Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - CC - 2014.11.17City Council City of Burlingame Meeting Agenda - Final BURLINGAME CITY HALL 501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME, CA 94010 Council Chambers7:00 PMMonday, November 17, 2014 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 a. Presentation by Youth Advisory Committee Concerning Holiday Parade b. Presentation by CHP of the California Law Enforcement Challenge Award 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. Page 1 City of Burlingame Printed on 11/13/2014 November 17, 2014City Council Meeting Agenda - Final Approve the City Council Meeting Minutes of November 3, 2014a. 11-3-14Unapproved MinutesAttachments: Adoption of a Resolution Approving the First Revised and Restated Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement for the San Mateo Operational Area Emergency Services Organization b. Staff Report Resolution JPA Final Revision 10 17 14 Attachments: Approval of a Letter Authorizing the City's Participation in the Peninsula SunShares Residential Solar Bulk Procurement Program Coordinated by the City of Foster City c. Staff Report Letter of Support Peninsula SunShares Project Summary Attachments: Adoption of a Resolution Awarding a Contract to CWS Construction for the Village Park Restroom Replacement (City Project #81990) and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Agreement d. Staff Report Resolution Village Restroom Replacement bid results Agreement for Public Improvement -Village Restroom Attachments: Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Three -Year Agreement with a Two-Year Optional Extension with LWP Claims Solutions for Third Party Administration of the City’s Self-Insured Workers’ Compensation Program e. Staff Report Resolution Contract Attachments: Approval of the Proposed New Job Classification of Police Lieutenant and the Accompanying Rate of Pay f. Staff Report Job Specifications Compensation Chart Attachments: Page 2 City of Burlingame Printed on 11/13/2014 November 17, 2014City Council Meeting Agenda - Final Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the Reclassification of Two Finance Department Positions: (1) Accounting Assistant III to Accounting Technician and (2) Financial Services Manager to Deputy Finance Director g. Staff Report Resolution Accounting Technician job description Deputy Finance Director job description Attachments: 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Public Comment) Introduction of an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Burlingame, Amending Chapter 25.63 of the Burlingame Municipal Code to Comply with State Law Requiring Incentives or Concessions for Qualifying Developments (Density Bonus Ordinance) a. Staff Report Ordinance Additional Attachments Attachments: 10. STAFF REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS (Public Comment) Set Public Hearing Date for an Appeal of the Planning Commission's Decision on an Application for a Design Review Amendment for a New Single -Family Dwelling to be Constructed at 1521 Cabrillo Avenue a. Staff Report Appeal Letter Council Appeal Procedures Attachments: Review of El Camino Real and Floribunda Avenue Intersection Safety Improvement Project Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) b. Staff Report Revised Mayor's Letter to Caltrans with City Comments in response to the DEIR Copy of Nov 3, 2014 Staff Report with attachments Attachments: One Year Review - Off-the-Grid Food Truck Event at the Caltrain Parking Lot Adjacent to the Broadway Caltrain Station c. Staff Report City Council Staff Report – December 16, 2013 City Council Minutes (excerpt) – December 16, 2013 November 4, 2014 email from Chief Eric Wollman Letter from Off the Grid Letter from Caltrain Attachments: Page 3 City of Burlingame Printed on 11/13/2014 November 17, 2014City Council Meeting Agenda - Final 11. COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND ACTIVITIES REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS Council Members report on committees and activities and make announcements. 12. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS 13. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Department Reports: Building, October 2014a. 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 - Special City Council Meeting - Monday, November 24, 2014; Next regular City Council Meeting - Monday, December 1, 2014 VIEW REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING ONLINE AT WWW.BURLINGAME.ORG - GO TO "CITY COUNCIL VIDEOS" 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 4 City of Burlingame Printed on 11/13/2014 Burlingame City Council November 3, 2014 Unapproved Minutes 1 BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL Unapproved Minutes Regular Meeting of November 3, 2014 1. CALL TO ORDER A duly noticed regular meeting of the Burlingame City Council was held on the above date in the City Hall Council Chambers. Mayor Brownrigg called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG The pledge of allegiance was led by Police Captain Eric Wollman who was being sworn in as the new Police Chief during the Ceremonial portion to follow. 3. ROLL CALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Brownrigg, Keighran, Nagel, Ortiz MEMBERS ABSENT: None 4. REPORT OUT FROM CLOSED SESSION There was no closed session. 5. UPCOMING EVENTS Mayor Brownrigg reviewed the upcoming events taking place in the City. 6. CEREMONIAL a. SWEARING IN OF JOHN S. ROOT AS A NEWLY APPOINTED COUNCILMEMBER John Root was sworn in as the new Councilmember by his wife, Carolyn. b. SWEARING IN OF ERIC WOLLMAN AS THE NEW POLICE CHIEF Police Captain Eric Wollman was sworn in as the new Police Chief by former Police Chief Ed Wood. 7. PRESENTATION a. STUDENT FIRE SAFETY POSTER CONTEST WINNERS Fire Inspector Julie Parenti reviewed the 2014 Fire Safety Poster Contest and she and Fire Marshal Rocque Yballa presented the poster awards to the Kindergarten to 5th grade winners from the following Burlingame Burlingame City Council November 3, 2014 Unapproved Minutes 2 schools: Franklin, Lincoln, Roosevelt, Washington, Our Lady of Angels, and St. Catherine of Siena. Mayor Brownrigg and the Councilmembers all congratulated the students and thanked them for participating. 7. PUBLIC COMMENTS Burlingame residents Cynthia Cornell, Cynthia Wukotich, Philip Eskins, and a resident spoke about the high cost of rents in Burlingame. Tara Pratt and Michael Barber spoke about the Burlingame Aquatic Center. There were no further comments from the floor. 8. CONSENT CALENDAR John Root advised that he would recuse on items 8a and 8e. Mayor Brownrigg removed item 8c for comment. Councilmember Keighran made a motion to adopt items 8a, b, d, e, of the Consent Calendar; seconded by Councilmember Ortiz. The motion was approved by voice vote, 5-0 for items 8b and 8d and 4-0-1 for items 8a and 8e (Root recused). a. APPROVE THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF OCTOBER 15 AND OCTOBER 20, 2014 CC Kearney requested Council approve the City Council meeting minutes of October 15 and October 20, 2014. b. ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 13. 36.040 OF THE BURLINGAME MUNICIPAL CODE TO ESTABLISH A 2-HOUR PARKING LIMIT ON THE 1500 BLOCK OF CYPRESS AVENUE BETWEEN THE ADDRESSES OF 1500 AND 1541 DPW Murtuza requested Council adopt Ordinance No. 1904. c. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING AND ACCEPTING THE 2014 ANNUAL REPORT OF AND DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO LEVY THE ASSESSMENTS FOR THE SAN MATEO COUNTY TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT FOR 2015 FinDir Augustine requested Council adopt Resolution No. 94-2014 to approve the 2014 Tourism Business Improvement District annual report and to give notice of intent to levy the 2015 annual assessments. Mayor Brownrigg commented and suggested that the hotels be asked their opinion and be asked to write in favor of the assessment. CM Goldman advised that staff would contact Anne LeClair at the San Mateo County Convention & Visitors Bureau with that request. Mayor Brownrigg made a motion to adopt item 8c; seconded by Vice Mayor Nagel. The motion was approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. d. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH METROPOLITAN PLANNING GROUP (M-GROUP) FOR CURRENT PLANNING SERVICES THROUGH JUNE 30, 2015 CDD Meeker requested Council adopt Resolution No. 95 -2014. Burlingame City Council November 3, 2014 Unapproved Minutes 3 e. ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 25 OF THE BURLINGAME MUNICIPAL CODE (ZONING ORDINANCE) SECTION 25.040.060 BUILDING HEIGHTS RELATED TO BUILDING HEIGHTS WITHIN THE TROUSDALE WEST (TW) ZONING DISTRICT CDD Meeker requested Council adopt Ordinance No. 1905. 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS a. CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATIONS FOR APPOVAL OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, DESIGN REVIEW AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RELATED TO CONSTRUCTION OF A FIVE AND SIX STORY, 132-UNIT ASSISTED LIVING AND MEMORY CARE FACILITY AT 1600 TROUSDALE DRIVE Councilmember Root recused himself from this item due to the fact that he currently serves on the Mills- Peninsula Sutter Health Group. CDD Meeker spoke and advised that all the design refinements to the project requested by Council at the October 20, 2014 meeting were noted in the staff report. Mr. Meeker further advised that the applicant would make a presentation with those refinements. Cheryl Fama, Chief Executive Officer of the Peninsula Healthcare District spoke and gave some background on the facility and the type of care that will be provided. Ms. Fama also reviewed the public benefits to be derived from the project. Ms. Fama introduced Design Consultant Joel Roos who reviewed the Council’s requested design changes. Betsy Donovan of Eskaton reviewed the costs associated with an assisted living facility. Council comments and questions followed and they requested that the Peninsula Healthcare District continue to be diligent with public outreach. Mayor Brownrigg opened the public hearing and there were no comments. Vice Mayor Nagel made a motion to adopt item Resolution No. 96-2014; seconded by Councilmember Keighran. The motion was approved by voice vote, 4-0-1 (Root recused). Vice Mayor Nagel made a motion to adopt item Resolution No. 97-2014, and add the findings of the City Arborist; seconded by Councilmember Keighran. The motion was approved by voice vote, 4-0-1 (Root recused). 10. STAFF REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a. CONSIDERATION OF APPOINTMENTS TO THE STORM DRAIN MEASURE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE DPW Murtuza advised there are two vacancies on the Storm Drain Measure Oversight Committee due to expired terms. The vacancy was publicized, and notification letters were sent to past Committee applicants. Three applications were received by the deadline of September 30, 2014 and two applicants were interviewed by the full Council on October 27, 2014. The third applicant was not available. Mayor Brownrigg opened the item for public comment, and there were no comments. Burlingame City Council November 3, 2014 Unapproved Minutes 4 CC Kearney gave each Councilmember a ballot to vote for two of the two candidates. The ballot submissions resulted in Kevin Osborne and Rudy Horak receiving the unanimous votes of all the Councilmembers. Kevin Osborne and Rudy Horak were appointed to the Storm Drain Measure Oversight Committee for a four year tern, ending in November 2018. b. CONSIDERATION OF APPOINTMENTS TO THE TRAFFIC, SAFETY & PARKING COMMISSION CM Goldman advised that the two vacancies are due to expired terms. The vacancies were publicized, and notification letters were sent to past Commissioner applicants. Four applications were received as of the extended deadline of October 10, 2014. The following four applicants were interviewed by the full Council on October 27, 2014: Nick Akers, Jeff Londer, Christopher Bush, and Russell Selkirk. Mayor Brownrigg opened the item for public comment, and there were no comments. CC Kearney gave each Councilmember a ballot to vote for two of the four candidates. The ballot submissions resulted in Jeff Londer and Nick Akers receiving the unanimous votes of all the Councilmembers. Nick Akers and Jeff Londer were appointed to the Traffic, Safety & Parking Commission for a three year term, ending in November 2017. c. REVIEW OF EL CAMINO REAL AND FLORIBUNDA AVENUE INTERSECTION SAFETY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (DEIR) DPW Murtuza reviewed the staff report and gave a presentation on the project that provided background and reviewed the pertinent, upcoming dates related to the project. Mr. Murtuza further reviewed the alternatives analyzed in the Draft Environmental Impact Report. DPW Murtuza advised that staff from the City’s Public Works, Community Development, and Parks Department jointly reviewed the DEIR and provided their findings which were summarized in the staff report. Council discussion followed and Council provided comments to be included in the Mayor’s letter to Caltrans. Council emphasized the removal and relocation of the five historical trees, and safety concerns related to left turn collisions at the intersection. Council also requested more transparency on the part of Caltrans and requested that Caltrans have staff at the November 13, 2014 meeting who were well informed on the project. Mayor Brownrigg requested that the City work with Hillsborough to get their input. Council thanked DPW Murtuza and staff for such an informative and excellent report in a very short amount of time. Mayor Brownrigg opened the item to the public and the following Burlingame residents spoke: Greg Taylor, Diane Silva, Betsy McGinn, Nini Argeris, Jennifer Pfaff, John Geer, Kent Lauder, Joanneh Nagler, and a resident of Walnut Avenue. Burlingame City Council November 3, 2014 Unapproved Minutes 5 Mayor Brownrigg said he is unable to attend the November 13, 2014 Caltrans meeting, as is Vice Mayor Nagel, and he requested that Councilmember Keighran attend the meeting and speak for the Mayor. CA Kane reminded the public that Caltrans is required to respond to anyone who contacts them and address their questions. Council requested that Caltrans include questions from the public in their report. d. REVISIONS TO LAND-USE RESTRICTIONS FOR THE BROADWAY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT AND GENERAL FOLLOW-UP REGARDING BROADWAY COMMUNITY MEETING CDD Meeker reviewed the staff report and advised that the City conducted a very successful community meeting on October 18, 2014 concerning the vitality of the Broadway Commercial District. Mr. Meeker said the comments received at the meeting as well as the 1200 survey respondents revealed there is an interest in loosening, or eliminating, the food establishment quota in the district and eliminating the conditional use permit requirement for health service uses above the ground floor. CDD Meeker further advised that if Council directs staff to proceed to work on those two items, the adequacy of an onsite parking supply will remain an issue and the cost for a parking study would be in the range of $50,000 to $75,000. Council questions and discussion followed with emphasis being on the parking study and the cost involved. CM Goldman spoke and advised that perhaps staff could return mid-year with a financial analysis. Mayor Brownrigg opened the item for public comment and John Kevranian and John Geer spoke on the item. Council directed staff to move forward with lifting or revising the restaurant moratorium; lifting the conditional use permit for second floor health services; and address the parking issue. CDD Meeker advised that the item would return to the Council at the December 1, 2014 meeting. e. DOWNTOWN BURLINGAME AVENUE SIDEWALK PAVER CLEANLINESS UPDATE Public Works Superintendent Rob Mallick spoke and reviewed the cleaning schedule of Burlingame Avenue pavers. Mr. Mallick advised that beginning in August 2014, the power washing program for Burlingame Avenue had to be reduced in order to comply with the new statewide drought emergency regulations. PWS Mallick further advised that the City recently purchased new mechanical scrubber equipment which will be used in lieu of power washing. Assistant Public Works Director Art Morimoto reviewed the new encroachment permit regulations for restaurants and food and beverage related businesses that use their frontage sidewalk for placement of tables and chairs. The permits require that the businesses keep their sidewalk frontages clean and if the businesses fail to comply, their encroachment permits will be terminated and administrative fines may possibly be imposed. DPW Murtuza advised that the recently purchased Tennant Scrubber was the suggestion of Councilmember Root. Council discussion followed and the Council thanked staff for all their efforts and requested that staff continue to work with all the businesses to keep their store frontages clean and implement code enforcement Burlingame City Council November 3, 2014 Unapproved Minutes 6 if necessary. Council emphasized the need for the whole community to take responsibility for the cleanliness of the downtown and suggested staff post a notice in the e-news. 11. COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND ACTIVITIES REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS Due to the late hour, this item was postponed until the next City Council meeting. 12. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS 13. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS a. Commission Minutes: Planning, October 14, 2014 14. