumulatively considerable...." The CEQA
Guidelines (section 15355) define "cumulative impacts" as "...two or more individual effects
which, when considered together, are considerable or which compound or increase other
environmental impacts."
The cumulative growth recognized in this EIR is the ABAG housing, population, and
employment projections, as well as regional traffic model forecasts, incorporated into the San
Mateo County Transportation Commission (CTC) Countywide Model (see EIR Chapter 3,
Project Description; and Chapter 18, Transportation and Circulation). Therefore, analyses of
cumulative impacts in this EIR are based on the “summary of projections” method, rather than
the “list of projects” method, as authorized by section 15130(b)(1)(B) of the CEQA Guidelines.
The proposed City of Burlingame 2040 General Plan is itself a cumulative project because the
plan would be implemented across the entire Planning Area incrementally and cumulatively over
many years (the horizon year of the General Plan is 2040). This program EIR evaluates the
2040 General Plan as one “project” in accordance with CEQA (see EIR Chapter 1, Introduction).
All potentially significant cumulative impacts are addressed in this chapter with the following
exceptions. Cumulative transportation impacts are analyzed in Chapter 18 (Transportation and
Circulation), using projections from the CTC Countywide Model. In addition, since the effects of
global climate change are the result of GHG emissions worldwide, individual projects do not
generate enough GHG emissions to influence global climate change. Thus, the analysis of GHG
emissions is by nature a cumulative analysis focused on whether an individual project’s
contribution to global climate change is cumulatively considerable. Accordingly, the GHG
analyses in Chapter 10 (Greenhouse Gas Emissions) is a cumulative impact analysis.
Additional cumulative effects are discussed below.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 22. CEQA-Mandated Section June 28, 2018 Page 22-2
22.1.1 Cumulative Aesthetic and Visual Resources Impacts
Impacts on aesthetics are localized impacts, and there are no significant impacts on aesthetics
and visual resources identified with 2040 General Plan implementation (see EIR Chapter 5--
Aesthetics and Visual Resources). Accordingly, the proposed project would not make a
cumulatively considerable contribution to any significant cumulative impact with respect to
aesthetics.
Mitigation. No cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact has
been identified; no mitigation is required.
22.1.2 Cumulative Agricultural Resources Impacts
The City of Burlingame is an almost fully developed, urbanized area that does not contain any
areas zoned or designated solely for commercial agriculture or forestry resources; therefore,
there are no potential impacts from future development under the 2040 General Plan. No
cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact would result.
Mitigation. No cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact has
been identified; no mitigation is required.
22.1.4 Cumulative Air Quality Impacts
As discussed in Chapter 7, the implementation of the Burlingame 2040 General Plan would be
consistent with the BAAQMD 2017 Clean Air Plan and would not result in increases in VMT that
would exceed estimated population growth. In addition, the General Plan would not result in
significant community risk and hazard impacts, or significant odor impacts. The BAAQMD’s
CEQA Air Quality Guidelines do not contain plan-level guidance for evaluating cumulative
impacts; however, the proposed project is consistent with the 2017 Clean Air Plan, and the
Clean Air Plan outlines the means by which the BAAQMD would attain air quality standards
over the long-term, as well as eliminate disparities in health risks in the San Francisco Bay
Area. No cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact would result.
Mitigation. No cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact has
been identified; no mitigation is required.
22.1.5 Cumulative Biological Resources Impacts
Because Burlingame has been largely urbanized for many years, important biological resources
are almost entirely associated with existing undeveloped areas of the City. Most of these are
protected from future development by existing land use designations: parks and open space
areas, creek corridors, lagoons, bay and estuaries, and areas of undevelopable topography or
where geologic or other hazards exist. The 2040 General Plan includes an extensive array of
coordinated policies and implementation programs to protect biological resources (see EIR
Chapter 8--Biological Resources). These policies support and expand protections beyond those
that are already in place, including Federal, State, and regional plans and regulations. No
cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact would result.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 22. CEQA-Mandated Section June 28, 2018 Page 22-3
Mitigation. No cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact has
been identified; no mitigation is required.
22.1.6 Cumulative Geology, Soils, and Minerals Impacts
The proposed General Plan’s impacts with respect to geology, soils, and minerals would be site-
specific and would not combine with the equally site-specific impacts of other projects outside
the Planning Area. Although it might be possible for two adjacent improperly constructed
projects to cumulatively affect a third facility (e.g., an underground utility line), the
implementation of adopted City regulations would not permit such improper construction.
Mitigation. No cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact has
been identified; no mitigation is required.
22.1.7 Cumulative Hazards and Hazardous Materials Impacts
Because of the applicable laws, standard policies, and General Plan policies and
implementation programs described in EIR Chapter 11 (Hazards and Hazardous Materials), the
proposed General Plan would create very little risk from hazards and hazardous materials. For
all potential exposure pathways other than transport of hazardous waste, the area of potential
impact would be limited to a particular development site and its immediate vicinity. No
significant cumulative impact is anticipated. With respect to hazardous waste facilities outside
Burlingame that would accept waste from the Planning Area, those facilities are subject to their
own safety and environmental regulations, and the amounts of waste that those facilities would
receive from the Planning Area would be too limited and too intermittent to represent a
cumulatively considerable contribution to any cumulative impact.
Mitigation. No cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact has
been identified; no mitigation is required.
22.1.8 Cumulative Historic and Cultural Resources Impacts
If the City determines that one or more historic or cultural resources exist on any future
development site, impacts on those resources would be avoided or reduced by complying with
existing regulations and by implementing the policies and implementation programs of the
proposed General Plan (see EIR Chapter 12--Historic and Cultural Resources). No
cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact would result.
Mitigation. No cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact has
been identified; no mitigation is required.
22.1.9 Cumulative Hydrology and Water Quality Impacts
The proposed General Plan includes numerous policies and implementation programs to
improve hydrology and water quality (see EIR Chapter 13--Hydrology and Water Quality).
Therefore, the proposed project would not contribute to any significant cumulative flooding
impact. Individual development projects could potentially cause soil erosion, contaminant spills,
and long-term water quality effects, but would be subject to universally applied regulatory
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 22. CEQA-Mandated Section June 28, 2018 Page 22-4
requirements. Compliance with these requirements would ensure that any cumulative impacts
would be less than significant.
Mitigation. No cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact has
been identified; no mitigation is required.
22.1.10 Cumulative Land Use and Planning Impacts
The proposed project would not make a cumulative considerable contribution to any significant
cumulative land use impact, for the following reasons. First, with respect to physically dividing
an established community, the proposed project’s effect would be positive rather than negative
because the project would create greater public connectivity than currently exists in the
Planning Area, especially in downtown Burlingame, North Burlingame and the Bayfront.
Second, with respect to consistency with adopted land use plans and policies, the proposed
project is based upon, and consistent with, regional and local plans as discussed in Chapter 14
(Land Use and Planning) of this EIR. Because the City could not approve individual projects
that were inconsistent with adopted City plans and policies, no significant cumulative impact
would occur. Accordingly, the proposed project would not make a cumulatively considerable
contribution to any significant cumulative land use or planning impact.
Mitigation. No cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact has
been identified; no mitigation is required.
22.1.11 Cumulative Noise Impacts
Implementation of the General Plan would result in construction noise and vibration as individual
development projects are constructed over time. Each individual development would be subject
to City regulations and policies regarding construction noise and vibration (see Chapter 15).
These policies establish the overall goal and intent of the City to protect residents from
excessive construction noise and vibration and require the appropriate evaluation of
construction noise and vibration impacts at sensitive receptor locations and the implementation
of feasible construction noise and vibration control measures when development occurs near
noise-sensitive land uses. Therefore, construction noise would not make a cumulatively
considerable contribution to a significant cumulative construction noise impact.
Implementation of the General Plan would also result in long-term increases in traffic and
stationary source noise levels, as well as the potential exposure of new, noise sensitive
receptors to noise effects from traffic, rail, airport, and commercial and industrial noise sources.
Each individual development project would be subject to City regulations and policies that limit
and control noise generation and exposure from these noise sources and render potential
cumulative increases in noise levels a less than significant impact in most areas of the City;
however, increases in traffic under General Plan build-out conditions would significantly
increase noise levels on one segment of Broadway (between El Camino Real and Bernal
Avenue). As this impact (Impact NOI-3) occurs under Year 2040 build-out conditions, it is
considered a cumulatively significant and unavoidable impact.
Mitigation. As described in Chapter 15, the General Plan contains a number of policies that
have the potential to reduce vehicle trips on the City’s roadway system and associated traffic
noise levels; however, cumulative noise increases on Broadway (between El Camino Real and
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 22. CEQA-Mandated Section June 28, 2018 Page 22-5
Bernal) would remain significant and unavoidable. No additional mitigation is feasible for this
impact.
22.1.12 Cumulative Population and Housing Impacts
The proposed 2040 General Plan is based upon ABAG population, housing, and employment
projections. This EIR concludes that, with the policies and programs included in the 2040
General Plan, the impacts of this growth would be less than significant (see EIR Chapter 16--
Population and Housing). Because the proposed project would not displace residents or
housing, the proposed project would not contribute to a displacement impact. The proposed
project would not make a cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative
population, housing, or employment impact.
Mitigation. No cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact has
been identified; no mitigation is required.
22.1.13 Cumulative Public Services Impacts -- Fire Protection/Emergency Medical
Service (EMS)
Implementation of the proposed General Plan would increase the demand for fire
protection/EMS, including additional firefighters and requisite training, support staff, equipment,
or other resources over time. The General Plan includes numerous policies and implementation
programs to improve fire protection/EMS (see EIR Chapter 17--Public Services). Therefore,
cumulative development would have a less-than-significant impact on these services.
Mitigation. No cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact has
been identified; no mitigation is required.
22.1.14 Cumulative Public Services Impacts -- Police Protection
Implementation of the 2040 General Plan would cumulatively increase the demand for police
protection services, including additional sworn police officers and requisite training, support
staff, and equipment over time. The General Plan includes numerous policies and
implementation programs to improve police protection services (see EIR Chapter 17--Public
Services). Therefore, cumulative development would have a less-than-significant impact on
police protection services.
Mitigation. No cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact has
been identified; no mitigation is required.
22.1.15 Cumulative Public Services Impacts -- Parks and Recreation
Implementation of the 2040 General Plan would cumulatively increase the demand for parks
and recreational facilities. Because the proposed General Plan includes policies and
implementation programs to ensure adequate parks and recreational facilities as development
occurs over time, the proposed General Plan would not make a cumulatively considerable
contribution to cumulative demands for parks and recreational facilities.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 22. CEQA-Mandated Section June 28, 2018 Page 22-6
Mitigation. No cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact has
been identified; no mitigation is required.
22.1.16 Cumulative Public Services Impacts -- Public School and Library
The 2040 General Plan includes policies and implementation programs to improve public
schools and libraries (see EIR Chapter 17--Public Services) beyond mitigating the incremental
impacts that could occur as new development is constructed over time. No cumulatively
considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact would result.
Mitigation. No cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact has
been identified; no mitigation is required.
22.1.17 Cumulative Public Services Impacts -- Wastewater Service
(a) Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) Wastewater Treatment Requirements.
Similar to jurisdictions across the San Francisco Bay Area, Burlingame is subject to RWQCB
wastewater treatment requirements. The proposed General Plan includes policies and
implementation programs that ensure the City’s commitment to meeting these requirements as
well as implementing best management practices to improve the quality of wastewater entering
the system (see EIR Chapter 20--Utilities and Service Systems). Therefore, the proposed
project would not make a cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative
impact related to wastewater treatment requirements, and cumulative impacts on wastewater
treatment requirements would be less then significant.
(b) Wastewater Treatment and Collection System. The Burlingame WWTP has a total
treatment capacity of 5.5 MGD (primary and secondary treatment), but the current rate of
wastewater treatment has remained constant at approximately 3.0 to 3.5 MGD, which serves
the population of about 30,000. Thus, the WWTP typically operates at rate that is less than 70%
of the plant’s capacity. The proposed General Plan projects a build-out population of 36,493.
Without expansion, the wastewater and treatment system would be sufficient to provide for the
projected 25% increase in the City’s population in 2040. Additionally, the 2040 General Plan
includes policies and implementation programs that would result in the continuation of ongoing
monitoring, maintenance, and upgrades to the City’s wastewater collection system (see EIR
Chapter 20--Utilities and Service Systems). Therefore, cumulative impacts related to the
wastewater collection system would be less than significant.
Mitigation. No cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact has
been identified; no mitigation is required.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 22. CEQA-Mandated Section June 28, 2018 Page 22-7
22.1.18 Cumulative Public Services Impacts -- Solid Waste and Recycling
Individual development projects under the 2040 General Plan would be required to be
consistent with adopted City solid waste and recycling regulations, including the solid
waste/recycling regulations and programs described in EIR Chapter 20 (Utilities and Service
Systems). The City will continue to implement a variety of solid waste reduction, recycling, and
re-use measures to meet its obligation under AB 939. These efforts will be coordinated with
waste management programs; therefore, future landfill diversion rates may improve. The
policies and programs of the General Plan would not interfere with implementation of existing
solid waste disposal regulations and would in fact support them. The overall cumulative solid
waste/recycling impact of cumulative development is therefore considered less than significant.
Mitigation. No cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact has
been identified; no mitigation is required.
22.1.19 Cumulative Public Services Impacts – Water Supply
Burlingame purchases potable water from the SFPUC RWS to meet all its potable water
demands. In 2015, the City purchased approximately 3.5 MGD (1,283 MG per year). In the
future, Burlingame plans to continue to purchase wholesale water from the SFPUC RWS and
does not expect obtaining potable water from other sources. Water supplies from the RWS
through 2040 are projected to be equal to Burlingame’s individual supply guarantee (ISG) of
1,909 MG, which is its contractual entitlement to SFPUC wholesale water, which survives in
perpetuity. With continued water conservation and future expanded use of recycled water, the
ISG would meet the needs of the General Plan’s 2040 projected population of 36,493. The
overall cumulative water supply impact of cumulative development is therefore considered less
than significant.
Mitigation. No cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact has
been identified; no mitigation is required.
22.2 GROWTH-INDUCING EFFECTS
CEQA Guidelines section 15126.2(d) requires that the EIR discuss "...the ways in which the
proposed project could foster economic or population growth, or the construction of additional
housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment."
General Plan implementation would result in a net increase in population, housing, and
employment in the Planning Area over existing (2018) conditions, as explained in section 3.4 of
this EIR. The net increases through the horizon year of 2040 would be approximately 2,951
dwelling units (mostly multi-family), 6,769 residents, and 9,731 employees. The direct increase
in population and jobs could have an indirect economic “multiplier” effect, generating additional
employment in the broader region.
Based on these considerations, no substantial, detrimental, growth-inducing effect is expected.
Any future individual development proposals not anticipated within the 2040 General Plan
development capacity assumptions would require routine local review of associated
development applications, including CEQA-mandated development-specific environmental
review, to ensure that any adverse environmental impacts are adequately addressed. These
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 22. CEQA-Mandated Section June 28, 2018 Page 22-8
existing requirements and procedures would be expected to avoid or reduce the potential
environmental impacts of such secondary growth inducement associated with the General Plan
to less-than-significant levels.
22.3 SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS
CEQA Guidelines section 15126.2(b) requires that the EIR discuss "significant environmental
effects which cannot be avoided if the proposed project is implemented." The impacts listed
below are identified as significant and unavoidable for one of four reasons: (1) no potentially
feasible mitigation has been identified; (2) potential mitigation has been identified but may be
found by the City to be infeasible; (3) with implementation of feasible mitigation, the impact still
would not, or might not, be reduced to a less-than-significant level; or (4) implementation of the
mitigation measure would require approval of another jurisdictional agency, whose approval will
be pursued by the City but cannot be guaranteed as of the publication of this EIR.
• Impact 10-1: Increases in GHG Emissions. The proposed General Plan Update would
result in GHG emissions that could exceed the 2030 and 2040 GHG emission targets
necessary to fully demonstrate progress and consistency with long-term state GHG
reduction goals, even after inclusion of all policies contained within the General Plan.
The CAP would assess feasible policies contained within the proposed General Plan
and include, if necessary, additional measures to further reduce GHG emissions. Until
these additional reductions have been demonstrated, this would be a significant and
unavoidable impact (see criterion [a] under Section 10.3.1, “Significance Criteria,”
above).
• Impact 10-2: Plan Consistency. Adoption and implementation of the proposed General
Plan Update would conflict with the 2017 Scoping Plan, Plan Bay Area 2040, and the
2017 Clean Air Plan. This would be a significant and unavoidable impact (see
criterion [b] under Section 10.3.1, “Significance Criteria,” above).
• Impact 15-3: Increases in Traffic Noise Levels. Implementation of the proposed
General Plan would increase noise levels along roadways with nearby sensitive
receptors. Proposed policies would establish noise standards for new development and
require that site-specific noise studies be conducted to reduce noise exposure; however,
traffic-related noise increases are predicted to exceed 3 dB, the level typically audible to
the human ear and, therefore, considered a substantial increase in noise. This would
represent a significant impact (see criteria [a] and [c] in subsection 15.3.1,
"Significance Criteria," above).
The implications of each significant unavoidable impact identified above are described in the
particular EIR chapter referenced with the impact. The General Plan is being proposed,
notwithstanding these effects, in order to fully achieve the project objectives described in section
3.4 of this EIR. If the City Council approves the project, or an alternative to the proposed
project, that would result in significant unavoidable impacts, the City Council must adopt a
“Statement of Overriding Considerations” per CEQA Guidelines section 15093, describing why
the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including region-wide or statewide
environmental benefits, of the proposed project outweigh its significant unavoidable impacts.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 22. CEQA-Mandated Section June 28, 2018 Page 22-9
22.4 IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES
CEQA Guidelines section 15126.2(c) requires that the EIR discuss "significant irreversible
environmental changes which would be caused by the proposed project should it be
implemented." Irreversible environmental changes caused by the proposed project would
include the following:
• As discussed in Chapters 3 (Project Description), 14 (Land Use and Planning), and 18
(Transportation and Circulation) of this EIR, General Plan implementation would
generally change the Planning Area within the Urban Limit Line from an auto-oriented
community to a multi-modal (auto, transit, bicycle, pedestrian) oriented community. This
change would require implementation of planning and design strategies that would result
in relatively permanent physical changes to Burlingame.
• General Plan implementation would result in the loss of an as-yet unknown number of
existing buildings, landscaping, and infrastructure, and its replacement with new
development, landscaping, and infrastructure in accordance with the goals, policies, and
implementation programs of the 2040 General Plan.
Implementation of the General Plan would result in an irreversible commitment of energy
resources, primarily in the form of fossil fuels, including fuel oil, natural gas, and gasoline or
diesel fuel for construction equipment and automobiles during construction and ongoing use of
development sites. Because development anticipated under the General Plan would be
required by law to comply with California Code of Regulations Title 24 and adopted City energy
conservation ordinances and regulations, the project would not be expected to use energy in a
wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary manner (see section 22.6 below). In addition, the General
Plan would implement sustainability measures as described throughout the EIR, especially in
Chapter 10 (Global Climate Change and Greenhouse Gas Emissions) and in section 22.6
(Energy).
The consumption or destruction of other non-renewable or slowly renewable resources would
also result during construction, occupancy, and use of individual development sites under the
General Plan. These resources would include, but would not be limited to, lumber, concrete,
sand, gravel, asphalt, masonry, metals, and water. General Plan implementation would also
irreversibly use water and solid waste landfill resources. However, development under the plan
would not involve a large commitment of those resources relative to supply, nor would it
consume any of those resources wastefully, inefficiently, or unnecessarily, especially
considering ongoing City and County conservation and recycling programs.
General Plan implementation would contribute both directly and indirectly to long-term increases
in greenhouse gas emissions, although to a lesser extent than if the same growth and
development were to occur under the existing General Plan (see EIR Chapter 10).
For practical purposes, these environmental changes would be permanent and irreversible.
Because the proposed General Plan would incorporate the energy conservation and
sustainability measures described below, the identified irreversible commitment of resources is
considered justified per CEQA Guidelines section 15126.2(c).
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 22. CEQA-Mandated Section June 28, 2018 Page 22-10
22.5 EFFECTS NOT FOUND TO BE SIGNIFICANT
Section 15128 of the CEQA Guidelines requires that the EIR "contain a statement briefly
indicating the reasons that various possible significant effects of a project were determined not
to be significant and were therefore not discussed in detail in the EIR." This EIR discusses all of
the environmental topic areas and questions included in CEQA Guidelines Appendix G
(Environmental Checklist Form), with the potential significance of each impact evaluated in the
appropriate EIR chapter (e.g., Chapter 5--Aesthetics, Chapter 14--Land Use and Planning, etc.).
22.6 ENERGY
22.6.1 Introduction
This energy conservation analysis has been prepared pursuant to California Public Resources
Code Section 21100(b)(3) and Appendix F of the CEQA Guidelines.
The purpose of this analysis is to assess the short- and long-term energy demand of the
proposed project, identify proposed and required conservation measures, and assess the extent
to which the proposed project would conserve energy. Project energy demand would not be
wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary if it does not increase energy demand over typical
construction and operating requirements.
Appendix F of the State CEQA Guidelines states that the goal of assessing energy conservation
in a project is to ensure the wise and efficient use of energy. Energy efficiency is achieved by
decreasing energy consumption, decreasing reliance on fossil fuels, and increasing reliance on
renewable energy sources.
22.6.2 Environmental Setting: State and Regional Energy
According to the California Energy Commission’s (CEC) 2015 Integrated Energy Policy Report,
Californians consumed about 280,500 gigawatt hours (GWh) of electricity in 2014 and 13,240
million BTU of natural gas in 2013. The CEC estimates that by 2025, California’s electricity
consumption will reach between 297,618 GWh and 322,266 GWh, an annual average growth
rate of 0.54 to 1.27 percent (CEC, 2015a), and natural gas consumption is expected to reach
between 12,673 million and 13,731 million BTU by 2024, an average annual growth rate of -0.4
to 0.33 percent (CEC, 2015a).
Approximately 70 percent of California’s electricity is generated from power plants located within
the State and from plants in other states but owned by California utilities. About 10 percent is
imported from the Pacific Northwest and 20 percent from the American Southwest (CEC, 2011).
In-state power is attained from 61.1 percent natural gas, 17.1 renewable energy, and 11.7
percent large hydropower.
Due in part to the State’s emphasis on renewable energy, California is second in leading the
nation when it comes to net electricity generation from renewable resources. A top producer of
electricity from conventional hydroelectric power, California is also a leader in net electricity
generation from several other renewable energy sources. In 2016, California generated
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 22. CEQA-Mandated Section June 28, 2018 Page 22-11
approximately 73,900 GWh of renewable electricity, accounting for 28.9 percent of the State’s
overall electricity sales (CEC, 2017a).
In 2015, total electricity use in San Mateo County was approximately 4,340 million kilowatt
hours (kWh), including approximately 2,840 million kWh for non-residential land uses, and
approximately 1,500 million kWh for residential land uses (CEC, 2017b). Natural gas
consumption was approximately 20.0 million BTU in 2016, including approximately 9.1 million
BTU from non-residential land uses and 10.9 million BTU from residential land uses (CEC,
2017c.
22.6.3 Regulatory Setting
22.6.3.1 Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS) Program
In 2002, California established its RPS Program, with the goal of increasing the percentage of
renewable energy in the state’s electricity mix to 20 percent of retail sales by 2017. The 2003
Integrated Energy Policy Report recommended accelerating that goal to 20 percent by 2010,
and the 2004 Energy Report Update further recommended increasing the target to 33 percent
by 2020. The state’s Energy Action Plan also supported this goal. In 2006 under Senate Bill
107, California’s 20 percent by 2010 RPS goal was codified. The legislation required retail
sellers of electricity to increase renewable energy purchases by at least one percent each year
with a target of 20 percent renewables by 2010. Publicly owned utilities set their own RPS
goals, recognizing the intent of the legislature to attain the 20 percent by 2010 target.
On November 17, 2008, Governor Schwarzenegger signed Executive Order S-14-08 requiring
“[a]ll retail sellers of electricity shall serve 33 percent of their load with renewable energy by
2020.” The following year, Executive Order S-21-09 directed the California Air Resources
Board, under its AB 32 authority, to enact regulations to achieve the goal of 33 percent
renewables by 2020.
In October 2015, Governor Brown signed Senate Bill 350 to codify ambitious climate and clean
energy goals. One key provision of SB 350 is for retail sellers and publicly owned utilities to
procure “half of the state’s electricity from renewable sources by 2030.”
22.6.3.2 Title 24 Energy Standards
The CEC first adopted Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings
in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to reduce energy consumption in the state.
Although not originally intended to reduce GHG emissions, increased energy efficiency, and
reduced consumption of electricity, natural gas, and other fuels would result in fewer GHG
emissions from residential and nonresidential buildings subject to the standard. The standards
are updated periodically to allow for the consideration and inclusion of new energy efficiency
technologies and methods.
Part 11 of the Title 24 Building Standards Code is referred to as the California Green Building
Standards Code (CALGreen Code). The purpose of the CALGreen Code is to “improve public
health, safety and general welfare by enhancing the design and construction of buildings
through the use of building concepts having a positive environmental impact and encouraging
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 22. CEQA-Mandated Section June 28, 2018 Page 22-12
sustainable construction practices in the following categories: (1) planning and design; (2)
energy efficiency; (3) water efficiency and conservation; (4) material conservation and resource
efficiency; and (5) environmental air quality.” The CALGreen Code is not intended to substitute
or be identified as meeting the certification requirements of any green building program that is
not established and adopted by the California Building Standards Commission (CBSC). The
CBSC has released the 2016 California Green Building Standards Code on its website. Unless
otherwise noted in the regulation, all newly constructed buildings in California are subject of the
requirements of the CALGreen Code.
CALGreen contains both mandatory and voluntary measures. For non-residential land uses
there are 39 mandatory measures including, but not limited to exterior light pollution reduction,
wastewater reduction by 20 percent, and commissioning of projects over 10,000 square feet.
Two tiers of voluntary measures apply to non-residential land uses, for a total of 36 additional
elective measures.
California’s Building Energy Efficiency Standards are updated on an approximately three-year
cycle. The 2016 standards, adopted January 1, 2017, improve upon existing standards in the
fact that they are 28 percent more efficient for residential construction and five percent more
efficient for non-residential construction, when compared to the previous 2013 standards (CEC,
2015). Although the 2016 standards do not achieve zero net energy, they are close to the
state’s goal, and mark important steps towards making building practices greener throughout
California. It is anticipated the 2019 standards will take the final step in establishing
requirements for zero net energy for newly constructed residential buildings throughout
California.
22.6.3.2 California Solar Initiative
The California Solar Initiative (CSI) was authorized in 2006 under SB 1 and allows the California
Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to provide incentives to install solar technology on existing
residential, commercial, nonprofit, and governmental buildings if they are customers of the
State’s investor-owned utilities (IOUs), including Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E). The CSI
program had a budget of nearly $2.2 billion to be expended by 2016 with a goal to reach 1,940
megawatts (MW) of installed solar power throughout the state by that time (CPUC, 2012). The
CSI program has several components, including the Research and Development, Single-Family
Affordable Solar Housing (SASH), Multi-Family Affordable Solar Housing (MASH), and Solar
Water Heating Pilot Program, each of which provides incentives to further the installation of
solar technology on California’s buildings.