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Brownrigg adjourned the meeting at 10:56 p.m. in memory of former Daly City Councilmember Al Teglia and radio host, Tom Magliozzi. Respectfully submitted, Mary Ellen Kearney City Clerk 1 STAFF REPORT AGENDA NO: 8b MEETING DATE: November 17, 2014 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: November 17, 2014 From: Mark Ladas, Fire Chief – (650) 558-7667 Subject: Adoption of a Resolution Approving the First Revised and Restated Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement for the San Mateo Operational Area Emergency Services Organization RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the resolution approving the First Revised and Restated Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement (JPA) for the San Mateo Operational Area Emergency Services Organization. BACKGROUND The County of San Mateo created the Emergency Services Council with the mission to provide planning, preparedness, public information, training, and Federal/State intergovernmental emergency services coordination for the 20 cities/towns within San Mateo County, as well as for County government, to enable them to respond to, minimize the impact of, and recover from a major emergency, disaster, or homeland security incident with the least possible loss of life or property. On April 3, 1997, the Emergency Services Council created the San Mateo County Operational Area Joint Powers Agreement establishing the San Mateo Operational Area Emergency Services Organization. The Joint Powers Agreement from 1997 was determined to be outdated and in need of revision. The entire landscape of the homeland security and emergency services field has changed drastically since 2001, and the agreement that governs how San Mateo County provides emergency services needs to reflect current laws, rules, directives, orders and trends. DISCUSSION Earlier this year the City Council voted to approve an updated version of the agreement, the First Amended Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement for the San Mateo Operational Area Emergency Services Organization. The San Mateo County Counsel’s office subsequently found that version of the agreement to be inconsistent with the Joint Powers law. The County Counsel’s office has now modified the language and formatting to better comply with the law. The agreement has been reviewed by the Emergency Services Council as well as the San Mateo County Emergency Managers Association, the San Mateo County Fire Chiefs, the San Mateo County Police Chiefs, the San Mateo County City Managers Association, and the San Mateo County City Attorneys Association. The most recent changes by the County Counsel’s office are mostly editorial and not substantial. San Mateo Operational Area Emergency Services Organization November 17, 2014 2 Substantial changes from the 1997 agreement, which the City Council approved earlier this year in the prior, updated agreement, include: 1. The addition of commonly used terminology and definitions (such as “command”, “emergency” and “emergency management”) 2. Improved explanation of the provisions of the Organization, its authority, composition, function, operations, and powers 3. Inclusion of National Response Framework and National Incident Management System (NIMS) 4. More accurate alignment of the Agreement with the Joint Exercise of Powers Act (CA Government code 6502) 5. An expansive outline of member agencies (municipalities) and participating partners (e.g. Red Cross, Fire Chiefs Association, Emergency Managers Association) FISCAL IMPACT There is no proposed change to the funding formula for the Joint Powers Agreement. EXHIBIT  Resolution Approving the First Revised and Restated Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement for the San Mateo Operational Area Emergency Services Organization  San Mateo Operational Area Joint Powers Agreement (final version) RESOLUTION NO. _____ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME APPROVING THE FIRST REVISED AND RESTATED JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS AGREEMENT FOR THE SAN MATEO OPERATIONAL AREA EMERGENCY SERVICES ORGANIZATION WHEREAS, in 1997, the City of Burlingame, with other cities of San Mateo County, entered into a San Mateo Operational Area Joint Powers Agreement for emergency services; and WHEREAS, the 1997 Agreement was deemed outdated and in need of updating to reflect the current compliances, practices and procedures of emergency services; and WHEREAS, in October 2014, the Agreement was updated to include current federal, state, and local codes, laws, and directives and to comply with California’s Joint Powers law; and WHEREAS, this Agreement has been reviewed by the County Fire Chiefs, Police Chiefs, Emergency Managers, City Managers, and City Attorneys; and WHEREAS, this Agreement has been reviewed by the County’s Emergency Services Council; and WHEREAS, during the revision process this Agreement was reviewed by the City Councils of the Member Agencies. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Burlingame approves the First Revised and Restated Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement for the San Mateo Operational Area Emergency Services Organization. _____________________________ Michael Brownrigg, Mayor I, Mary Ellen Kearney, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 17th day of November, 2014 and was adopted thereafter by the following vote: AYES: Councilmembers: ______________________________ NOES: Councilmembers: ______________________________ ABSENT: Councilmembers: ______________________________ _____________________________ Mary Ellen Kearney, City Clerk October 17, 2014 Page 1 First Revised and Restated Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement San Mateo County Operational Area Emergency Services Organization THIS JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is made as of the Effective Date by and between the public entities set forth below, creating the San Mateo County Operational Area Emergency Services Organization Authority (“Organization”). Each public entity executing this Agreement shall be referred to individually as a “Member Agency,” with all referred to collectively as “Member Agencies.” RECITALS Whereas the Member Agencies’ goal is to establish a unified emergency services organization; and Whereas the Member Agencies agree that the purpose of this Organization will be to operate pursuant to Presidential Directive 5, the National Response Framework, National Incident Management System (NIMS), Presidential Directive 8, the National Preparedness Goal and California’s Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS) and local adopted Emergency Operations Plans and Annexes. Whereas the Member Agencies agree that the participants within this Organization may include all local governments within the geographic area of the County, special districts, unincorporated areas, and participating non-governmental entities; and Whereas the Member Agencies agree that the collective goal is to provide coordinated plans for the protection of persons and property based on the phases of emergency management; and Whereas the Member Agencies have the authority to enter into this Agreement under the Joint Exercise of Powers Act, California Government Code Section 6500 et seq. (“Act”). NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the recitals and mutual obligations of the Member Agencies as herein contained, the Member Agencies agree as follows: Article I - GENERAL PROVISIONS 1.01 Purpose This Agreement creates an entity to exercise the powers shared in common by the Member Agencies to engage in local and regional cooperative planning and coordination and delivery of services. As part of this Organization’s purpose, Member Agencies seek to meet or exceed the current Emergency Response Planning and Management Capabilities within the Operational Area. Further, Member Agencies seek to support existing regional Public Information and Notification Systems, and to continue to support the regional hazardous materials emergency response program. Such purposes are to be accomplished and the Members Agencies’ common powers exercised as set forth in this Agreement. 1.02 Creation of Authority Pursuant to the Joint Exercise of Powers Act, the Member Agencies hereby create a public entity to be known as the “San Mateo County Operational Area Emergency Services Organization Authority” (“Organization.”) The Organization shall be a public entity separate and apart from the Member Agencies. The geographic jurisdiction of the Organization is all territory within the geographic October 17, 2014 Page 2 boundaries of the Member Agencies; however, the Organization may undertake any action outside those geographic boundaries as is necessary and incidental to accomplishing its purpose. 1.03 Membership in the Organization Membership in the Organization is limited to public entities, as defined by the Joint Exercise of Powers Act, located or operating within San Mateo County that have approved and executed this Agreement, and contributed resources of any kind toward establishing and supporting the Organization (including, but not limited to financial, personnel, equipment, or other resources) as approved by the Emergency Services Council. 1.04 Participating Members/Partners in the Organization Participation in the Organization is intended to ensure cooperative emergency planning and response; all participating Member Agencies and partners are expected to attend all regular and special meetings of the Emergency Services Council, encourage active participation by their jurisdictions in the development of plans and training programs, drills, exercises and training opportunities, and otherwise assist in supporting the implementation of this Agreement. 1.05 Powers of the Organization The Organization may purchase, lease, own and/or dispose of property and equipment and enter into contract(s), as required to satisfy the purposes of this Agreement. The Organization may employ agents and/or employees, operate works and improvements, sue and be sued in its own name, and invest surplus funds. Article II- COMMON TERMINOLOGY 2.01 Terminology Defined Not all vocabulary of technical terms listed in the Agreement is used in the Agreement. In part, the terms are included as a resource to further clarify terminology utilized in documentation, field operations and/or applicable subject matter. 2.02 All-Hazards: “Grouping classification encompassing all conditions, environmental or manmade, that have the potential to cause injury, or death; damage to or loss of equipment, infrastructure services, or property; or alternately causing functional degradation to societal, economic or environmental aspects. Annotation: All-hazards preparedness ensures that if a disaster occurs, people are ready to get through it safely, and respond to it effectively. FEMA began development of an Integrated Emergency Management System with an all-hazards approach that included ‘direction, control and warning systems which are common to the full range of emergencies from small isolated events to the ultimate emergency – war.” (DHS, Lexicon, October 23, 2007, p. 1) 2.03 Catastrophe: An event during which a society incurs, or is threatened to incur, such losses to persons and/or property that the entire society is affected and extraordinary resources and skills are required, some of which must come from other nations. 2.04 Community Emergency Response Team (CERT): “Community Emergency Response Team” (CERT) training is one way for citizens to prepare for an emergency. CERT training is designed to prepare people to help themselves, their families and their neighbors in the event of a catastrophic disaster. Because emergency services personnel may not be able to help everyone immediately, residents can make a difference by using the training obtained in the CERT course to save lives and protect property. (DHS, National Response Framework (Comment Draft). DHS, September 10, 2007, p. 18) October 17, 2014 Page 3 2.05 Command: The act or directing and or controlling by virtue of explicit legal, agency or delegated authority. The term “Command” may also refer to the Incident Commander. 2.06 Emergency: Any incident, whether natural or manmade, that requires responsive action to protect life or property. Under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, an emergency means any occasion or instance for which, in the determination of the President, federal assistance is needed to supplement state and local efforts and capabilities to save lives and to protect property and public health and safety or to lessen or avert the threat of a catastrophe in any part of the United States. 2.07 Emergency Management: A subset of incident management, the coordination and integration of all activities necessary to build, sustain and improve the capability to prepare for, protect against, respond to, recover from or mitigate against threatened or actual natural disasters, acts of terrorism or other manmade disasters. 2.08 Emergency Operations Center (EOC): The physical location at which the coordination of information and resources to support incident management activities normally takes place. An EOC may be a temporary facility or may be located in a more central or permanently established facility, perhaps at a higher level of organization within a jurisdiction. 2.09 Incident: An occurrence or event, natural or manmade, which requires a response to protect life or property. Incidents can, for example, include major disasters, emergencies, terrorist attacks, terrorist threats, civil unrest, wild land and urban fires, floods, hazardous materials spills, nuclear accidents, aircraft accidents, earthquakes, hurricanes, tornadoes, tropical storms, tsunamis, war- related disasters, public health and medical emergencies and other occurrences requiring an emergency response. 2.10 Incident Command System (ICS): A standardized on-scene emergency management construct specifically designed to provide for the adoption of an integrated organizational structure that reflects the complexity and demands of single or multiple incidents, without being hindered by jurisdictional boundaries. It is used for all kinds of emergencies and is applicable to small as well as large and complex incidents. 2.11 Local Emergency: The duly proclaimed existence of conditions of disaster or extreme peril to the safety of persons and/or property within territorial limits of a county, city and county, or city caused by such conditions as fire, flood, storm, epidemic, riot, drought, sudden and severe energy shortage, plant or animal infestation or disease, earthquake, tsunami or other conditions which are likely to be beyond the control of the services, personnel, equipment and facilities of that local political subdivision to combat. 2.12 Local Government: A county, municipality, city, town, township, local public authority, school district, special district, intrastate district, council of governments (regardless of whether the council of governments is incorporated as a nonprofit corporation under state law;) regional or interstate government entity or agency or instrumentality of a local government; an Indian tribe or authorized tribal entity, or in Alaska a Native Village or Alaska Regional Native Corporation; a rural community, unincorporated town or village or other public entity. See Section 2 (10), Homeland Security Act of 2002, P.L. 107-296, 116 Stat. 2135 (2002). October 17, 2014 Page 4 2.13 Mitigation: Activities providing a critical foundation in the effort to reduce the loss of life and/or property from natural and/or human-caused disasters by avoiding or lessening the impact of a disaster and providing value to the public by creating safer communities. Mitigation seeks to fix the cycle of disaster damage, reconstruction, and repeated damage. These activities or actions, in most cases, will have a long-term sustained effect. 2.14 National Incident Management System (NIMS): System that provides a proactive approach guiding government agencies at all levels, the private sector and nongovernmental organizations to work seamlessly to prepare for, prevent, respond to, recover from, and mitigate the effects of incidents, regardless of cause, size, location or complexity, in order to reduce the loss of life or property and harm to the environment. 2.15 National Response Framework: This document establishes a comprehensive, national, all- hazards approach to domestic incident response. It serves as a guide to enable responders at all levels of government and beyond to provide a unified national response to a disaster. It defines the key principles, roles, and structures that organize the way U.S. jurisdictions plan and respond. 2.16 Operational Area: An intermediate level of the state emergency services organization, consisting of the County and all political subdivisions within the county area. In a state of emergency, the operational area shall serve as a link in the system of communications and coordination between the political subdivisions comprising the operational area and the Regional or State Emergency Operations Center. 2.17 Preparedness: Actions that involve a combination of planning, resources, training, exercising and organizing to build, sustain and improve operational capabilities. Preparedness is the process of identifying the personnel, training and equipment needed for a wide range of potential incidents and developing jurisdiction-specific plans for delivering capabilities when needed for an incident. 2.18 Recovery: The development, coordination and execution of service- and site-restoration plans; the reconstitution of government operations and services; individual, private-sector, nongovernmental and public-assistance programs to provide housing and to promote restoration; long-term care and treatment of affected persons; additional measures for social, political, environmental and economic restoration; evaluation of the incident to identify lessons learned; and post-incident reporting and development of initiatives to mitigate the effects of future incidents. 2.19 Resources: Personnel and major items of equipment, supplies and facilities available or potentially available for assignment to incident operations and for which status is maintained. Under the National Incident Management System, resources are described by kind and type and may be used in operational support or supervisory capacities at an incident or at an emergency operations center. 2.20 Response: Immediate actions to save and sustain lives, protect property and the environment, and meet basic human needs. Response also includes the execution of plans and actions to support short-term recovery. 2.21 Standardized Emergency Management System: The Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS) is the cornerstone of California’s emergency response system and the fundamental structure for the response phase of emergency management. SEMS is required by the California Emergency Services Act (ESA) for managing multiagency and multijurisdictional responses to emergencies in California. The system unifies all elements of California’s emergency management October 17, 2014 Page 5 community into a single integrated system and standardizes key elements. SEMS incorporates the use of the Incident Command System (ICS), California Disaster and Civil Defense Master Mutual Aid Agreement (MMAA,) the Operational Area (OA) concept and multiagency or inter-agency coordination. State agencies and local governments are required to use SEMS in order to be eligible for any reimbursement of response-related costs under the state’s disaster assistance programs. Article III – GOVERNANCE 3.01 Composition of the Council The Organization shall be administered by the Emergency Services Council (“Council”) consisting of the following members: a) A member of the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors, who shall be designated by the Supervisors. b) Each governing body of a Member Agency shall annually select and appoint a representative to serve on the Council and may select and appoint an alternate representative. Each representative and alternative representative must be a member of the governing body of the Member Agency. c) The Chair of the Emergency Services Council shall be the representative from the Board of Supervisors. d) A Vice-Chair shall be selected by the Council. 3.02 General Purpose of the Organization The general purpose of the Organization is to: a) Provide structure for administrative and fiscal policies and procedures; b) Identify and pursue funding sources; c) Set policy; d) Maximize the utilization of available resources; and e) Oversee all committee activities. 3.03 Specific Responsibilities of the Council The specific responsibilities of the Council shall be as follows: a) To review and recommend adoption by the Board of Supervisors and City Councils of each City, Emergency Plans, programs and agreements, in addition to the basic agreements as deemed necessary to carry out the purpose of the Organization. b) To approve an annual budget in an amount necessary to carry out the purposes of the Organization. Upon review and approval of the annual budget by the Council, each Member Agency shall recommend the budget to the governing body of the Member Agency for the purpose of securing from each the appropriations in accordance with each Member Agency’s identified allocation (via Budget Sheets.) c) Each Member Agency’s Executive Officer shall identify and designate at the beginning of each fiscal year, a local coordinator for regular participation in the San Mateo County Emergency Managers Association. Should the identified Coordinator change at any time during the year, the Member Agency shall advise the Director of Emergency Services within 30 days. d) If a Member Agency participates in a contract relationship for the provision of emergency services, it is still required to name a local emergency coordinator to the Emergency Managers Association who will assure the continuity of communication between the Member Agency, the County Office of Emergency Services (OES) and the Organization. October 17, 2014 Page 6 3.04 Meetings of the Organization. a) Regular Meetings: The Council shall approve a schedule for its regular meetings provided, however, that the Council shall hold at least one regular meeting quarterly. The Council shall fix the date, hour and location of regular meetings by resolution and the Secretary shall transmit a copy of the resolution to each Member Agency at the first meeting of the fiscal year. b) Special Meetings: Special meetings of the Council may be called in accordance with the Brown Act by the Chair, a majority of the Council or the Director. c) Call, Notice and Conduct of Meetings: All meetings of the Council, including without limitation, regular, adjourned regular and special meetings, shall be noticed, held and conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Ralph M. Brown Act, California Government Code section 54950 et seq. As soon as practicable, but no later than the time of posting, the Secretary shall provide notice and the agenda to each Member Agency. Any Member Agency may request that an item be considered for placement on the Agenda by submitting the request to the Director of Emergency Services. d) Meetings of the Council shall be conducted by the Chair or by the Vice-Chair in the absence of the Chairperson. In the absence of both Chair and Vice-Chair, the meeting shall be chaired by member of the Council selected by a majority vote of the Council. 3.05 Minutes The Secretary of the Organization shall cause to be kept a digital recording of each meeting, which shall be posted on the SMC OES Website. The Secretary will create brief summary written minutes for approval by the Council. 3.06 Voting All power of the Organization shall reside with the Council. Each Member Agency shall have one vote. A Member Agency’s alternate representative may participate and vote in the proceedings of the Council only in the absence of that Member Agency’s regular representative. No absentee ballot or proxy voting is permitted. 3.07 Quorum; Required Votes; Approvals A quorum of the Council is a majority of the representatives of the Member Agencies of the Organization. If the number of Member Agencies is an even number, a majority is fifty percent of the Member Agencies, plus one. The Council may not take any substantive action without a majority of the Member Agencies voting to take that action. Action on non-substantive procedural matters may be taken by a majority of a quorum. Article IV – PARTICIPATING PARTNERS, EMPLOYEES AND ADVISORY COMMITTEES 4.01 Participating Partners In order to ensure cooperative emergency planning and response, the following may be invited to attend, as non-voting members, all regular and special meetings of the Council, participate in the development of plans and training programs, and otherwise assist in supporting the implementation of this Agreement: a) A representative of the American Red Cross to be invited by the Chair with the approval of the Council. b) One representative each from the San Mateo County Fire Chiefs Association and the San Mateo County Police Chiefs and Sheriff Association as may be invited by the Chair with approval of the Council. c) One representative for Water Districts as may be invited by the Chair with approval of the Council. October 17, 2014 Page 7 d) One representative for Sanitary Districts as may be invited by the Chair with approval of the Council. e) One representative for the San Mateo County Harbor District as may be invited by the Chair with approval of the Council. f) One representative for the Port Authority as may be invited by the Chair with approval of the Council. g) One representative for San Mateo County Transit District as may be invited by the Chair with approval of the Council. h) One representative for Pacific, Gas and Electric Company as may be invited by the Chair with approval of the Council. i) One representative for the Office of Education as may be invited by the Chair with approval of the Council. j) One representative for the Hospital Consortium as may be invited by the Chair with approval of the Council. k) One representative for the EMS Agency as may be invited by the Chair with approval of the Council. l) One representative for the San Mateo Emergency Managers Association as may be invited by the Chair with approval of the Council. Should other interested parties be identified for participation, the Organization shall consider a written request for participation and may be invited by the Chair with approval of the Council. 4.02 Treasurer The Treasurer of the County of San Mateo shall be the Treasurer of the Organization. The Treasurer shall be the depository, shall have custody of the accounts, funds and money of the Organization from whatever source, and shall have the duties and obligations set forth in the Joint Exercise of Powers Act. 4.03 Auditor and Financial Accountability The Organization will ensure financial accountability as required by Section 6505 of the Government Code. The Organization will ensure that audits are conducted as required by that Section. Unless the Council votes to appoint a separate auditor, audits will be conducted by auditor selected to conduct the audit of the Sheriff’s Office. In the event that the Council selects a separate auditor, the full cost of the audit will be the responsibility of the Organization. The Auditor shall perform the functions of auditor for the Organization and shall make or cause an independent annual audit of the accounts and records of the Organization by a certified public accountant, in compliance with the requirements of the Joint Exercise of Powers Act and generally accepted auditing standards. 4.04 Legal Counsel The San Mateo County Counsel’s Office shall be the legal counsel for the Organization. To the extent permitted by the Joint Exercise of Powers Act, the Organization may change, by resolution, the legal counsel to the Organization. The full cost of outside legal counsel will be the responsibility of the Organization. 4.05 Secretary to the Organization The San Mateo County Office of Emergency Services shall provide a Secretary and administrative support to the Organization. 4.06 Contractors The Organization shall have the power by resolution to appoint and employ such other consultants and independent contractors as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of the Organization. The Organization will be responsible for any/all incurred costs. October 17, 2014 Page 8 4.07 Committees The Organization may form and dissolve Committees as determined by the Council. 4.08 Director of Emergency Services The Sheriff or his/her designee is the Director of the San Mateo County Area Office of Emergency Services (“Director”). The SMC Area Office of Emergency Services is responsible for the on-going operation of the San Mateo County Operational Area and is also responsible for achieving the purposes of the Organization as follows: a) Emergency Response - coordination and planning during any regional emergency in accordance with adopted emergency plans. b) Plans and Operations - preparation, development, coordination, and integration of compatible and complimentary unified area-wide emergency plans for approval by the State of California and adoption by the Council. c) Communications - coordination, development and maintenance of an area-wide emergency communications service, including public alert and warning systems, and other situational awareness tools. d) Public Education and Information - coordination and support of an area-wide public education and information program. e) Training and Exercise -coordination and assistance in the training and exercising of all County employees identified as Disaster Service Workers, as defined by Sect. 3100 of the California Government Code and volunteers. The Member Agencies will be responsible for the training and exercise of their identified employees; however, OES will provide needed support as requested. f) Grant Program Administration - coordination and assistance with designated emergency coordinators within the Operational Area in the securing and distribution of grant funds for regional emergency management initiatives and program support. g) General Administration - coordination and assistance in the procurement and inventory of emergency equipment, management of, maintenance and distribution of area-wide inventories of vital supplies and equipment. h) The Organization does not intend to acquire title to any property. But in the event that it does, pursuant to Section 6505.1 of the Government Code, the Organization designates the Director to handle that property. In the event that the Organization does acquire title to property, the Director will obtain a bond in the amount determined by the contracting parties. 4.09 Staffing Reimbursement The County Office of Emergency Services is a bureau of the Sheriff’s Office, staffed by sworn officers and other civil service employees of the County of San Mateo appointed by the Sheriff. The Office of Emergency Services supports the purposes of the Organization. A portion of the cost of Office of Emergency Services staff is reimbursed by the Organization in an amount determined by the funding allocation in this Agreement. Article V – BUDGET AND COST-SHARING In consideration of the mutual promises herein contained, it is hereby agreed that the cost of maintaining the Organization will be shared as described below. October 17, 2014 Page 9 a) From the total amount of the annual budget there shall be deducted estimated revenue from federal “matching funds,” state grants, and other service revenues. b) The balance of the annual budget remaining after anticipated revenues have been deducted shall be paid as follows: 1. The county shall pay 50% of the remaining balance. 2. The cities shall pay the remaining 50% of the balance, apportioned in accordance with the following formula: i. One half of said 50% to be apportioned by people units or population. a) Total population of all member cities divided into one-half of the total of the cities’ share of the budget equals a factor in cents. b) Population of each member city times the factor in cents equals the share for each city. ii. The remaining one-half of said 50% to be apportioned on the basis of assessed valuation as follows: a) Total assessed value of real and personal property in all member cities divided into one-half of the total of the city’s share of the budget equals a factor in mils. b) Assessed value of real and personal property of each member city times the factor in mils equals the share for each city. c) For the purpose of this Agreement the total assessed valuation of real and personal property in all Member Agencies shall be the most recent such total maintained by the offices of the County Assessor. d) The figures used for population in each city shall be determined by a method and from a source that is mutually acceptable to the majority of members. e) It is understood and agreed that the financial obligations incurred by the Member Agencies under the provisions of this Agreement will be incurred annually, subject to the limitation that the county and cities are financially able to make funds available. f) If the Member Agencies representing 25% or more of the county’s population do not approve the budget in any fiscal year, the proposed budget will be referred back to the Director and the Finance Committee for revision and recommendation. If no resolution can be reached by the committee, the Member Agencies may proceed to adopt budgets that provide those services they deem necessary for adequate emergency services protection as a whole, but any Member Agency shall be financially responsible for that portion of the budget unilaterally adopted. Any Member Agency that does not meet its financial commitment under the adopted budget will lose its voting status and/or other such privileges of membership as determined by the Council. g) It is further agreed that any excess in federal or state funds, in any year, shall be reviewed by the Finance Committee, who will then make a recommendation to the Council, as to the disposition of the excess funds. h) With respect any Member Agency that is not a City or the County , the amount to be contributed is determined by a negotiation between those Member Agencies and the Director Emergency Services and must be approved by the Council. A letter memorializing the agreed contribution will be an attachment to this Agreement. Article VI - INSURANCE a) The County shall add the Organization and Emergency Services Council to its existing excess liability insurance coverage and shall maintain such coverage in full force and effect during the life of the Agreement. Member Agencies understand that the County is partially self-insured. Unless the Organization decides otherwise, County shall provide for the defense of any claims or litigation within the self-insured retention. Legal representation by the County will ordinarily be provided by the County Counsel. October 17, 2014 Page 10 b) Any out-of-pocket expense or loss, by way of judgment or settlement, arising out of the operation of this Agreement, within the limits of the County’s self-insured retention shall be shared by the parties in accordance with the formula as described in Article V (b). Article VII - EFFECTIVENESS This Agreement shall be effective upon its execution by all Member Agencies. It is effective as to new Members Agencies upon adoption and approval by the Council and by the new Member Agency’s governing body. This Agreement shall continue in effect until terminated as provided herein. Article VIII – TERM AND TERMINATION 8.01 Withdrawal by Members a) Any Member Agency may withdraw from this Agreement by written notice given by such Member Agency to all other Member Agencies, which notice shall be given at least 120 days prior to the commencement of the fiscal year in which it is to take effect. For the purpose of such notice, a fiscal year is defined as July 1 of a calendar year through June 30 of the succeeding calendar year. b) Any former or prospective Member Agency may enter or re-enter the organization by petition to the Council by its governing body, and majority approval of the petition by the Council. Upon approval, the new Member Agency must agree in writing to all terms of this Agreement. c) Should a Member Agency withdraw less than 120 days prior to the commencement of the fiscal year, the withdrawal will be effective but that Member Agency will be responsible for its calculated contribution for that year pursuant to Article V. d) Should a Member Agency give required notice and withdraw from the Agreement, the prior contribution of that Member Agency will be divided equally by formula among the remaining Member Agencies. 8.02 Termination of Organization and Disposition of Surplus Money and Property This Agreement shall terminate effective upon a vote of the Council, the County and by at least eleven (11) cities representing the majority of the population of the County. In the event that the Organization ceases to exist, surplus funds will be returned consistent with Section 6512 of the Government Code in proportion to the contributions made. The Organization does not intend to acquire title to any property. But in the event that it does, title to all property acquired by the Organization, shall be owned by the County of San Mateo to be used for “County Wide” purposes. 8.03 Amendments Any proposed Amendments to this Agreement may be recommended by the Council but must be ratified by each Member Agency’s governing body. 8.04 Review of this Agreement The Council will conduct a review of this Agreement in 2020 and every five years thereafter to determine whether any changes to the Agreement are necessary or advisable. In the event that the Council concludes that changes should be made, each Member Agency representative will take those recommended changes to the governing body of the Member Agency for ratification. 8.05 Bylaws The Council may, from time to time, adopt and/or amend Bylaws for the conduct of its affairs; provided the purpose is consistent with this Agreement and/or are necessary and appropriate. October 17, 2014 Page 11 Article IX - MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 9.01 Notices It shall be the responsibility of the Sheriff or his/her designee to ensure all notices are provided to Member Agencies and posted in compliance with the legal requirements of the Agreement. 9.02 Severability If any one or more of the terms, provisions, promises, covenants, or conditions of this Agreement were, to any extent, adjudged invalid, unenforceable, void, or voidable for any reason whatsoever by a court of competent jurisdiction, each and all of the remaining terms, provisions, promises, covenants, and conditions of this Agreement shall not be affected thereby and shall be valid and enforceable to the fullest extent permitted by law. 9.03 Supersession It is mutually understood and agreed by the Member Agencies that this Agreement supersedes the 1997 San Mateo County Operational Area Joint Powers Agreement, any previous agreements on this subject matter and any amendments thereto. 9.04 Assignment No Member Agency shall assign any rights or obligations under this Agreement without the prior written consent of the Council. 9.05 Governing Law This Agreement is made and to be performed in the State of California, and as such, California substantive and procedural law shall apply. Venue for any litigation under this Agreement shall be in the County of San Mateo. 9.06 Headings The section headings herein are for convenience only and are not to be construed as modifying or governing the language of this Agreement. 9.07 Counterparts This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which will be deemed an original and all of which shall constitute this Agreement. 9.08 No Third Party Beneficiaries This Agreement and the obligations hereunder are not intended to benefit any party other than the Authority and its Members Agencies, except as expressly provided otherwise herein. No entity that is not a signatory to this Agreement shall have any rights or causes of action against any party to this Agreement as a result of that party's performance or non-performance under this Agreement, except as expressly provided otherwise herein. 9.09 Filing of Notice of Agreement Within 30 days after the Effective Date, the Secretary shall cause to be filed with the Secretary of State the notice of Agreement required by the Act. Within 30 days after any amendment to this Agreement, the Secretary shall file the amendment with the Secretary of State. 