22.6.4 Environmental Impacts
Short-term energy demand would result from construction activities occurring throughout
implementation of the General Plan update. Short-term demand would include energy needed
to power worker and vendor vehicle trips as well as construction equipment. Long-term energy
demand would result from land use operations within the City, which would include activities
such as lighting, heating and cooling of structures, etc. Operational energy demands would
typically be the result of vehicle trips, electricity and natural gas usage, and water and
wastewater conveyance. This discussion generally describes the energy needs of these
activities and how they are applicable to the proposed General Plan update.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 22. CEQA-Mandated Section June 28, 2018 Page 22-13
Adoption of the General Plan update would result in new construction over the next
approximately 20 years. Construction activities would generally require the use of heavy-duty
construction equipment (e.g. backhoes, excavators, scrapers, loaders, etc.) during most phases
of development, but especially during demolition, site preparation, and grading activities. These
activities would use gasoline and diesel fuel to power the equipment and vehicles needed to
build the proposed project. The energy required for these activities is a necessary component of
construction, and would not be used in an inefficient manner. The Bay Area is well served by
suppliers of gasoline and diesel fuels; the energy required to support development occurring
under the proposed General Plan Update would not constitute a significant impact for demand
on either of these sources of energy.
New and existing land uses would consume energy to support normal day-to-day operations.
Vehicles and mass transit used by employees to go to work, do work, etc. would require energy
in the form of gasoline, diesel, natural gas, and/or electricity. The specific fuel required for
transport would be dependent on the mode of transportation and type of engine used to propel
the vehicle. Energy would be also required to heat/cool buildings, provide indoor and outdoor
lighting, and transport water/wastewater. As highlighted in many policies contained in the
proposed General Plan Update, the City of Burlingame is committed to sustainable practices
that would enhance community-wide energy efficiency. A discussion of how policies contained
in the General Plan Update would improve operational energy efficiency is presented below.
Electricity and Natural Gas
Electricity and natural gas would be used to provide energy to the residential, commercial,
industrial and other land uses envisioned in the Burlingame 2040 General Plan. All new
development and redevelopment would be subject to current California Building Code (CBC)
requirements for building energy efficiency. Although the Title 24 Building Standards have not
yet been updated to reflect what standards would look like in the future, it is anticipated new
residential land uses would be required to be zero net energy (ZNE) by 2020, and new
commercial land uses would be required to be ZNE by 2030. Furthermore, Policy CC-1.9
contained in the proposed General Plan Update would direct the City to adopt ZNE building
goals for municipal buildings. In addition to addressing new developments, the General Plan
Update also contains policies directed at increasing the energy efficiency of existing
developments, and increasing the rate of electricity generated by renewable sources in the City.
Table 22-1 summarizes the proposed Burlingame 2040 General Plan goals and policies that
ensure efficient use of electricity and natural gas in the City.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 22. CEQA-Mandated Section June 28, 2018 Page 22-14
Table 22-1: Proposed Burlingame General Plan Policies that Ensure
Efficient Use of Electricity and Natural Gas Resources
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance Criteria
Healthy People and Healthy Places Element
Policy HP-2.6
Renewable Energy
Pursue the goal of using
100% renewable energy
for the City’s municipal
accounts. Encourage
residents and businesses
to opt up to 100%
renewable purchase for
additional community-wide
greenhouse gas
reductions. Encourage and
support opportunities for
developing local solar
power projects.
Encourages electricity be
sourced from renewable
source other than the grid.
The grid’s electricity may be
produced by non-renewable
sources. Reduces GHG
emissions associated with
those non-renewable
sources.
A substantial
increase in net
energy demand or
use of fuel or energy
in a wasteful manner
Policy HP-2.7
Residential Solar
Power
Encourage homeowners to
install solar power
systems. Provide
information to
homeowners on the
benefits of solar power
and funding opportunities.
Promote Property
Assessed Clean Energy
(PACE) programs that
finance renewable energy
systems. Offer incentives
for home solar power
systems.
Encourages electricity be
sourced from renewable
source other than the grid.
The grid’s electricity may be
produced by non-renewable
sources. Reduces GHG
emissions associated with
those non-renewable
sources.
A substantial
increase in net
energy demand or
use of fuel or energy
in a wasteful manner
Policy HP-2.8
Energy Efficiency
Support energy efficiency
improvements in the aging
building stock citywide.
Encourage energy
efficiency audits and
upgrades at the time of
sale for existing homes
and buildings. Host energy
efficiency workshops, and
distribute information to
property owners, tenants,
and residences.
Establishes the City’s intent
to promote energy
efficiency, which would lead
to reduced GHG emissions.
A substantial
increase in net
energy demand or
use of fuel or energy
in a wasteful manner
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 22. CEQA-Mandated Section June 28, 2018 Page 22-15
Table 22-1: Proposed Burlingame General Plan Policies that Ensure
Efficient Use of Electricity and Natural Gas Resources
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance Criteria
Policy HP-2.9
Municipal Energy
Efficiency
Continue to enhance
energy efficiency in City
facilities. Conduct periodic
energy audits to assess
energy efficiency progress
and needed
improvements.
Establishes the City’s
commitment to promote the
use of specific energy
benchmarking programs for
nonresidential buildings,
which could lead to
additional energy efficiency
upgrades in existing
buildings and result in the
reduction of GHG
emissions.
A substantial
increase in net
energy demand or
use of fuel or energy
in a wasteful manner
Policy HP-2.10
Municipal Green
Building
Aim for new construction
and major renovations of
City facilities to be zero net
energy.
Establishes commitment to
reducing energy
consumption and GHG
emissions that may be
generated through energy
production/use.
A substantial
increase in net
energy demand or
use of fuel or energy
in a wasteful manner
Community Character Element
Goal CC-1 Incorporate sustainable
practices in all
development decisions.
Establishes the City’s goal
for sustainable growth
patterns to address traffic
congestion and reduce
resource consumption and
greenhouse gas emissions.
A substantial
increase in net
energy demand or
use of fuel or energy
in a wasteful manner
Policy CC-1.7 Solar
Energy
Incentivize solar panel
installation on existing
buildings and new
developments
Encourages electricity be
sourced from renewable
source other than the grid.
The grid’s electricity may be
produced by non-renewable
sources. Reduces GHG
emissions associated with
those non-renewable
sources.
A substantial
increase in net
energy demand or
use of fuel or energy
in a wasteful manner
Policy CC-1.9 Green
Building Practice
and Standards
Support the use of
sustainable building
elements such as green
roofs, cisterns, and
permeable pavement.
Continue to enforce the
California Green Building
Standards Code
(CALGreen). Adopt zero-
net-energy building goals
for municipal buildings.
Establishes goal for new
construction and major
renovations of City facilities
to be zero net energy.
A substantial
increase in net
energy demand or
use of fuel or energy
in a wasteful manner
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 22. CEQA-Mandated Section June 28, 2018 Page 22-16
Table 22-1: Proposed Burlingame General Plan Policies that Ensure
Efficient Use of Electricity and Natural Gas Resources
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance Criteria
Policy CC-1.12 Continue to educate
Burlingame community
members about
sustainable development
strategies, programs, and
opportunities
Encourages community
members to reduce energy,
or activities that would
consume energy that would
result in GHG emissions.
A substantial
increase in net
energy demand or
use of fuel or energy
in a wasteful manner
Transportation Fuels
New and existing land uses would consume transportation-related fuels to support normal day-
to-day operations. Vehicles and mass transit used by employees to go to work, do work, etc.
would require energy in the form of gasoline, diesel, natural gas, and/or electricity. The specific
fuel required for transport would be dependent on the mode of transportation and type of engine
used to propel the vehicle. As described in Chapter 7, Air Quality, VMT is estimated to increase
under build-out of the General Plan, but this increase would be smaller than the population
increase associated with build-out conditions, indicating overall transportation and mobility
would become more efficient over time. State regulations such as LCSF would reduce the
carbon intensity of transportation-related fuels, and the proposed General Plan contains
contains policies directed at reducing VMT, supporting alternative transportation fuel, and
supporting alternative means of transportation. Table 22-2 summarizes the proposed
Burlingame 2040 General Plan goals and policies that ensure efficient use of transportation
fuels and reduction in VMT and transportation fuel use below levels that would occur without
implementation of the General Plan.
Table 22-2: Proposed Burlingame General Plan Policies that Ensure
Efficient Use of Transportation Fuels
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance Criteria
Healthy People and Healthy Places Element
Policy HP-2.4
Electric Vehicles
Prepare an Electric
Vehicle Strategic Plan to
support and expand
Burlingame’s electric
vehicle network. Establish
parking standards that
prioritize electric vehicle
spaces. Require new
residential developments
to install or be pre-wired
for electric vehicle
charging stations.
Encourages people in the
Bay Area to purchase and
use electric vehicles by
providing them with
supporting infrastructure.
Helps reduce consumption
of fossil fuels in
transportation.
A substantial
increase in net
energy demand or
use of fuel or energy
in a wasteful manner
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 22. CEQA-Mandated Section June 28, 2018 Page 22-17
Table 22-2: Proposed Burlingame General Plan Policies that Ensure
Efficient Use of Transportation Fuels
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance Criteria
Policy HP-2.5
Municipal Electric
Vehicles
Purchase electric vehicles
as replacements for
gasoline-powered vehicles
in the City’s fleet. Install
electric vehicle charging
stations to incentivize City
employees to use electric
vehicles.
Encourages City
employees to purchase and
use electric vehicles by
providing them with
supporting infrastructure.
Helps reduce consumption
of fossil fuels in
transportation.
A substantial
increase in net
energy demand or
use of fuel or energy
in a wasteful manner
Policy HP-2.15
Alternative Fuel
Purchase electric or hybrid
models of lawn and
garden and construction
equipment for City
maintenance operations,
as feasible
Establishes goal to reduce
GHG emissions generated
by law, garden, and
construction equipment
used for City maintenance
operations. Helps reduce
consumption of fossil fuels
in mobile sources.
A substantial
increase in net
energy demand or
use of fuel or energy
in a wasteful manner
Community Character Element
Policy CC-1.2
Transit-Oriented
Development
Promote higher-density
infill development with a
mix of uses on
underutilized parcels,
particularly near transit
stations and stops.
Establishes the City’s
commitment to high-density,
transit-oriented development
in specific Priority
Development Areas.
Improving transit ridership
and reducing automobile use
would reduce consumption
of transportation fuels.
A substantial
increase in net
energy demand or
use of fuel or energy
in a wasteful manner
Policy CC-1.3
Walkable Streets
and Neighborhoods
Promote walkable
neighborhoods and
encourage pedestrian
activity by designing safe,
welcoming streets and
sidewalks that incorporate
signalized crosswalks,
attractive lighting and
landscaping, curb
extensions, and traffic-
calming measures at
appropriate locations.
Encourages modes of transit
other than those that
produce GHG emissions
when used (e.g., gasoline or
diesel combustion).
A substantial
increase in net
energy demand or
use of fuel or energy
in a wasteful manner
Policy CC-1.4
Parking
Requirements
Study options for reduced
residential parking
requirements in areas that
are well served by public
transportation, such as the
North Burlingame and
North Rollins Road areas.
Implement preferred
options.
Encourages modes of transit
other than those that
produce GHG emissions
when used (e.g., gasoline or
diesel combustion).
A substantial
increase in net
energy demand or
use of fuel or energy
in a wasteful manner
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 22. CEQA-Mandated Section June 28, 2018 Page 22-18
Table 22-2: Proposed Burlingame General Plan Policies that Ensure
Efficient Use of Transportation Fuels
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance Criteria
Policy CC-1.5
Transportation
Demand
Management
Require that all major
development projects
include a Transportation
Demand Management
program to reduce single-
occupancy car trips.
Establishes the City’s
commitment to reducing
VMT, and by association
transportation fuel
consumption.
A substantial
increase in net
energy demand or
use of fuel or energy
in a wasteful manner
Policy CC-1.13
Electric Vehicle
Network
Support the electric
vehicle network by
incentivizing use of electric
vehicles and installations
of charging stations.
Encourages people in the
Bay Area to purchase and
use electric vehicles by
providing them with
supporting infrastructure.
Helps reduce fuel
combustion in vehicles.
A substantial
increase in net
energy demand or
use of fuel or energy
in a wasteful manner
Mobility Element
Policy M-1.1
Complete Streets
Define and develop a well-
connected network of
Complete Streets that can
move all modes safely,
efficiently, and comfortably
to promote efficient
circulation while also
improving public health
and safety.
Establishes the City’s
commitment to encourage
mixed-use development,
which would contribute to
reduction of automobile
usage and vehicle miles
traveled and lead to reduced
fuel consumption.
A substantial
increase in net
energy demand or
use of fuel or energy
in a wasteful manner
Policy M-1.2
Connectivity to
Destinations
Connect commercial
districts, centers of
employment, civic uses,
parks, schools, and other
destinations with high-
quality options for all travel
modes. Ensure the system
accommodates the needs
of all users, including
youth, the elderly, and
people with disabilities.
Establishes the City’s goals
to maintain a well-connected,
safe, non-vehicular
infrastructure throughout
Burlingame. Well-connected
and safe routes promote
travel for modes other than
vehicles. Reduces GHG
emissions from the mobile
sector.
A substantial
increase in net
energy demand or
use of fuel or energy
in a wasteful manner
Policy M-2.1
Pedestrian
Amenities and
Access
Expand pedestrian access
by eliminating gaps in
sidewalk and path
networks, improving
safety, and requiring safe
and comfortable
pedestrian facilities
Establishes the City’s goals
to maintain a well-connected,
safe, non-vehicular
infrastructure throughout
Burlingame. Well-connected
and safe routes promote
travel for modes other than
vehicles. Reduces fuel
combustion in mobile
sources.
A substantial
increase in net
energy demand or
use of fuel or energy
in a wasteful manner
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 22. CEQA-Mandated Section June 28, 2018 Page 22-19
Table 22-2: Proposed Burlingame General Plan Policies that Ensure
Efficient Use of Transportation Fuels
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance Criteria
Policy M-2.2
Walkable
Infrastructure and
Access to
Destinations
Ensure that schools,
commercial districts,
employment destinations,
parks, civic facilities, and
transit stops have safe and
convenient pedestrian
access, including
connections across
Highway 101 and trails
through parks and regional
networks. Explore
improving access across
Highway 101 exclusively
for pedestrians and
cyclists.
Establishes the City’s goals
to maintain a well-connected,
safe, non-vehicular
infrastructure throughout
Burlingame. Well-connected
and safe routes promote
travel for modes other than
vehicles. Reduces fuel
combustion in mobile
sources.
A substantial
increase in net
energy demand or
use of fuel or energy
in a wasteful manner
Policy M-2.3
Pedestrian Priority
Promote and prioritize
pedestrian improvements
and safety where conflicts
or problems exist between
pedestrians and other
travel modes.
Establishes the City’s goals
to maintain a well-connected,
safe, non-vehicular
infrastructure throughout
Burlingame. Well-connected
and safe routes promote
travel for modes other than
vehicles. Reduces fuel
combustion in mobile
sources.
A substantial
increase in net
energy demand or
use of fuel or energy
in a wasteful manner
Policy M-2.4
Circulation around
Downtown Library
Improve pedestrian
circulation around the
Downtown library to
minimize potential
automobile/pedestrian
conflict
Establishes the City’s goals
to maintain a well-connected,
safe, non-vehicular
infrastructure throughout
Burlingame. Well-connected
and safe routes promote
travel for modes other than
vehicles. Reduces fuel
combustion in mobile
sources.
A substantial
increase in net
energy demand or
use of fuel or energy
in a wasteful manner
Policy M-3.1
Uninterrupted
Bicycle Network
Develop a safe,
convenient, and integrated
bicycle network that
connects residential
neighborhoods to
employment, education,
recreation, and
commercial destinations
throughout Burlingame.
Establishes the City’s goals
to maintain a well-connected,
safe, non-vehicular
infrastructure throughout
Burlingame. Well-connected
and safe routes promote
travel for modes other than
vehicles. Reduces GHG
emissions from the mobile
sector.
A substantial
increase in net
energy demand or
use of fuel or energy
in a wasteful manner
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 22. CEQA-Mandated Section June 28, 2018 Page 22-20
Table 22-2: Proposed Burlingame General Plan Policies that Ensure
Efficient Use of Transportation Fuels
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance Criteria
Policy M-4.2 Caltrain
Electrification
Support efforts to electrify
Caltrain to improve
regional transit services to
Burlingame, if these
improvements do not
result in unacceptable
safety or noise impacts on
the community.
Establishes goals to reduce
fuel combustion from single-
occupancy vehicles and
transit.
A substantial
increase in net
energy demand or
use of fuel or energy
in a wasteful manner
Policy M-4.5 Transit
Priority
Establish a network of
transit-serving corridors to
accommodate local and
regional transit routes,
supporting high-frequency
service on regional transit
streets to make transit
service more time
competitive with personal
vehicle trips.
Establishes the City’s goals
to connect residents and
employees to alternative
modes of transportation (i.e.,
not taking single-occupancy
trips). Reduces fuel
combustion from vehicle
trips.
A substantial
increase in net
energy demand or
use of fuel or energy
in a wasteful manner
Policy M-4.6
Broadway Station
Work with Caltrans to
identify opportunities to
expand train transit
services at the Broadway
Station, including adding
more frequent community
and weekend stops at this
station.
Establishes the City’s goals
to connect residents and
employees to alternative
modes of transportation (i.e.,
not taking single-occupancy
trips). Reduces fuel
combustion from vehicle
trips.
A substantial
increase in net
energy demand or
use of fuel or energy
in a wasteful manner
Policy M-5.1 TDM
Guidelines and
Programs
Establish specific TDM
guidelines and
requirements within the
Zoning Ordinance that
encourage travel by a
variety of modes for both
individuals and
employees, focusing
different strategies in
different parts of the
community as appropriate
to promote sustainability
and economic
development.
Establishes the City’s
commitment to reducing
VMT, and by association fuel
combustion generated by
vehicles on the roadway.
A substantial
increase in net
energy demand or
use of fuel or energy
in a wasteful manner
Policy M-6.1 Transit
Supportive Land
Use
Plan for and accommodate
land uses that facilitate
development of compact,
mixed use development
with the density, diversity
of use, and local
accessibility supportive of
transit use.
Establishes the City’s
commitment to high-density,
transit-oriented development.
Improving transit ridership
and reducing automobile use
would reduce operational
mobile source GHG
emissions and fuel
combustion.
A substantial
increase in net
energy demand or
use of fuel or energy
in a wasteful manner
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 22. CEQA-Mandated Section June 28, 2018 Page 22-21
Table 22-2: Proposed Burlingame General Plan Policies that Ensure
Efficient Use of Transportation Fuels
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance Criteria
Policy M-6.2 Mixed
Use Areas
Promote residential,
employment, recreation,
and commercial uses
within designated mixed-
use areas to reduce
walking distances between
destinations and to create
an active street
environment throughout
the day.
Establishes the City’s
commitment to high-density,
transit-oriented development.
Improving transit ridership
and reducing automobile use
would reduce operational
mobile source GHG
emissions.
A substantial
increase in net
energy demand or
use of fuel or energy
in a wasteful manner
Policy M-8.1 Electric
Vehicle
Infrastructure
Identify electric vehicle
charging priority locations
and opportunities to
integrate emerging
technology into public
parking infrastructure to
encourage and expand the
use of zero-emissions
vehicles.
Encourages people in the
Bay Area to purchase and
use electric vehicles by
providing them with
supporting infrastructure.
Helps reduce fuel
combustion in vehicles.
A substantial
increase in net
energy demand or
use of fuel or energy
in a wasteful manner
Infrastructure Element
Policy IF-6.7 Electric
Vehicles
Work with energy
providers to plan for and
provide for the electricity
needs of a growing EV
network in Burlingame.
Establishes City’s
commitment to collaborate
with appropriate agencies on
promotion of alternative fuel
usage and standards.
A substantial
increase in net
energy demand or
use of fuel or energy
in a wasteful manner
Water Resources, Wastewater Generation, and Solid Waste
New and existing land uses would consume water and generate wastewater and solid waste.
The use of and transport of water consumes energy, and landfilled materials contribute to state
GHG emissions. Table 22-3 summarizes the proposed Burlingame 2040 General Plan goals
and policies that ensure efficient use and consumption energy related to water resources,
wastewater generation, and solid waste generation.
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 22. CEQA-Mandated Section June 28, 2018 Page 22-22
Table 22-3: Proposed Burlingame General Plan Policies that Ensure Efficient Use and
Consumption of Energy Related to Water Resources, Wastewater, and Solid Waste
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance Criteria
Healthy People and Healthy Places Element
Policy HP-2.13
Composting
Expand composting
services to multi-family
residential buildings and
commercial buildings.
Establishes goals to reduce
the amount of methane
generated by organic
matter decomposition in
landfills. Reduces
landfilling.
A substantial
increase in net
energy demand or
use of fuel or energy
in a wasteful manner
Policy HP-2.14 Zero
Waste
Encourage the South
Bayside Waste
Management Authority
(SBWMA) to explore and
consider rate plans that
support zero waste goals.
Identify opportunities to
support and implement
zero waste goals and
strategies for the City and
community.
Establishes goals to reach
zero waste. Reduces
landfilling.
A substantial
increase in net
energy demand o
use of fuel or energy
in a wasteful manner
Policy HP-6.2 Water
Conservation
Promote best practices for
water conservation
throughout the City, and
continue to enforce City
ordinances requiring high-
efficiency indoor water
fixtures in new
development. Educate the
public about Burlingame’s
water rebate programs,
and continue to establish
tiered water rates that
promote water
conservation. Consider
water consumption when
evaluating development
projects. Encourage
drought-tolerant
landscaping and efficient
irrigation systems.
Establishes goals to
preserve water and use it in
sustainable ways. Reduces
energy needed to transport
water.
A substantial
increase in net
energy demand or
use of fuel or energy
in a wasteful manner
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 22. CEQA-Mandated Section June 28, 2018 Page 22-23
Table 22-3: Proposed Burlingame General Plan Policies that Ensure Efficient Use and
Consumption of Energy Related to Water Resources, Wastewater, and Solid Waste
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance Criteria
Policy HP-6.4 Water
Recycling
Promote recycled water
use to the extent such
resources are available.
Work to allow graywater
and rainwater catchment
systems in residential,
commercial, and industrial
buildings. Establish a
recycled water plan and
implement a recycled
water program associated
with the Wastewater
Treatment Facility, when
financially feasible.
Establishes goals to
preserve water and use it in
sustainable ways. Reduces
energy needed to transport
water, which in turn
reduces GHG emissions.
A substantial
increase in net
energy demand or
use of fuel or energy
in a wasteful manner
Policy HP-6.8
Water-Efficient
Landscaping
Continue to enforce
Burlingame’s Water-
Efficient Landscaping
Ordinance, and promote
the use of native, drought-
tolerant landscaping.
Educate the public about
the Bay-Friendly
Landscaping Guidelines
and other resources for
water-efficient
landscaping.
Establishes goals to
preserve water and use it in
sustainable ways. Reduces
energy needed to transport
water.
A substantial
increase in net
energy demand or
use of fuel or energy
in a wasteful manner
Community Character Element
Policy CC-1.6 Promote water
conservation by
encouraging and
incentivizing property
owners to incorporate
drought-tolerant
landscaping, “smart”
irrigation systems, water
efficient appliances, and
recycled water systems.
Continue to enforce the
water-efficiency
landscaping ordinance.
Encourage recycling and
reuse of graywater in new
buildings.
Establishes goals to
preserve water and use it in
sustainable ways. Reduces
energy needed to transport
water, which in turn reduces
GHG emissions.
A substantial
increase in net
energy demand or
use of fuel or energy
in a wasteful manner
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 22. CEQA-Mandated Section June 28, 2018 Page 22-24
Table 22-3: Proposed Burlingame General Plan Policies that Ensure Efficient Use and
Consumption of Energy Related to Water Resources, Wastewater, and Solid Waste
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance Criteria
Infrastructure Element
Policy IF-2.11
Retrofits
Implement programs that
incentivize businesses and
private institutions to
replace existing plumbing
fixtures with water-efficient
plumbing.
Demonstrates the City’s
commitment to working with
employers in the City to
reduce inefficient water
usage. Reduces GHG
emission associated with
transporting the water and
treating the wastewater.
A substantial
increase in net
energy demand or
use of fuel or energy
in a wasteful manner
Policy IF-2.12
Recycled Water
Increase the use of
recycled water as
available, cost effective,
and safe. This may include
allowed use of graywater
systems consistent with
health and building codes.
Establishes goals to
preserve water and use it in
sustainable ways. Reduces
energy needed to transport
and treat water.
A substantial
increase in net
energy demand or
use of fuel or energy
in a wasteful manner
Policy IF-5.3
Municipal Waste
Reduction
Reduce municipal waste
generation by continuing
to employ a wide range of
simple and innovative
techniques, such as
electronic communications
to reduce paper usage and
buying products with less
packaging and in bulk.
Establishes the City’s goal of
being a sustainable
community. Reduced waste
would reduce GHG
emissions associated with
landfilled emissions.
A substantial
increase in net
energy demand or
use of fuel or energy
in a wasteful manner
Policy IF-5.5
Construction Waste
Recycling
Require demolition,
remodeling, and major
new development projects
include salvaging or
recycling asphalt and
concrete and all other
nonhazardous
construction and
demolition materials to the
maximum extent
practicable
Establishes the City’s goal of
being a sustainable
community. Reduced waste
would reduce GHG
emissions associated with
landfilled emissions.
A substantial
increase in net
energy demand or
use of fuel or energy
in a wasteful manner
Policy IF-5.7
Composting
Facilitate the ability of all
residents to compost both
for their own use and for
collection by contract
waste haulers.
Establishes the City’s goal of
being a sustainable
community. Reduced waste
would reduce GHG
emissions associated with
landfilled emissions.
A substantial
increase in net
energy demand or
use of fuel or energy
in a wasteful manner
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR City of Burlingame 22. CEQA-Mandated Section June 28, 2018 Page 22-25
Table 22-3: Proposed Burlingame General Plan Policies that Ensure Efficient Use and
Consumption of Energy Related to Water Resources, Wastewater, and Solid Waste
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance Criteria
Policy IF-5.12
Reuse
Encourage reuse of
materials and reusable
products. Develop a
program for reuse of
materials and reusable
products in City facilities
and outreach programs for
community-wide
participation by promoting
communitywide garage
sales and online venues.
Establishes the City’s goal of
being a sustainable
community. Reduced waste
would reduce GHG
emissions associated with
landfilled emissions.
A substantial
increase in net
energy demand or
use of fuel or energy
in a wasteful manner
Policy IF-5.15
Composting
Expand composting
programs in coordination
with waste vendor to all
residential type and
businesses.
Establishes the City’s goal of
being a sustainable
community. Reduced waste
would reduce GHG
emissions associated with
landfilled emissions.
A substantial
increase in net
energy demand or
use of fuel or energy
in a wasteful manner
Policy IF-5.16 Zero
Waste
Participate in negotiations
with waste vendor to
implement zero waste
supportive contracts and
services.
Establishes goals to reach
zero waste. Zero waste
would result in less GHG
emissions from landfills.
A substantial
increase in net
energy demand or
use of fuel or energy
in a wasteful manner
Energy Use Significance Conclusion
As summarized in Table 22-1 to Table 22-3, the proposed General Plan includes policies that
address energy efficiency through a variety of land use, mobility, and emissions reductions
policies. Although implementation of the General Plan may increase VMT and energy usage
compared to current (Year 2018) conditions, increased density would provide for more efficient
use of resources within the City, ensuring the General Plan does not result in the wasteful or
inefficient use of energy resources. There would be a less-than-significant impact (see criteria
[c] in subsection 11.3.1, "Significance Criteria," above).
Burlingame 2040 General Plan Public Draft EIR
City of Burlingame 23. EIR Preparers
July 3, 2018 Page 23-1
G:\1942 Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ord\P5_CEQA\6_DRAFT EIR (public) 06-28-2018\Chapter 23_EIR Preparers_BurlingameGP-EIR_06-26-
2018.doc
23. EIR PREPARERS
MIG
Urban and Environmental Planners
Victoria Harris, Senior Project Manager and EIR Project Manager
Chris Dugan, Director of Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas and Noise Analysis
Ray Pendro, Senior Planner
Laura Stetson, Principal
Dan Amsden, Project Planner
Lilly Jacobson, Associate
Ivy Poisson, Associate
Phil Gleason, Associate
NELSON/NYGAARD
Transportation Planning
Meghan Weir, Senior Associate
HEXAGON TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC.
Transportation Engineering and Analysis
At van den Hout, Vice President and Principal Associate
Ollie Zhou, T.E., Associate
City of Burlingame
2040 General Plan
Final Environmental Impact Report
Response to Comments
SCH No. 2017082018
October 2018
Lead Agency:
City of Burlingame
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, California 94010
This document is designed for double-sided printing to conserve natural resources.
Final Environmental Impact Report i
Table of Contents
1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1
2 Responses to Comments ............................................................................................... 3
Agencies .......................................................................................................................... 4
Response A-1 – San Francisco International Airport ........................................................ 4
Response A-2 – Airport Land Use Commission ............................................................. 4
Response A-3 – Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) ................................. 4
Response A-4 – Town of Hillsborough ...................................................................... 4
Response A-5 – California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) ......................................... 5
Response A-6 – Peninsula Health Care District ............................................................. 6
Response A-7 – City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County ............................. 6
Individuals ....................................................................................................................... 7
Response I-1 – Otto Miller .................................................................................. 7
Response I-2 – Jeff DeMartini .............................................................................. 7
Response I-3 – John Kevranian ............................................................................. 8
Oral Comments 9
3 Errata ...............................................................................................................................10
Chapter 2 Summary ...................................................................................... 10
Chapters 11, 12, 15, 17, 18 Environmental Impact Analysis ............................................... 10
Chapter 21 Alternatives ................................................................................... 13
4 Comment Letters …………………………………………………………………. after page 16
List of Tables
Table 1 DEIR Comments ............................................................................................................................................... 3
Introduction 1
Final Environmental Impact Report ii
This document is designed for double-sided printing to conserve natural resources.
Final Environmental Impact Report 1
1 Introduction
Section 1: Introduction
This Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) has been prepared to comply with Sections 15089 and 15132 of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. As noted in §15089 (b) of the Guidelines, the focus of a FEIR
should be on responses to comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR). Accordingly, this document
incorporates the City of Burlingame 2040 General Plan DEIR (State Clearinghouse No. 2017082018) by reference in
its entirety. The DEIR is available for review at the City of Burlingame, 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, California and
on the City’s web site (www.envisionbburlingame.com). This FEIR includes the following four sections.
Section 2: Responses to Comments
The City published a Notice of Availability and circulated a DEIR for public review and comment from July 3, 2018
through August 20, 2018. Ten comment letters were submitted to the City during the review period, including seven
letters from public agencies and three letters from individuals. This section includes a list of all correspondence
submitted to the City of Burlingame, each identified by a letter for later reference, together with the authors and the
dates the letters were issued. All comment letters are presented in Section 4, with numbered brackets to highlight
specific comments responded to in Section 2. This section also addresses oral comments on the DEIR delivered at the
July 11, 2018 Planning Commission Meeting.
Review of Environmental Documents
Section 15204 of the CEQA Guidelines provides guidance to the public in reviewing CEQA documents. This section
is designed not to limit the scope of comments that can be submitted by the public but to focus comments on issues
that are substantive to the environmental analysis. Commenting entities should focus on the adequacy of the document
in identifying and analyzing impacts to the environment and identify any areas they believe to be inadequate. The
guidance indicates that comments should be submitted in a manner that:
Identifies a specific environmental effect
Supports the effect and its significance with substantial evidence
Comments should include alternatives or mitigation measures to avoid or reduce identified, specific environmental
effects. This section reiterates that the lead agency is bound by “reasonableness” and “good faith” in its analysis and
that the lead agency is not required to respond to comments in the FEIR that do not identify significant environmental
issues.
Each response provided herein is coded to correspond to the individual comment/author and each of the bracketed
comments in that letter. A summary table is included with each response to identify if the response introduces “new
significant information” under any of the four categories identified in Section 15088 et seq. of the CEQA Guidelines.
Evaluation of Comments
Section 15088 et seq. of the State CEQA Guidelines provides guidance on the evaluation and response to comments
received during circulation of the DEIR. To summarize:
The lead agency must evaluate all comments received during the public review period and prepare a written
response to comments on significant environmental issues.
The lead agency must provide the response to the commenting entity at least ten days prior to certification of
the EIR.
The response must:
Introduction 1
Final Environmental Impact Report 2
Identify any significant environmental issues raised in the comment;
Explain, if necessary, why any recommendations provided in the comment were not accepted; and
Be supported by reasoned analysis.
Responses may be provided as direct revisions to the DEIR or as a separate section of the FEIR with marginal
notes in the DEIR text indicating that it was subsequently revised.
A lead agency is required to recirculate the DEIR if “significant new information” is introduced during the public comment
period. “Significant new information” includes:
1. New significant impacts
2. Substantial increases in the severity of impacts
3. Feasible alternatives or mitigation that would reduce significant impacts
4. Identification of inadequacies in the analysis
Recirculation is not required when new information is not significant; this includes:
Revisions that clarify or amplify an adequate analysis
Insignificant modifications (such as spelling and grammar corrections)
Section 3: Errata
This section identifies revisions to the DEIR to incorporate clarifications developed in response to comments on the
DEIR. Additions to the text are underlined and deletions have been stricken through. No substantial revisions were
made to the DEIR and recirculation of the document is not required pursuant to CEQA.
Section 4: Comment Letters
This section contains the public comment letters.
Environmental Impact Report 3
2 Responses to Written Comments
The Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) was circulated for a 45-day public review and comment period
beginning July 3, 2018 and ending August 20, 2018. The correspondence listed in Table 1 (Draft EIR Comments
Received) was submitted to the City of Burlingame concerning the DEIR. Written responses to each comment are
subsequently provided. The following responses to comments include a summary to identify if the response will
introduce “new significant information” under any of the four categories identified in Section 15088 et seq. of the CEQA
Guidelines or if it does not introduce “new significant information.” The four general categories are:
1. New significant impacts
2. Substantial increases in the severity of impacts
3. Feasible alternatives or mitigation that would reduce significant impacts
4. Identification of inadequacies in the analysis
Table 1
Draft EIR Comments Received
ID Commenting Agency Date
A-1 San Francisco International Airport 8/13/2018
A-2 Airport Land Use Commission 8/16/2018
A-3 Bay Conservation and Development Commission 8/16/2018
A-4 Town of Hillsborough 8/17/2018
A-5 California Department of Transportation 8/20/2018
A-6 Peninsula Health Care District 8/20/2018
A-7 City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County 8/20/2018
Commenting Individual
I-1 Otto Miller 8/13/2018
I-2 Jeff DeMartini 8/20/2018
1-3 John Kevranian 8/14/2018
Response to Comments 2
Final Environmental Impact Report 4
Agencies
Response A-1 – San Francisco International Airport
A-1.1. This commenter clarifies that instead of stating “portions of the planning area are located within Area B of the
AIA boundaries,” the correct statement is that “all of the planning area is located within Area B of the AIA boundaries.”
The City hereby acknowledges that the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) will exercise its statutory duties to review
all land use policy actions and land development proposals within the City that lie within airport-influence areas. The
City further acknowledges that all areas of the incorporated City of Burlingame are contained within AIA Area A, which
requires real estate agents or others offering subdivided property for sale or lease to disclose the presence of all
existing and planned airports within two miles of the property. The response provides a revision that clarifies an
adequate analysis.
A-1.2. This commenter identified a mistake on page 15-6 of the Draft EIR and acknowledges that the correct description
of the 65 CNEL area is provided on page 15-15. The commenter also pointed out that while nearly all of the incorporated
City of Burlingame is located outside the 65 CNEL noise contour, any new residential or overnight uses nearby may
experience some noise disturbance from aircraft departures. Any proposed residential uses therefore should meet the
interior noise requirements of the 2016 California Building Code. The EIR text has been revised accordingly; this
response provides a revision that clarifies an adequate analysis.
Response A-2 – Airport Land Use Commission
A-2.1. Please refer to response A-1.1 for a discussion about the need for real estate disclosure requirements. The
response provides a revision that clarifies an adequate analysis.
A-2.2. Please refer to response A-1.1 for a discussion of the need for review of projects by the ALUC. An application
for review by the C/CAG Airport Land Use Committee and C/CAG for a determination of consistency with the SFO
ALUP has been submitted to C/CAG. The response provides a revision that clarifies an adequate analysis.
Response A-3 – Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC)
A-3.1. The BCDC commended the City of Burlingame for including a discussion of s ea level rise in the Draft 2040
General Plan. However, BCDC noted that the State’s sea level rise projections have recently been updated (in March
2018) and suggest that prior to finalizing the 2040 General Plan the City should consider incorporating the new
projections into the sea level rise discussion. When and if specific development proposals are proposed in areas
potentially subject to sea level rise, as recommended by BCDC, the City would utilize the most current science-based
and regionally specific projections for future sea level rise. The 2040 General Plan Community Safety Element includes
policies related to sea level rise which require the City to use up-to-date sea level planning information and appropriate
setback and building elevation requirements in low-lying areas of the City, and to coordinate with San Mateo County
on the county-wide Sea Level Rise Vulnerability Assessment. The language in the General Plan sufficiently addresses
the comment; no changes or additional analysis is required in the EIR.
Response A-4 – Town of Hillsborough
A-4.1. The Town of Hillsborough proposes language to be added to the General Plan that would have the City of
Burlingame work with neighboring jurisdictions, including the Town of Hillsborough, to assess drainage, water, and
sewer treatment constraints, capacities, needs, and capital projects, and to partner where appropriate. Hillsborough
also suggests that the jurisdictions work together to proactively manage project specific and cumulative traffic impacts
Response to Comments 2
Final Environmental Impact Report 5
associated with schools, increased density, construction, and route changes. The City acknowledges this comment.
The suggestions will be considered during the public hearing process. The comment refers to suggested changes in
the 2040 General Plan but does not require changes or additional analysis in the EIR.
Response A-5 – California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
A-5.1. The commenter requests receipt of the traffic analysis worksheets for intersections and State highway ramps.
The City has provided additional information to the commenter. This comment does not identify any new information
that has a bearing on the analysis in the EIR.
A-5.2. The commenter requests that descriptions of current conditions and proposed projects described in the Traffic
Impact Analysis (TIA) be corrected. For instance, the description of the improvement mentioned on page 4 of the TIA
report “US 101 northbound auxiliary land from Peninsula to Broadway” is incorrect; this project has been completed.
The comment is correct regarding the US 101 northbound auxiliary lane. The TIA inadvertently mentioned this
improvement, which has been already completed. Regarding the US 101 express lane project, the Plan Bay Area 2040
indicated that this project is not fully funded (only $350 out of $534 million is covered in the Plan perio d) and is thus
not included for evaluation. This comment does not identify any new information that has a bearing on the analysis in
the EIR.
A-5.3. Please clarify how the tables on Page 17 of the TIA were developed. Hexagon used the citywide travel demand
forecast model to generate the VMT numbers. The daily VMT numbers accounted for all trips generated by Burlingame
land uses. The residential VMT and employment VMT were generated following SB 743 guidelines. This comment
does not identify any new information that has a bearing on the analysis in the EIR.
A-5.4. The commenter requests adding the Caltrans District 4 Bike Plan (2018) to Table 18-1: Relevant Plans and
Policies Related to Transportations Systems. The District 4 Bike Plan includes multiple projects fully or partially within
Burlingame, including intersection improvement projects for SR 82 intersections and several separated crossing
projects for US 101. This information has been included in the errata. This response does not identify any new
information that has a bearing on the analysis in the EIR.
A-5.5. Caltrans encourages Burlingame to adopt Alternative 2: Higher Development Density and Intensity in North
Burlingame (120 Dwelling Units/Acre), which will provide more housing units, placing them near the Millbrae
BART/Caltrain Station, which could encourage transit use, further address the housing/jobs imbalance in Burlingame,
and conform with State and regional policies. Noted for clarification that the Higher Density and Intensity in North
Burlingame Alternative proposes a residential density of 140 Dwelling Units/Acre, compared to 120 Dwelling Units/Acre
in the Proposed 2040 General Plan. This is a policy decision for the Planning Commission and City Council to consider
in the public hearing process. This response does not identify any new information that has a bearing on the analysis
in the EIR.
A-5.6. Caltrans provides clarification that the Howard-Ralston Eucalyptus Tree Row is within the planning area and is
listed on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). The Howard-Ralston Eucalyptus Tree Row is also a State-
owned historical resource within Caltrans’ right-of-way (ROW). As such, all projects proposed within the boundaries of
the Howard-Ralston Eucalyptus Tree Row are required to comply with the January 2015 Memorandum of
Understanding Between the California Department of Transportation and the California State Historic Preservation
Office Regarding Compliance with Public Resources Code Section 5024 and Governor’s Executive Order W-26-92
(hereafter the PRC 5024 MOU; found at http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/vol2/5024mou_15.pdf). This is a standard
requirement to be applied to future development projects. This response does not identify any new information that has
a bearing on the analysis in the EIR.
Caltrans further clarifies that before a Caltrans encroachment permit can be issued, applicants must demonstrate that
the proposed work is in compliance with the PRC 5024 MOU and the Caltrans Standard Environmental Reference
Response to Comments 2
Final Environmental Impact Report 6
(SER) Chapter 2 (http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/vol2/vol2.htm). Per the PRC 5024 MOU and the SER, all cultural resource
technical studies regarding the Howard-Ralston Eucalyptus Tree Row must be reviewed and approved by the Caltrans
District 4 Office of Cultural Resource Studies (OCRS). The City of Burlingame acknowledges these comments and will
reflect these clarifications in the 2040 General Plan.
A-5.7. Caltrans encourages the City of Burlingame to sufficiently allocate fair-share contributions toward multimodal
and regional transit improvements to fully mitigate cumulative impacts to regional transportation. Caltrans also strongly
supports measures to increase sustainable mode shares, thereby reducing VMT. Caltrans states that it welcomes the
opportunity to work with the City and local partners to secure the funding for needed mitigation. The City acknowledges
these comments. This response does not identify any new information that has a bearing on the analysis in the EIR.
A-5.8. The commenter states: “As the Lead Agency, the City of Burlingame is responsible for all project mitigation,
including any needed improvements to the State Transportation Network. The project’s fair-share contribution,
financing, scheduling, implementation responsibilities, and lead agency monitoring should be fully discussed for all
proposed mitigation measures.”
The DEIR includes a mitigation measure for the impact of a decline in LOS at the intersection of California Drive and
Broadway. The DEIR states that “under the 2040 General Plan the proposed 2040 GP would worsen the intersection
level of service to unacceptable LOS F and add more than 5 seconds of average delay during both the AM and PM
peak hours”. The mitigation is to have the City “coordinate with Caltrain and Caltrans to design and construct a grade-
separated intersection at Broadway and the rail tracks.” It is assumed and the City’s intent that the proposed grade
separation project would restore intersection LOS at California Drive and Broadway to acceptable conditions. This
mitigation measure, along with others in the DEIR, will be subject to a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP)
which the City will implement. This response does not identify any new information that has a bearing on the analysis
in the EIR.
A-5.9. The commenter advises the City of Burlingame that any work or traffic control that encroaches onto the State
right-of-way requires an encroachment permit issued by Caltrans. The City acknowledges this comment, as this is
standard practice. This response does not identify any new information that has a bearing on the analysis in the EIR.
Response A-6 – Peninsula Health Care District
A-6.1. The Peninsula Health Care District requests that the North Burlingame Mixed-Use Overlay be established and
applied to the District Property and School District Property before the General Plan is finalized and adopted. This
would ensure that the future use of the site by the District would be consistent with the General Plan, and by having an
overlay rather than a designation the City would maintain the Public/Institutional land use designation. This is a policy
decision for the Planning Commission and City Council to consider in the public hearing process. This response does
not identify any new information that has a bearing on the analysis in the EIR.
Response A-7 – City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County
A-7.1. The City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County requests that the City place conditions on
each future development project to reduce the project pro rata share of cumulative CMP traffic impacts. The agency
further recommends that the City follow the “Guidelines for Implementing the Land Use Component of the Congestion
Management Program,” which requires trip reduction for projects that generate a net 100 or more peak-hour period trip
on the CMP roadway network. The 2040 General Plan includes policies that support these recommendations, including
Goal Mobility 5, which stresses implementation of TDM strategies that reduce overall vehicle trips and encourage the
use of transportation modes that reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and greenhouse gas emissions. In addition,
Mobility policy 9-2 stresses the establishment of a transportation impact fee for new development that generates funds
for improving all modes of transportation. This response does not identify any new information that has a bearing on
the analysis in the EIR.
Response to Comments 2
Final Environmental Impact Report 7
Individuals
Response I-1 – Otto Miller
I-1.1. Mr. Miller supports the higher density in the North Burlingame alternative. This is a policy decision for the Planning
Commission and City Council to consider in the public hearing process. This response does not identify any new
information that has a bearing on the analysis in the EIR.
I-1.2. Mr. Miller cautioned the City that if the higher density alternative moves forward, the City should address parking
problems that could result from allowing higher densities. The City notes that all new development is required to provide
parking consistent with Municipal Code standards. This response does not identify any new information that has a
bearing on the analysis in the EIR.
Response I-2 – Jeff DeMartini
I-2.1. The commenter noted that no school enrollment was included in the EIR and is concerned that in the future
school aged children will not be able to attend a school in their neighborhood. The commenter is correct in that no
school enrollment data were included in the EIR. The EIR did not include enrollment because it is too speculative to
identify where new school facilities would be needed. The EIR does state that “new housing would be constructed over
the long term as population growth occurs pursuant to new land use policy. New homes would be occupied by a variety
of households, including those with school-aged children. Both the Burlingame School District and San Mateo Union
High School District would monitor growth in Burlingame and update their facilities plans as needed to identify new
facility needs, including locations, timing, and funding for expanded or new classrooms and related facilities.” The
comment does not identify any new information that has a bearing on the analysis in the EIR.
I-2.2. The commenter noted that during the CAC process, the Planning Commission was given information that
concluded in writing that the North Rollins area was not appropriate for future residential development, yet the EIR now
states that these impacts are less than significant. This statement is not correct. During the CAC process, information
was provided regarding potential constraints, such as noise, but at that time technical analysis had not been conducted.
The DEIR provides that technical analysis. The comment does not identify any new information that has a bearing on
the analysis in the EIR.
I-2.3. The commenter noted that there is no mention of a location for a Burlingame ferry service in the EIR. This is
because while the General Plan includes discussion and a goal relating to ferry service (Goal CC-6), it does not include
a specific ferry service proposal that could be evaluated in the EIR. The comment suggests transportation policy
changes in the 2040 General Plan that may be considered by the Planning Commission and City Council during the
public hearing process. The comment does not identify any new information that has a bearing on the analysis in the
EIR.
I-2.4. The commenter noted that there is not discussion of large format retailers with frontage along Highway 101 in
the General Plan and EIR. This is because proposed land use policy does not specifically support such uses along
the frontage. The Innovation Industrial (I/I) land use would allow commercial and light industrial uses, creative
industry businesses, design businesses, limited indoor sports and recreation, and wholesale uses, but large format
retailers are not specified. The comment refers to suggested land use policy changes in the 2040 General Plan that
may be considered by the Planning Commission and City Council during the public hearing process. The comment
does not identify any new information that has a bearing on the analysis in the EIR.
I-2.5. The commenter wanted to know the timing of the Broadway grade separation, especially considering that City
staff had previously stated that an elevated track was not a good option for Burlingame. According to the DEIR, “the
draft 2040 GP identifies a policy (M-12.2) to coordinate with Caltrain and Caltrans to design and construct a grade-
Response to Comments 2
Final Environmental Impact Report 8
separated intersection at Broadway and the rail tracks.” The City Council has indicated preference for a split
configuration with the rail tracks partially elevated above a partially-submerged roadway. The timing of this project is
not known at this time. Thus, the DEIR reflects this circumstance. This response does not identify any new information
relevant to the EIR.
I-2.6. The commenter asks that the traffic consultant provide a summary of each project that has been assumed in the
analysis. Refer to comment and response A-5.2 above. This response does not identify any new information relevant
to the EIR.
I-2.7. The commenter requests that if any financial impact analyses were conducted by the City, they should be made
public. No fiscal impact analysis was performed. The comment does not identify any new information relevant to the
EIR.
Response I-3 – John Kevranian
I-3.1. The commenter noted that there is no mention of a location for a Burlingame ferry service in the EIR. This is
because while the General Plan includes discussion and a goal relating to ferry service (Goal CC-6), it does not include
a specific ferry service proposal that could be evaluated in the EIR. The comment suggests transportation policy
changes in the 2040 General Plan that may be considered by the Planning Commission and City Council during the
public hearing process. The comment does not identify any new information that has a bearing on the analysis in the
EIR.
Response to Comments 2
Final Environmental Impact Report 9
Oral Comments
Commissioner Questions/Comments
The following comments were delivered at the July 11, 2018 Planning Commission Meeting. Many comments pertained
specifically to the General Plan; the following are those that addressed the DEIR.
EIR page 210 indicates two alternatives, not three. That is a typo, there are three alternatives. It is acknowledged in
the Errata below.
Commenter recalled in previous discussions that environmental justice is an emerging element for General Plans. The
Legislature has passed legislation to require General Plans to address environmental justice. If there were census
tracts that were identified as disadvantaged it would need to be addressed, but Burlingame does not have any of those
areas that would be considered impacted due to income or exposure to environmental hazards. As such there is not
an explicit addressing of environmental justice in terms of complying with State Law, unless the Commission or Council
sees an issue that requires policy to be to be addressed in the General Plan. As for the EIR, CEQA Regulations do
not yet require the assessment of environmental justice.
On page 17-7 of the DEIR Burlingame School District should be abbreviated as "BSD" not "BUSD." This change is
acknowledged in the Errata below.
Regarding wastewater collection and treatment, are the cumulative effects of growth in the Town of Hillsborough
included? The City’s wastewater treatment plant is operated under contract by private company Veolia Water. In
addition to serving the City, the plant serves the Town of Hillsborough (Hillsborough) and the San Mateo County
Burlingame Hills Sewer Maintenance District (Burlingame Hills). Hillsborough and Burlingame Hills are “satellite
collection systems” to the City. These systems discharge directly to the Burlingame system, with eac h managing their
own collection systems. According to the DEIR “no immediate changes to the system are needed to meet the demands
of immediate growth, as the water and wastewater master plans anticipate growth consistent with the General Plan.
Plan. To accommodate the level of long-term development allowed by the General Plan, the City will continue to assess
demand and to update water and wastewater master plans as needed” (page 20-6). Given that the treatment plant
serves the Town of Hillsborough, updating the wastewater master plan would consider any changes in growth
anticipated in the Town of Hillsborough and the Burlingame Hills.
Page 21-11 of the EIR mentions a noise impact on Broadway between El Camino Real and Bernal Avenue, and
attributes it to new residential units in the hillside neighborhood west of the road segment. Is that really the reason, the
right description? Or is it better described as hillside residents accessing Broadway and the Broadway interchange?
The noise impact is caused by hillside residents accessing Broadway and the Broadway interchange and other regional
traffic on that segment of the roadway.
Response to Comments 2
Final Environmental Impact Report 10
3 Errata
This section identifies revisions to the DEIR to incorporate clarifications developed in response to comments on the
DEIR. Additions to the text are underlined and deletions have been stricken through. No significant revisions were
made to the DEIR, and recirculation of the document is not required pursuant to CEQA.
Chapter 2 Summary
2.4.2 Environmentally Superior Alternative
Page 2-10, Section 2.4.1, Identified Alternatives, first sentence is corrected as follows “Pursuant to these
CEQA sections, Chapter 20 identifies and evaluates the following two three alternatives to the project:”
Page 2-11, Section 2.4.2, Environmentally Superior Alternative, second paragraph is corrected as follows:
The Proposed Project would result in a significant, unavoidable noise impact on Broadway between El
Camino Real and Bernal Avenue.
Chapters 11, 12, 15, 17, 18 Environmental Impact Analysis
Chapter 11, Hazards and Hazardous Materials.
Page 11-2 (b) Airport Hazards. First bulleted paragraph is corrected as follows:
Portions All of the planning area are is located within Area B of the Airport Influence Area (AIA) boundary
zones of San Francisco International Airport. Further since all of AIA Area B falls under AIA Area A, real
estate disclosures (Section 11010 (b) (13) of the Business and Professio ns Code) are required for people
offering subdivided property for sale or lease to disclose the presence of all existing and planned airports
within two miles of the property.
Chapter 12, Historic and Cultural Resources.
Page 12-2, Section 12.1.1, Environmental Setting, after second bullet. The following clarifies the status of
the Howard-Ralston Eucalyptus Tree Rows.
The Howard-Ralston Eucalyptus Tree Row is a State-owned historical resource within Caltrans’ right-of-way.
As such, all projects proposed within the boundaries of the Howard-Ralston Eucalyptus Tree Row are
required to comply with the January 2015 Memorandum of Understanding Between the California
Department of Transportation and the California State Historic Preservation Office Regard ing Compliance
with Public Resources Code Section 5024 and Governor’s Executive Order W -26-92 (hereafter the PRC
5024 MOU; found at http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/vol2/5024mou_15.pdf).
Chapter 15, Noise.
On page 15-6, second bullet, the sentence is corrected as follows:
Burlingame is located within two miles of San Francisco International Airport. According to the Comprehensive Airport
Land Use Compatibility Plan for the Environs of San Francisco International Airport, a small part of the City’s industrial
area located east west of Rollins Road and northwest of Mitten Road is within the 65 CNEL contour associated with
airport operations.
Response to Comments 2
Final Environmental Impact Report 11
The following edits to Table 15-9, Mitigation Measure 15-3A, and Table 15-16 reflect a suggested new General Plan
policy (CS-4.2) that would allow new residential develop proposed in areas within a noise contour area of 75 CNEL or
greater (clearly unacceptable) to take place if there is a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements and noise
insulation features are included in the project design. Policy CS-4.2 relates to those project locations that are primarily
exposed to noise from transportation operations. In this case the maximum instantaneous noise level in bedrooms
shall not exceed 50dB(A) at night (10:00 P.M. to 7:00 A.M.) and 55 dB(A) during the day with windows closed.