9.10 Conflict of Interest Code The Organization shall adopt a conflict of interest code as required by law. Member Agencies understand that representatives and alternate representatives are listed on the Organization’s Conflict of Interest Code and will be responsible for filing a Form 700 with the Organization. October 17, 2014 Page 12 9.11 Indemnification The Organization shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless each Member Agency (and each Member Agency's officers, agents, and employees) from any and all liability, including but not limited to claims, losses, suits, injuries, damages, costs and expenses (including attorney's fees,) arising from or as a result of any acts, errors or omissions of the Organization or its officers, agents or employees. Each Member Agency shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the other Member Agencies (and their officers, agents, and employees) from any and all liability, including but not limited to claims, losses, suits, injuries, damages, costs and expenses (including attorney's fees,) arising from or as a result of any acts, errors or omissions of that party or its officers, agents or employees. 9.12 Dispute Resolution/Legal Proceedings Disputes regarding the interpretation or application of any provision of this Agreement shall, to the extent reasonably feasible, be resolved through good faith negotiations between the Member Agencies and/or the Organization. 9.13 Authorization to Enter Into Agreement Each party warrants that the person signing this Agreement on its behalf is authorized to bind that party to this Agreement. 9.14 Confirmation of Jurisdictional Authority By signing this Agreement, the Member Agencies retain all authority granted to them by the State and/or their respective Charters. The powers and/or authority granted pursuant to this Agreement shall in no way serve to limit or restrict an individual Member Agency’s jurisdictional authority. 9.15 Participation Understanding The Member Agencies understand that to facilitate proper emergency response, each public entity has an important role to play. By adopting this Agreement, the Member Agencies recognize the importance of that role. Descriptions of the activities that are expected of each Member Agency are contained in Attachment A to this Agreement. Attachment A may be modified by a majority of the Council at a meeting of the Organization. (SIGNATURES ARE ON FOLLOWING PAGE) October 17, 2014 Page 13 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each Member Agency has caused this Agreement to be executed and attested by its proper officers thereunto duly authorized, as follows: Signatories Resolution/Action Number Date of Adoption Atherton Belmont Brisbane Burlingame Colma Daly City East Palo Alto Foster City Half Moon Bay Hillsborough Menlo Park Millbrae Pacifica Portola Valley Redwood City San Bruno San Carlos San Mateo South San Francisco Woodside County of San Mateo October 17, 2014 Page 14 ATTACHMENT A SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT The following list of responsibilities was developed by a sub-committee of the Emergency Managers Association of San Mateo County. The determined need is to assure the Member Agencies meet the basic functional needs of the communities within San Mateo County during a disaster. To determine the readiness of Member Agencies to respond to an emergency, each Member Agency agrees to participate in an annual survey or other mechanism, developed by the EMA Policy & Continuity Working Group, to gather preparedness data from Member Agencies. An evaluation shall be presented to the Emergency Services Council as set forth in section 1.01 of this Supplemental Agreement. Article I – MEMBER AGENCY RESPONSIBILITIES AND TRAINING 1.01 Emergency Preparedness and Planning Standards The Member Agencies shall each accept primary responsibility for the readiness within their respective jurisdictions and development of disaster preparedness plans which shall be compatible with and complimentary to the area-wide emergency planning and organization, formulated pursuant to this Agreement. As such, each Member Agency agrees that it will adhere to current state and federal NIMS/SEMS requirements. The Director will provide an annual report of each Member Agency’s attainment towards the current State and federal NIMS/SEMS requirements, as well as assist the Member Agencies in working towards full compliance. 1.02 Information Reporting Member Agencies of the Organization shall report on the agreed adopted standards, cited in Section 1.01 of this Supplemental Attachment, annually to the Director of the Office of Emergency Services, who will compile the information and report to the Council at its January meeting. a. The following is an example of the type of information to be collected annually; other formats may be developed or used as needed. Adopt an Emergency Operations Plan and Annexes, review and update no less than every three years City/Town Percentage Complete 1 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 b. Have a Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, internally reviewed annually and provide updates as required, and approved by FEMA. (Currently no less than every five years. City/Town Percentage Complete 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 c. Participate in the Operational Area Multi-year Training and Exercise Plan City/Town Percentage Complete 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 October 17, 2014 Page 15 d. Adopt use of the Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program (HSEEP) City/Town Percentage Complete 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 e. Participate in meetings and activities including the Emergency Managers Association (EMA) City/Town Percentage Complete 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 f. Participate in Training and Exercises City/Town Percentage Complete 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 g. Prepare and maintain necessary plans and agreements to facilitate emergency sheltering City/Town Percentage Complete 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 1.03 Training and Exercises A Training and Exercise Plan is a means to establishing a standard of readiness and initiates a basic knowledge and capability skill set. Full participation by Member Agency Emergency Managers and other Operational Area stakeholders is important to developing a multi-year training program. Training and exercise planning and development will be the responsibility of the EMA T&E Group to accommodate the needs of the stakeholders. Full commitment and participation by the Member Agencies and participating partners will also be recommended in at least one annual exercise, in some capacity, to ensure the preparedness level of our Operation Area. Further, Member Agencies agree to support the NIMS compliance of each of their jurisdictions. 1.04 Recommended Training for the Governing Bodies of Member Agencies In an effort to ensure NIMS Compliance and a standardized understanding among Member Agencies, the following training curriculum, is recommended for representatives of each Member Agencies’ governing bodies: a) 100: Introduction to ICS or equivalent b) FEMA IS 700.a: NIMS An Introduction c) ICS-402:Incident Command System (ICS) Overview for Executives/Senior Officials(G402) 1.05 Local Coordinator Responsibilities All Member Agencies have adopted this Agreement with a commitment to engage in local and regional cooperative planning, coordination and delivery of services. Each Member Agency will provide local support via staff with primary and/or secondary responsibilities including, but not limited to the following: a) Management/Coordination of the Local Emergency Operations Center (EOC) – (functional and support services.) October 17, 2014 Page 16 b) Provide liaison support to the County Emergency Operations Center (EOC) Director or his/her designee in emergency or disaster situations. c) Oversee the preparation and prepare and modify elements of the local Emergency Operations Plan and Disaster Recovery Plan to ensure compatibility with the Operational Area Emergency Operations Plan and Annexes. d) Develop relationships with representatives of local departments, public and private support and relief agencies, business, educational, homeowners' and other groups regarding emergency services; prepare specialized plans designed to meet the needs of various sections of the community. e) Prepare and disseminate training materials to ensure effective response in a disaster situation; f) Develop, train and maintain community engagement, through programs such as Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) g) Develop relationships with representatives of other emergency management and response agencies and organizations; review legislation, regulations and other documentation to ensure that the City is in compliance with such regulations and avail itself of all financial and other resources. h) Respond to the Emergency Operations Center when it is activated; ensure that appropriate documents are available at the center and provide liaison and coordinative support as required. 1.06 Operational Area District Coordinator Responsibilities In addition to the roles and responsibilities identified in Section 4.09, The Director of Emergency Services will provide staff in direct support of the Local Coordinators. These Operational Area District Coordinators are not intended to replace local staff, as they do not have the required authority within local jurisdictions to operate as the primary coordinators. They will, however, provide the following services, which include but are not limited to: a) Develop, review and update emergency operations plans. b) Develop, review and update detailed standard operating procedures, checklists and resource documents. c) Compile data and prepare program papers and progress reports for the jurisdictions served. d) Compile and review jurisdictional data in support of the annual Standards Review. e) Support a Planning and Exercise Design Team as well as complete a 3-5 year Training and Exercise Program that is HSEEP compliant. f) Act as information, education and/or resource officer for the jurisdictions served. g) Speak to civic groups, clubs, and organizations to promote emergency services programs, encouraging public understanding and support. Notify local jurisdiction when appropriate. h) Work cooperatively with other office staff on area-wide projects and in training programs. i) Develop relationships with representatives of other emergency management and response agencies and organizations, review legislation, regulations and other documentation to ensure that the County is in compliance with such regulations and avail itself of all financial and other resources. Atherton _______________________________ ___________________ City Manager/Mayor Date Belmont _______________________________ ___________________ City Manager/Mayor Date Brisbane _______________________________ ___________________ City Manager/Mayor Date Burlingame _______________________________ ___________________ City Manager/Mayor Date Colma _______________________________ ___________________ City Manager/Mayor Date Daly City _______________________________ ___________________ City Manager/Mayor Date East Palo Alto _______________________________ ___________________ City Manager/Mayor Date Foster City _______________________________ ___________________ City Manager/Mayor Date Half Moon Bay _______________________________ ___________________ City Manager/Mayor Date Hillsborough _______________________________ ___________________ City Manager/Mayor Date Menlo Park _______________________________ ___________________ City Manager/Mayor Date Millbrae _______________________________ ___________________ City Manager/Mayor Date Pacifica _______________________________ ___________________ City Manager/Mayor Date October 17, 2014 Portola Valley _______________________________ ___________________ City Manager/Mayor Date Redwood City _______________________________ ___________________ City Manager/Mayor Date San Bruno _______________________________ ___________________ City Manager/Mayor Date San Carlos _______________________________ ___________________ City Manager/Mayor Date San Mateo _______________________________ ___________________ City Manager/Mayor Date South San Francisco _______________________________ ___________________ City Manager/Mayor Date Woodside _______________________________ ___________________ City Ma nager/Mayor Date County of San Mateo _______________________________ ___________________ County Manager/President of the Date Board of Supervisors October 17, 2014 1 STAFF REPORT AGENDA NO: 8c MEETING DATE: November 17, 2014 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: November 17, 2014 From: William Meeker, Community Development Director – (650) 558-7255 Subject: Approval of a Letter Authorizing the City’s Participation in the Peninsula SunShares Residential Solar Bulk Procurement Program Coordinated by the City of Foster City RECOMMENDATION The City Council is asked to authorize the Mayor to sign a letter on behalf of the City of Burlingame committing to participation in the SunShares Residential Solar Bulk Procurement Program that is being coordinated by the City of Foster City. BACKGROUND The City of Foster City is acting as lead agency in the Peninsula SunShares program, an effort to reduce the cost and complexity of residential solar installations by soliciting through a Request for Proposals to solar vendors, bulk pricing that private property owners can choose to access through contracts between themselves and the selected solar vendor(s). By offering pre- negotiated pricing, ease of administration and public outreach, it is hoped that residents will choose to install solar technology at a higher rate than without the program. DISCUSSION Foster City, the lead agency, has contracted with the non-profit Vote Solar to serve as program administrator. Vote Solar will develop and issue the Request for Proposals to solar vendors and will conduct outreach to and directly interface with both the public participants and with the selected solar vendor(s) during the active registration period. Vote Solar will provide this service at no cost to the partner agencies if the threshold of 40,000 direct outreach contacts is provided by the Partner Agencies. In the attached letter drafted for the Mayor’s signature, the City of Burlingame commits to directly contacting a minimum of 5,000 residents, members of the business community and City employees to promote the program. For example, contacts may be made through utility billing, business licensing, permitting and the City’s e-newsletter, which currently has more than 6,000 subscribers. Any public agency on the Peninsula is eligible to participate in the program. If the City chooses to participate, it will be responsible for: Solar Bulk Procurement Program November 17, 2014 2 1. Completing a Letter of Commitment with the City of Foster City (attached). 2. Adding the City of Burlingame logo to the outreach materials. 3. Contacting by mail or email residents and/or businesses within the community to explain the Vote Solar program. 4. Providing Vote Solar and/or City of Foster City with the number of contacts made for recordkeeping and tracking purposes. 5. Using resources available to the agency to promote the program during the application period. 6. Participating on the proposal evaluation committee (if desired). FISCAL IMPACT None. Exhibits:  Letter of Support  Peninsula SunShares Program Summary  Register online with the City of Burlingame to receive regular City updates at www.Burlingame.org  MICHAEL BROWNRIGG, MAYOR TERRY NAGEL, VICE MAYOR ANN KEIGHRAN RICARDO ORTIZ JOHN ROOT TEL: (650) 558-7200 FAX: (650) 342-8386 www.burlingame.org The City of Burlingame CITY HALL -- 501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA 94010-3997 November 17, 2014 ‘Andra Lorenz, Management Analyst City of Foster City 610 Foster City Boulevard Foster City, CA 94404 RE: Participation in Peninsula SunShares Dear Ms. Lorenz: I am pleased to provide this letter in support of the collaborative solar education and discount program now being developed between the City of Foster City (“Peninsula SunShares”) and the Vote Solar Initiative (VSI). The City of Burlingame believes the proposed program, which will be administered by VSI, will help to continue to overcome soft cost barriers impeding broad market transformation of residential rooftop solar by enabling homeowners to voluntarily participate in a group education and discount program for solar photovoltaic (PV) panels on their homes. As a major Peninsula municipality, The City of Burlingame looks forward to offering our residents and community members working in the City limits, the opportunity to participate in this program. With the launch of residential PACE throughout California in August 2014, Peninsula SunShares participants will have an additional financing tool to help them implement both energy efficiency and solar upgrades to their homes. The City of Burlingame is a participating California FIRST community and also welcomes the opportunity to jumpstart interest in PACE financing through the program. Peninsula SunShares will serve as a national model for regional collaboration and engagement in sustainability that helps to meet the goals of AB32 as well as the policy direction provided by the City of Burlingame’s Climate Action Plan. Participation in Peninsula SunShares November 17, 2014  Register online with the City of Burlingame to receive regular City updates at www.Burlingame.org  The City of Burlingame welcomes the opportunity to collaborate with the City of Foster City and its program partners on this innovative program and will use our internal and external communication channels to reach our residents and business community throughout the program term. The City of Burlingame commits to the following: 1. Provide Vote Solar with contact information of, and make introductions to, internal and external stakeholders, such as the Citizens Environmental Council and the Chamber of Commerce, who can reach residents and/or businesses (employees) as a part of the program’s outreach strategy. We understand that these contacts will be made on behalf of the program by our organization, which will enable Vote Solar to coordinate outreach efforts. Our organization has the means and plans to directly contact a minimum of 5,000 community residents, City employees and employees of businesses within our community. 2. Conduct outreach to community members (residents, members of faith based organizations and/or local non-profits, neighborhood associations, etc.) to promote program availability using internal communication channels which include, but are not limited to email blasts (ex. Councilmember list serve, internal workforce email, utility bill inserts, neighborhood association social media outlets, etc.), intranet posts, newsletters, and posters. 3. Report the number of contacts that are made on behalf of the Peninsula SunShares program by the City. It is our hope that our joint work will continue the progress that SunShares has made in expanding the number of solar installations in California. Sincerely, Michael Brownrigg Mayor – City of Burlingame Peninsula SunShares Residential Solar Bulk Procurement Program Lead Agency: Foster City Project Purpose To encourage the private installation of rooftop solar by homeowners of single family (and possibly small multi-family) residences in cities on the Peninsula through creation of reduced overall acquisition and installation costs produced by economies of scale. Project Overview Foster City is acting as lead agency in the Peninsula SunShares program, an effort to reduce the cost and complexity of residential solar installations by soliciting through a Request for Proposals to solar vendors, bulk pricing that private property owners can choose to access through contracts between themselves and the selected solar vendor(s). By offering pre-negotiated pricing, ease of administration and public outreach, it is hoped that residents will choose to install solar technology at a higher rate than without the program. Project Administration Lead Agency Foster City has contracted with the non-profit Vote Solar to serve as program administrator. Vote Solar will develop and issue the Request for Proposals to solar vendors and will outreach to and directly interface with both the public participants and with the selected solar vendor(s) during the active registration period. Vote Solar will provide this service at no cost to the partner agencies if the threshold of 40,000 direct outreach contacts are provided by the Partner Agencies. Responsibility of Partner Agencies Any public agency on the Peninsula is eligible to participate in the program. Participating agencies will be responsible for the following: 1. Complete a Letter of Commitment with the City of Foster City. 2. Add its logo to the outreach materials 3. Contact by mail or email residents and/or businesses within the community with whom Vote Solar can outreach. 