Table 15-2: Proposed Burlingame 2040 General Plan Exterior Land Use Compatibility Standards
Burlingame 2040 General Plan
Land Use Category
Community Noise Equivalent Level (in dBA, CNEL)
Normally
Acceptable
Conditionally
Acceptable
Normally
Unacceptable
Clearly
Unacceptable
Residential – Low Density Single Family,
Duplex, Mobile homes < 55 < 65 < 75 > 75
Residential – Multi Family < 60 < 70 < 75 > 75
Transient Lodging – Motels, Hotels < 60 < 70 < 80 > 80
Schools, Libraries, Churches, Hospitals,
Nursing Homes < 60 < 70 < 80 > 80
Auditoriums, Concert Halls,
Amphitheaters -- < 65 -- > 80
Sports Arenas, Outdoor Spectator Sports -- < 70 -- > 80
Playground, Neighborhood Parks < 70 -- < 80 > 80
Golf Course, Riding Stables, Water
Recreation, Cemeteries < 70 -- >70 --
Office Buildings, Business Commercial
and Professional < 60 < 75 > 75 --
Industrial, Manufacturing, Utilities,
Agriculture < 70 < 75 > 75 --
Land Use Compatibility Definitions:
Normally Acceptable: Specific land use is satisfactory based upon the assumption buildings involved are of normal
conventional construction, without any special noise insulation requirements.
Conditionally Acceptable:
New construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analyses of noise
reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features included in the design.
Conventional construction, but with closed windows and fresh air supply systems or air
conditioning will normally suffice.
Normally Unacceptable:
New construction or development should be generally discouraged. If new construction or
development does proceed, a detailed analysis of noise reduction requirements must be made
and needed noise insulation features included in the design.
Clearly Unacceptable:
New development should generally not be undertaken. If new construction or development does
proceed, a detailed analysis of noise reduction requirements must be made and needed noise
insulation features included in the design.
Source: City of Burlingame, 2017. Public Draft Burlingame 2040 General Plan (Figure CS-2)
Mitigation Measure 15-3A. The City shall revise the 2040 General Plan land use and
noise compatibility standards (Table CS-2) to better incorporate the City’s existing
Response to Comments 2
Final Environmental Impact Report 12
ambient noise environment and the Office of Planning and Research’s 2017 General
Plan Guidelines, as follows:
Burlingame 2040 General Plan
Land Use Category
Community Noise Equivalent Level (in dBA, CNEL)
Normally
Acceptable
Conditionally
Acceptable
Normally
Unacceptable
Clearly
Unacceptable
Residential – Low Density Single Family,
Duplex, Mobile homes < 60 < 70 < 75 > 75
Residential – Multi Family < 65 < 70 < 75 > 75
Transient Lodging – Motels, Hotels < 65 < 70 < 80 > 80
Schools, Libraries, Churches, Hospitals,
Nursing Homes < 65 < 70 < 80 > 80
Auditoriums, Concert Halls,
Amphitheaters -- < 65 -- > 80
Sports Arenas, Outdoor Spectator Sports -- < 75 -- >75
Playground, Neighborhood Parks < 70 -- < 75 > 75
Golf Course, Riding Stables, Water
Recreation, Cemeteries < 75 -- < 80 > 80
Office Buildings, Business Commercial
and Professional < 70 < 77.5 > 77.5 --
Industrial, Manufacturing, Utilities,
Agriculture < 75 < 80 > 80 --
Land Use Compatibility Definitions:
Normally Acceptable: Specific land use is satisfactory based upon the assumption buildings involved are of normal
conventional construction, without any special noise insulation requirements.
Conditionally Acceptable:
New construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analyses of noise
reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features included in the d esign.
Conventional construction, but with closed windows and fresh air supply systems or air
conditioning will normally suffice.
Normally Unacceptable:
New construction or development should be generally discouraged. If new construction or
development does proceed, a detailed analysis of noise reduction requirements must be made
and needed noise insulation features included in the design.
Clearly Unacceptable:
New development should generally not be undertaken. If new construction or development does
proceed, a detailed analysis of noise reduction requirements must be made and needed noise
insulation features included in the design.
Response to Comments 2
Final Environmental Impact Report 13
Table 15-3: Proposed Burlingame Existing Regulations and General Plan Policies
to Avoid or Reduce Impacts on Traffic Noise
Regulation/Policy Description of
Regulation/Policy
How Does It Avoid or
Reduce Impact?
Applicable
Significance
Criteria
Community Safety Element
Policy CS-4.2
Residential Noise
Standards
Require the design of new
residential development to
comply with the following
standards
The maximum acceptable
interior noise level for all new
residential units (single-family,
duplex, mobile home, multi-
family, and mixed-use units)
shall be an Ldn of 45 dB with
windows closed.
For project locations that are
primarily exposed to noise
from aircraft, Caltrain, and
Bart, Highway 101, and
Interstate 280 operations, the
maximum instantaneous noise
level in bedrooms shall not
exceed 50 dBA at night (10:00
P.M. to 7:00 A.M) and the
maximum instantaneous noise
level in all interior rooms shall
not exceed 55 dBA during the
day (7:00 am to 10:00 pm)
with windows closed.
Requires all new
residential development
to comply with
established interior and
exterior noise
standards. Compliance
with these standards is
intended to reduce
noise exposure to
humans.
(a) Generate or
expose people to
noise levels that
exceed standards
in the City’s
municipal code
(c) Result in a
substantial,
permanent
increase in noise
(d) Result in a
substantial,
temporary
increase in noise
Chapter 17. Public Services. Section 17.2.3 Environmental Impacts. c) School Services. Both the BUSD
BSD and SMUHSD monitor growth in Burlingame and updates its facilities plans as needed to identify new
facility needs, including locations, timing, and funding for expanded or new classrooms and related facilities.
BUSD will continue to collect development impact fees as provided for in State law to fund expanded facilities.
Chapter 18. Transportation and Circulation, Section 18.1.2. Regulatory Setting
Table 18-1 has been revised as follows to incorporate reference to the recently adopted Caltrans District 4 Bike Plan.
Chapter 21 Alternatives
21.4 Environmentally Superior Alternative
Page 21-11, Section 21.4, Environmentally Superior Alternative, second paragraph is corrected as follows:
Response to Comments 2
Final Environmental Impact Report 14
The Proposed Project would result in a significant, unavoidable noise impact on Broadway between El
Camino Real and Bernal Avenue.
Table 18-1 Relevant Plans and Policies Related to Transportation Systems
Plan, Year Overview Relevant Plans and Policies
County and State Plans
Caltrans District 4
Bike Plan (2018)
This Plan builds on the
California State Bicycle and
Pedestrian Plan, known as
“Towards an Active California.”
It adopts the overall vision,
goals, objectives, and
strategies of Toward an Active
California and represents an
important implementing action
from the statewide plan.
San Mateo Top Tier Projects identified for
Millbrae/Burlingame: Provide new separated
crossing on E. Millbrae Avenue.
Separated crossings include overcrossings
and undercrossings, and adding a bikeway
under an elevated freeway, completely
separating bicycle and pedestrian travel from
automobiles.
San Mateo County
Congestion
Management
Program, Final
2013
The purpose of the CMP is to
identify strategies to respond
to future transportation needs,
develop procedures to
alleviate and control
congestion, and promote
countywide solutions. The
CMP is required to be
consistent with the
Metropolitan Transportation
Commission (MTC) planning
process that includes regional
goals, policies, and projects
for the Regional
Transportation Improvement
Program (RTIP). The 2013
CMP, which is developed to
be consistent with MTC‟s Plan
Bay Area, provides updated
program information and
performance monitoring
results for the CMP roadway
system.
Due to their potential safety and delay impacts,
14 signalized intersections have been
preliminarily identified as key Burlingame
intersections for analysis in the General Plan
process, which includes one CMP intersection
in Burlingame. Two additional CMP
intersections adjacent to Burlingame are also
included, as they are considered important in
determining the overall capacity of the City’s
street system. The three CMP intersections
are:
El Camino Real and Broadway in
Burlingame
El Camino Real and Peninsula Avenue in
San Mateo
El Camino Real and Millbrae Avenue in
Millbrae
Response to Comments 2
Final Environmental Impact Report 15
Table 18-1 Relevant Plans and Policies Related to Transportation Systems
Plan, Year Overview Relevant Plans and Policies
San Mateo County
Comprehensive
Bicycle and
Pedestrian Plan,
2011
Outlines recommendations
and design guidelines for
“safe, convenient, and
universally accessible” bicycle
and pedestrian facilities
throughout the county
Funded by the City/County
Association of Governments of
San Mateo County and the
San Mateo County
Transportation Authority
The plan examines:
Existing bicycle and pedestrian conditions
Connections to transit
Areas with high incidents of collisions
Areas with high demand for more or better
facilities.
Pedestrian and Bicycle Focus Areas are
highlighted to prioritize funding in areas with
high demand or need, including roadways with
high occurrences of bicycle and pedestrian
injuries, and the El Camino Real corridor.
San Mateo County
Transportation
Authority Short-
Range Highway
Plan, 2011-2021
Outlines how funding has
been and will be allocated to
highway improvement projects
throughout San Mateo County
Burlingame area projects include:
Reconstruction of Broadway at Highway
101 interchange
Modification of the interchange at
Peninsula Avenue and Highway 101
The plan also identifies the existing funding
gap that limits completion of all desired
highway improvements and ranks the
proposed and completed projects by funding
priority.
San Mateo County
Transportation Plan
for Low-Income
Populations, 2012
Examines mobility needs in
transportation-disadvantaged
communities in San Mateo
County and develops
strategies to bridge gaps in
service delivery
Transportation strategies to
address the divide in service
include education, free
services to low-income
persons and auto loan and
repair assistance programs
Recommends reinstating emergency
transportation assistance through a
partnership between San Mateo County Health
Services Agency and Burlingame Yellow Cab
Response to Comments 2
Final Environmental Impact Report 16
Table 18-1 Relevant Plans and Policies Related to Transportation Systems
Plan, Year Overview Relevant Plans and Policies
San Mateo County
Transportation
Authority Draft
Strategic Plan
2015-2019, 2014
Policy, investment and service
plan to improve bus service
and expand ridership
throughout the SamTrans
service area
Identifies five-year goals of
increase weekday fixed-route
ridership and farebox revenue,
reduce debt service, improve
organizational performance,
and manage workforce
change
Outlines trends and forecasts for regional
transit:
35% of all system boardings are on El
Camino Real
50% of boardings are in the morning and
evening commute peaks
Metropolitan Transportation Commission
projects an increasing shift in growth
toward El Camino Real that will lead to
opportunities for cost-effective increases in
service
Focused on service and investment strategies
to support and expand a transit culture in San
Mateo County
1
EXHIBIT A
Responses to Comments on the Draft General Plan
Revised November 1, 2018
1. Kris Cannon (August 30, 2017)
Ms. Cannon suggests minor changes to Education and Lifelong Learning chapter. The
following revisions to the Implementation Plan are recommended in response to her comments
(not all suggestions for revisions are included):
IP-72 Library as an Education and Lifelong Learning Resource
The Library will continue to serve as an education and lifelong learning resource to promote
and provide access to local and web-based educational resources, literacy programs, and
services for parents, students, and adults.
Ms. Cannon notes a correction to Implementation Program 73 (IP073), indicating it should
reference “Burlingame School District,” not Burlingame Unified School District. This revision will
be made.
2. Holly Daley (August 29, 2017)
Ms. Daley compliments the treatment of resiliency in Chapter VIII and asks that more
information be provided regarding responsibilities for implementation. The Implementation Plan
(Chapter XI) indicates responsibilities, funding sources, and time frames.
3. Justin Moresco (August 29, 2017)
In the Community Safety chapter, Mr. Moresco notes that Policy CS-7.2 references “current
building codes,” would also include other items not specifically related to seismic life safety such
as plumbing and electrical provisions. Also, the target date of 2020 for completion of the
various aspects of the assessment is unclear; the letter suggests a change in the language at
the end to make it clear that the entire study described should be completed by the end of 2020.
Staff suggests this policy be reworded as follows:
CS-7.2: Residential Upgrades
Require that any residential facility that is being increased more than 50 percent assessed
value or physical size conform to current, “life-safety” engineering standards all provisions of
the current building code throughout the entire structure. Encourage owners of residential
buildings with known structural defects such as unreinforced garage openings, “soft story”
construction, unbolted foundations, and inadequate shear walls to take steps to remedy the
problem by retrofitting buildings to meet current, “life-safety” engineering standards and
bring buildings up to the current building code. Form an ad hoc committee to investigate,
before the end of 2020, and describe the seismic risk posed by pre-1980 wood frame “soft
2
story” buildings in Burlingame and to evaluate the costs and benefits of potential actions that
could be pursued by the City. The ad hoc committee shall report its findings to the City
Council before the end of 2020. [DR]
4. Kris Cannon (August 30, 2017)
Ms. Cannon notes a correction to Implementation Program 73 (IP073), indicating it should
reference “Burlingame School District,” not Burlingame Unified School District. This revision will
be made.
5. Jennifer Pfaff (September 4, 2017)
Ms. Pfaff submitted a series of corrections and clarifications to the Community Context (Chapter
II), Community Character (Chapter IV), Healthy People and Healthy Places (Chapter IX),
Engagement and Enrichment (Chapter X), and Implementation (Chapter XI). Staff recommends
the corrections and edits to be made as submitted.
Ms. Pfaff also makes some suggestions on content. In Chapter IX, she suggests omission of
Policy HP-5.8 (Invasive Plant Species), citing concerns the policy could be overreaching. Staff
notes that Bob Disco, City Arborist, cited similar concerns in his letter dated December 29,
2017. Staff suggests the edits proposed by Mr. Disco be incorporated to balance the concerns.
6. Jean Hastie, Sisters of Mercy of the Americas (September 25, 2017)
Ms. Hastie asks that reference to Mercy Center Burlingame (page INT-11) be changed to
Sisters of Mercy. This revision will be made.
7-8. Terry Nagel (October 15, 2017)
Ms. Nagel asks that discussion in the Engagement and Enrichment chapter regarding civic
engagement be expanded to more fully describe “The Burlingame Way.” This discussion will be
expanded per the suggestions in her letter.
In the Community Safety chapter, she suggests mentioning efforts to include school children in
safety preparedness programs. Policies CS-2.2 and CS-3.4 as written cover all residents,
including school children.
She suggests that Policy CS-2.9 be broadened to include all alleys. Staff suggests this policy be
reworded as follows:
CS-2.9: Alley and Emergency Access Ensure access to City alleys in the downtown area,
and maintain rear building exits to be clear and unobstructed in accordance with the
American with Disabilities Act. Ensure that alleys citywide that provide rear egress from rear
exists provide clear and unobstructed access all the way to a public way.
She heartily supports the inclusion of Policy CS-3.5 regarding CERT programs.
3
Regarding liquefaction zones shown on Figure CS-6, she suggests a policy of notifying people
of increased hazards during earthquakes in such zones. Policy CS-3.3 addresses public
education regarding all hazards.
9. Jennifer Lee, City of Burlingame Environmental Regulatory Compliance Coordinator
(October 26, 2017)
Most of Ms. Lee’s comments related to document formatting fixes. These edits will be made as
indicated.
Ms. Lee requests that an implementation program be added to Chapter XI indicating that the
City will adopt a Green Infrastructure Plan in accordance with the Municipal Regional
Stormwater NPDES Permit. As a Green Infrastructure Plan is a mandate, it should be reflected
in the implementation programs and will be added as submitted.
10. Danelle Rienks (October 29, 2018)
Ms. Rienks comments on the scarcity of affordable housing opportunities in Burlingame and
neighboring communities. Staff notes that the General Plan Update does not include an update
of the Housing Element, which was most recently updated in 2015. The Housing Element
includes a number of goals, policies, and programs intended to address housing matters for a
range of households and income groups. Implementation actions of the Housing Element
include the City’s adoption of commercial linkage fees to fund housing resource, involvement in
an affordable workforce and senior housing project on City-owned land in Downtown
Burlingame, and the inclusion of affordable units in projects that utilize the City’s Density Bonus
regulations.
11. Timothy Hooker (November 22, 2017)
Mr. Hooker notes that future decisions will be driven by vast volumes of data collected and that
Burlingame will need to have the technology infrastructure in place to facilitate this decision-
making. This issue is addressed in Chapter VII: Infrastructure under the topic of
Telecommunications.
12. Bob Disco, City Arborist (December 29, 2017)
The City arborist suggests revising Policy HP-5.8 as follows:
HP-5.8: Invasive Plant Species Prohibit the use of any invasive plant species in
landscaped or natural areas. Work with the California Invasive Plant Council to identify
invasive plant species within Burlingame, and Where species have already
invaded, establish plans for removal. Ensure that new development obtains appropriate
permits and approvals related to invasive species from the Army Corps of Engineers and
other relevant agencies.
4
13. Laurie Graham (no date)
Ms. Graham suggests including policy for bird-safe windows in new development. Staff is
familiar with bird-friendly design features and believes they could be practical in new
development. While consideration could be deferred to development review, staff suggests the
following policy be added to the Bayfront section of the Community Character Chapter:
CC-6.8: Bird-Friendly Design
To minimize adverse effects on native and migratory birds, incorporate design measures to
promote bird safety as part of development review. [DR]
14. San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) (January 5, 2018)
The SFPUC raises objection to any land use designation change that affects its properties,
noting its intergovernmental immunity (that is, ability to regulate its own property no matter the
General Plan designation or zoning). The SFPUC also notes that any future use of properties
owned by the agency will be subject to the SFPUC’s Project Review Process.
The Parks and Recreation and Rail Corridor designations applied via the General Plan update
do not preclude SFPUC’s use of these properties for public utility purposes, particularly given
the statutory authority of SFPUC to regulate how the properties are used and developed.
With regard to any planned redesign of California Drive, at the time such occurs, SFPUC will be
consulted to the extent its properties are affected.
With regard to the Francard Eucalyptus Grove, any action by the City or SFPUC affecting the
grove could be subject to review under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) given the grove’s protected status. Regarding tree
preservation along California Drive, Policy HP-7.3 promotes such “wherever possible.”
15. Sierra Club Loma Prieta et al (January 9, 2018)
The letter addresses a proposed project at 1300 Bayshore Highway with regard to bird-friendly
design. However in the last paragraph of the letter, there is a request that the Envision
Burlingame General Plan include a bird-friendly design policy for all projects along the Bay.
Staff is familiar with bird-friendly design features and believes they could be practical in new
development. While consideration could be deferred to development review, staff suggests the
following policy be added to the Bayfront section of the Community Character Chapter:
CC-6.8: Bird-Friendly Design
Incorporate design measures to promote bird safety as part of development review to
minimize adverse effects on native and migratory birds. [DR]
16. John A. Matthews, Jr. (February 6, 2018)
5
Mr. Matthews requests that the property at 1764 Marco Polo Way, which is part of the proposed
Peninsula Wellness Community but is not owned by the Peninsula Health Care District, be
designated for multi-family use rather than Public/Institutional. The Draft General Plan had
anticipated that land use and zoning designations would be determined by the master plan.
However in consideration of the ongoing nature of the Peninsula Wellness Community and
uncertainty regarding which properties may ultimately be included, staff suggests that properties
not currently designated as “Unclassified” (the current General Plan and Zoning designation
applied to institutional sites) retain land use designations more consistent with current land use
and zoning designations as determined by the current North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific
Plan and Trousdale West (TW) Zoning, respectively.
Meanwhile, in an EIR comment letter (August 20, 2018), the Peninsula Health Care District has
indicated interest in a mixed-use land use designation more consistent with its plans for a mix of
senior residential, support services, office, and community uses, and has suggested that a
“North Burlingame Mixed Use Overlay” be designated for its properties.
Given these requests, staff suggests the following designations for the respective properties
rather than the Public/Institutional land use:
Address
Current
North Burlingame/Rollins
Road Land Use and Zoning
Designations
Proposed
General Plan Update
Designation
Properties fronting Trousdale Drive
1609 Trousdale Drive
1819 Trousdale Drive
1825 Trousdale Drive
1875 Trousdale Drive
• Current Land Use: Mixed-
Use Office Residential
• Current Zoning: Trousdale
West (TW)
• Recommendation: North
Burlingame Mixed Use
Properties fronting Marco Polo Way
1720 Marco Polo Way
1730 Marco Polo Way
1740 Marco Polo Way
1764 Marco Polo Way
• Current Land Use:
Residential – Medium-High
Density
• Current Zoning: Trousdale
West (TW)
• Recommendation: North
Burlingame Mixed Use
Peninsula Health Care District Properties
1801 Trousdale Drive
1811 Trousdale Drive
• Land Use: Institutional
• Zoning: Unclassified
Recommendation:
Public/Institutional with “North
Burlingame Mixed Use Overlay”
17. Greg Holtmann (March 28, 2018)
Mr. Holtmann suggests that a new hotel on the Bayfront on the State-owned property would
benefit Burlingame and that more intense housing and parking development be permitted in the
Broadway/California Drive area. Staff notes that the State Lands Commission is responsible for
determining which land use or mix of uses is proposed for its property, but that the land use
policy proposed in the General Plan would allow this development choice. Furthermore, the land
use policy proposed in the General Plan would allow for increased housing density in the
Broadway/California Drive area.
6
18. Jennifer Pfaff (July 5, 2018)
Ms. Pfaff questions whether Figure CC-3 shows the full extent of the historic El Camino Real
zone. The referenced figure is not intended to show the historic zone but instead the general
boundaries of particular land use study areas. For clarification, the historic tree grove extends
from Ray Drive to Peninsula Avenue, which in the referenced study area diagram corresponds
to both the El Camino Real and Downtowns study areas.
19. Kamran Ehsanipour, AIA (July 11, 2018)
Mr. Ehsanipour requests that the proposed land use designation for the property at 1501 El
Camino Real be changed from General Commercial to North Burlingame Mixed Use. Staff
supports an alternative land use designation to allow mixed use but recommends Broadway
Mixed Use, as the development scale is more appropriate and ground-floor commercial would
be required.
Alternatively, the North Burlingame Mixed Use designation could be applied as requested by Mr.
Ehsanipour if it includes provisions for a height limit that would be consistent with the
surrounding neighborhood. The properties to the north and south are zoned R-3, which has a
height limit of 35 feet, or up to 55 feet with a Conditional Use Permit. This alternative would
allow more units than the Broadway Mixed Use designation (Broadway Mixed Use specifies a
maximum density of 40 units/acre, compared to a range of 20 to 120 units/acre in the North
Burlingame Mixed Use designation).
20. John Kevranian (August 14, 2018)
Mr. Kevranian requests that ferry service be addressed in the Mobility chapter. The General
Plan Community Character Chapter includes discussion, goals, and a policy relating to ferry
service:
Goal CC-5: Maintain and promote the Bayfront Area as a premier destination along San
Francisco Bay for land- and water-based recreation, hospitality uses, creative industries,
logistics support, water-based transit service, and local businesses that benefit from
proximity to San Francisco International Airport.
Goal CC-6: Establish a cohesive design character for the Bayfront Area that protects views
to the waterfront, encourages walking and biking, accommodates water-based recreation
and ferry service, and addresses sea level rise.
Policy CC-6.6: Water-based Activities – Accommodate access to the Bay for water-based
recreation and transit uses.
However, a specific ferry service proposal is not presented in the General Plan. While ferry
service was discussed during development of the General Plan, it was not included as a policy
matter in absence of a proposal. Nevertheless, Goal CC-6 could allow consideration of a ferry
proposal to be consistent with the General Plan should one be presented.
7
21. Joseph Baylock (August 30, 2018)
While Mr. Baylock’s letter comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR), the
letter was received after the conclusion of the EIR comment period on August 20, 2018. The
comments may be received and responded to as comments on the Draft General Plan, but
cannot be included in the Final EIR (FEIR).
Mr. Baylock’s letter addresses two areas of concern: water supply and project density.
Regarding water supply, the General Plan is obligated to plan for and evaluate water supply
within the context of the municipal and water service boundaries; however, overall water
availability is a regional concern. The Infrastructure Chapter (Chapter VII) of the Draft General
Plan includes a goal to ensure the long-term availability of water through conservation methods
and regular maintenance and improvements to the overall water supply delivery system.
Policies include maintaining and implementing the Urban Water Management Plan—which
outlines water conservation strategies and programs, as required by the State’s Water
Management Planning Act—and preparing and implementing a Water Shortage Allocation Plan
that for periods of system-wide shortage.
Regarding project density, Mr. Baylock suggests that the density of the high-density residential
land use (shown as “North Burlingame Mixed Use” on the Land Use Plan/Figure CC-1) should
be reduced to 100 du/acre, rather than increased to 140 du/ac as evaluated as an alternative in
the EIR. The Draft General Plan specifies 120 du/ac as the maximum for the North Burlingame
Mixed Use, with an alternative evaluated in the EIR to allow up to 140 du/ac. This is a policy
decision for the Planning Commission and City Council to consider in the public hearing
process. The evaluation of a density up 140 du/ac in the EIR would not preclude the Planning
Commission and City Council from specifying a lower density, whether 120 du/ac as specified in
the Draft General Plan, or a lower density.
22. Bryan Miranda, Public Storage (August 31, 2018)
Mr. Miranda indicates an interest by Public Storage to maintain and possibly expand its facilities
located within the proposed Rollins Road Live/Work area. As such, he has requested that self-
storage uses continue to be allowed under the Live/Work land use designation and its
respective zoning, and that a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) greater than the 1.0 maximum proposed
for the Live/Work land use designation be allowed with a Conditional Use Permit. He suggests
that self-storage uses have substantially less impacts than other commercial uses would have
(in terms of traffic, water supply, public services), and proposes that a FAR of 1.25 to 1.5 be
allowed with a Conditional Use Permit on a case-by-case basis.
Staff notes that the Live/Work land use description in the Draft General Plan allows long-
established industrial buildings and uses may remain, provided any new use proposed in an
existing industrial building is deemed compatible with live/work uses. Light industrial and
warehouse uses are mentioned as allowed uses.
Staff suggests that provisions for increased FAR for less-impactful land uses such as self-
storage be considered as a provision in the zoning regulations. Provided the provision
incorporates performance standards accounting for the reduced impact of the use, such a
provision could be consistent with the assumptions of land use intensity and impacts evaluated
in the General Plan EIR. The additional FAR could also be contingent on the provision of a
8
community benefit or benefits, consistent with the framework being developed for the Live/Work
standards.
23. John Bergener, San Francisco International Airport (October 16, 2018)
Mr. Bergener notes three policies in the Community Safety Element of the Draft General Plan
that are inconsistent with the Comprehensive Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan for the
Environs of San Francisco International Airport.
First, he notes that the Airport recommends that Policy CS-4-9 be revised to be consistent with
the Airport Influence Area (AlA) IP-1 Airport Influence Area A- Real Estate Disclosure Area, of
the CALUCP, to read:
Require that all new development, the real estate disclosure requirements of state law
apply. Section 11010 of the Business and Professions Code requires people offering
subdivided property for sale or lease to disclose the presence of all existing and planned
airports within two miles of the property (Cal. Bus. And Prof. Code Section 11010(b)(13).
The law requires that, ifthe property is within an "airport influence area" designated by the
airport land use commission, the following statement must be included in the notice of
intention to offer the property for sale:
Notice of Airport in Vicinity
This property is presently located in the vicinity of an airport, within what is known as an
airport influence areas. For that reason, the property may be subject to some of the
annoyances or inconveniences associated with proximity to airport operations (for example:
noise, vibration, or odors). Individual sensitivities to those annoyances can vary from person
to person. You may wish to consider what airport annoyances, if any, are associated with
the property before you complete your purchase and determine whether they are acceptable
to you.
Staff suggests that Policy CS-9 be revised as proposed.