4. Provide Vote Solar and/or City of Foster City with the number of contacts made for recordkeeping and tracking purposes. 5. Use resources available to the agency to promote the program during the application period. 6. If desired, agencies may participate on the proposal evaluation committee (optional.) Opportunity for Sponsor Agencies The program is also seeking endorsements from regional advocacy or membership organizations. The expectation of a sponsor agency includes: 1. Add its logo to the outreach materials 2. Use resources available to the agency to promote the program during the registration period. 3. Contact by e-mail or mail residents or employees of companies in participating communities through organization membership contacts or email subscription lists with whom Vote Solar can outreach. 4. Provide Vote Solar and/or City of Foster City with the number of contacts made for recordkeeping and tracking purposes. Proposed Timeline  October 2014: Partner Agencies and Sponsor Agencies invited to join Peninsula SunShares  November 28, 2014: Letters of Commitment due from Partner Agencies and Sponsor Agencies  December 2014 - March 2015: Outreach materials developed, RFP issued, proposals evaluated, vendor(s) selected  March - June 2015: Open registration period, installations begin  July – November 2015: Contract signing deadline, finish installations; evaluate program; establish next steps For More Information ‘Andra Lorenz, Management Analyst alorenz@fostercity.org; 650-286-3215 1 STAFF REPORT AGENDA NO: 8d MEETING DATE: November 17, 2014 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: November 17, 2014 From: Margaret Glomstad, Parks and Recreation Director – (650) 558-7307 Karen Hager, Recreation Supervisor – (650) 558-7317 Subject: Adoption of a Resolution Awarding a Contract to CWS Construction for the Village Park Restroom Replacement (City Project #81990) and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Agreement RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that City Council approve the attached Resolution awarding a construction contract to CWS Construction for the Village Park Restroom Replacement Project, City Project No. 81990 in the amount of $155,000.00 and authorizing the City Manager to execute the agreement. BACKGROUND The Village Restroom is in need of replacement. In the CIP budget, $200,000 has been appropriated for the replacement of the Village Park Restroom. The project scope consists of the removal of the existing wood framed toilet building and the replacement with a new concrete masonry unit toilet building consisting of two single occupant toilet rooms, a storage room and a utility room. The project was first advertised for bids on January 24, 2014. Bidders were instructed to bid a lump sum proposal for all the Labor and Materials required to complete the project. On February 26, 2014 a total of ten bids were opened for this project. Due to various insufficiencies in that first bid process and in the interest of efficient public contracting, the City Council approved the rejection of all bids in April. The project was subsequently re-bid. DISCUSSION The four bids that were received ranged from $155,000 to $193,907. The bid results were as follows: 1.CWS Services Construction - $155,000 2.SLM Development - $174,500 3.OnPoint Construction - $184,700 4.Southwest Construction - $193,907 CWS Construction submitted the lowest responsible bid in the amount of $155,000. Resolution Awarding the Village Park Restroom Contract #81990 November 17, 2014 2 FISCAL IMPACT The following are the estimated project expenditures: Fund Expenses Starting Balance $200,000 Architect Fees $29,500 Bid amount $155,000.00 10% construction contingency $15,000.00 Testing Fees $5,500 Fees from previous bid, printing $1,895.09 Legal Ad $840.00 Totals: $200,000 $207,735.09 The Village Park CIP was approved in Fiscal Year 11-12 for $200,000. Staff estimates the project will be $7,735.09 over budget as a result of rebidding and the general increased costs since FY 11-12. As part of the mid-year report, a request will be made to increase the project’s budget by $7,800. Exhibits:  Resolution  Bid Summary  Agreement with CWS Construction RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AWARDING A CONTRACT TO CWS CONSTRUCTION FOR THE VILLAGE PARK RESTROOM REPLACEMENT (CITY PROJECT #81990) AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT WHEREAS, the City of Burlingame Parks and Recreation Department on October 16, 2014 re -advertis ed for the Village Park Restroom Replacement Project in local newspapers and contractor clearing houses for soliciting bids; and WHEREAS, on November 6, 2014, at 2 pm, all bids received were opened in public in the office of the Parks and Recreation Department at 850 Burlingame Ave, California; and WHEREAS, the bid of CWS Construction was determined to be the lowest responsive and responsible bid for the total job in the amount of $155,000. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: 1. CWS Construction is determined to have submitted the lowest responsive and responsible bid for the Village Park Restroom Replacement Project, City Project No.81990, and the same is hereby accepted. 2. The City Manager is hereby authorized to execute an agreement with CWS Construction for the performance of said work, in the form attached to this resolution. Mayor I, Mary Ellen Kearney, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do h ereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the Burlingame City Council held on the 17th day of November, 2014, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote: AYES: Councilmembers: NOES: Councilmembers: ABSENT: Councilmembers: ________________________________ Mary Ellen Kearney, City Clerk Proposal OpeningProposal ResultsDistrictBulringame Parks and Recreation Dept. ProjectVillage Park Toilet BuildingDTA Project #Date TimeCompany Base BidProposalSub-ContractorsExperience Quals.Non-collusionPublic Code Statement Prevailing WageNondiscriminatory CertificateCert. of Workers CompensationSignatures PageReq. Doc. ChecklistProposal Security1CWS $155,000.00xxxxxxxxxxx2Southwest $193,907.00xxxxxxxxxxx3SLM Dev. $174,500.00xxxxxxxxxxx4On Point $184,700.00xxxxxxxxxxx567891011* not executed ** not included1301-vps11/06/14 2:00 PMProposal Results1 Agreement For Public Improvement Village Park Restroom Replacement 2014-2015 - City Project No. 81990 THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into in the City of Burlingame, County of San Mateo, State of California on November 17, 2014, by and between the CITY OF BURLINGAME, a municipal corporation, hereinafter called "City", and CWS Construction hereafter called "Contractor," WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, City has taken appropriate proceedings to authorize construction of the public work and improvements herein provided for and execution of this Contract; and WHEREAS, a notice was duly published for bids for the contract for the improvement hereinafter described; and WHEREAS, on November 17, 2014 after notice duly given, the City Council of said City awarded the contract for the construction of the improvements hereinafter described to Contractor, which contractor said Council found to be the lowest responsible bidder for said improvements; and WHEREAS, City and Contractor desire to enter into this agreement for the construction of said improvements; NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED by the parties hereto as follows: 1. Scope of work. Contractor shall perform the work as described on Village Park Restroom Replacement 2014-2015, PROJECT NO. 81990 Proposal, Contract & Special Provisions. 2. The Contract Documents. The complete contract between City and Contractor consists of the following documents: this Agreement; the Notice Inviting Sealed Bids, attached hereto as Exhibit A; the accepted Bid Proposal, attached hereto as Exhibit B; the provisions contained in the contract book entitled “Village Park Restroom Replacement 2014-2015 – City Project No. 81990”, attached as Exhibit C; the complete General and Special Provisions set forth in the State of California Standard Specifications for the Construction of Local Streets and Roads, July 2002 edition, as promulgated by the California Department of Transportation; prevailing wage rates of the State of California applicable to this project under State law; and all bonds, which are collectively hereinafter referred to as the Contract Documents. All rights of the City and Contractor are fully set forth and described in the Contract Documents, which are hereby incorporated as if fully set forth herein. All of the above documents are intended to cooperate so that any work called for in one, and not mentioned in the other, or vice versa, is to be executed the same as if mentioned in all said documents. 3. Contract Price. The City shall pay, and the Contractor shall accept, in full, payment of the work above agreed to be done, to the sum of One hundred fifty-five thousand dollars, ($155,000). Said price is determined by the unit (section) prices contained in Contractor's Bid. In the event work is performed or materials furnished in addition to those set forth in Contractor's Bid and the Specifications, such work and materials will be paid for at the unit (section) prices therein contained. Said amount shall be paid in progress payments as provided in the Contract Documents. 4. Provisions Cumulative. The provisions of this Agreement are cumulative and in addition to and not in limitation of any other rights or remedies available to the City. 5. Notices. All notices shall be in writing and delivered in person or transmitted by certified mail, postage prepaid. Notices required to be given to the City shall be addressed as follows: Margaret Glomstad, Parks and Recreation Director City of Burlingame 850 Burlingame Avenue Burlingame, California 94010 Notices required to be given to Contractor shall be addressed as follows: CWS Construction c/o Charlie Slack 94 San Benito Way Novato, CA 94945 Tel: (415) 599-5595 Email: cwsconstruction@comcast.net 6. Interpretation. As used herein, any gender includes the other gender and the singular includes the plural and vice versa. 7. Waiver or Amendment. No modification, waiver, mutual termination, or amendment of this Agreement is effective unless made in writing and signed by the City and the Contractor. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, two identical counterparts of this Agreement, consisting of three (3) pages, including this page, each of which counterparts shall for all purposes be deemed an original of this Agreement, have been duly executed by the parties hereinabove named on the day and year first hereinabove written. CITY OF BURLINGAME “CONTRACTOR” By ______________________________ By ___________________________ Lisa K. Goldman, City Manager CWS Construction ATTEST: _____________________________________ Mary Ellen Kearney, City Clerk Approved as to form: ______________________________________ Kathleen Kane, City Attorney 1 STAFF REPORT AGENDA NO: 8e MEETING DATE: November 17, 2014 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: November 17, 2014 From: Leslie Loomis, Human Resources Director – (650) 558-7209 Subject: Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Three- Year Agreement with a Two-Year Optional Extension with LWP Claims Solutions for Third Party Administration of the City’s Self-Insured Workers’ Compensation Program RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the City Council adopt the resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a three-year agreement with a two-year optional extension with LWP Claims Solutions for third party administration of the City’s self-insured workers’ compensation program. BACKGROUND The City is self-insured for workers’ compensation, and Athens Administrators has been the City’s third party administrator since 2001. With the assistance of the City’s broker ABD Insurance and Financial Services, the City sent out a Request for Proposal (RFP) earlier this year and posted it to the City’s website. The City received five responses. DISCUSSION Staff and ABD reviewed the proposals, including each vendor’s reporting capabilities and in- house case management services, and elected to interview three firms. Athens Administrators, LWP Claims Solutions, and TriStar were invited to interviews with the City Manager, the Human Resources Director, the Finance Director, the Police Chief, the Police Captain, and the Public Works Superintendent. LWP Claims Solutions was the unanimous choice of the panel members. The selection committee believes that LWP will achieve better claims management and outcomes, provide improved customer service and communications to the injured staff and the City’s Department Heads; and reduce the overall costs of the workers’ compensation program through proactive and aggressive oversight and management of the primary drivers of workers’ compensation—medical and litigation costs. FISCAL IMPACT The cost for claims administration for the first two years of the contract is $88,000 per year, a slight decrease from the fees the incumbent third party administrator proposed. The price will Contract for Workers’ Compensation Third Party Administrator November 17, 2014 2 increase slightly in the remaining years of the contract (less than $5500 by year five, should the City exercise its option to extend the agreement for two years.) Additional fees are noted in Exhibit C of the attached agreement. Sufficient funds are available within the City’s workers’ compensation budget. Exhibits:  Resolution  Contract RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A THREE-YEAR AGREEMENT WITH A TWO-YEAR OPTIONAL EXTENSION WITH LWP CLAIMS SOLUTIONS FOR THIRD PARTY ADMINISTRATION OF THE CITY’S SELF-INSURED WORKERS’ COMPENSATION PROGRAM WHEREAS, the City is self-insured for workers’ compensation, and Athens Administrators has been the City’s third party administrator since 2001; and WHEREAS, with the assistance of the City’s broker ABD Insurance and Financial Services, the City sent out a Request for Proposal (RFP) earlier this year for third party administrator services; and WHEREAS, City staff and ABD reviewed the five proposals received and elected to interview three firms; and WHEREAS, City staff participated in the interviews; and WHEREAS, LWP Claims Solutions was the unanimous choice of the panel members; and WHEREAS, the selection committee believes that LWP will achieve better claims management and outcomes, provide improved customer service and communications to the injured staff and the City’s Department Heads; and reduce the overall costs of the workers’ compensation program through proactive and aggressive oversight and management of the primary drivers of workers’ compensation—medical and litigation costs; and WHEREAS, the cost for the first two years of the contract is $88,000 per year, increasing slightly in the remaining years of the contract. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Manager is authorized to execute a three-year agreement between the City and LWP Claims Solutions for workers’ compensation third party administrator services. ____________________________ Michael Brownrigg, Mayor I, MARY ELLEN KEARNEY, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 17th day of November 2014, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ____________________________ Mary Ellen Kearney, City Clerk AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AND LWP Claims Solutions, Inc THIS AGREEMENT is by and between _LWP CLAIMS SOLUTIONS, INC_____ (“Consultant”) and the City of Burlingame, a public body of the State of California (“City”). Consultant and City agree: 1. Services. City wishes to obtain the services of Consultant to provide third party administrative services for the City’s self-insured workers’ compensation program (brief description of project). Consultant shall provide the Services set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein. 2. Compensation. Notwithstanding the expenditure by Consultant of time and materials in excess of said Maximum compensation amount, Consultant agrees to perform all of the Scope of Services herein required of Consultant for pricing as presented in the attached Exhibit C, including all materials and other reimbursable amounts (“Maximum Compensation”). Consultant shall submit invoices on a monthly basis. All bills submitted by Consultant shall contain sufficient information to determine whether the amount deemed due and payable is accurate. Bills shall include a brief description of services performed, the date services were performed, the number of hours spent and by whom, a brief description of any costs incurred and the Consultant’s signature. 3. Term. This Agreement commences on full execution hereof and terminates on December 31, 2017 unless otherwise extended or terminated pursuant to the provisions hereof. Consultant agrees to diligently prosecute the services to be provided under this Agreement to completion and in accordance with any schedules specified herein. In the performance of this Agreement, time is of the essence. Time extensions for delays beyond the Consultant’s control, other than delays caused by the City, shall be requested in writing to the City’s Contract Administrator prior to the expiration of the specified completion date. 4. Assignment and Subcontracting. A substantial inducement to City for entering into this Agreement is the professional reputation and competence of Consultant. Neither this Agreement nor any interest herein may be assigned or subcontracted by Consultant without the prior written approval of City. It is expressly understood and agreed by both parties that Consultant is an independent contractor and not an employee of the City. 5. Insurance. Consultant, at its own cost and expense, shall carry, maintain for the duration of the Agreement, and provide proof thereof, acceptable to the City, the insurance coverages specified in Exhibit B, "City Insurance Requirements," attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. Consultant shall demonstrate proof of required insurance coverage prior to the commencement of services required under this Agreement, by delivery of Certificates of Insurance and original endorsements to City. Except in the case of professional design/errors and omissions insurance, the City shall be named as a primary insured. 6. Indemnification. Consultant shall indemnify, defend, and hold City, its directors, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers harmless from and against any and all liability, claims, suits, actions, damages, and causes of action arising out of, pertaining or relating to the negligence, recklessness or willful misconduct of Consultant, its employees, subcontractors, or 2 agents, or on account of the performance or character of the Services, except for any such claim arising out of the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the City, its officers, employees, agents, or volunteers. It is understood that the duty of Consultant to indemnify and hold harmless includes the duty to defend as set forth in section 2778 of the California Civil Code. Notwithstanding the foregoing, for any design professional services, the duty to defend and indemnify City shall be limited to that allowed pursuant to California Civil Code section 2782.8. Acceptance of insurance certificates and endorsements required under this Agreement does not relieve Consultant from liability under this indemnification and hold harmless clause. This indemnification and hold harmless clause shall apply whether or not such insurance policies shall have been determined to be applicable to any of such damages or claims for damages. 7. Termination and Abandonment. This Agreement may be cancelled at any time by City for its convenience upon written notice to Consultant. In the event of such termination, Consultant shall be entitled to pro-rated compensation for authorized Services performed prior to the effective date of termination provided however that City may condition payment of such compensation upon Consultant's delivery to City of any or all materials described herein. In the event the Consultant ceases performing services under this Agreement or otherwise abandons the project prior to completing all of the Services described in this Agreement, Consultant shall, without delay, deliver to City all materials and records prepared or obtained in the performance of this Agreement. Consultant shall be paid for the reasonable value of the authorized Services performed up to the time of Consultant’s cessation or abandonment, less a deduction for any damages or additional expenses which City incurs as a result of such cessation or abandonment. 8. Ownership of Materials. All documents, materials, and records of a finished nature, including but not limited to final plans, specifications, video or audio tapes, photographs, computer data, software, reports, maps, electronic files and films, and any final revisions, prepared or obtained in the performance of this Agreement, shall be delivered to and become the property of City. All documents and materials of a preliminary nature, including but not limited to notes, sketches, preliminary plans, computations and other data, and any other material referenced in this Section, prepared or obtained in the performance of this Agreement, shall be made available, upon request, to City at no additional charge and without restriction or limitation on their use. Upon City’s request, Consultant shall execute appropriate documents to assign to the City the copyright or trademark to work created pursuant to this Agreement. Consultant shall return all City property in Consultant’s control or possession immediately upon termination. 9. Compliance with Laws. In the performance of this Agreement, Consultant shall abide by and conform to any and all applicable laws of the United States and the State of California, and all ordinances, regulations, and policies of the City. Consultant warrants that all work done under this Agreement will be in compliance with all applicable safety rules, laws, statutes, and practices, including but not limited to Cal/OSHA regulations. If a license or registration of any kind is required of Consultant, its employees, agents, or subcontractors by law, Consultant warrants that such license has been obtained, is valid and in good standing, and Consultant shall keep it in effect at all times during the term of this Agreement, and that any applicable bond shall be posted in accordance with all applicable laws and regulations. 10. Conflict of Interest. Consultant warrants and covenants that Consultant presently has no interest in, nor shall any interest be hereinafter acquired in, any matter which will render 3 the services required under the provisions of this Agreement a violation of any applicable state, local, or federal law. In the event that any conflict of interest should nevertheless hereinafter arise, Consultant shall promptly notify City of the existence of such conflict of interest so that the City may determine whether to terminate this Agreement. Consultant further warrants its compliance with the Political Reform Act (Government Code § 81000 et seq.) respecting this Agreement. 11. Whole Agreement and Amendments. This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding and Agreement of the parties and integrates all of the terms and conditions mentioned herein or incidental hereto and supersedes all negotiations or any previous written or oral Agreements between the parties with respect to all or any part of the subject matter hereof. The parties intend not to create rights in, or to grant remedies to, any third party as a beneficiary of this Agreement or of any duty, covenant, obligation, or undertaking established herein. This Agreement may be amended only by a written document, executed by both Consultant and the City Manager, and approved as to form by the City Attorney. Such document shall expressly state that it is intended by the parties to amend certain terms and conditions of this Agreement. The waiver by either party of a breach by the other of any provision of this Agreement shall not constitute a continuing waiver or a waiver of any subsequent breach of either the same or a different provision of this Agreement. Multiple copies of this Agreement may be executed but the parties agree that the Agreement on file in the office of the City Clerk is the version of the Agreement that shall take precedence should any differences exist among counterparts of the document. This Agreement and all matters relating to it shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. 12. Capacity of Parties. Each signatory and party hereto warrants and represents to the other party that it has all legal authority and capacity and direction from its principal to enter into this Agreement and that all necessary actions have been taken so as to enable it to enter into this Agreement. 13. Severability. Should any part of this Agreement be declared by a final decision by a court or tribunal of competent jurisdiction to be unconstitutional, invalid, or beyond the authority of either party to enter into or carry out, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this Agreement, which shall continue in full force and effect, provided that the remainder of this Agreement, absent the unexcised portion, can be reasonably interpreted to give effect to the intentions of the parties. 14. Notice. Any notice required or desired to be given under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be personally served or, in lieu of personal service, may be given by (i) depositing such notice in the United States mail, registered or certified, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, addressed to a party at its address set forth in Exhibit A; (ii) transmitting such notice by means of Federal Express or similar overnight commercial courier (“Courier”), postage paid and addressed to the other at its street address set forth below; (iii) transmitting the same by facsimile, in which case notice shall be deemed delivered upon confirmation of receipt by the sending facsimile machine’s acknowledgment of such with date and time printout; or (iv) by personal delivery. Any notice given by Courier shall be deemed given on the date shown on the 5 Mary Ellen Kearney License Number: 152 City Clerk Expiration Date: June 30, 2015 Approved as to form: Kathleen Kane City Attorney Attachments: Exhibit A Scope of Services Exhibit B City Insurance Provisions Exhibit C Pricing ExhibitA ScopeofServices  LWPClaimsSolutionswillprovidethirdpartyclaimsadministrationservicesfortheCityofBurlingame’s selfinsuredworkers’compensationclaims.TheScopeofServicesasestablishedbytheRFPincludes;  ClaimsAdministrationRequirementsandExpectations x TPAmustperformallservicesrequiredtosuperviseandadministeraselfͲinsuredworkers’ compensationprogramfortheCityofBurlingame,andtoactastheCityofBurlingame’s representativeinmattersrelatingtotheCityofBurlingame’sobligationsundertheworkers’ compensationlawsofthestateofCalifornia. x ProvideatollfreetelephonenumberfortheCityofBurlingameandclaimants. x Processallclaims,includingbutnotlimitedtoinvestigation,reservingandpayment,filing reports,negotiatingandsettlingofclaimsforamountpreͲapprovedbytheCityofBurlingame. x ContacttheCityofBurlingame,claimantandmedicalproviderwithin24hoursofreceiptofall claims. x Uponknowledgeofaseriousinjury,illness,exposureorcatastrophicclaim,and/orifemployee ishospitalized,notificationwillbemadeimmediatelyviatelephonetotheCityofBurlingame. x FirstaidclaimsaretobeflaggedwithnoticetotheCityofBurlingameandshallbeidentifiedas firstaidonalllossrundatareports.Billpaymentsforfirstaidclaimsshallbedeterminedbythe CityofBurlingame. x ResponsetoanyquestionsorinquiriesbytheCityofBurlingameorclaimantsshouldbe respondedtowithinonebusinessday. x Initialinvestigationwillbecompletedwithin14daysfromdayofreceiptoftheclaimandif needed,furtherinvestigationcompletedwithin30daysorassoonasallthefactsofthecase canbereasonablygathered. x Initialplanofactionmustbeclearlydocumentedintheclaimfilewithin14daysfromreceiptof theclaimandupdatedevery30Ͳ60days. x Initialestimateofreservesestablishedwithin14daysofreceiptofclaim.Adjustersmust documentthebasisforeachreservecalculation. x Significantreserveincreasesonanyoneclaimmustbecommunicatedanddiscussedwiththe CityofBurlingame. x Adjuster’snotesshouldincludebutnotlimitedto;commentsregardingexposure,disposition planforclaimclosure,financialtransactions,supervisor’snotes,andanyotherrelevantclaim information. x WittenstatusreportswillbeprovidedtotheCityofBurlingameduringscheduledclaimreviews oruponrequest. x AcomprehensivestatusreportwillbeprovidedtotheCityofBurlingamethetimeanyclaim exceedsatotalincurredvalueof$50,000. x TPAmustkeeptheCityofBurlingameinformedandinvolvedinallacceptedcasespriorto sendingacceptanceletterstoemployees. x Transitional/modifieddutymustbedocumentedintheclaimfileandshouldincludethemedical diagnosis,workrestrictionsandestimateddurationofdisability. x DocumentedfollowͲuptothetreatingphysician(s)isrequirednolaterthanevery30daysprior toMMIstatus.Ongoingdisabilitywillbedocumentedthroughongoingmedicalreports. x AdjusterwillnotifytheCityofBurlingameofanylegaloradministrativeactionsthataffecttheir claimsincluding:appeals,prenotificationofdepositions,pretrialorworkers’compensation boardhearings. x CityofBurlingameshouldhavetheabilitytoelectronicallyviewtheprogressionofanyoftheir claims x TheCityofBurlingamewillhavefinalapprovalforalloutsidecasemanagementservicesutilized, includingbutnotlimitedtodefenseattorneys,nursecasemanagers,vocationalexpertsand investigativefirms. x Onallsettlements,including0%PDandfuturemedical,asettlementauthorizationrequestmust firstbesubmittedtotheCityofBurlingamefortheirapproval. x Notifytheexcesscarrierofpotentialclaimsasprovidedbythecarrier’sServiceagreement terms. x MonitorandcollectallrecoveriesduetheCityofBurlingame. x ReviewmedicalproviderbillsforappropriatenessoffeeschargedutilizingtheCaliforniaOfficial MedicalFeeSchedule. x AsmoothintegrationandadministrationofMedicalProviderNetworkProgram. x TheCityofBurlingamemaintainsaworkers’compensationclaimstrustcheckingaccount.The TPAshallberesponsibleforpaymentsofbenefitsfromthisaccount.  LitigationManagement x TheCityofBurlingamereservestherighttoselectcounsel. x AlldefensecounselreferralsneedpriorapprovalbytheCityofBurlingame. x Revieweachlegalbillforaccuracy. x Proceduresinplacetoaudittheeffectivenessoflegalcounselontheoutcomeofclaims.  NurseCaseManagement x PreauthorizationbytheCityofBurlingameisrequiredonallnursecasemanagement assignments. x Nursecasemanager’sactionplansandnoteswillbedocumentedintheclaimfile,andas appropriateNCM’swillparticipateinclaimreviewsorwhenconsultationwiththeNCMis requestedbytheCityofBurlingame.  ClaimStaffingexpectationsandClaimHandlingPhilosophies x AssigninganaccountmanagertotheCity. x Adedicatedclaimsteammustbeprovided. x Maintaincontactwithclaimants. x Identifyandmanagefraudulentclaims. x Determinelengthofdisability x ObtainpreauthorizationforallassignmentsofinvestigationandsubͲrosa. x Timelypaybenefits. x Establishandmaintainreservesforopenclaims. x Worktoreturninjuredworkerstowork. x Assignmedicalcasemanagementasrequired. x Monitorandworktopreventduplicateandotheroverpayments. x AssignURasrequired.  Establishandmaintainspecialhandlingguidelines.  RiskManagementInformationSystem(RMIS) x Internetbasedclaimsystemwithaccess24hoursaday,7daysaweektoviewclaimadjuster andsupervisornotes,generatelossrunsorotherpreͲscheduledoradhocloss management/claimreports. x AbilitytoexportclaimdataintovariousMicrosoftproducts,i.e.Word,excel,powerpoint. x ProvideRMIStechnicalsupportforquestions,problemsordevelopmentofcustomized reporting. x ImportallpriorlossdatadatedbeforeJanuary1,2015intoasingledatabase. x ProvidescheduledlossreportstobesentelectronicallytotheCityofBurlingame.Customized reportswillbeprovidedasrequired. x Qualitycontrolprogramtoensuredataintegrityandclaimantconfidentiality.AnyRMIS problemswillberesolvedwithin24hoursorless. x Imagesystemtoscanalldocumentsreceivedpertainingtothecase. x FullycompliantwithMMSEASection111reportingrequirements.   Exhibit B INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS Contractor shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder and the results of that work by the Contractor, his agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors. Minimum Scope of Insurance Coverage shall be at least as broad as: 1. Commercial General Liability (CGL): Insurance Services Office (ISO) Form CG 00 01 12 04 covering CGL on an “occurrence” basis, including products-completed operations, personal & advertising injury, with limits no less than $1,000,000 per occurrence. If a general aggregate limit applies, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be $2,000,000. 2. Automobile Liability: ISO Form Number CA 00 01 covering any auto (Code 1), or if Contractor has no owned autos, hired, (Code 8) and non-owned autos (Code 9), with limit no less than $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage. 3. Workers’ Compensation insurance as required by the State of California, with Statutory Limits, and Employer’s Liability Insurance with limit of no less than $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease. 4. Professional Liability (Errors and Omissions) Insurance appropriate to the Contractor’s profession, with limit no less than $1,000,000 per occurrence or claim, $2,000,000 aggregate. If the contractor maintains higher limits than the minimums shown above, the City requires and shall be entitled to coverage for the higher limits maintained by the contractor. Other Insurance Provisions The insurance policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: Additional Insured Status The City, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers are to be covered as insureds on the auto policy with respect to liability arising out of automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by or on behalf of the contractor and on the general liability policy with respect to liability arising out of work or operations performed by or on behalf of the Contractor including materials, parts or equipment furnished in connection with such work or operations. General liability coverage can be provided in the form of an endorsement to the Contractor’s insurance (at least as broad as ISO Form CG 20 10, 11 85 or both CG 20 10 and CG 20 37 forms if later revisions used). Primary Coverage For any claims related to this contract, the Contractor’s insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees, or volunteers shall be excess of the Contractor’s insurance and shall not contribute with it. Notice of Cancellation Each insurance policy required above shall provide that coverage shall not be canceled, except after thirty (30) days’ prior written notice (10 days for non-payment) has been given to the City. Waiver of Subrogation Contractor hereby grants to City a waiver of any right to subrogation which any insurer of said Contractor may acquire against the City by virtue of the payment of any loss under such insurance. Contractor agrees to obtain any endorsement that may be necessary to effect this waiver of subrogation, but this provision applies regardless of whether or not the City has received a waiver of subrogation endorsement from the insurer. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City. The City may require the Contractor to purchase coverage with a lower deductible or retention or provide proof of ability to pay losses and related investigations, claim administration, and defense expenses within the retention. Acceptability of Insurers Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best’s rating of no less than A:VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the City. Claims Made Policies (note – should be applicable only to professional liability, see below) If any of the required policies provide claims-made coverage: 1. The Retroactive Date must be shown, and must be before the date of the contract or the beginning of contract work. 2. Insurance must be maintained and evidence of insurance must be provided for at least five (5) years after completion of the contract of work. 3. If coverage is canceled or non-renewed, and not replaced with another claims-made policy form with a Retroactive Date prior to the contract effective date, the Contractor must purchase “extended reporting” coverage for a minimum of five (5) years after completion of work. Verification of Coverage Contractor shall furnish the City with original certificates and amendatory endorsements or copies of the applicable policy language effecting coverage required by this clause. All certificates and endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work commences. However, failure to obtain the required documents prior to the work beginning shall not waive the Contractor’s obligation to provide them. The City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements required by these specifications, at any time. Special Risks or Circumstances City reserves the right to modify these requirements, including limits, based on the nature of the risk, prior experience, insurer, coverage, or other special circumstances. TPA Fees Response Year 1 - $88,000 Year 2 - $88,000 Year 3 - $90,640 Year 4 - $90,640 Year 5 - $93,360 $2,000 per indemnity claim $200 per medical only claim No charge for first aid Life of claim fee for take-over claims to be negotiatied None $2,500 one time charge No charge, unlimited users No charge No charge E-mail, fax or on-line - no charge Telephonic available through vendor, charge to be determined by vendor. Response $8 per bill $200 per bill 20% of savings $1 per bill received from Clearinghouse 15% of savings 25% of savings Tier 1- Nurse Level Review - $100 Flat Fee Nurse Level Review-Includes 3 medical requests in a single review, set up, phone calls to physician, email notices to adjuster and letters to all parties including network providers Tier 2- Peer Review- $215 Flat Fee* (in addition to Tier 1 review fee) This includes up to 3 medical requests per single medical referral. Pharmacy Review -$100- Nurse Level Review Flat Fee w/out Physician Peer Review Claims Administration Medical/Legal Bill Review/Auditing PPO network access fees UR: RN, peer and specialty Bill