Second, he identifies a conflict with Policy CS-5.4, which proposes identifying setback areas
and parklands suitable for a wetland buffer. He notes that locating new wetlands in close
proximity to the Airport poses wildlife hazards to arriving and departing aircraft, and that a policy
recommending creation of wetlands would be inconsistent with the CALUCP, AP-4 Other Flight
Hazards are Incompatible, which states, " ... (f) Any use that creates an increased attraction for
wildlife, particularly large flocks of birds, that is inconsistent with FAA rules and regulations,
including, but not limited to, FAA Order 5200.5A, Waste Disposal Sites On or Near Airports,
FAA Advisory Circular 150/5200-33B, Hazardous Wildlife Attractants On or Near Airports, and
any successor or replacement orders or advisory circulars.
Staff suggests deleting Policy CS-5.4 as requested. The remaining policies under Goal CS-5
(Protect vulnerable areas and infrastructure from flooding related to rising sea levels in the San
Francisco Bay) can address rising sea levels without creating hazards for airport operations.
Third, he recommends that Policy CS-8.3 be revised to clearly state that the Airport Land Use
Commission review is to determine whether the proposed action is consistent or not consistent
with the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP), with the Airport Land Use Commission
9
(C/CAG Board) Consistency Determination Process. Staff suggests Policy CS-8.3 be revised to
read:
Policy CS-8.3: Airport Land Use Commission Review
Ensure all applicable plans, ordinances, and development applications are reviewed by the
City/County Association of Governments Board of Directors, acting as the for San Mateo
County's Airport Land Use Commission, for a determination of the consistency with the most
current Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan for the Environs of San Francisco International
Airport, as required by State law.
EXHIBIT B
General Plan Update
Public Review Draft
Public Comments
1
From:Kris Cannon
Sent:Wednesday, August 30, 2017 10:51 AM
To:CD/PLG-Kevin Gardiner
Subject:Re: CAC Meeting #18 Agenda - tomorrow
Hi Kevin,
Sorry to miss the meeting tonight. I have just reread the draft and think it is a very good document.
Lots and lots of good work here.
The Implementation Program chapter is very impressive. Sorry I can't hear the comments from the
group.
I do have a few recommendations for additions under EE, realizing that this is a late time to add
things. But I feel that the absence of acknowledgement of the library’s importance in our future should
be reinforced.
In reality the library, its programs and resources, are a major contribution to the good life in
Burlingame. More people use the library, as a meeting and resource place, than any other institution.
It is a magnet for ALL kinds of Burlingame citizens.
Somewhere we need to say, the library is our community’s resource for information.
The changes and technological advances will come, the library will include them and give people the
information no matter what medium.
Should be a mention that there are two public libraries in Burlingame, both Main Library and
Easton Branch (perhaps in descriptions of the two neighborhoods?).
Both are historic buildings.
Under Education and Life Long Learning
EE – 1.10 Library facilities (meeting rooms for small and large group, students and public) are
available for public use.
“research technology improvements as available” and as needed.
EE – 1.12 Increase access to literacy programs for all age groups. (this means reading and getting
information, no matter in what medium)
EE-1.13 . pEE4. Include support for existing foundation (Burlingame Library Foundation – which has
been a large growing annual financial support for the library since 1995) . Surely the existing
foundation should be mentioned if we are mentioning things like fees.
Thanks for the opportunity for input.
Kris Cannon
(in Paris)
On Tuesday, August 29, 2017 3:06 PM, CD/PLG-Kevin Gardiner <kgardiner@burlingame.org> wrote:
2
Hello Community Advisory Committee Members:
Attached is the agenda for our final CAC meeting, tomorrow night August 30th at 7:00 at the
recreation center. We’re having the meeting in the “Art Room” at the far end of the corridor since that
seemed to work nicely last time. We’ll have signs posted to help find the way.
Tomorrow night we’ll be discussing the Public Review Draft of the General Plan and the upcoming
community workshop in October. In particular, we’ll be discussing the Implementation Programs
chapter (Chapter XI) since this is new. As you review the draft, please take an extra moment to
review the programs in this chapter and come prepared with your questions and comments.
We’ll also be demonstrating an example of the “ePlan” which will be a fully web-based version of the
General Plan. This will allow users to easy navigate between topics, policies, programs, and cross
references. It creates a dynamic, user-friendly experience so that it’s truly a “living plan” that people
can use every day.
The Public Review Draft can be downloaded from the documents page on the Envision Burlingame
website:
http://www.envisionburlingame.org/app_pages/view/17
We know some people like to review documents on their screens, and others prefer hard copies. If
you’d like to have us print you a hard copy, please let me know and I’ll arrange to have for you to pick
up at City Hall, or we’ll bring it for you to the meeting. But please let me know ahead of time, as we’re
just printing copies as they are requested.
Please let me know if you have any questions before tomorrow night’s meeting, or if you’d like to
obtain a hard copy of the draft.
Thanks,
Kevin
Kevin Gardiner, Planning Manager
City of Burlingame Community Development Department – Planning Division
501 Primrose Road | Burlingame, CA 94010
Tel. 650.558.7253 | Fax 650.696.3790 | kgardiner@burlingame.org
From:hhdaley
To:CD/PLG-Kevin Gardiner
Cc:Justin Moresco;Terry Nagel;kmschmidt
Subject:Comments: General Plan, Chapter 8 - Emergency Prep, DR, Community Resilience
Date:Tuesday, August 29, 2017 3:27:16 PM
Hello Kevin,
Knowing how busy you are, I also thank you (along with Justin Moresco) for the opportunity to provide General
Plan comments to you via email.
It is very exciting and encouraging to see resiliency and safety featured in our City's core plan. I am an original
member of the Burlingame Neighborhood Network board, and my professional background is in corporate risk
management.
Highlighted in yellow are points of particular interest. My questions/comments are in blue. These are specific
to Chapter 8 (below).
Essentially:
Chapter 8 does a terrific job defining the What.
Suggest defining the owners/Who would be helpful to clarify accountability and promote achievement.
Thank you, Kevin.
Regards,
Holly Daley
BNN
2117 Poppy Drive
Burlingame
Emergency Preparedness, Disaster Response and
Community Resilience
Burlingame—like all cities in the Bay Area—is exposed to a variety of natural and
human-caused hazards that require consideration in emergency response planning.
The environmental features that contribute to Burlingame’s scenic qualities and great
places to enjoy nature have been created by earthquake faults, steep slopes, wooded
hillsides, and San Francisco Bay, all of which pose potential hazards. Catastrophic
earthquakes, landslides, flooding, wildland and urban fires, and liquefaction
represent natural hazards that must be addressed in any planning process. Human-
caused hazards include energy instability and threats of terrorism.
Preparing for potential disasters and having adequate response strategies in place are
not solely the responsibility of our government, although we place a high degree of
reliance upon local, regional, statewide, and national agencies and systems. We
anticipate that proper emergency preparedness and disaster response from
government agencies means that they will have the necessary equipment and
resources to respond to a disaster and to maintain public health and welfare without
regular services (such as water and electricity) during the following recovery period.
We also recognize that having a resilient community enables a city to recover more
quickly from a disaster and that private businesses, individual citizens and volunteer
organizations and associations play a critical role. In the event of a major disaster
city emergency responders and city resources will be focused on the major incidents
and infrastructure and residents will need to be able to support each other from 24 up
to 72 or more hours.
This goal and supporting policies are designed to prepare residents and businesses
for disasters, and to ensure that the City of Burlingame and other government
agencies are ready to respond to protect lives and property in the event of an
emergency, and to build a more resilient community.
CS-3.1: Emergency Management Plan
HD question: Is this plan 'owned' by CCFD or City Manager or Planning Manager?
Maintain a Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan that outlines the City’s
responsibilities and procedures in an emergency. Ensure the plan integrates needed
coordination between the City and neighborhoods, schools, churches, businesses, and
hotels.
CS-3.2: Emergency Drills
HD question: Not sure who is coordinating, i.e. is City or CCFD working with
schools to assure annual student ShakeOut drills, or is City or CCFD conducting
training with any businesses/Rotary/Chamber groups, is this part of City or CCFD's
mandate (v. an objective)? Is City Manager evaluating said testing results of the ER
plan? Is there a specific frequency, i.e. annually? Assume this is in addition to the
citywide exercise BNN has been coordinating with residential blocks which, Kevin,
we would love to invite you to join (90-minutes on 10/14).
Coordinate with partner agencies—such as neighboring cities, schools and colleges,
businesses, and community organizations—and residents and neighborhoods to
conduct emergency and disaster preparedness exercises that test emergency response
plans.
CS-3.3: Public Education
HD comment: As a community group which helps provide this public education,
BNN has been appreciative of City funding in recent years which helps offset our
personal expenses. Thank you.
Provide public education for individuals, schools, and community groups to promote
citizen awareness and preparedness for self-action in case of a major disaster or
emergency. [PI]
CS-3.4: Emergency Preparedness Kits
HD comment: Thank you for recognizing and supporting the pursuit of funding for
such supplies.
Encourage all residents and businesses to prepare and maintain emergency kits with
enough supplies to be self-sufficient for three to seven days. Support establishing
emergency caches at the neighborhood and business level by partnering with
community organizations pursuing funding. [PI]
CS-3.5: Community Emergency Response Training
HD question: This seems CERT specific, thus, owned by CCFD, and accountable to
whom - the City? Who owns this neighborhood communication plan? Would Rik,
BNN or HAMs receive resources if expected to develop this (rather help CCFD
develop it)? This sounds like Rik and Suzanne's show!
Maintain a volunteer-based Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) and
related emergency response training programs, and ongoing refresher exercises.
Establish and maintain a communication and deployment plan for CERTs during a
disaster and align the plan with neighborhood communication plans. [SO/FB/PI]
CS-3.6: Energy Assurance Plan
Develop, maintain, and implement a citywide Energy Assurance Plan that documents
the energy needs of critical City and community facilities and functions, establishes
goals and actions to increase energy resiliency during disasters, and prioritizes the
use of renewable energy or other sustainable technologies to reduce dependency on
the grid during power outages. [SO/MP]
CS-3.7: Mutual Aid Agreements
Participate in mutual aid agreements to ensure adequate resources, facilities, and
other support for emergency response. [AC]
CS-3.8: Rail Agency Coordination
Coordinate with the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board (Caltrain) and the
California High Speed Rail Authority to ensure that new train services, including
electrification and higher speeds, do not result in overburdened safety risks to the
community both in terms of infrastructure and access (e.g., rail street crossing
closures). [AC]
CS-3.9: Mass Communications Device
Obtain, maintain, and regularly upgrade a mass communications system to
effectively notify people during disasters and emergencies by using current
communication technologies. [PI]
CS-3.10: Community Resiliency Officer
HD question: Hooray! Especially in the wake of Houston. Would this be full-time;
reporting to City Manager v. CCFD?
Create a Community Resiliency Officer position at the City that would be
responsible for:
Leading community engagement and education about safety, disaster
preparation and resilience;
Bringing resources together, such as HAMS, CERT, BNA, CCFD, BFD,
City Manager, and City Council;
Bringing best regional, state and national practices to Burlingame; and
Developing recommendations to mitigate identified risks. [SO] CS-3.11:
Emergency Preparedness Activities and Communications
Publish and promote emergency preparedness activities and drills. Use the
City social media, and the website to provide safety tips that may include
identifying and correcting household hazards, knowing how and when to turn
off utilities, helping family members protect themselves during and after an
earthquake, recommending neighborhood preparation activities, and advising
residents to maintain an emergency supply kit containing first-aid supplies,
food, drinking water and battery operated radios and flashlights. [PI]
CS-3.12: Neighborhood Response Groups
HD question: Again, is this a City Manager commitment of resources (v. CCFD)?
Participate in Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) training and consider
training neighborhood groups to care for themselves during disasters. To this end,
actively assist in neighborhood drills and safety exercises to increase participation
and build community support. [FB/PI]
CS-3.13: Dependent Populations
Coordinate with State agencies that oversee facilities for persons with disabilities,
and those with access and functional needs, to ensure that such facilities conform to
all health and safety requirements, including emergency planning, training, exercises
and employee education. [AC]
CS-3.14: Foreign Language Emergency Information
Obtain translated emergency preparedness materials and make them available to
appropriate foreign language populations. [PI]
From:Justin Moresco
To:CD/PLG-Kevin Gardiner
Cc:Terry Nagel; Kathy Schmidt; Holly Daley
Subject:Recommended edits to draft General Plan
Date:Tuesday, August 29, 2017 7:42:26 AM
Hello Kevin,
Thank you for the opportunity to provide input into the draft General Plan. Unfortunately, I
can't make this Wednesday's meeting, so I'm sending my feedback via email.
You and I have exchanged emails about the draft plan before. To provide a bit of context, I'm
a structural engineer, so I've focused my comments on the residential upgrades section of the
plan. I was also a Burlingame Neighborhood Network board member for three years.
CS-7.2 Residential Upgrades
Require that any residential facility that is being increased more than 50 percent assessed value or physical
size conform to all provisions of the current building code throughout the entire structure. Encourage owners
of residential buildings with known structural defects such as unreinforced garage openings, “soft story”
construction, unbolted foundations, and inadequate sheer walls to take steps to remedy the problem by
retrofitting buildings to meet current, “life-safety” engineering standards. and bring buildings up to the
current building code. Form an ad hoc committee to investigate, before the end of 2020, and describe the
seismic risk posed by pre-1980 wood frame “soft story” buildings in Burlingame and to evaluate the costs
and benefits of potential actions that could be pursued by the City. The ad hoc committee shall report its
findings to the City Council before the end of 2020.
I suggest removing "current building codes" in the second sentence because this would include all sorts of things,
like plumbing and electrical provisions, unrelated to safety. The "life-safety" standard is what we're after and is
widely recognized within the engineering community. There are engineering standards that could be referenced and
used by the city. You could extend this argument to the first sentence, too. But in this case, since it's in the context
of a major upgrade, it perhaps makes more sense to require meeting the current building code. I'd be curious to
know what the current Burlingame Building Code requires as I'm sure there is some reference in there about large
upgrades triggering improvements elsewhere in the building. Again, if our intent is safety, it might make sense to
dial this requirement back a bit. As it stands -- depending on what the current building code requires -- this could
have a significant effect on many projects across the city, which in turn might garner a lot of pushback from the real
estate industry. A compromise here might be to say that the entire structure must meet current, life-safety standards,
similar to the second sentence, but in this case it becomes a requirement rather than an encouragement.
I suggest a change in the language at the end just to make it clear that the entire study described would need to be
completed by 2020. In the current language, one could interpret the 2020 target to not include the costs and benefits
portion.
Thank you,
Justin
1
From:Kris Cannon
Sent:Wednesday, August 30, 2017 2:26 PM
To:CD/PLG-Kevin Gardiner
Subject:Re: CAC Meeting #18 Agenda - tomorrow
Hi Kevin,
Small correction
IP 73
It's Burlingame School District
not unified - that indicates a K-12 district.
Kris Cannon
On Tuesday, August 29, 2017 3:06 PM, CD/PLG-Kevin Gardiner <kgardiner@burlingame.org> wrote:
Hello Community Advisory Committee Members:
Attached is the agenda for our final CAC meeting, tomorrow night August 30th at 7:00 at the
recreation center. We’re having the meeting in the “Art Room” at the far end of the corridor since that
seemed to work nicely last time. We’ll have signs posted to help find the way.
Tomorrow night we’ll be discussing the Public Review Draft of the General Plan and the upcoming
community workshop in October. In particular, we’ll be discussing the Implementation Programs
chapter (Chapter XI) since this is new. As you review the draft, please take an extra moment to
review the programs in this chapter and come prepared with your questions and comments.
We’ll also be demonstrating an example of the “ePlan” which will be a fully web-based version of the
General Plan. This will allow users to easy navigate between topics, policies, programs, and cross
references. It creates a dynamic, user-friendly experience so that it’s truly a “living plan” that people
can use every day.
The Public Review Draft can be downloaded from the documents page on the Envision Burlingame
website:
http://www.envisionburlingame.org/app_pages/view/17
2
We know some people like to review documents on their screens, and others prefer hard copies. If
you’d like to have us print you a hard copy, please let me know and I’ll arrange to have for you to pick
up at City Hall, or we’ll bring it for you to the meeting. But please let me know ahead of time, as we’re
just printing copies as they are requested.
Please let me know if you have any questions before tomorrow night’s meeting, or if you’d like to
obtain a hard copy of the draft.
Thanks,
Kevin
Kevin Gardiner, Planning Manager
City of Burlingame Community Development Department – Planning Division
501 Primrose Road | Burlingame, CA 94010
Tel. 650.558.7253 | Fax 650.696.3790 | kgardiner@burlingame.org
Commented [JP1]:
Commented [JP2]:
ANZA EXPEDITION CAMP - The Anza Expedition of 1776, on its way up the peninsula to locate sites for
the Presidio and Mission of San Francisco, camped here on March 26 at a dry watercourse a short league
beyond Arroyo de San Mateo. Historical Location: El Camino Real and Ralston Avenue.
1
THIS SECTION IS NOT ALLOWING ME TO EDIT IN WORD!! PLEASE SEE STICKY FOR CORRECTION LINE 6:
Commented [JP1]: Line 6 edit: “’stations built
between 1890s and 1920s established…..(REPLACES
incorrect “in the”)
5
▪
▪
Commented [JP2]: 904 Bayswater (condos) only has
6 units, so the photo belongs in the Medium density,
rather than the medium/high.
Formatted: Font: Times New Roman, 10 pt
11
▪
▪
Commented [JP3]: CANNOT EDIT PARAGRAPH
FOLLOWING< BUT THERE ARE NO DENSITIES SET
FOR IN DSP. I THINK THERE SHOULD BE, SO, THIS
EITHER SHOULD BE ELIMINATED, OR THERE
NEEDS TO BE POLICIES OF DENSITY TO GO
ALONG WITH THIS.
25
CC- 2.4
n
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪
Formatted: Font: 12 pt
▪
This section CC-26 and CC-27 has a number of errors in it and this chapter will not allow me to edit. SEE
FOLLOWING SUGGESTED EDITED SECTION IN ITALICS:
Burlingame has a rich history as one of the earliest complete communities on the
Peninsula. San Francisco residents of the late 1800s wishing to escape the city’s cold, foggy
summers built grand estates in Burlingame where they enjoyed sunny weather and beautiful
wooded landscapes. Development of the town proceeded slowly in the 1890s with the
27
establishment of the Burlingame Country Club, and the construction of a train station in
1893-4 on a route that extended from San Francisco to San Jose. The station was the first
permanent structure in the United States built in the Mission Revival architectural style. By
the turn of the century, the area featured many estates owned by families drawn by the
proximity of San Francisco and the Burlingame Country Club. The first residential
subdivision of the area, “Town of Burlingame,” was completed in 1896, consisting of
hundreds of parcels generally 50 feet wide and 150 deep. The settlement grew slowly until
1906 when the San Francisco earthquake and fires forced many people to leave San
Francisco in search of new homes. By then, a handful of modest businesses had been
established in close vicinity to the station, in what became known as known as Burlingame
Square, clearly defining the center of this growing community. By 1908, over a dozen
additional subdivisions had been recorded in Burlingame.
27
FIGURE CC-2: IDENTIFIES THE FIVE (not four)……..
Commented [JP6]: Line 4, remove “and” after El
Camino Real, replace with COMMA, put Comma after
Severn Lodge Dairy and ADD “ANZA EXPEDITION
CAMP SITE”
Commented [JP1]:
Commented [JP2]:
Commented [JP3]:
1
From:Jean Hastie
Sent:Monday, September 25, 2017 8:34 AM
To:CD/PLG-Kevin Gardiner
Subject:A Request
I’ve read through the Draft General Plan posted on the web site. Kudos on an incredible document and representation of
so much thought, research, and planning.
If possible, I would like to request that the reference to Mercy Center on page INT-11 be changed from Mercy Center
Burlingame to Sisters of Mercy. Mercy Center is a program entity within the Sisters of Mercy organization. There could
be some sensitivity around reference to Mercy Center rather than the acdtual organization, i.e. Sisters of Mercy. Thanks
for understanding.
Jean
Jean Hastie
WMW Special Projects Administrator
Sisters of Mercy of the Americas, West Midwest Community
Office: 650.340.7441
Sun, Oct 15th 2017, 08:30
Name:
Terry Nagel
Email:
Subject:
Civic engagement, safety, environmental progress
Comment:
Civic Engagement (EE-3) I was surprised at the brevity of the "Civic Engagement" section of
the draft GP. Burlingame is known for involving community members in all major decisions. We
have a method that some have dubbed "The Burlingame Way" which involves inviting
representatives from key stakeholder groups (one rep and one backup from each) in a 12- or
18-month Working Group to map out solutions or plans. In order for the meetings to go forward,
one rep or alternate must be present from every group. We used that method for resolving the
Safeway roadblock, creating our Downtown Plan, designing the Burlingame Avenue train
station and other projects. I believe you even used it for drafting the GP and the city currently
has a group like this working on a long-term plan for El Camino Real in Burlingame. I suggest
emphasizing our city's commitment to civic engagement through Working Groups, surveys,
focus groups, presentations to community groups, workshops and public forums. I would add
language about the channels we use for outreach, which include our city newsletter, messages
included with water bills, snail mail, the city's website and social media. I would like to see the
group establish a goal of reviving the free, 9-month Burlingame Citizens' Academy, which
featured a different department head explaining how the city works. It created a lot of goodwill
and "ambassadors" for our city who helped educate their neighbors about city issues. Safety
Under CS-2.2, Fire Prevention Education, I would add schoolchildren as one of the groups that
CCFD educates about fire safety. I believe CCFD works with elementary-age children to plot
safe exits in their homes. CS-2.9 - Shouldn't the rule about ensuring access to city alleys also
include alleys in residential neighborhoods? CS-3.4 - Again, schoolchildren should be included
because I believe CCFD invites children to inventory their family preparedness kits. (At least
they used to!) It is the incentive that gets many people to build emergency kits. The goal of
establishing emergency caches is an excellent one. CS-3.5 - CERT - An excellent goal. At the
present time, volunteers are providing CERT refresher courses, meetings and newsletters, not
the city or CCFD.c Environmental Progress I haven't read the entire GP yet, but I want to make
sure there is something in the GP about specific deadlines for updating the Climate Action
Plan, annual reports to the City Council and public about progress on CAP objectives, and a
commitment to renewable energy for all city operations. Thank you!
Sun, Oct 15th 2017, 08:51
Name:
Terry Nagel
Email:
Subject:
Liquefaction map
Comment:
Figure CS-6, showing liquefaction zones, is a real surprise to me. The red zones extend farther
than I thought and the orange zones (moderate liquefaction risk) penetrate pretty far inland. I
think the city should add a goal of notifying people who live in these zones of the increased
danger during earthquakes. Thanks again!
1
CD/PLG-Kevin Gardiner
From:CY/Yard-Jennifer Lee
Sent:Thursday, October 26, 2017 10:17 AM
To:CD/PLG-Kevin Gardiner
Subject:General Plan Comments
Hi Kevin,
I have just reviewed the latest draft of the General Plan and it looks fantastic! I have some comments on the document
and I was wondering if you could relay them to your consultant. There are 23 comments in there which should be
viewable on the comment toolbar. Hopefully these should be easy edits to incorporate, about half are formatting‐
related.
One major addition that I would like to get added is the Green Infrastructure Plan in the Implementation Programs
section at the end. Since this section already lists a number of Plans and documents, I think it would be fitting to also
include the GI Plan.
L:\Stormwater\Burlingame_Public_Draft_August2017_ALL‐searchable_JLcomments.pdf
Please let me know if you have any comments. Thanks!
Jennifer Lee
Environmental Regulatory Compliance Coordinator
City of Burlingame
1361 N. Carolan Ave, Burlingame, CA 94010
(650) 558‐7381 | jlee@burlingame.org
Sign up for eNews
I. INTRODUCTION
INT-2 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
The types of housing available in the community
Use and protection of natural resources
The provision of public safety services and protection against
natural and human-caused hazards (including noise) in the city
Preparation of a general plan is also subject to the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), which means that local jurisdictions
must analyze and mitigate (where necessary) the plan’s significant
environmental impacts.
About Envision Burlingame
Envision Burlingame is the community-led planning process that guided
development of the Burlingame General Plan. When the City initiated the
Envision Burlingame process in 2015, it had not comprehensively updated
the General Plan in over 30 years. Envision Burlingame presented the
unique opportunity to engage the entire Burlingame community and ask:
“How do we want Burlingame to look, function, and feel 25 years from
now?” The process had three broad objectives:
1. DDevelop a v isio n fo r Burl in game, with particular attention paid
to the topics of stability and opportunities for desired change.
2. UUpdate polici es and regulations to ensure they address all
applicable regional, State, and federal requirements.
3. CCr e a te an updat ed a n d di git a l Ge ner a l Plan that is easily
accessed, understood, and applied by residents, property and
business owners, and decision makers.
Envision Burlingame was a robust community-driven process that
included multiple community workshops and surveys, a Community
Advisory Committee (CAC) that met 18 times over the two-plus-year
process, and extensive input from the Burlingame Planning Commission
and City Council. The effort also made a priority of engaging the “next
generation” with involvement from local Burlingame high school
students, as well as students from area universities. A summary of the 1
Summary of Comments on
Burlingame_Public_Draft_August2017_ALL-
searchable_JLcomments.pdf
Page: 1
Number: 1 Author: jlee Subject: Inserted Text Date: 10/25/2017 1:58:22 PM
attending nearby
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | INT-5
Plan Chapters
Community Character
The Community Character chapter fulfills State requirements for the Land
Use Element, and identifies policies to focus growth in targeted areas to
preserve Burlingame’s historic and single-family neighborhoods, the
character of El Camino Real, the jobs base along the Bayfront and Rollins
Road, and commercial districts of Burlingame Avenue and Broadway. This
chapter is organized around areas of stability and areas of change,
highlighting the unique characteristics, land uses, and design aesthetics
of each Burlingame district.
Economic Development
The Economic Development chapter addresses a topic emphasized by
community members, but is not required by law. This chapter provides
policies to diversify the economic base and expand employment
opportunities by attracting new and retaining existing businesses.
Mobility
The Mobility chapter fulfills State requirements for the Circulation
Element, and outlines policies to improve all modes of travel throughout
Burlingame, with an increased emphasis on improvement for cyclists and
pedestrians. Particular attention is focused on California Drive, with the
aim of better accommodating pedestrians and bicyclists. Attention is also
given to the importance of better connections across Highway 101 for all
travel modes.
Infrastructure
The Infrastructure chapter addresses topics required for the Circulation
Element: water supply storage and delivery, wastewater collection and
treatment, flood control, solid waste management, and
telecommunications.
Community Safety
The Community Safety chapter meets State requirements for the Safety
and Noise Elements. This chapter establishes goals and policies
1
Page: 2
Number: 1 Author: jlee Subject: Inserted Text Date: 10/25/2017 2:01:03 PM
stormwater management,
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CX-3
dates to 1917, when the Hillsborough-based Severn Lodge Dairy opened
a distribution plant at 220 California Drive. The wall was restored by the
Burlingame Historical Society and listed a point of interest on the
California Register in 2004.
In addition to specifically designated historic sites, Burlingame is home to
entire neighborhoods that provide a cohesive historic fabric that is
important to preserve. The Burlingame General Plan includes policies to
preserve and enhance designated historic sites, and to identify additional
buildings, landscapes, and districts to be includes as designated
resources.
Context and Community Profile
Geographic Context
The City of Burlingame is located on the San Francisco Peninsula, about
10 miles south of San Francisco. The corporate city limits encompass
approximately 5.8 square miles, of which 76 percent (4.4 square miles)
consists of developable land and the remaining 24 percent waters of San
Francisco Bay (approximately 1.3 square miles) and the Mills Canyon
Preserve (0.15 square miles). See FFigure CX-1.
Sphere of Influence
A city’s sphere of influence refers to adjacent unincorporated areas that
receive or may in the future receive services from the city and may
become part of the city. The San Mateo County Local Agency Formation
Commission (LAFCO) identifies the unincorporated residential
neighborhood of Burlingame Hills as within Burlingame’s sphere of
influence (see Figure CX-2 ).
Burlingame Planning Area
A general plan, pursuant to State law, must address all areas within the
jurisdiction’s planning area. The planning area for the Burlingame
General Plan includes all properties within the incorporated city limits and
1
Page: 3
Number: 1 Author: jlee Subject: Inserted Text Date: 10/25/2017 2:12:41 PM
are
VII. INFRASTRUCTURE
IIF-4 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
community. In 2004, the City prepared a Water System Master Plan that
identified deficiencies within the water system and prioritized
improvement projects to ensure the long-term integrity of the water
system. Due to aging water system infrastructure, long-term projections
for completion of improvements and annual upkeep and replacement of
the system are constant necessities.
Given California’s history of severe droughts and projected increases in
the Bay Area population through 2040 and beyond, water conservation is
critical for ensuring that future demands can be met sustainability. Prior to
the drought of 2011-2016, Burlingame water users consumed
approximately 3.0 to 5.5 million gallons per day of potable water. As of
July 2015, that level had dropped significantly, to approximately 2.4 to 4.6
million gallons per day. The conservation achievement was spurred both
by a statewide mandate imposed by Governor Jerry Brown and collective
voluntary water conservation efforts by community members. However,
water use in the city is projected to rise to approximately 5.22 million
gallons per day by 2040(accounting for both residential and
nonresidential users). As of 2016, the City had a water supply assurance
agreement from the SFPUC to receive an allotment of 5.23 million gallons
per day on an annual average. While the allotments are negotiated on a
scheduled basis, with Burlingame having the ability to request an
increased supply, rising water costs and the almost finite water supply
means that increased future conservation measures will be needed to
ensure supplies remain available.
The following goal and policies aim to improve the overall function and
reliability of the water system and to encourage water conservation by all
users.
2040(accounting
forts
dto
1
2
Page: 4
Number: 1 Author: jlee Subject: Sticky Note Date: 10/25/2017 4:50:14 PM
missing space
Number: 2 Author: jlee Subject: Highlight Date: 10/25/2017 4:50:03 PM
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | IIF-9
Burlingame/Ralston, Sanchez/Terrace, Mills and El Portal/Trousdale.
Annual storm drain fees assessed to all properties fund the $39 million in
bonds sold to finance identified improvements through 2039 (see F igure
I F -3). The improvement program is specifically designed to help increase
storm drainage capacity, replace aging pipes and pumps, improve public
safety, and reduce local flooding.
According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the
agency responsible for preparing Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs),
Burlingame is located primarily within Zone X 0.2, which means there is a
0.2 percent annual chance of flood hazard (referred to as a 500-year storm
event), and partially within Zone X - Area of Minimal Flood Hazard.
Properties along certain creeks and on the Bayside of Highway 101 lie
within Zone A, Zone AE, Zone AH, and Zone VE, all of which have
mandatory flood insurance requirements. Figure IF-4 shows the flood
zones in Burlingame.
Due to the age of the regional system, many of the storm drain systems
have a 10-year design storm capacity, not the standard 30-year capacity
for regional facilities. Some local storm drain systems also have less than
a two-year design storm capacity, where the standard is also 10 years. In
addition to these flood concerns, the City will be subject to flooding over
time due to sea level rise, as outlined in the Safety Element. Flood
protection improvements represent critical infrastructure investments
needed to protect life and property and encourage continued private
economic investment throughout Burlingame.
Goal I F -4:Protect people and property from the adverse effects
of flooding through a stormwater system that adequately moves
runoff from existing and future development, prevents property
damage due to flooding, and improves environmental quality.
I F -4.1: St or m D rai n Infrast ruc tu re M a intenance
Ensure that local storm drain infrastructure is sufficiently maintained to
minimize flood hazards. [MP, SO]
1 2
3
Page: 5
Number: 1 Author: jlee Subject: Sticky Note Date: 10/25/2017 4:58:39 PM
As a requirement of our stormwater permit, the City needs to develop and implement a Green Infrastructure Plan that will describe how we
will shift our impervious surfaces and storm drain infrastructure from gray (or traditional storm drains, culverts, and pipes) where runoff flows
directly into storm drain and then to receiving waters, to green (a more resilient, sustainable system that slows runoff by dispersing it to
vegetated areas).
As such, our goal should reflect that we are moving away from creating new storm drains and pipes as the default for moving stormwater, but
instead use vegetation to capture and harvest the rainwater as a resource.
Number: 2 Author: jlee Subject: Inserted Text Date: 10/25/2017 4:53:27 PM
captures and treats
Number: 3 Author: jlee Subject: Inserted Text Date: 10/25/2017 4:53:37 PM
water
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | IIF-11
I F -4.7: D iv e rsio n
Require new development to be designed to prevent the diversion of
stormwater onto neighboring parcels. [DR, SO]
I F -4.8: R a inw a ter Har ves ting
Encourage the use of rainwater harvesting facilities, techniques, and
improvements where appropriate, cost effective, safe, and
environmentally sustainable as a way to reduce urban runoff and
stormwater flows into the storm drain system. [DR, PI]
I F -4.9: P ol lut ion P reventi on
Prevent pollutants from entering the storm drain system by managing
point and non-point pollution sources through public and private
facilities, local regulations, and education.
Solid Waste and Recycling
Burlingame contracts with a private vendor for solid waste and recycling
services. Under California law, the vendor, working in concert with the
City, is required to divert waste from landfills (recycle and reduce) to
achieve State waste reduction and pollution prevention goals.
Burlingame residents, businesses, and local institutions have shown a
clear commitment to reducing the waste stream, having achieved a 60
percent waste diversion rate as of 2016. The City has led by example
through its Environmental Purchasing Policy and sponsorship of zero
waste City events. Even with the tremendous success the City has
achieved, additional waste reduction will be attained through increased
recycling opportunities, new goals and programs for businesses and
institutions, more home composting, and sustainable purchasing
practices that extend to residents and businesses.
For additional policies related to solid waste reduction and recycling,
refer to the Healthy People and Healthy Places Element.
12
Page: 6
Number: 1 Author: jlee Subject: Sticky Note Date: 10/26/2017 9:45:31 AM
Add program categories
Number: 2 Author: jlee Subject: Inserted Text Date: 10/26/2017 9:45:10 AM
[DR, SO, PI]
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | CS-13
future noise contours for Burlingame and key areas were noise is
anticipated to be an issue currently or in the future.
Vibration concerns are like noise concerns because excessive or
prolonged exposure to vibration can result in adverse health impacts. In
Burlingame, train operations produce vibrations that affect properties
along the rail line.
The following goal and policies aim to minimize human exposure to
excessive noise by evaluating noise exposure risks, planning placement of
new land uses in consideration of the noise environment, and
incorporating appropriate mitigation measures on a project-by-project
basis.
GGoal CS-4: Protect residents and visitors to Burlingame from
excessive noise
and disruptive ground vibration.
CS-4 .1 : Loc a ti n g Noi se-sen si ti ve Uses
Locate noise-sensitive uses such as homes, schools, hospitals, libraries,
religious institutions and convalescent homes away from major sources of
noise. [DR]
CS-4 .2: Resid ent ial No is e S tan dard s
Require the design of new residential development to comply with the
following noise standards:
The maximum acceptable interior noise level for all new
residential units (single-family, duplex, mobile home, multi-family,
and mixed use units) shall be an Ldn of 45 dB with windows
closed.
For project locations that are primarily exposed to noise from
aircraft, Caltrain, and BART operations, the maximum
instantaneous noise level in bedrooms shall not exceed 50dB(A) at
night (10:00 P.M. to 7:00 A.M.), and the maximum instantaneous
1
Page: 7
Number: 1 Author: jlee Subject: Sticky Note Date: 10/26/2017 8:55:07 AM
move phrase "and disruptive ground vibration." up one line
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | HP-11
HHP -3.12: C onst ruc tio n Best Pr act ices
Require construction projects to implement the Bay Area Air Quality
Management District’s Best Practices for Construction to reduce pollution
from dust and exhaust as feasible.
Parks, Open Space, and Recreation
Parks and recreation facilities provide places where people can be
physically active, gather as a community, recreate, learn and participate in
the greater community. Active park spaces include sports fields, game
courts and playgrounds. Open spaces and natural areas support
biodiversity, allow for the management of water and other natural
resources, and offer opportunities for residents to be in and learn about
nature. Burlingame has a diversity of open spaces, with most
neighborhoods having relatively easy access to a neighborhood park or
playground or the Mills Canyon Wildlife Area. Along the Bayfront, the
Bayside fields, community garden, Bayside Dog Exercise Park, golf
driving range, and Bay Trail offer places that attract not just Burlingame
residents but visitors from other communities. And while the Bayfront
amenities are separated from the rest of Burlingame by Highway 101, the
policies in the Mobility Element include initiatives to improve pedestrian
and bicycle access across the freeway.
F igure H P-1 identifies neighborhoods where residents are not within
one-quarter or one-half mile from a park, distances considered to be
walkable and bikeable. The Easton Addition neighborhood lacks ready
access to park space, with the exception of fields at Roosevelt Elementary
School. Open space in Downtown, where land use policy will allow for
construction of up to1,200 new units (from baseline year 2016), is limited
to a small playground on Primrose Road within Downtown itself;
otherwise, the nearest park is Washington Park to the east. With the
addition of residences at the north end of town—on El Camino Real and
Rollins Road—additional open space amenities will be needed to create
complete communities and respond to new residents’ desires for
gathering and recreation spaces. Because Burlingame has virtually no
1
Page: 8
Number: 1 Author: jlee Subject: Inserted Text Date: 10/25/2017 5:06:28 PM
connect with
IX. HEALTHY PEOPLE AND HEALTHY PLACES
HP-22 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
HHP-6.6: R e gi onal St ormw a ter M a n a ge me n t
Continue to follow requirements for the Municipal Regional Stormwater
and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit to
monitor stormwater activities, reduce pollution from stormwater runoff,
and provide annual reports on compliance activities. [AC, S , H]
HP -6.7: St or mw a ter Co n vey ance Syst em
Identify opportunities to upgrade and improve the City’s stormwater
conveyance system (MS4). [SO, S , H]
HP-6.8: Water-E f f icient Land sc a ping
Continue to enforce Burlingame’s Water-Efficient Landscaping
Ordinance, and promote the use of native, drought-tolerant landscaping.
Educate the public about the Bay-Friendly Landscaping Guidelines and
other resources for water-efficient landscaping. [PI, S , H]
HP-6.9: Gr e e n In f ras tr uc ture
Adopt and implement a Green Infrastructure Plan in accordance with the
Municipal Regional Stormwater National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System Permit. Incorporate green infrastructure into streets and right-of-
ways wherever practicable, including curb extensions, flow-through
planters, and bioswales that slows stormwater runoff by dispersing it to
vegetated areas, harvests and uses runoff, promotes infiltration and
evapotranspiration, and uses bioretention to clean runoff.
HP-6.10: New Dev el opm ent a n d C on s truc tio n
Regulate new development and construction to minimize pollutant and
sediment concentrations in receiving waters, and ensure surface water
discharged into the San Francisco Bay meets or exceeds relevant
regulatory water quality standards. Require new development to
incorporate Low Impact Design features that treat and reduce surface
runoff volumes. [DR, S, H]
1 2
Page: 9
Number: 1 Author: jlee Subject: Inserted Text Date: 10/26/2017 10:00:12 AM
[DR, SO, PI]
Number: 2 Author: jlee Subject: Sticky Note Date: 10/26/2017 10:00:23 AM
Add implementation categories
XI. IMPLEMENTATION
IP-10 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
II mp l em enting Program
Estim at ed Timefr ame(s) 5 Years 10 Years15+ Years Annual On-going Responsible Department(s) Public Works
Supporting Department(s)
Police
Partner(s)
Funding Source(s) General Fund, Grants
IP-18 Complete Streets Implementation
City staff will use a phased approach to evaluate and implement
the proposed Complete Streets improvements identified in the
Mobility Element. A priority list will be established through the
Capital Improvements program.
√
Policy(ies) Implemented CC-1.2 through 1.4; M-1.1; M-2.1
through 2.5; M-3.1 through 3.7
Program Category(ies) DR, MP, AC
Responsible Department(s) Public Works
Supporting Department(s)
Central County Fire Department,
Community Development,
Police
Partner(s)
Funding Source(s) General Fund, Grants
IP-20 Complete Streets Evaluation
City staff will periodically evaluate and prepare recommendations
on how well the streets and transportation network are serving
each category of users.
√
1
Page: 10
Number: 1 Author: jlee Subject: Sticky Note Date: 10/26/2017 8:49:19 AM
Missing bold
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | IP-19
II mp l em enting Program
Estim at ed Timefr ame(s) 5 Years 10 Years15+ Years Annual On-going Funding Source(s) Recycling Fund
IP-37 Rainwater Harvesting and Greywater Systems
City staff will evaluate the appropriateness of amending the City’s
building and development codes to support and encourage
rainwater harvesting and greywater systems.
√
Policy(ies) Implemented CC-1.1, CC-1.7; If-2.11; IF-4.8
Program Category(ies) SR, DR, SO, PI
Responsible Department(s) Community Development
Supporting Department(s)
City Attorney, City Manager
(Sustainability Coordinator),
Finance, Public Works
Partner(s)
Funding Source(s) General Fund
IP-37 Underground Utility Ordinance
The City will continue to require private developers to
underground utilities along the street frontage of their project site
when new or substantial development occurs.
√ Policy(ies) Implemented IF-6.3
Program Category(ies) PR, MP
Responsible Department(s) Public Works
Supporting Department(s)
City Attorney Community
Development
Partner(s)
If-2.11
1
2
3 4
5
Page: 11
Number: 1 Author: jlee Subject: Sticky Note Date: 10/26/2017 10:02:57 AM
Since the previous chapters spelled it as "graywater", let's keep it consistent.
Number: 2 Author: jlee Subject: Inserted Text Date: 10/26/2017 10:02:10 AM
Graywater
Number: 3 Author: jlee Subject: Inserted Text Date: 10/26/2017 10:02:14 AM
graywater
Number: 4 Author: jlee Subject: Sticky Note Date: 10/26/2017 9:27:31 AM
Missing capitalization
IF-2.11
Number: 5 Author: jlee Subject: Highlight Date: 10/26/2017 9:27:35 AM
XI. IMPLEMENTATION
IP-20 | CITY OF BURLINGAME
II mp l em enting Program
Estim at ed Timefr ame(s) 5 Years 10 Years15+ Years Annual On-going Funding Source(s) N/A
IP-42 Disaster and Emergency Program
Central County Fire Department staff and City staff will prepare a
comprehensive update of the City’s disaster and emergency
program.
√
Policy(ies) Implemented CS-3.1 through 3.15
Program Category(ies) SO< FB< PI
Responsible Department(s) Central County Fire Department
Supporting Department(s)
City Manager, Finance, , Parks
and Recreation, Police, Public
Works
Partner(s)
Funding Source(s) General Fund, Grants
IP-43 Disaster Drills
Central County Fire Department staff will conduct training and
exercise drills to train City staff and test the effectiveness of the
Emergency Operations Plan and operational readiness of the
Emergency Operations Center.
√
Policy(ies) Implemented CS-2.8; CS-3.2; CS-3.7
Program Category(ies) SO, AC, PI
Responsible Department(s) Central County Fire Department
Supporting Department(s)
Community Development, City
Manager, Human Resources,
SO< FB< PI 12
Page: 12
Number: 1 Author: jlee Subject: Sticky Note Date: 10/26/2017 9:37:12 AM
SO, FB, PI
Number: 2 Author: jlee Subject: Highlight Date: 10/26/2017 9:37:04 AM
ENVISION BURLINGAME
BURLINGAME GENERAL PLAN UPDATE | IP-29
II mp l em enting Program
Estim at ed Timefr ame(s) 5 Years 10 Years15+ Years Annual On-going Responsible Department(s)
Supporting Department(s)
Partner(s)
Funding Source(s)
IP-63 Recycled Water Plan
City staff will evaluate the feasibility of delivering recycled water to
customers to increase the use of recycled water.
√
Policy(ies) Implemented CC-1.1; CC-1.7; IF-2.11
Program Category(ies) SR, DR, SO, PI
Responsible Department(s) Public Works
Supporting Department(s) City Attorney, City Manager,
Community Development,
Finance
Partner(s)
Funding Source(s) General Fund, Grants
IP-64 Water Conservation Standards
The City will continue to maintain Water Conservation Standards
within the Municipal Code for households, businesses, industries,
and public infrastructure. √
Policy(ies) Implemented CC-1.1; CC-1.7; CC-1.8; IF-2.10
Program Category(ies) SR, DR, SO, PI
Responsible Department(s) Public Works
,3;;*UHHQ,QIUDVWUXFWXUH3ODQ
7KH&LW\ZLOODGRSWDQGLPSOHPHQWD*UHHQ,QIUDVWUXFWXUH3ODQLQDFFRUGDQFHZLWKWKH0XQLFLSDO
5HJLRQDO6WRUPZDWHU13'(63HUPLW
3ROLF\ LHV ,PSOHPHQWHG && ,) ,) ,) ,) ,) +3 +3 +3
+3 +3
3URJUDP&DWHRU\ LHV '503623,
5HVSRQVLEOH'HSDUWPHQW V 3XEOLF:RUNV
6XSSRUWLQJ'HSDUWPHQW V &RPPXQLW\'HYHORSPHQW3DUNVDQG5HFUHDWLRQ&LW\0DQDJHU
6XVWDLQDELOLW\&RRUGLQDWRU
3DUWQHU V 6DQ0DWHR&RXQW\ZLGH:DWHU3ROOXWLRQ3UHYHQWLRQ3URJUDP
)XQGLQJ6RXUFHV V *HQHUDO)XQG
(VWLPDWHG7LPHIUDPH V <HDUV
1
Page: 21
Number: 1 Author: jlee Subject: Sticky Note Date: 10/26/2017 9:08:49 AM
Please add an implementing program for the Green Infrastructure Plan after the Water Conservation Standards. See text on right.
Sun, Oct 29th 2017, 10:09
Name:
Danelle rienks
Email:
Subject:
Losing my home Renter for 18 years on Douglas Avenue
Comment:
Hello I have lived work and going to school and burlingame for the last 18 years. My daughter
lives with me and goes to school and works on Burlingame Avenue I am self-employed and all
of my clients are in burlingame we do not want to leave burlingame this is our people are
community our city our life we want to stay in burlingame As you know we live at the major
project 1128 to 1130 to Douglas however 1124 Douglas just got sold to a major developer who
is going to redevelop and make the rent well over $3000 a month for a very small unit that I
currently only pay 1200 a month for now you tell me does this send me into homelessness will
we be living in my car I could not find any apartments under $2000 in the surrounding area
please help this is overwhelming and pushing us to homeless .I make less than $25,000 a year
and there’s no way I can afford an apartment of $3000 or more and even when you guys
decide to build affordable housing in luxury apartments those are still $3000 a month so get a
clue help us out would you like us living on the City Hall doorstep?And by the way the
affordable housing in other surrounding cities is closed there are no open applications available
or open apartments available and affordable housing anywhere in any city so I don’t know what
to do we will end up homeless on the City Hall doorstep with a sign and I can begging for
affordable housing
1
CD/PLG-Kevin Gardiner
From:Esperto Labs
Sent:Wednesday, November 22, 2017 8:07 AM
To:Envision Burlingame
Subject:---General Plan Input-Technology and Smarter Roads--
As I indicated in one of the meetings, I suspect we will need to begin planning our city roads and
sidewalks for a more equitable mix of transportation modes; for bikes, to electric powered people
movers and cars. As you can see in the attached link this change will impact a cities design
substantially.
http://www.sehinc.com/news/future-what-do-driverless-cars-mean-road-design
Furthermore; Burlingame 2040 should be able to make informed decisions by capturing massive
amounts of data about the population and its patterns, such as security, water use and traffic flows.
This information gathering results in what is called big data, and it is essentially gathered via
surveillance.
There can also be voluntary efforts to collect information, but the ease and affordability of sensors
throughout Burlingame, Artificial Intelligence and advanced analytics in the future will mean this
function can be completely automated. The data can be collated from a constantly evolving
technology encompassing traffic lights and cameras, pollution sensors, building control systems, and
personal devices – all literally feeding giant data stores held in the cloud.
The ability to crunch all this data for our City managers who then disseminate it to the Burlingame
residents is becoming easier due to rampant growth in the use of devices algorithms, AI, and
predictive software – all running on networks of high performance computing and storage devices.
Bottom-line; Burlingame will need to take a more active role in managing the technology infrastructure
rather than outsourcing this function to San Mateo County.
In summary; let's make sure we do not let the events set the agenda where we are tossed and turned
by the tides of life. Let's practice “proactivity” or grace under stress. This way we might avoid the
myriad of new taxes and Bond Measures which are sure to come our way.
2
Thanks
Timothy Hooker
--
Timothy Hooker
Chief Experience Officer
Esperto Labs
P.O. Box 117523
Burlingame, CA 94011-7523
650-989-2950-Voice/fax
800-418-1491-Toll free
My Email: timothy@espertoinc.com
Our website: www.espertolabs.com
Facebook: www.facebook.com/espertoinc
LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/esperto
Web Design|Online-Marketing|Social Media|Security
Search Engine Optimization|Reputation Management
From:PARKS-Bob Disco
To:CD/PLG-Kevin Gardiner
Subject:General Plan
Date:Tuesday, August 29, 2017 10:45:07 AM
Hi Kevin,
I understand the General Plan is in final review. I do have issues with this section:
HP-5.8: Invasive Plant Species
Prohibit the use of any invasive plant species in landscaped or natural areas. Work with the
California Invasive Plant Council to identify invasive plant species within Burlingame, and establish
plans for removal. Ensure that new development obtains appropriate permits and approvals related to
invasive species from the Army Corps of Engineers and other relevant agencies. [AC, DR, H,
S] ______
We don’t want to be consulting with the Plant Council to plant or remove plant material. Their
list of invasive plants is too restrictive and many of the trees they have listed are common in
Burlingame and not invasive. I just see problems with this.
Please let me know how I can get this changed.
Thanks,
Bob
Bob Disco
Park Superintendent / City Arborist | Park & Recreation Department | City of Burlingame | 650.558.7334 |
bdisco@burlingame.org
Name:
Laurie Graham
Email:
Subject:
Bird Safe Windows
Comment:
Any new buildings should be built with bird-safe windows. There is such a thing. Thank you.
London Breed
President of
the Board of
Supervisors and
Acting Mayor
Ike Kwon
President
Vince Courtney
Vice President
Ann Moller Caen
Commissioner
Francesca Vietor
Commissioner
Anson Moran
Commissioner
Harlan L. Kelly, Jr.
General Manager
San Francisco
Water Power Sewer
525 Golden Gate Avenue, 10th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94102
1415.487-5210
Services of the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission
January 5, 2018
Via Email to envisionburlinoame@burlinqame.oro,
PLANNINGDEPT@BURLINGAME.ORG AND TO KGARDINEROBURLINGAME.ORG
Kevin Gardiner AICP, Planning Manager
William Meeker, Community Development Director
City of Burlingame
Community and Economic Development Department
501 Primrose Road - 2nd Floor
Burlingame, CA 94010
Re: City of Burlingame — Draft General Plan and Zoning Ordinance
Update
Dear Mr. Gardiner and Mr. Meeker:
On behalf of the City and County of San Francisco ("San Francisco"), through
its Public Utilities Commission ("SFPUC"), we thank you for the opportunity to
comment on the City of Burlingame ("Burlingame")'s proposed Draft General
Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update ("Draft General Plan") and register San
Francisco's strong objections to the proposed zoning changes, because (i) San
Francisco is not subject to such changes because of intergovernmental
immunity principles and (ii) such changes will materially impact the SFPUC's
ratepayers' economic use of the SFPUC Property.
Background
As part of its regional utility system, the SFPUC manages 63,000 acres of
watershed land and hundreds of miles of other property, mostly used for water
transmission pipelines and electrical power overhead lines. The SFPUC's
Hetch Hetchy Regional Water System provides water to approximately 2.7
million people, including to the City of Burlingame.
Pursuant to San Francisco's Charter and in accordance with land use policies
and practices adopted by the SFPUC, the primary purpose of SFPUC Property
is for SFPUC utility use. The SFPUC requires unrestricted access to its
property to ensure timely completion of both routine and emergency
maintenance and repair to all utility infrastructure and appurtenances. To
protect this access, the SFPUC has adopted long-standing land use policies,
which heavily restrict the scope of use of its lands by third parties, including a
prohibition on structures and restriction on vegetation installation and
management and surface coverings. No aerial encroachments, trees, or
structures are allowed. Any proposed third-party use over the SFPUC Property
must conform to these SFPUC land use policies.
In addition and as much as practicable, surplus property owned by the SFPUC
OUR MISSION: To provide our customers with high-quality, efficient and reliable water, power and sewer
services in a manner that values environmental and community interests and sustains the resources entrusted
to our care.
Kevin Gardiner AICP, Planning Manager
William Meeker, Community Development Director
City of Burlingame Community and
Economic Development Department
January 5, 2018
Page 2
is utilized in a beneficial manner for ratepayers and is consistent with San
Francisco's existing plans and policies.
The SFPUC monitors and protects its lands by reviewing proposed projects
and activities that may impact SFPUC lands and infrastructure for consistency
with SFPUC policies and plans and interfere with its facilities and operations.
Current Zoning and Use of SFPUC Property
San Francisco, through the SFPUC, owns a tract of land (the "SFPUC
Property') in the City of Burlingame ("Burlingame") in fee (as opposed to an
easement). The SFPUC Property consists of multiple parcels and runs parallel
to, and occupies, a portion of California Drive. The SFPUC Property
constitutes a portion of the former Market Street Railway right-of-way
(commonly known as the Old Muni Right of Way) that San Francisco acquired
for the operation of a street railway line running between San Francisco and
San Mateo County pursuant to a deed dated September 29, 1944.
The SFPUC Property in Burlingame currently bears either an unclassified
zoning classification or a R3 zoning classification.
Consistent with these zoning classifications, certain income-producing tenants
and licensees occupy portions of the SFPUC Property pursuant to real estate
agreements with San Francisco, through the SFPUC. Burlingame currently
occupies small portions of the SFPUC Property as shown on the attached map
in addition to California Drive. As shown on the attached map, old SFPUC
revocable permits were issued to Burlingame with respect to portions of the
SFPUC Property used by Burlingame. Since at least 1995, however, large
portions of the SFPUC Property used by Burlingame have not been subject to
a lease or permit with the SFPUC.
SFPUC's Comments
In August 2017, Burlingame issued its Draft General Plan and Zoning
Ordinance Update, which includes proposed zoning changes that, if applicable,
would affect the SFPUC Property. The following comments pertain primarily to
the portions of the SFPUC Property designated as SFPUC Parcels 23 and 24.