Review/official medical fee schedule. Include options (per bill, per line, flat, etc.). Hospital inpatient/outpatient bill review Hospital bill not covered by state fee schedule or PPO savings Electronic billing Lien review Data Conversion fee. Confirm if this is a onetime charge RMIS fee. Confirm how many allowed users per fee Subrogation recovery fee Self-Insurance Plan Annual Report fee Claim Reporting ( telephonic, fax, on line) Exhibit C Life of Contract – flat fee. Include any increases per year Life of Claim, if offered Administrative fee. Confirm if this is a onetime fee or charged per year Physician Peer Review- $385-Flat fee peer review Includes unlimited medical request per single medical referral)(in addition to Tier 1 review fee $3 per bill See Additional Information below No charge Response No separate charge. Standard or customized MPN offered at 25% of savings below fee schedule. No charge N/A Response Investigation $84, SIU $94 per hour $99.00 per hour $104.00 per hour (includes travel and wait time) + incidental expenses (including mileage, tolls, parking and telephone) $8.90 per index $1 per bill Actual Charges Actual Charges Product Medications Prescribers Fee LevelI11$295 LevelII 1Ͳ4 1$695 LevelIII 5Ͳ8 1$995 LevelIV 1Ͳ9+1Ͳ2+$1,495 LevelV1Ͳ9+1Ͳ2+$1,995 Clinical Pharmacy Fees Pricing includes thorough evaluation and recommendations for treating physician. Charge for any ongoing physician oversight is: $104 per hour. Storage Fees - paper files transferred from prior administrator Managed Care Telephonic nurse case management Field nurse case management Index (ISO), including OFAC Medical Bill EDI Bank Fee Medical Provider Network fees. Include access fees and MPN charges for standard MPN and customized MPN MMSEA fees Wellness Programs Any additional fees not captioned above Investigation SIU Pharmacy review fees Clinical Pharmacy fees Legal bill review 1 STAFF REPORT AGENDA NO: 8f MEETING DATE: November 17, 2014 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: November 17, 2014 From: Leslie Loomis, Human Resources Director – (650) 558-7209 Subject: Approval of the Proposed New Job Classification of Police Lieutenant and the Accompanying Rate of Pay RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council approve the proposed new job classification of Police Lieutenant and the accompanying rate of pay. BACKGROUND The Burlingame Police Department’s current management rank structure consists of one Chief, two Captains, and seven Sergeants. This model has been in place since the 1980s. Although the current structure has worked well in the past, Police Department staff feels that it is now appropriate to restructure the department because of changes in policing and police management that have taken place over the past 30 years and the current make up/demographics of the department. In addition, with the recent retirement of Chief Wood after a successful career with the Police Department and the promotion of Captain Wollman to Chief, there are opportunities to restructure the department to create a management rank structure that will provide great benefit to the department. DISCUSSION The new management rank structure consists of one Chief, one Captain, two Lieutenants, and six Sergeants (i.e., replace one Captain and one Sergeant with two Lieutenants). Staff believes this would be beneficial for the following reasons: A lack of Lieutenants within the rank structure leaves a lot of the “day to day” operational tasks with the Captains. With two divisions at the Police Department, the current structure requires two Captains and takes each away from their executive duties. Staff believes this is not the most cost-effective way of operating or the most efficient utilization of command staff’s time. With Lieutenants handling the “day to day” operational tasks of each division, a single Captain can be utilized more exclusively for executive duties such as managing personnel issues, policy making, special projects, assisting the Chief, etc. In the current state of policing and police management, the leap from Sergeant to Captain is often times a difficult transition, and can lead to a lack of qualified internal candidates. Vacant command staff positions are then often times filled by external candidates (as was the case during the past two Burlingame Captain vacancies), leading to stagnation within the ranks, a lack of opportunity for advancement, and possible morale issues. Police Lieutenants November 17, 2014 2  The leap from Sergeant to Lieutenant, and subsequently Lieutenant to Captain, is a far easier transition, and one that would open up the possibility of advancement to additional internal personnel. The majority of San Mateo County police agencies (as well as police agencies outside of San Mateo County) utilize the rank of Lieutenant in their organizations. They do so for the same reasons mentioned above and with great success. FISCAL IMPACT This proposal is primarily a change in the Police Department’s organizational structure and should have very little, if any, fiscal impact. The current total compensation packages for a Burlingame Police Sergeant and Captain are:  Police Sergeant: $12,723.84 monthly  Police Captain: $16,701.28 monthly The recommended total compensation package for a Burlingame Police Lieutenant is:  Police Lieutenant: $14,773.26 monthly Based on the figures above, the change in employee salary costs by eliminating a Captain and a Sergeant and adding two Lieutenants should balance out. Exhibits:  Police Lieutenant Job Specifications  Compensation Chart for Police Officer, Sergeant, Lieutenant, and Captain POLICE LIEUTENANT Class specifications are only intended to present a descriptive summary of the range of duties and responsibilities associated with specified positions. Therefore, specifications may not include all duties performed by individuals within a classification. In addition, specifications are intended to outline the minimum qualifications necessary for entry into the class and do not necessarily convey the qualifications of incumbents within the position. DEFINITION Under direction of a Captain or Chief of Police, a Police Lieutenant is directly responsible for the efficient mid-management of a Police Department Division or field activity within the constraints of Departmental policies, procedures and modern policing concepts. The scope of work activity requires an extensive understanding of problem-solving tactics and strategies and an ability to implement such tactics and strategies in accordance with Departmental operating policies. Working conditions may include field and desk work and involve shift work. The position requires the exercise of sound, independent judgment. A Police Lieutenant may manage the work of Police Sergeants, Police Officers, civilian personnel and volunteers and do related work as required. ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS (Include, but are not limited to the following) Coordinate, assign, and direct the work of the Police Department on an assigned shift or division. Issue directives, orders and special assignments to subordinates. Review and approve reports of preceding shifts noting any special instruction or unusual conditions. Manage complex criminal investigations and assist in the preparation of criminal cases for court prosecution. Conduct inspections of officers, equipment and department logs and investigate traffic conditions; review patrol activities; accompany officers, observe their work, and when necessary, take charge of preliminary investigations of serious crimes. Review logs and reports of individual officers; discuss problem of traffic control, arrests, patrol activities and related subjects with subordinates. Report to superior any important crimes or incidents and the performance of personnel on the shift. Manage and/ or conduct the interviewing of complainants, witnesses or suspects in criminal and administrative investigations; cooperate in and coordinate investigations with outside law enforcement and other related agencies. Instruct subordinates and peers in the techniques of preliminary investigations; observe performance of subordinates; prepare timely and accurate performance evaluations; develop the professional growth of subordinates. OTHER DUTIES May be required to speak and present information to the public or community groups; provide direction and information to the public; act as the police department Public Information Officer; May appear in court and testify when necessary; May perform general law enforcement work such as investigations, documenting, collecting evidence in criminal or related matters or assisting subordinates in these duties. May present information on police related matters to community groups and attend citywide meetings when requested. KNOWLEDGE/ABILITIES/SKILLS (The following are a representative sample of the knowledge/abilities and skills necessary to perform essential duties of the position.) Knowledge of: Modern law enforcement methods and procedure; modern police management and supervision; practices of criminal investigation and identification; ju venile welfare; traffic control and safety; administrative investigations and procedures; police records keeping; care and custody of persons and property; training and communications; property and evidence management; broad knowledge of constitutional law and criminal law relating to apprehension and investigations of crimes, arrests and criminal prosecution. Ability to: Effectively plan and coordinate the work of others; gather and analyze facts and draw logical conclusions; obtain information through interview and interrogation; collaborate effectively; prepare concise, accurate and comprehensive reports; maintain police records; mentor, motivate and support subordinates to greater efforts and improved work methods while inspiring esprit de corps and maintaining positive morale. Develop, establish and apply goals of the Department. Interpret and respond to instructions, policies and procedures; exercise sound judgment, acumen and discretion in decision making. Interact positively and cooperate with co-workers, respond politely to customers, work as a team member, function under demanding time pressure, respond in a positive manner to supervision, and attend work and perform duties on a regular and consistent basis Skills: Drive police vehicles in accordance with the Vehicle Code; monitor and operate the police radio in a patrol vehicle while driving in heavy traffic; broadcast into a microphone and comprehend police radio communications which are a mixture of English and police code. Ability to use safely departmentally- issued firearms and safety equipment. Ability to use police department computer. Knowledge of department computer systems and records management systems. QUALIFICATIONS (The following are minimal qualifications necessary for entry into the classification) Experience: Completion of 2 years of service as a police sergeant with the City of Burlingame. Education and Training: A Bachelor’s degree from an accredited college or university. Licenses/Certificates: Possession of a valid California Class C driver’s license. POST Supervisory Certificate. PHYSICAL, MENTAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL WORKING CONDITIONS Work long hours at various times of the day or night. Work shifts, holidays and weekends as necessary. Ability to run fast enough to apprehend fleeing suspects, generally 50-500 yards with speed. Climb or jump over obstacles of various heights, widths and depths, such as fences, walls, vehicles, shrubs, etc. Use firearms with speed and accuracy. Overcome and/or control physically resistant persons or arrestees of various sizes and weights. (Averaging at least 6’ tall and 220 lbs.) Move persons or objects o f various sizes by pushing, dragging, lifting or carrying. Sit for long periods of time in police vehicles or at desks. Crouch, stoop, squat, crawl, kneel, climb, stretch and twist upper body during searches, apprehensions or transportation, or entering or exiting vehicles. Work cooperatively with all other agencies and people contacted during the course of work. Remain calm during emergencies and exercise good judgment at all times. Vision: Normal vision not less than 20/40 in each eye without correction and corrected to 20/20 in the better eye and not less than 20/25 in the lesser eye. Free of color blindness. Hearing: Ability to hear police radio transmissions, telephone conversations, normal conversation and verbal instructions. Burlingame Police Compensation 9/16/14 [all data from BAERS data base] Min Salary Max Salary Deferred Comp Medical Vision Dental Life LTD Holiday Pay Total Comp Police Officer $6,676 $8,115 $65 $1,931 $26 $190 $8.63 $499.07 $10,834.70 Police Sergeant $8,108 $9,843 $98 $1,931 $26 $190 $11.50 $19.50 $605.34 $12,723.84 Police Lieutenant $9,720 $11,739 $98 $1,931 $26 $190 $11.50 $19.50 $758.46 $14,773.46 Police Captain $11,287 $13,590 $98 $1,931 $26 $190 $11.50 $19.50 $835.78 $16,701.28 NOTE #1: Differential between Max Salary of Officer to Sergeant is 21.3%; between Sergeant to Captain is 38%. NOTE #2: 1/2014 Officers and Sergeants received 2.5% and Captains 0%. Otherwise the salary increases are the same for MOUs 1/1/14-1/31/18. 1 STAFF REPORT AGENDA NO: MEETING DATE: November 17, 2014 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: November 17, 2014 From: Leslie Loomis, Director of Human Resources – (650) 558-7209 Subject: Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the Reclassification of Two Finance Department Positions: (1) Accounting Assistant III to Accounting Technician and (2) Financial Services Manager to Deputy Finance Director RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached Resolution authorizing the reclassification of an existing Accounting Assistant III position to an Accounting Technician position and an existing Financial Services Manager position to a Deputy Finance Director position. BACKGROUND The adopted FY 2014-15 budget includes funding for an Accounting Assistant III and a Financial Services Manager. Due to the number of employees in the Finance Department and associated growth over the past several years, staff recommends the City reclassify the Accounting Assistant III and Financial Services Manager positions to Accounting Technician and Deputy Finance Director, respectively. DISCUSSION The Finance Department has requested these two reclassifications to enable a restructuring of the finance function in order to achieve efficiencies and address the Department’s needs. Neither of these reclassifications will result in a change in the bargaining units representing these two positions. (1) Reclassification of an Accounting Assistant III position to an Accounting Technician position The Accounting Technician classification is a higher level position, and this shift will allow the organizational chart to more clearly reflect the main transactional responsibility areas within Finance: Financial Reporting, Revenue Collection/Treasury, and Accounting/Payroll. In conjunction with this reclassification, the “special pay” assigned to this current position for the additional responsibilities of Deputy Treasurer will be eliminated. The difference in the top monthly step for an Accounting Technician is $ 610/month more than the Accounting Assistant III position, but the elimination of the special pay will mean that the impact to the salary and benefits costs for this change will be limited to approximately $3,000 annually. Reclassification of Two Finance Department Positions November 17, 2014 2 Staff has met and conferred with AFSCME Local 829 and reached agreement regarding this proposed reclassification. (2) Reclassification of a Financial Services Manager position to a Deputy Finance Director position A restructuring of the Finance Department has been under development for some time. With the turnover experienced by the department in the last few years, new leadership has allowed the opportunity to review the organizational structure and work flow. New procedures have been put into place to better reflect best practices and to ensure that all areas of finance receive proper oversight and direction. Now that the department is fully-staffed, accounting functions previously performed by the Financial Service Manager can be more appropriately conducted by the accounting staff. The new duties of the new Deputy Finance Director position will allow for more comprehensive review and oversight role, as opposed to direct supervision of all accounting staff levels. In addition, special projects, non-routine analyses, and system improvements can be managed by this position without undue attention from the Finance Director , allowing the Finance Director to focus on addressing the City’s long-term financial issues more proactively, and play a more integral part of the City’s Executive team. The Deputy Finance Director will also serve as the City’s Deputy Treasurer, a title previously misplaced with the Accounting Assistant III position. The highest salary step in the Deputy Finance Director position will be $10,821 per month, as compared to the highest salary step for the Financial Services Manager position of $9,834. The salary/wages impact to the Finance Department would be, at a maximum, an increase of $14,800 a year to cover the higher pay range and associated benefit costs. FISCAL IMPACT These reclassifications were anticipated in the FY 2014-15 Finance Budget. If these two reclassifications are approved, the maximum annual increase will be $17,800 annually. Exhibits:  Resolution  Accounting Technician Job Description  Deputy Finance Director Job Description RESOLUTION NO. _______ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AUTHORIZING THE RECLASSIFICATION OF AN ACCOUNTING ASSISTANT III POSITION TO AN ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN POSITION AND A FINANCIAL SERVICES MANAGER POSITION TO A DEPUTY FINANCE DIRECTOR POSITION WHEREAS, the FY 2014-15 budget includes funding for both an Accounting Assistant III and a Financial Services Manager; and WHEREAS, staff recommends the City reclassify the Accounting Assistant III position to an Accounting Technician position in order to allow staffing to more accurately reflect the main transactional responsibilities within the Finance department, including financial reporting, revenue collection/treasury, and accounting/payroll; and WHEREAS, staff recommends the City reclassify the Financial Services Manager position to a Deputy Finance Director position so that accounting functions previously performed by the Financial Services Manager can be more appropriately conducted by the accounting staff; while the Deputy Finance Director will take on a review and oversight role as well as special projects, non-routine analyses, and system improvements; and WHEREAS, these reclassifications were anticipated in the City’s FY 2014-2015 budget; and WHEREAS, the total impact to fiscal year 2014-15 actual costs for the Finance Department will be $11,559.00; and WHEREAS, City Council authorization is required to reclassify the Accounting Assistant III and Financial Services Manager positions to the Accounting Technician and Deputy Finance Director positions, respectively. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED AND DETERMINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL THAT: 1. The position of Accounting Assistant III shall be reclassified to the position of Accounting Technician. 