Kevin Gardiner AICP, Planning Manager
William Meeker, Community Development Director
City of Burlingame Community and
Economic Development Department
January 5, 2018
Page 3
First, many of the following comments should be moot in light of
intergovernmental immunity principles that make a municipality's zoning and
building laws inapplicable to real property owned by another city. Such
principles are based on California Government Code 53090 et seq. and judicial
and administrative interpretations of those statutes (see, e.g., County of Los
Angeles v. City of Los Angeles (1963) 212 Cal.App.2d 160, 166; Akins v.
County of Sonoma (1967) 67 Ca1.2d 185, 194; and 40 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 243
(1962)). Accordingly, San Francisco requests that Mountain View consider
these intergovernmental immunity principles in its deliberations regarding the
scope of its proposed zoning changes.
Location 1: A portion of SFPUC Parcel 24 from Oak Grove Avenue to
Burlingame Avenue
Current Zoning: Unclassified
Proposed Zoning: Parks and Recreation2
Current Use: Parking, vacant space and a portion of California Drive
Existing Permit(s): NRP0003 issued to Burlingame for Storm Water Pump
Station at California Drive and Grove Avenue
As noted above, pursuant to San Francisco's Charter and in accordance with
land use policies and practices adopted by the SFPUC, the primary purpose of
SFPUC Property is for SFPUC utility use. To support this utility use, the
SFPUC has a statutory duty to its water ratepayers to manage its lands in a
manner that promotes its water and power enterprises. Consistent with such
duty and policies, portions of the SFPUC Property are, or have been, income-
producing, which income is used to reduce the costs of the SFPUC's utility
operations. Consequently, if the proposed rezoning applies to the SFPUC
Property, it would adversely impact the SFPUC's ability to produce income and,
in light of its discussions regarding sale of all or portions of the SFPUC
Property, could significantly reduce its value.
1 Unclassified lands (Current): Any lot, parcel of land or area within the city which has not been
assigned a zone classification by adoption of a map or by legislative action is Unclassified. The use
of unclassified land for any purpose for which no permit, license or other evidence of approval has
been granted by an appropriate action of the city is declared to be an unlawful use (Burlingame
Municipal Code 25.12.040).
Continuation of existing use of unclassified lands: Any existing use of unclassified land which was
heretofore legally permitted may continue but may not be changed to any other use, expanded,
extended beyond present confines or otherwise modified without a conditional use permit from the
planning commission and compliance with the city general plan and any adopted city specific
plans, including their design guidelines (Burlingame Municipal Code 25.12.041).
2 Parks and Recreation: "The Parks and Recreation (PR) designation applies to regional parks,
community and neighborhood parks, and special use facilities such as community centers, golf
courses, and trails that accommodate active recreation activities. Burlingame has a diverse set of
parks and recreation facilities that meet a variety of needs for both residents and visitors, and this
land use designation preserves these spaces throughout the City" (Draft General Plan, page 62).
Kevin Gardiner AICP, Planning Manager
William Meeker, Community Development Director
City of Burlingame Community and
Economic Development Department
January 5, 2018
Page 4
The proposed rezoning might also give rise to inverse condemnation claims
based on the lost income and/or property value resulting from attempts to apply
such new zoning restrictions against the SFPUC Property.
Accordingly the SFPUC must strongly object to the proposed rezoning (insofar
as it may be applicable to the SFPUC Property) because (i) the SFPUC
Property is exempt from Burlingame's zoning restrictions based on
intergovernmental immunity principles, (ii) the proposed restrictions would
deprive the SFPUC's ratepayers of income to support the SFPUC's primary
utility purpose; and (ii) such restrictions would diminish the SFPUC Property's
resale value.
Location 2: A portion of SFPUC Parcel Numbers 23 and 24 from
Broadway to Oak Grove Avenue
Current Zoning: R33
Proposed Zoning: Rail Corridor4
Current Use: A portion of California Drive, parking
Existing SFPUC P4109 — Storm water discharge pipe
Permit(s): P4204 — SFPUC income-producing license to Off the
Grid
P4287 — SFPUC income-producing license to Parking
for Maverick Jacks
The rail corridor use does not support the statutory and policy mandates that
the SFPUC Property be used primarily for utilities. As stated above, the
SFPUC has a statutory duty to its water ratepayers to manage its lands in a
manner that promotes its water and power enterprises. Consistent with such
duty and policies, portions of the SFPUC Property are, or have been, income-
producing, which income is used to reduce the costs of the SFPUC's utility
operations. Consequently, if the proposed rezoning applies to the SFPUC
Property, it would adversely impact the SFPUC's ability to produce income and,
in light of its discussions regarding sale of all or portions of the SFPUC
Property, could significantly reduce its value.
Accordingly the SFPUC must strongly object to the proposed rezoning (insofar
as it may be applicable to the SFPUC Property) because (i) the SFPUC
3 R3 (Current): R3 Zoning designates both permitted and conditional uses. Permitted uses include
multifamily residential uses, churches, convents and parish houses. Conditional uses include
parking areas, rooming houses or boardinghouses, and limited corner store retail (Burlingame
Municipal Code 25.28).
4 Rail Corridor: "The Rail Corridor (RC) designation applies to properties including and supporting
rail lines and ancillary functions. These parcels include the public right-of way, as well as parking
lots and other spaces associated with commuter service" (Draft General Plan, page 64).
Kevin Gardiner AICP, Planning Manager
William Meeker, Community Development Director
City of Burlingame Community and
Economic Development Department
January 5, 2018
Page 5
Property is exempt from Burlinganne's zoning restrictions based on
intergovernmental immunity principles, (ii) the proposed restrictions would
deprive the SFPUC's ratepayers of income to support the SFPUC's primary
utility purpose; and (ii) such restrictions would diminish the SFPUC Property's
resale value.
Location 3: SFPUC Parcel 23 and a portion of SFPUC Parcel 24 from Mills
Avenue to Broadway
Current Zoning: Unclassified
Proposed Zoning: Rail Corridor
Current Use: Portion of California Drive, parking, and vacant land
Existing SFPUC P4275- Income-producing license for parking for
Permit(s): Rector Motor Company
The same concerns and principles discussed above with respect to Location 1
(portion of SFPUC Parcel 24 from Oak Grove Avenue to Burlingame Avenue)
and Location 2 (portion of SFPUC Parcel Numbers 23 and 24 from Broadway
to Oak Grove Avenue) apply to this parcel.
Accordingly the SFPUC must strongly object to the proposed rezoning (insofar
as it may be applicable to the SFPUC Property) because (i) the SFPUC
Property is exempt from Burlingame's zoning restrictions based on
intergovernmental immunity principles, (ii) the proposed restrictions would
deprive the SFPUC's ratepayers of income to support the SFPUC's primary
utility purpose; and (ii) such restrictions would diminish the SFPUC Property's
resale value.
Francard Eucalyptus Grove
In addition, the Draft General Plan discusses the Francard Eucalyptus Grove
all or portions of which may be located on the SFPUC Property. The Draft
General Plan identifies the Grove as both registered and eligible to be
registered as historic with the National Historic Register.
"In 2012, the Francard Grove Eucalyptus Tree Rows
along the Caltrain tracks were added to the National
Historic Register. The Francard Grove tree row
aligned with the Caltrain tracks between North Lane
and Larkspur Drive, and is within the right-of way
belonging to the Joint Powers Board" (Draft General
Plan, page 26).
"The Francard Tree Groves along the Caltrain tracks
are eligible for listing on the National Register of
Historic Places" (Draft General Plan, page 73).
Kevin Gardiner AICP, Planning Manager
William Meeker, Community Development Director
City of Burlingame Community and
Economic Development Department
January 5, 2018
Page 6
Please provide a detailed map of the grove boundaries in relation to SFPUC
property. To the extent that the grove is situated at all on the SFPUC Property,
the SFPUC will have further comments.
California Drive Roadway Redesign
The Draft General Plan proposes a redesign of California Drive which may
affect SFPUC Parcels 23 and 24. The project map, identified as Figure M-6,
was not attached to the document, and therefore it is not clear where the
proposed redesign will occur.
"Implement a redesign of California Drive consisting
of a "road diet" south of Broadway and installation of
continuous bicycle facilities to establish a north-south
bicycle corridor through Burlingame, connecting to
bicycle facilities in Millbrae and San Mateo. Concepts
for sections north of Broadway and between
Broadway and Burlingame Avenue focus on traffic
calming, providing a continuous bicycle facility, and
improving pedestrian connections" (Draft General
Plan, page 149 M-10.1).
Please provide SFPUC with plans that show the location of the new bicycle
lanes and pedestrian walkways so we can confirm whether or not they impact
the SFPUC-owned section of California Drive. The SFPUC reserves the right
to issue further comments after receipt of the plans.
Additionally, if these improvements are in fact planned for the SFPUC Property,
any proposed use or improvement on the SFPUC Property, including, but not
limited to, ingress and egress over the SFPUC Property must: (1) comply with
current SFPUC policies; (2) be vetted through the SFPUC's Project Review
process; and (3) be formally authorized by the SFPUC.
All Locations: Potential Tree Preservation on SFPUC Property
The Draft General Plan proposes to preserve trees along California Drive in
certain locations. This likely includes a portion of SFPUC Parcel 24 along
California Drive between North Land and Morrell Avenue.
"Protect local scenic roadways by preserving mature
trees wherever possible, maintaining landscaping
along roadways, and ensuring that development and
land uses do not detract from the aesthetics of the
Kevin Gardiner AICP, Planning Manager
William Meeker, Community Development Director
City of Burlingame Community and
Economic Development Department
January 5, 2018
Page 7
corridor" (City and County Scenic Roadways page
238 HP-7.3).
Because it is not clear whether this provision is intended to apply to the SFPUC
Property we request that Burlingame provide us with a detailed map of the
trees proposed to be preserved in relation to SFPUC property boundaries.
We also request that Burlingame clarify if this proposed change to its General
Plan implements a state tree preservation law.
The SFPUC reserves the right to trim or remove trees that are deemed
hazardous; that may impact negatively any SFPUC infrastructure; or that may
present a liability to the City of San Francisco. With these exceptions,
consistent with its land use policies, the SFPUC seeks to preserve trees.
SFPUC Project Review Process
As stated above, any changes proposed on SFPUC property would require
approvals from the SFPUC, including but not limited its Project Review
Process, which requires that proposed projects and other proposed activities
on any SFPUC property be considered by the SFPUC's Project Review
Committee if the proposed project or activity contemplates construction;
excavation or earth moving; clearing; installation of improvements; the use of
hazardous materials; other disturbance to watershed and property resources;
or the issuance of new or revised leases, licenses, and permits.
Among other Commission restrictions, the SFPUC emphasizes that the SFPUC
Property may not be used to fulfill an adjoining owner's open space, setback,
parking, access, or third-party development requirements. In addition, the
SFPUC Property may not be used as the emergency vehicle access for an
adjoining property.
The Project Review Committee is a multidisciplinary team with expertise in
natural resources management, environmental regulatory compliance,
engineering, water quality, and real estate. The Committee reviews proposed
projects and activities on or adjacent to the SFPUC Property for:
1. Interference with SFPUC facilities and/or operations;
2. Consistency with our Environmental Stewardship Policy, Real Estate
Guidelines, and other policies and best management practices; and
3. Compliance with the California Environmental Quality Avenue (CEQA)
and environmental regulations including mitigation, monitoring, and
reporting plans.
In reviewing a proposed project, the Project Review Committee may conclude
Kevin Gardiner AICP, Planning Manager
William Meeker, Community Development Director
City of Burlingame Community and
Economic Development Department
January 5, 2018
Page 8
that modifications or avoidance and minimization measures are necessary.
Large and/or complex projects may require several project review sessions to
review the project at significant planning and design stages.
Please notify all property owners and/or developers that, to the extent
their proposals will involve the development or use of the SFPUC
Property, such proposals are first subject to the SFPUC's Project Review
Process. The Committee must first vet the proposal, and then the project
sponsor must receive authorization from the SFPUC pursuant to a final
executed lease or revocable license before they can use or make any changes
to the SFPUC Property.
To initiate the Project Review process, a project sponsor must download and fill
out a Project Review application at http://www.sfwater.org/ProiectReview and
return the completed application to Michael Oakes at moakes@sfwater.orq
If
res@sfwater
any questions or need further information, please contact us at
Sin rel
osanna Russell
Real Estate Director
San Francisco Public Utilities Commission
January 9th, 2017
Burlingame City Council
City of Burlingame
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
Re: SFO Technology Center at 1300 Bayshore Highway Project
Dear Mayor Brownrigg and Burlingame City Councilmembers,
The Sierra Club Loma Prieta Chapter, Sequoia Audubon Society, Golden Gate Audubon Society,
Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society, the Committee for Green Foothills, and the Citizens
Committee to Complete the Refuge are all writing to express our deep concern with the
proposed SFO Technology Center at 1300 Bayshore Highway (Project). We strongly believe the
proposed Project design will result in unacceptable bird mortality that can be avoided if
Burlingame directs the developer towards an alternative, ecologically - and location-sensitive
design.
Renderings of the project show an 8-story reflective and transparent curtain of glass facing the
Bay with very little distinction between sky and building. Additionally, the Project proposes to
surround and cross Easton Creek with transparent glass fences, railings, two pedestrian bridges
with partially glass railings as well as glassy strips connecting the two buildings, at several levels,
across the creek. This design is extremely hazardous to migratory birds. Birds collide with glass
buildings and structures during the day as they attempt to access resources reflected by or seen
through the glass. At night, brightly lit glass buildings lure migrating birds to their death. The
glass screen walls that extend between the two buildings over the creek are of particular
concern, as birds flying to and from the Bay along the creek channel are almost certan to collide
with these transparent walls.
We strongly believe that the proposed design will introduce an unmitigable hazard to the bay
front.
The San Francisco Bay has been designated as a site of “hemispheric importance” to bird
populations throughout the Western Hemisphere. 136 species of birds have been documented
along the Bay Trail in Burlingame; including the threatened Wester n Snowy Plover. In addition
to resident birds, flocks of wintering shorebirds feed and rest along the shore in Burlingame for
much of the year, from each autumn until migrating back to their breeding grounds each spring.
Yet the documents for the Project show no biological surveys or mitigations for impacts to birds
and wildlife. In fact, the Project documents show no awareness of the seriousness of the issue
for birds, even though it is located adjacent to important habitat.
It is now widely recognized that bird collisions with man-made structures, especially glass
buildings and glassy elements, are significant contributors to bird -mortality and, most
importantly, to the decline of bird populations in North America. When bird -friendly design is
implemented as a guiding principal, the hazards can be greatly reduced.
Many neighboring cities recognize bird -collision with glass as an important issue and make an
effort to minimize hazardous construction. The issue is addressed in General and Specific Plans
(San Jose, Palo Alto, Mountain View), in Ordinances and mandatory Guidelines (San Francisco,
Oakland, San Jose, Sunnyvale, Richmond) and in Mitigation Measures for areas near the Bay
(Menlo Park). All of these cities look to provide standards and ordinances for bird-friendly
design for any buildings located along and near the Bay. Some cities also require or recommend
bird-friendly design and the regeneration of ecosystems along creek corridors. For example,
Mountain View has established a 200-foot “habitat overlay zone” for creeks and sensitive
habitats in the North Bayshore. Companies such as Google, Facebook, Intuit, Microsoft, and
LinkedIn are also incorporating bird-friendly design into their buildings situated on or near the
Bay, signifying the easily attainable union between ecology and urban design and preserving
the integrity of our natural ecosystems while allowing our region to develop.
Generally, bird-friendly design measures may include: a substantial reduction in the amount of
glassy material used in the building’s design; avoidance of glass and glazing that reflect the bay,
the sky and surrounding vegetation; incorporation of visual cues into glass facades to alert birds
of the structure; avoidance of see-through situations such as transparent or glassy obstructions
and free standing walls; and avoidance or reduction of light emissions at night. Along the Bay
front, it is especially crucial to implement avoidance and minimization measures to prevent bird
carnage. We recommend planning with respectful setbacks from sensitive habitats and the
implementation of adequate avoidance measures and minimization measures to prevent
unnecessary and substantial bird deaths.
Together, our organizations represent tens of thousands of members in San Mateo, San
Francisco and Santa Clara Counties and together we wish to bring these concerns to your
attention. It would be tragic for this Project to become an inadvertent death trap for birds.
We urge the City of Burlingame to join other Bay Area cities and companies in demonstrating
environmental stewardship and leadership by requiring an alternative, bird -friendly design for
the 1300 Bayshore Highway Project and all other projects along the Bay. We hope the City of
Burlingame elects to build in a manner compatible with nature, particularly along the bay, and
to integrate development along the bay with the natural environment in ways that do not
degrade this environment. We also hope that Burlingame will include a Bird -Friendly Design
Policy in the Envision Burlingame General Plan that will provide guidelines for implementation
of such policy in Burlingame. Below, we provide resources on bird -friendly design for your
review.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Gita Dev
Sustainable Land Use Committee
Sierra Club Loma Prieta
Leslie Flint
Conservation Committee
Sequoia Audubon Society
Helen Wolter
Legislative Advocate, San Mateo County
Committee for Green Foothills
Gail Raabe
Board of Directors
Citizens Committee to Complete the Refuge
Noreen Weeden
Director of Volunteer Programs
Golden Gate Audubon Society
Mackenzie Mossing
Environmental Advocacy Associate
Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society
Cc:
o Burlingame Planning Commission
o Kevin Gardiner, Planning Manager
Standard, Guidlines and Design Resources
• The City of San Francisco Standards for Bird Safe Buildings
o http://sf-planning.org/standards-bird-safe-buildings
• The City of San Jose Creeks and Bird Safe Design Ordinance requi res Bird Safe Design in
all areas along the Bay (north of Hwy 237). There are also recommendations for new
construction along creeks.
o https://www.sanjoseca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/60393
• Richmond Bird-safe standards
o https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/41218 (See 6-105)
• Sunnyvale Bird Safe Building Design Guidelines (required)
o https://sunnyvale.ca.gov/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=23799
• In Mountain View, the North Bayshore Precise Plan requires Bird Safe Design for all new
buildings North of Hwy 101 and installs a 200-ft Habitat Overlay Zone setback near
wetlands and creeks.
o http://www.mountainview.gov/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=24429
• American Bird Conservancy Bird-Friendly Design Guide
o https://abcbirds.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Bird-friendly-Building-
Guide_LINKS.pdf
Additional resources
• The Glass industry is well aware of the issue of bird collision, and a US Senate bill is
looking to require bird friendly design for government buildings
o https://www.usglassmag.com/2018/01/bird-friendly-bill-introduced-in-
senate/
• Lighted buildings attract and kill migratory birds
o http://www.audubon.org/news/nearly-400-migratory-birds-were-killed-one-
texas-building-single-night
1
CD/PLG-Kevin Gardiner
From:John A. Matthews Jr
Sent:Tuesday, February 06, 2018 11:12 AM
To:CD/PLG-Kevin Gardiner; Raymond Marino; Brian Neider; John Lucchesi
Subject:1764 Marco Polo Way
Kevin Gardiner
Planning Manager
City of Burlingame
Kevin,
This email will serve to record our conversation yesterday.
The rough draft for the new general plan called Envision Burlingame shows 1764 Marco Polo Way as a “Public
Institutional” use designation. It assumes that this property will be part of a specific plan area with the Mills Peninsula
Hospital. 1764 Marco Polo Way is not owned by the hospital. We agreed that the proposed new designation is
inappropriate and you will contact the CIty’s consultants to have the properties along Marco Polo Way not owned by the
Hospital District to be appropriately zoned to allow multi-family mixed use.
Thank you for your assistance,
Jack
John A. Matthews AIA
335 A East Fourth Avenue
San Mateo, CA 94401
Phone: 650-340-1107
Fax: 650-340-1677
1
From:info@envisionburlingame.org
Sent:Wednesday, March 28, 2018 1:58 PM
To:info@envisionburlingame.org
Subject:Comment from the Envision Burlingame Website
Comment Submitted by:
Name: Greg Holtmann
Organization: Broadway Business Improvement District President & owner of Sutterfields Consignment on Broadway
Email:
Subject:
Envision Burlingame
Comment:
Burlingame would benefit from putting a new hotel together with open
space for recreation at the site of state owned undeveloped property on
the bay south of Kinkaid’s Restaurant. Obviously, this would improve
Burlingame’s transient occupancy tax while simultaneously improving
our bay trail. Also, he has asked in writing for the city council to
increase housing density in the Broadway/California Drive area in order
to enhance our “transit village “ neighborhood and increase the
pedestrian traffic to all the businesses on Broadway. As residents
decrease reliance on personal automobiles, easy access to mass transit
will make or break a community like Burlingame.
In the short term, the Broadway BID has also requested an increase of
parking density which would also greatly enhance business on Broadway,
while increasing use tax benefits for Burlingame.
1
CD/PLG-Kevin Gardiner
From:Jennifer Pfaff
Sent:Thursday, July 05, 2018 3:41 PM
To:CD/PLG-Kevin Gardiner
Subject:Map of zones on diagram 3-5- El Camino Real zone
Hi Kevin,
I am briefly flipping through pages, of the draft, trying to understand the lay of the land, and how and what to
mention. Then I happened to see this attached map a nd so am wondering why the diagram on 3-5 does not show
the full length of the historic zone of ECR (Peninsula to Ray), that runs along the DSAP region, as well—I
haven’t seen this drawn out before and was curious why the ECR area wasn’t drawn all the way to Peninsula at
the border, or at least showing it as an overlay green over red, for example. There is high density housing
allowed on nearly the whole thing, both east- and west sides, excluding a short area along eastside around
Burlingame Avenue give or take a block. Historically, El Camino Real has been its own zone— this may be too
in the weeds to bring up at the meeting, but I was just curious….thx. j.
KAMRAN EHSANIPOUR, AlA
ARCHITECT uc. c 17697
Ill ANZA BLY[), , SUITE 212, Dli RLII"GAME, CA 94010
PH. (650) 342-0237 FAX (650) 342 5114
July 11, 2018 VIA e-mail: kgardiner@burlingame.org
VIA Hand Deliver
Kevin Gardiner, Planning Manager
Members of Planning Commission
City Of Burlingame
Planning Department
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
Re: Burlingame General Plan Study
Public Comments
Dear Mr. Gardiner and Members of Planning Commission,
My name is Kamran Ehsanipour. I am a Burlingame practicing architect for over three decades and the
owner of the vacant land in the corner of El Camino Real and Adeline Dr. (1501 El Camino Real). My office
address is: 111 Anza Blvd., Suite 212, Burlingame, CA 94010. I also have been a Burlingame resident for
many years.
My comments here are focused on the zoning regulations applicable to my lot 1501 El Camino Real. This
property, along with its neighboring property 1508 Adeline Dr. (known as Adeline Market), were within an
R-3 zoning along El Camino Real for many years, but were used as a commercial property under the
Grandfather Rules. On or around 1984, the zoning for the above mentioned two properties changed from
R-3 to C-1 commercial use (Ordinance No. 1266). Under the zoning Codes at the time for C-1, a mixed use
was allowed. A few years ago, The City of Burlingame revised its zoning regulations, and as the result of that
the mixed use feature was stripped away from the C-1 Zoning Parcels, including my property.
The goal of each City Public Official is to provide the best quality of life for its residents, encouraging
development to provide adequate housing units for all income levels, encouraging development of retail,
offices and businesses that, while addressing the needs of its residents, at the same time generates enough
funds for the City to support its public services costs.
E-mail: kamran@ehsanipour.com Websrte: www.ehsanipour.com
• ARCHITECTURE oPlANNING a ENGINEERING • INTERIOR DESIGN a CONSTRUCTION
Burlingame General Plan Study
Public Comments
July 11, 2018
The 21st Century Urban Design has find the answer to the above goals in two words: “MIXED USE”.
A MIXED USE property reduces traffic, saves time for residents, adds to the quality of life for its residents,
provides easy and comfortable access to shopping for its residents, and at the same time can add to the
beauty of the buildings, streets and the City.
Considering the above professional facts, it is mostly beneficial to allocate a “Mixed Use” right, for
properties in zoning C-1 in general, which mainly provides retail, office and businesses that apply to every
day residents’ use, and in particular a C-1 Parcel that was in the past zoned as Residential (R-3), and still is
surrounded by R-3 Residential Buildings/ Parcels, (the immediate neighbors both north as well as south are
zoned R-3).
My professional opinion as an architect with decades of experience in mixed use design is, considering the
location, the history of Zoning Use and existing surrounding parcels’ Zoning Use and the benefits to the
neighboring residents, the parcel that is most qualified to be considered as a MIXED USE in the City of
Burlingame is the subject property, 1501 El Camino Real.
Accordingly, I respectfully request to re-instate the right to have MIXED USE for my property 1501 El Camino
Real, and apply the “NORTHERN BURLINGAME MIXED USE” zoning to this property which is only a two block
away from the proposed NBMU area.
Your consideration of my request is greatly appreciated.
Regards,
Kamran Ehsanipour, Architect
1501 El Camino Real, Burlingame, CA Property Owner
E-mail: kamran@ehsanipour.com Websrte: www.ehsanipour.com
• ARCHITECTURE oPlANNING a ENGINEERING • INTERIOR DESIGN a CONSTRUCTION
1
CD/PLG-Kevin Gardiner
From:John Kevranian
Sent:Tuesday, August 14, 2018 1:04 PM
To:CD/PLG-Kevin Gardiner
Subject:Comment Letter to the General Plan Draft EIR
Hi Kevin,
Chapter 18. Transportation and Circulation in part: "Burlingame aims to develop a complete multimodal transportation
network...to encourage people to use non‐automobile modes for as many trips as possible...to move people with less
delay, cost and environmental impacts."
While various Alternative Modes of local and regional transportation are stated therein, somehow Ferry Service is
omitted, which with Burlingame's adjacency to SFO and proximity to Millbrae Station provides Burlingame the complete
multimodal transportation network the General Plan calls for.
Best,
John Kevranian
650‐676‐7301
Sent from my iPhone
Joseph Baylock
1527 Newlands Ave.
Burlingame, CA 94010
joe@baylock.com
Mr. Kevin Gardiner, Community Development Director
City of Burlingame Community Development Department
501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA 94010
kgardiner@burlingame.org
Dear Mr. Gardiner,
Please accept this document as responsive to the request for public comment.
Comments on Draft EIR of June 28, 2018
The City of Burlingame seeks public comment on the Draft Environmental Impact Report of June 28,
2018 (SCH#: 2017082018) as part of the General Plan update. This document is intended to provide
such comment in support of the Program EIR’s goals noted as:
“The advantages of a Program EIR include consideration of effects and alternatives that cannot
practically be reviewed at the project-level, consideration of cumulative impacts that may not be
apparent on a project-by-project basis, the ability to enact citywide mitigation measures, and
subsequent reduction in paperwork.”
The comments here are focused on the DEIR and do not include a review of the Existing Conditions
Report (ECR) which may be a valuable future exercise.
Two main areas of concern are described here:
1. The minimal identification, discussion and analysis of Water Supply and Distribution in the DEIR
particularly in regards to section 20.1.1(a) and subsequent sections.
2. A counter to the comment regarding increasing density above 120 du/acre.
Water Supply Security
Water supply security is a major area of concern due to both the known (i.e. approved) and projected
growth in commercial and residential demand throughout Northern California. It is a fundamentally
flawed approach to examine only Burlingame’s historical use and potential for water conservation. That
appears to be the limited scope of the DEIR:
“Total water demand within the Burlingame service area was approximately 1,283 million
gallons in 2015….
2
“The projected annual water demand for the City is 1,875 million gallons MG in 2025, 1,963 MG
in 2030, and 2,138 MG in 2040. Passive and active conservation would reduce the water
demand in 2025 to 1,756 MG, to 1,775 MG in 2030, and to 1,841 MG in 2040 .”
What is interesting is the lack of documentation for these aggressive conservation results. Per Section
20.2.3, Burlingame is “guaranteed” 1,909 MG per year in perpetuity from the San Francisco PUC
Regional Water System. However, Burlingame use would exceed that allotment as soon as 2030 if the
conservation methods prove to be ineffective. To avoid going over the 1,909 MG guaranty, the
conservation efforts for 2040 must achieve 77% effectiveness. If conservation only achieves 50% of the
hoped-for reduction, Burlingame will be in need of 1,989.5 MG in 2040, well over the “guaranteed”
allotment. One lesson from this analysis is that the anticipated growth in Burlingame and the
accompanying increased water demand may force the reduction of water use, even if planned
conservation methods prove ineffective.
Therefore, attention must also be paid to the effects of proposed water conservation measures. Active
conservation measures at the state, county and local level have been implemented in recent years in
reaction to the five-year drought. As noted by the Sacramento Bee
(https://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/water-and-drought/article212605634.html):
“The two bills, AB 1668 and SB 606, set general guidelines for water agencies to follow in
California's post-drought era.
“Water agencies will be encouraged to have their customers limit indoor water use to an
average of 55 gallons a day per person, declining to 50 gallons by 2030.
In addition, the California Water Resources Control Board wants to increase water flows on several
rivers, as recently reported in the San Francisco Chronicle
(https://www.sfchronicle.com/science/article/California-water-wars-State-plans-to-cut-SF-s-
13166078.php), with these noted possible effects:
“Between 7 and 23 percent less river water on average would be available for human
consumption, and sometimes more, according to state estimates…
“A prolonged dry spell like the one between 1987 and 1992, according to agency projections,
would force cuts of up to 40 percent, which [Steve] Ritchie [assistant general manager for water
for the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission] said is simply unsustainable for a thriving
metropolitan area ...”
The impact of these planned or possible restrictions on the flora and fauna of Burlingame have not been
well-documented. This oversight needs to be corrected in the DEIR. And, perhaps the more
fundamental issue of planning for a 23% increase in population should be reconsidered.
This reconsideration should account for on-going projects such as, but not limited to: 301 Airport Blvd.
(Facebook/Oculus which is sized for approximately 4,500 employees per local commercial realtor
estimates), 220 California Dr., Carolan Ave. (Anson Apartments), 263 Lorton Ave., 988 Howard Ave., 920
3
Bayswater Ave., Trousdale Ave. (Sunrise), and Marco Polo Way (proposed Senior Center). The mix of
commercial and residential projects also suggests that population growth (i.e. residents) may not be the
most accurate metric to gauge future water usage.
Of equal or greater import are the regional trends and possible governmental actions that can
negatively affect water security for residents and businesses. The Urban Water Management Plan
(UWMP) for Burlingame has not been reviewed and may prove to be a valuable future exercise. At a
minimum, it should identify several serious risks including, but not limited to:
Earthquake vulnerability of the Hetch Hetchy pipeline system and local distribution facilities,
The possibility that the Federal Department of the Interior may decide to “restore” Hetch
Hetchy to its natural, dry state,
The on-going drought and wildfire risks in the state that can reduce available water supplies.
The April 2018 USGS report titled “The HayWired Earthquake Scenario” should be reviewed and the risks
included in the DEIR along with mitigation plans for increased Burlingame water storage and other
options. See https://www.usgs.gov/news/usgs-rolls-out-groundbreaking-earthquake-study-haywired-
earthquake-scenario?qt-news_science_products=1#qt-news_science_products.
The July 2018 state appellate court ruling against Restore Hetch Hetchy’s argument that the reservoir
represented an unlawful diversion of water at odds with the state Constitution cannot be relied upon to
stand forever. Any mitigation for a change of base water sources of the SFPUC merit examination.
August 2018 news reports that California has enough water supply to fight more than fifteen major
wildfires do not account for the reduction in reservoir levels due to these ongoing emergency
consumption levels.
Similar risks should be identified in future water supply assessments (WSAs) and it is hard to envision
how the cumulative number of projects in Burlingame, San Mateo County and the Bay Area could not
raise serious concerns about any “all clear” assessment for major projects.
The minimal investment in additional reservoir capacity, underground storage capacity and
desalinization capacity should be examined (https://www.sfchronicle.com/science/article/California-
funds-new-dams-to-protect-against-13101961.php) for risks to the demand forecasts presented in the
Draft EIR.
Further state-level concerns that should be addressed are the risks to the California Environmental
Quality Act itself. Pointed statements by public officials including the governor would indicate that the
limited protections CEQA provides today may be reduced. The impact on water security of a diminished
CEQA process are serious.
In summary, section 20 of the Draft EIR, as it stands, is inadequate to address serious, foreseeable risks
to water supply security for Burlingame residents and businesses.
Project Density
Prior public comments have been received that urge the City to increase the high-density category to
140 du/acre from 120 du/acre (Table 1-1). The ramifications of such an increase are wide-ranging and
4
in many respects negative to the water supply security, infrastructure capacity, public school capacity
and quality of education and to the overall quality of life of Burlingame residents. Contrary to the prior
comment, a reduction to 100 du/acre would be more in keeping with the ability of the City, the County
and the State to maintain existing commitments of quality and capacity of a number of governmental
functions.
As we continue to Envision Burlingame, we must take a realistic, reasoned approach to planning and
development with an eye towards what can reasonably be expected from levels of government with
limited resources and major financial, regulatory and environmental constraints. Please accept these
comments with that lens.
Sincerely,
Joseph Baylock
PUBLIC STORAGE
701 Western Avenue, Glendale, CA 91201
Tel: 818-244-8080
publicstorage.com
August 31, 2018
Kevin Gardiner, Community Development Director
City of Burlingame Community Development Department
501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA 94010
Re: Public Storage Input on Envision Burlingame and the Live Work Designation Applicable to 1811
Adrian Road and Surrounding Property
Dear Mr. Gardiner,
Thank you for the opportunity to meet with you and to provide input on Envision Burlingame, the City’s
comprehensive General Plan update. As you know, Public Storage owns and operates a location at 1811 Adrian
Road in Burlingame, in addition to the industrial building to the behind our facility at 1801 Adrian Road
(together, “Property”). In 2015, Public Storage converted a then-vacant building at 1811 Adrian Road into a
Public Storage location pursuant to a Conditional Use Permit for self-storage use within the Automobile Sales
and Service Overlay Area of the Rollins Road (“RR”) zoning district.1 Public Storage is now contemplating a
project to further modernize this facility. To that end, Public Storage respectfully requests that the City consider
a modification to the proposed General Plan and zoning that would allow Public Storage to provide the most
effective and best use of the Property, without any notable change in impacts to the City or surrounding area.
As proposed, the new General Plan land use designation for the Property would be “Live Work,”2 and the
zoning district would continue to be RR.3 Permitted uses in the Live Work land use designation include “light
industrial, service commercial, retail commercial, studios for creative industries, commercial recreation, and
limited medium-density residential as live-work units.”4 Public Storage very much appreciates that our self-
storage use will continue to be a permitted uses in the Live Work designation, and RR zoning district.
However, we note that the proposed maximum floor area ratio (“FAR”) for the Live Work designation is 1.0,
with the same maximum FAR permitted for self-storage use with a Conditional Use Permit (for use above 0.5
FAR) in the RR zoning district5 We believe, based on our extensive experience as an owner and operator of
self-storage properties throughout the country that our use is more suited to a higher FAR because our
1 Burlingame Zoning Code §§ 25.44.020(k), 25.44.030(a), 25.44.050(b)(2).
2 Proposed General Plan Land Use Map, available at:
https://www.envisionburlingame.org/files/managed/Document/335/Burlingame%20GP%20-%20Maps%20-
LAND%20USE_FINAL.pdf.
3 Burlingame general plan zoning – northeast areas Map, Draft June 2016, available at:
https://www.burlingame.org/document_center/Zoning/ZoningMap-Burlingame-NE.pdf.
4 Envision Burlingame Public Draft, at page CC-13, available at:
https://www.envisionburlingame.org/files/managed/Document/334/Burlingame_Public_Draft_August2017_ALL-searchable.pdf ;
Land Use Designation Description, available at:
https://www.envisionburlingame.org/files/managed/Document/279/Revised%20Land%20Use%20Table_4.13.17.pdf.
5 Id.; Burlingame Zoning Code §§ 25.44.020(k), 25.44.030(a).
PUBLIC STORAGE
701 Western Avenue, Glendale, CA 91201
Tel: 818-241-8080
publicstorage.com
self-storage uses involve buildings that can be slightly larger in size but have substantially less impacts than
other uses would have if higher FAR were permitted (e.g. traffic, water supply, public services). And, the
ability to redevelop, modernize and increase the size of the building would allow us to improve aesthetics and
security for the neighborhood, and to provide better customer service. This is because self-storage facilities
have very few employees and visitors on a daily basis, and therefore have very low transportation and other
environmental and public service impacts.
Therefore, Public Storage recommends an increased maximum FAR of 1.25 to 1.5 for self-storage uses, to be
approved on by Conditional Use Permit on a case-by-case basis. If it would be helpful, we would be happy to
provide data and/or a parking consultants’ report to support this recommendation.
Thank you very much for your consideration. Public Storage values the City’s partnership and is dedicated to
providing the best service for our customers in Burlingame as possible.
Sincerely,
Bryan Miranda
Regional Vice President
EXHIBIT C
Implementation Programs
Errata/Edits (shown in tracked changes)
1
EXHIBIT D
75 CNEL Noise Contour Errata/Edits
Figure CS-2 in Chapter VIII (Community Safety Element) indicates residential uses in the noise
contour 75 CNEL or greater to be “Clearly Unacceptable.” However, Figures 15-2 (Existing (2017)
Transportation Noise Contours) and Figure 15-3 (Future (2040) Transportation Noise Contours)
in the Draft EIR indicate existing and proposed residential uses within the 75 CNEL noise contours
aligning with Highway 101 and Interstate 280. Existing residential uses within the 75 CNEL
contour include multifamily and single family uses in the vicinity of Rollins Road from Cadillac
Way to Larkspur Drive, and multifamily and single family uses in the vicinity of Interstate 280.
Proposed residential uses within the 75 CNEL contour include a portion of the proposed
Live/Work land use area at the north end of Rollins Road.
Policy CS-4.2 (Residential Noise Standards) addresses residential uses within the 70 CNEL noise
and greater noise contours with requirements that new residential units shall have a maximum
acceptable interior noise level of 45 dB with windows closed. Furthermore, for project locations
that are primarily exposed to noise from transportation operations, the maximum instantaneous
noise level in bedrooms shall not exceed 50dB(A) at night (10:00 P.M. to 7:00 A.M.) and 55 dB(A)
during the day with windows closed. These standards can be achieved by incorporating buffers
and noise control features into a development project such as setbacks, landscaping, building
transitions, site design/building orientation, and building construction approaches.
Below are suggested edits to the General Plan and EIR to address this matter, consistent with
the performance standards in Policy CS-4.2.
General Plan Figure CS-2, include the following text in both the Normally Acceptable
category (70 CNEL for multifamily residential) and Clearly Unacceptable (75 CNEL
and greater for multifamily residential): If new construction or development does
proceed, a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements must be made and
needed noise insulation features included in the design. This text is currently applied
to the Normally Acceptable category; it would therefore be duplicated as a condition
in the Clearly Unacceptable category to address the 75 CNEL noise contours
associated with Highway 101 and Interstate 280. (Refer to edits shown in tracked
changes below)
Make the same edits to the corresponding Tables 15-9 and Mitigation Measure 15-3A
in the EIR.
In General Plan Policy CS-4.2, make the following text edit: For locations primarily
exposed to noise from aircraft, Caltrain, and BART, Highway 101, and Interstate 280
operations, the maximum instantaneous noise levels in bedrooms shall not exceed
50dB(A) at night (10:00 P.M. to 7:00 P.M.), and the maximum instantaneous noise
level in all interior rooms shall not exceed 55 dB(A) during the day (7:00 A.M. to 10:00
P.M.) with windows closed.
Make the same edits to the corresponding Table 15-16 in the EIR.
2
§¨¦101§¨¦28075 CNEL70 CNELCity of MilllbraeCity of HillsboroughCity of San MateoSan Franciso BayCalifornia DrTrousdale DrBernal AveAdeline DrEaston DrPeninsula AveHoward AveBurlingame General Plan EIRFigure 15-2 Existing (2017) Transportation Noise Contours 1,500750 3,000 FT 0N65 CNEL60 CNELBurlingame BoundaryStreet CenterlinesRailroads75 CNEL70 CNEL
§¨¦101§¨¦280City of MilllbraeCity of HillsboroughCity of San MateoSan Franciso BayCalifornia DrTrousdale DrBernal AveAdeline DrEaston DrPeninsula AveHoward AveBurlingame General Plan EIRFigure 15-3 Future (2040) Transportation Noise Contours 1,500750 3,000 FT 0N65 CNEL60 CNELBurlingame BoundaryStreet CenterlinesRailroads75 CNEL70 CNEL
BURLINGAME CITY HALL
501 PRIMROSE ROAD
BURLINGAME, CA 94010
City of Burlingame
Meeting Minutes
Planning Commission
7:00 PM Council ChambersMonday, October 22, 2018
b.Adoption of the Update to the Burlingame General Plan and Environmental Impact Report
(EIR)
Staff Report
Final EIR (FEIR)
Exhibit A: Responses and suggested actions to Draft General Plan
public comments
Exhibit B: Draft General Plan public comments – original
correspondence
Exhibit C: Implementation Programs errata/edits
Exhibit D: 75 CNEL Noise Contour errata/edits
Resolution - General Plan
Resolution - EIR
Meeting Minutes and Public Notice
Attachments:
Community Development Director Gardiner introduced the consultant team: Laura Stetson and Dan
Amsden of MIG.
There were no questions of staff.
Chair Gaul opened the public hearing.
Laura Stetson and Dan Amsden made a presentation to the commission.
Commission Questions/Comments:
>Response to comments, on page 1 and 2, there is a comment from Justin Moresco regarding a soft
story construction evaluation deadline of 2020. There is a recommendation to delete the 2020 reference in
the first place it is mentioned, but then it is mentioned a second time. Should the second mention also be
deleted? (Stetson: Recommendation is to not have the deadline stated, to provide flexibility.)
>The description of "sheer" walls in the Moresco letter should use the spelling "shear."
> Item #2 on Response to Comments, Chapter XIII should be Chapter VIII. Item #11 on Response to
Comments, should be Chapter VII, not Chapter XII.
> Is there a number that represents the likely build -out, as opposed to maximum buildout? (Stetson:
The EIR does not assume maximum buildout. It is more like 80%. Maximum generally cannot be
achieved on every property, given variations in shapes of properties and other factors that would prevent
building out to the maximum. There is some allowance in the calculation that does not assume maximum
buildout.)
>The slide presentation would be helpful to have posted for members of the public. It provides a good
summary of where the numbers are at.
> In the north end of Rollins Road there are high voltage power lines. Did the EIR take that into
consideration? Would they impact what could be developed in the area? (Stetson: There are not
regulations that would prevent situating housing near high -voltage power lines. However it is something
Page 1City of Burlingame Printed on 10/26/2018
October 22, 2018Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
each individual developer would take into consideration through the process. From the EIR perspective
there is not evidence that would suggest homes could not be placed in proximity to power lines, but it is a
decision the developer would want to consider with respect to perceived concerns .)(Gardiner: The power
lines in the Rollins Road area align with a drainage easement, and buildings would not be allowed within
the easement both because of the drainage and because of the power lines. It is a "no-build" zone and
can only be used for parking or open space. Buildings would need to maintain clearances to each side.)
> Concern with the significant burden on the community to require a historic resource study for each
discretionary project. Believes most properties will not be found eligible for historic status. (Amsden:
There are other options such as a resource survey, or perhaps a tiered approach .)(Gardiner: The intent is
to identify potential resources, both for community character and to meet the requirements of CEQA .
We've done further research and there could be other approaches. A "historic context statement" is an
option that would provide a measure of pre -screening; there are other possibilities. The policy language
could be adjusted to allow the matter to be studied further as an implementation action.)
>Is the approach to historic resources in the plan the approach recommended by the Community
Advisory Committee (CAC)? (Gardiner: Yes. The committee weighed the merits of a comprehensive
survey compared to individual evaluations that would be tied to applications for significant development
projects, and the CAC thought this approach was more equitable. In this approach, a property owner would
not be included in an evaluation unless they were proposing a project.)
> 144 homes have sold in Burlingame since January 1, 2018. 128 of the homes sold were over 50 years
old. Need to carefully consider how these properties are evaluated.
Public Comments:
> Kamran Ehsanipour: Owns property at corner of Adeline Drive and El Camino Real. At last meeting
expressed benefits of building a mixed use building. Given its frontage and proximity to North Burlingame,
believes the North Burlingame Mixed Use would be a better fit for the property rather than Broadway Mixed
Use. The Broadway Mixed Use designation would reduce the number of units that could be
accommodated on the property, and requests that the North Burlingame Mixed Use zoning be applied
instead. Mixed use is beneficial for traffic and the look of the neighborhood.
> Justin Moresco: Called for an inventory of soft -story multifamily residential buildings. These buildings
are highly dangerous in earthquakes. Intent is to have an inventory of soft -story buildings in Burlingame
and make recommendation to the City Council, and identify incentives that can offered. Both the
inventory and recommendation should be accomplished by 2020 and should not be too difficult a timeline
for the deliverable. Requests that the date in the letter and recommendation remain as proposed,
otherwise it may not be carried out. There are probably between 50 and 200 such buildings in Burlingame.
> Vince Muzzi: Had unpleasant experience in Millbrae with historical review. If something is historic,
people will know; a consultant could go out and do it once. Burlingame is a stable community, there are
not a lot of teardowns. If people have a property that is generating income, the delta between maintaining
current use or putting the property to another use needs to be significant. Can change the zoning, but
nothing might happen. Should look at what was projected in other plans, and whether changes that were
anticipated occurred. Concerned unrealistic growth projections could undermine support for the plan.
> Mike Dunham: Lives in Burlingame. There is a severe shortage of housing in California. Consensus is
rents and home prices are so high because the State has severely underbuilt in the last few decades .
Burlingame has also underbuilt in the last few decades. The General Plan is very thoughtful on where it
makes sense to build the units. There is a severe shortage of workforce housing for people who work in
Burlingame; San Mateo County already creates 19 jobs for every new home built. Worries that the problem
is only going to get worse, needs to fight the forces of NIMBYism that think everything is fine as it is .
Current generation can't buy homes in the community, they move to the East Bay instead. Kids in
Burlingame now will not be able to stay in Burlingame when they grow up, will move away. Encourages
accelerating the process of building housing.
Page 2City of Burlingame Printed on 10/26/2018
October 22, 2018Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
> Bryan Miranda, Public Storage: Owns properties at 1761, 1801 and 1811 Adrian Road. There is a
tremendous demand for storage: 88% occupied after being open for two years. Would like to allow FAR
to be increased to 1.15 to be able to expand to the building currently occupied by Goodwill. Goodwill has
given notice it will be vacating to get more space. The Goodwill building is accessed through the Public
Storage property so it makes sense to convert it into storage rather than another use. Would convert it by
adding a second floor within the existing building, but with the 1.0 FAR could only extend the second floor
across half of the building. Would need 1.15 FAR to extend the second floor across the entire building.
Chair Gaul closed the public hearing.
Commission Discussion:
> A lot of work has been done over the last couple of years, likes the direction it is going. It provides
the City with a direction to go.
> The historical review process needs more study. There needs to be a balance, some properties are
worth protecting. Policy needs to be crafted to leave flexibility for determining what the process for
evaluation will be.
>The 50 year threshold for historical review was proposed to be consistent with CEQA.
> Accessory dwelling units have become very popular, can they be added as a category to the housing
count? Expects interest to grow.
> Doesn't think North Burlingame Mixed Use land use should be applied to the 1501 El Camino Real
property. North Burlingame has a wide frontage, but this part of El Camino Real is more narrow and tight .
It looks, acts, and behaves more like neighborhood commercial in the Broadway mixed use area, so a
higher density would not be appropriate in this case.
> Okay with the suggestion for an FAR increase for storage uses in the Live /Work area given the
suggestion that the increase is justified by the reduced impacts of the storage use.
> The process has been impressive. The vision presented of what areas are staying the same and what
areas are changing in Burlingame is helpful. The character will stay the same except in the few areas
where change is desired. There is a need for more housing, and where it is being proposed is the right
area.
> Still concerned about language for historical review, still needs further review and discussion. Wants a
sieve that catches what wants to be kept, but let everything else through easily. Requires more study .
(Stetson: Can craft something to put forward to the City Council that reflects what has been expressed,
with policy direction to have the issue studied at some point in time.)
> Values the resources and the fabric of many of the the neighborhoods, but doesn ’t want such a bright
line that it will bring out opposition to the plan. Needs to find something more palatable and achievable.
>The Final EIR addresses the comments that were received on the Draft EIR, citing additional study or
mitigation was not necessary. It is ready to move forward.
>The General Plan is ready to move forward with the suggested staff edits, with the reworking of the
historic resources policy. The revised historical language can come back to the Planning Commission as
a Director's Report or FYI.
Commissioner Terrones made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Gaul, to recommend
adoption of the Draft General Plan and Environmental Impact Report. The motion carried by the
following vote:
Aye:Sargent, Loftis, Comaroto, Gaul, Terrones, and Tse6 -
Absent:Kelly1 -
Page 3City of Burlingame Printed on 10/26/2018
1
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA NO: 10f
MEETING DATE: November 5, 2018
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Date: November 5, 2018
From: Lisa K. Goldman, City Manager – (650) 558-7243
Subject: Discussion of Mayor Brownrigg’s Recommendation that the City Hire a
Public Space Design Firm to Assist with the Design of the Public Square
within the Post Office Project
DISCUSSION
Mayor Brownrigg recommends that the City Council authorize staff to issue a Request for a
Proposals related to hiring a public space design firm to assist the City in designing the public
square that will be part of the future Post Office project at 220 Park Road.
FISCAL IMPACT
The fiscal impact is unknown at this time. Funds for this purpose could be appropriated from
undesignated fund balance during the mid-year budget update.
1
Memorandum
AGENDA NO: 11a
MEETING DATE: November 5, 2018
To: City Council
Date: November 5, 2018
From: Vice Mayor Donna Colson
Subject: Committee Report
Tuesday, October 16, 2018
Senior Listening
• About 15 seniors attended
• Provided update on the community center and programming - provided the survey options
and received positive feedback on the site, the architecture and the timing.
• Discussion around parking and how we are managing the downtown parking situation and
future growth.
• Charles Voltz presented information on Memory Centers
• Also presentation on volunteer opportunities and then also services via San Mateo non-
profit organization.
• Goals
Monday, October 22, 2018
Parks Master Plan Meeting
• Parks and recreation master plan meeting with new consultants.
• Reviewed all park (and parklike sites) and made sure everything was included in the
overall analysis
• Reviewed initial survey results
Community Center Planning Group
• Meet to finalize lighting, interior color and flooring
BAC Meeting
• Meeting with BAC leadership to understand financial implications around the pool
reconstruction options
TSPN/Beautification/Park and Recreation Commission Interviews
• Conducted interviews with excellent candidates
Colson Committee Report November 5, 2018
2
Tuesday, October 23, 2018
Canada College Inaugural President’s Leadership Lunch
• Attended lunch and learned about the various outreach programs for underserved students
• Excellent presentations from students and the options available for non-traditional careers -
fashion and then the other track of heading to a UC.
Wednesday, October 24, 2018
Home For All Meeting
• Measure K - Supervisor Canepa and Supervisor Pine going to work on the MK funding
allocations. Looking closer to $88 mm this year. Will be allocated by end of February -
earlier this year. Idea to take a look at the initiatives and see what is passing and then
understand the affordable housing financial landscape. DOH preservation strategies for
naturally occurring projects - have allocated all $10 mm and working to have an
understanding of this strategy and see how it works.
• NOFA - Awarded $20mm to both rental and homeownership projects. First time we had
ownership in the mix. Had 13 projects submitted and approved 12 projects.
Affordable Housing Sharing Funds Pilot Discussion
• What to do when cities are amassing affordable housing funds and cannot spend and so
working to discuss how we might “cap and trade” this with a sharing fund. Conversation
around RHNA sharing numbers and how cities could lend/give and share RHNA numbers.
The topic is complex and there may not be a way to accomplish this, but if we can figure
out a legally approved procedure, then we do have someone willing to carry the legislation.
Middle Income Development Efforts (60-120% AMI)
• Use of tax-exempt bonds to purchase units and lease as middle income. Set up as a JPA -
finding a recently built market rate housing, operating for five years, go in and purchase
the building with tax-exempt government financing and replace market rate renters with
lower-income (middle income) renters.
• First time homebuyer opportunities - so how do we figure out the missing middle AMI 60-
120% ?
Wrap Up
• CASA/LISC funding efforts - these two are concluding and there are some ideas floating
around with legislation.
Meeting with USPO ownership
• Discussed timing of project
• Reviewed options as to how we can activate the property, especially opening up the
parking lot
Colson Committee Report November 5, 2018
3
Measure I Committee Kickoff Meeting
• Discussed roles and responsibilities of the Committee
• Reviewed the current budget allocation priorities
• Directed staff with follow up questions - Carol provided
Tuesday, October 30, 2018
Connect18 Conference - Tech, Privacy and Democracy
Held at Facebook Menlo Park Campus
• Excellent award presentation to D-Tech high school and Oracle for innovation
• Presentation on privacy and civil liberties around technology and personal data. Overview
of how the legal environment has changed over time and what catalysts have moved that
conversation forward. Need to look to the future and how we manage the changing
environment.
• Interesting presentation from Coursera on global learning platforms for higher education,
learning and training. Working with top universities to create a digital and expansive
program and global outreach. One solution to the retraining and job elimination concerns.
Creating even more coursework from say Google - to educate various levels of tech and
guarantee jobs upon conclusion of training. These may include people without college
degrees. Also, lifelong learning and a cost effective model for disseminating education to
the masses.
• Final presentation with the Institute For the Future - Ethical Operating Systems. Discussion
of 8 risks zones to modern economy with technology in future -
o Truth, Information, Propaganda - Especially in social media
o Addition and the Dopamine Economy - Device addition
o Economic Inequalities - Access by race, social standing
o Machine Ethics and Algorithmic Biases - social justice
o Surveillance State - global face recognition and spying on citizens
o Data Control & Monetization - crypto currencies (mainly male dominate as an
example)
o Trust Violations - Facebook data breach
o Hateful and Criminal Actors - using tech for bad purposes
• Presentation on FB use for social media in politics and city information
Meeting with Labor Union
• Meeting with local labor - opportunity to learn more about the training programs and
who/how they are recruiting and serving. Working to gather more women into the network,
and doing directed outreach to female candidates
Wednesday, October 31, 2018
Staff meeting USPO
• Progress update
• Discussion around site layout and timing
• Options to activate the space