2. The position of Financial Services Manager shall be reclassified to the position of Deputy Finance Director. Michael Brownrigg, Mayor Page 2 of 2 I, Mary Ellen Kearney, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 17th day of November, 2014 by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: __________________________ Mary Ellen Kearney, City Clerk ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN DEFINITION: Under general supervision, coordinates and performs the duties of the more complex paraprofessional functions in water/business licenses and/or financial services (“general”), payroll, or treasury assignments.  Accounting Technician - General verifies accounts payable; prepares a variety of journal entries; performs technical accounting work in the preparation, maintenance, and processing of accounting records and financial transactions related to general accounting, business licenses, billing, cashiering, and utility accounts; may assist in scheduling work flow assignments; performs a variety of tasks associated with fixed assets; performs other related duties as required.  Accounting Technician – Payroll performs the full array of accounting duties involved in the processing of payroll and the maintenance of the payroll system; reviews and reconciles payroll reports and prepares journal entries; provides information to departments and employees regarding payroll issues; performs other related duties as required.  Accounting Technician – Treasury coordinates and performs the duties of the more complex paraprofessional functions, including the posting, balancing and reporting of investment and banking activities; assists in maintaining market values for in-house equity programs; assists in bank activity reconciliation and cash handling; performs a variety of tasks associated with fixed assets; performs other related duties as required. DISTINGUISHING CHARACTERISTICS: The Accounting Technician - General is the working level classification expected to perform the more complex para-professional accounting and financial reporting assignments related to general accounting, business licenses and utility accounts. Assignments are characterized by the presence of fairly clear guidelines from which to make decisions, and the availability of supervision when required. The Accounting Technician - Payroll is the working level classification expected to perform the more complex para-professional payroll responsibilities related to payroll processing, distribution and required reporting, including records maintenance and the preparation of payroll reports in accordance with union agreements and City, state and federal rules and regulations. Incumbents exercise considerable judgment in decision-making and day-to-day payroll operations. The Accounting Technician - Treasury is the working level classification expected to perform the more complex para-professional accounting duties related to cash handling and investment, including the preparation of spread sheets, balancing bank statements, entering and balancing daily activity reports on investment trading, accounting and financial reporting assignments. Assignments are characterized by the presence of fairly clear guidelines from whi ch to make decisions, and the availability of supervision when required. SUPERVISION RECEIVED/EXERCISED: Class specifications are only intended to present a descriptive summary of the range of duties and responsibilities that are associated with specified positions. Therefore, specifications may not include all duties performed by individuals within a classification. In addition, specifications are intended to outline the minimum qualifications necessary for entry into the class and do not necessarily convey the qualifications of incumbents within the position. ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN Page 2 of 7 \\10.176.2.252\granicus_nas\insite\files\BURL\Attachments\77287fd5-650b-4c60-885d-cfba08813234.doc Receives general supervision from the Financial Services Manager or Administrative/Information Support Manager depending on assignment. Incumbents may exercise lead, technical and functional supervision over assigned personnel. ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS: (include but are not limited to the following) Accounting Technician – General  Reconciles bank statements; prepares various accounting reports; verifies accounts payable; converts requisitions to purchase orders; prepares a variety of journal entries and enters data into the financial system; makes adjusting and closing entries.  Performs necessary investigation and analysis of accounts and activities; maintains and balances the City’s fixed assets; processes fixed asset journals; creates spreadsheets for each new asset; enters assets into financial software.  Reviews designated computer reports for accuracy and completeness; assumes responsibility for a complete set of financial reports.  Coordinates and prepares water and sewer bills; maintains necessary utility journals, ledger and other records using an on-line computer system; opens and closes accounts; records transfer of accounts; primary responsibility for data input on meter reads into computer terminal; explains City’s water billing and collection procedures to general public; handles complex complaint investigations promptly with courteous and careful consideration; assists other staff in making adjustments on water bills; processes business permits, business license and other cash transactions.  Generates a variety of financial data and reports for use by departments, City Management, and to comply with state and the Federal government requirements.  May assist in scheduling of staff and work assignments to ensure coverage and continued efficient workflow; may act in the supervisor’s absence to address customer service issues.  Audits and verifies monthly cash balances; verifies expenditures for accounts payable; audits credit cards.  Establishes positive working relationships with representatives of community organizations, state/local agencies and associations, City management and staff, and the public. Accounting Technician – Payroll  Maintains the payroll system and employee payroll records; posts and distributes time and attendance records; audits time sheets; inputs approved payroll changes and new employee information; prepares paychecks; distributes paychecks and reports to various departments.  Demonstrates a full understanding of applicable wage policies, procedures and work methods associated with assigned duties; maintains current knowledge of City, state and federal legislation affecting payroll.  Prepares payroll records for posting to the general ledger; prepares payroll journal vouchers; prepares a variety of routine and special reports as necessary; reviews and approves all vouchers for payment of payroll liabilities.  Identifies and resolves problems and inconsistencies relative to the maintenance of payroll accounting controls; prepares manual checks when necessary; makes wage adjustments. ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN Page 3 of 7 \\10.176.2.252\granicus_nas\insite\files\BURL\Attachments\77287fd5-650b-4c60-885d-cfba08813234.doc  Reviews new MOU provisions and provides for implementation.  May provide lead direction, training and work review to assigned staff.  Assists employees, benefit vendors and outside agencies with payroll and benefit questions and requests; assists employees in the completion of payroll related forms; researches changes to wage and hour ordinances and recommends modifications to the payroll system for compliance purposes; researches and analyzes data regarding salaries and benefits for cost studies.  Establishes positive working relationships with representatives of community organizations, state/local agencies and associations, City management and staff, and the public. Accounting Technician – Treasury  Enters and records investment purchases, sales, trades and interest to update the general ledger and broker systems; runs transaction detail reports, and reviews them for accuracy and reconciles any discrepancies.  Assists in the running of cash flow project reports and reconciles to receipts; prepares monthly, quarterly and yearly activity detail spreadsheets.  Balances fixed investments to monthly bank statement; serves as the liaison with banks for deposits and armored car services.  Serves as the liaison with hotels regarding the payment of transit occupancy taxes and other related financial activities.  Works closely with department staff to prepare required on-going and special reports and account reconciliations.  Conducts a variety of complex financial and policy related special projects and studies regarding banking and investment trends and activities.  Establishes positive working relationships with representatives of community organizations, state/local agencies and associations, City management and staff, and the public. PHYSICAL, MENTAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL WORKING CONDITIONS: Position requires prolonged sitting, standing, walking, reaching, twisting, turning, kneeling, bending, squatting, and stooping in the performance of daily activities. The position also requires grasping, repetitive hand movement, and fine coordination in preparing statistical reports and data using a computer keyboard. Additionally, the position requires near vision in reading correspondence, statistical data, and using a computer. Acute hearing is required when providing phone and personal service. The need to lift, drag, and push files, paper, and documents weighing up to 25 pounds also is required. Some of these requirements may be accommodated for otherwise qualified individuals requiring and requesting such accommodations. QUALIFICATIONS: (The following are minimal qualifications necessary for entry into the classification.) Education and/or Experience: ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN Page 4 of 7 \\10.176.2.252\granicus_nas\insite\files\BURL\Attachments\77287fd5-650b-4c60-885d-cfba08813234.doc Any combination of education and experience that has provided the knowledge, skills, and abilities and skills necessary for an Accounting Technician. A typical way of obtaining the required qualifications is to possess the equivalent of three years of accounting, budgeting, payroll, cash handling, or investment experience equivalent to that of an Accounting Assistant III with the City of Burlingame, and a high school diploma or equivalent. License/Certificate: Possession of, or ability to obtain, a valid Class C California driver’s license. KNOWLEDGE/ABILITIES/SKILLS: (The following are a representative sample of the KAS’s necessary to perform essential duties of the position.) Knowledge of: Accounting Technician – General: Basic principles and practices of financial record keeping, report writing, and governmental accounting; financial systems operations, and databases; governmental fund and cost accounting; basic cost control and auditing procedures and practices; fixed assets; utility billing and cash management; basic principles of mathematics; applicable federal, state and local laws, codes, and regulations; standard office procedures, practices, and equipment; modern office practices, methods, and equipment, including a computer and applicable software; methods and techniques for record keeping and report preparation and writing; proper English, spelling and grammar; occupational hazards and standard safety practices. Accounting Technician – Payroll: Principles and practice of municipal payroll processing, payroll records maintenance; federal, state and local wage and hour laws, codes, ordinance and labor agreements; generally accepted accounting principles; automated payroll systems and operations; basic principles and practices of governmental payrol l accounting; basic bookkeeping and accounting principles; computerized record keeping system principles and practices; basic principles and practices of supervision; applicable federal, state, and local laws, codes, and regulations; standard office procedures, practices, and equipment; modern office practices, methods, and equipment, including a computer and applicable software; methods and techniques for record keeping and report preparation and writing; proper English, spelling, and grammar; occupational hazards and standard safety practices. Accounting Technician – Treasury: Basic principles and practices of banking and cash handling as they relate to municipal accounts and trusts; basic principles of investment and investment terminology; financial record keeping, report writing, and governmental accounting; financial systems operations, and databases; basic City budget practices and ordinances relative to financial reporting and investments; basic principles of mathematics; applicable federal, state and local laws, codes, and regulations; standard office procedures, practices, and equipment; modern office practices, methods, and equipment, including a computer and applicable software; methods and techniques for record keeping and report preparation and writing; proper English, spelling and grammar; occupational hazards and standard safety practices Ability to: Accounting Technician – General: Prepare, maintain, and reconcile various financial, accounting, and statistical records; maintain fixed assets; prepare accurate financial and statistical reports and statements; keep accurate records; perform mathematical calculations quickly and accurately; interpret, explain, and apply applicable laws, codes, and regulations; perform cashiering duties accurately; respond to questions from the public and City personnel regarding policies and procedures for assigned area; read, interpret and record data accurately; organize, prioritize, and follow-up on work assignments; work independently and as part of a team; make sound decisions within established guidelines; analyze a complex issue and develop and implement an appropriate response; follow written and oral directions; observe safety principles and work in a safe manner; communicate clearly and concisely, both or ally and in writing; establish and maintain effective working relationships. ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN Page 6 of 7 \\10.176.2.252\granicus_nas\insite\files\BURL\Attachments\77287fd5-650b-4c60-885d-cfba08813234.doc Accounting Technician – Payroll: Maintain internal control of payroll operations; interpret, explain and apply a variety of laws and regulations governing payroll administration; accurately maintain payroll records, reports and files; accurately process a complex payroll on a timely basis; identify errors in records and payroll information and make appropriate changes; accurately count, record and balance assigned transactions; i ndependently make decisions regarding procedural activities or requirements; interpret, explain, and apply applicable laws, codes, and regulations; read, interpret and record data accurately; organize, prioritize, and follow-up on work assignments; work independently and as part of a team; make sound decisions within established guidelines; analyze a complex issue and develop and implement an appropriate response; follow written and oral directions; observe safety principles and work in a safe manner; communicate clearly and concisely, both orally and in writing; establish and maintain effective working relationships. Accounting Technician – Treasury: Prepare, maintain, and reconcile various financial, investment, and cash flow records; prepare accurate in vestment and banking reports and statements; keep accurate records; perform mathematical calculations quickly and accurately; interpret, explain, and apply applicable laws, codes, and regulations; read, interpret and record data accurately; organize, prioritize, and follow-up on work assignments; work independently and as part of a team; make sound decisions within established guidelines; analyze a complex issue and develop and implement an appropriate response; follow written and oral directions; observe safety principles and work in a safe manner; communicate clearly and concisely, both orally and in writing; establish and maintain effective working relationships. Skill to: Operate an office computer and a variety of word processing, spreadsheet and softwa re applications, including payroll and other financial systems. A-103 ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN Page 7 of 7 \\10.176.2.252\granicus_nas\insite\files\BURL\Attachments\77287fd5-650b-4c60-885d-cfba08813234.doc AFSCME 829 UNIT NON-EXEMPT REVISED: 11/10/14 DEPUTY FINANCE DIRECTOR Page 1 of 3 DEPUTY FINANCE DIRECTOR Class specifications are only intended to present a descriptive summary of the range of duties and responsibilities associated with specified positions. Therefore, specifications may not include all duties performed by individuals within a classification. In addition, specifications are intended to outline the minimum qualifications necessary for entry into the class and do not necessarily convey the qualifications of incumbents within the position. DEFINITION: This position assists the Finance Director to plan, supervise and direct the Department’s operations which include accounting, payroll, purchasing, cash management, revenue and treasury operations, overseeing the City budget and annual audit. The Deputy Finance Director supervises, trains, and evaluates Finance staff and provides highly responsible technical and professional support. ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS: (include but are not limited to the following)  Supervise the General Ledger, Accounts Payable, Payroll, Accounts Receivable, and Treasurer sections of the Finance Services Division.  Assist in the development and implementation of goals, policies and priorities of the Finance Department.  Coordinate the development and administration of the City budget; maintain documentation for all budget requests and adjustments; provide review of draft budget document.  Participate in the selection and appointment of personnel, determine employee performance objectives, write performance evaluations, work with employees on performance issues and succession planning.  Develop and administer accounting and budget control systems as necessary to comply with governmental accounting procedures and pronouncements, laws, ordinances and other regulations.  Direct the preparation and processing of accounts payable, accounts receivable, payroll, and cash deposits.  Direct the monthly reconciliation of each asset and liability account of the City.  Conduct and coordinate the City’s annual audit. Administer the City-wide revenue program; provide revenue projections and prepare revenue analysis.  Respond to requests for information and advise City departments, other governmental agencies and the public of City financial and accounting policies.  Coordinate indirect cost allocation and service fee studies.  Assist in the fiscal management of the City’s self-insurance programs; work directly with the City Attorney, Human Resources, actuaries and third party administrators.  Prepare a variety of technical analyses regarding expenditures and revenue projections.  Oversee the compilation of the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) and other miscellaneous financial reports as needed.  Assist the Finance Director and Public Works staff in reviewing and preparing the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). DEPUTY FINANCE DIRECTOR Page 2 of 3  Monitor the investment and withdrawal of funds and produce the City’s monthly investment report.  Oversee internal controls in cash handling and collections.  Perform special projects and other duties as assigned.  Assist the Finance Director in planning department activities and policy development; draft staff reports and attend Council meetings as directed.  Recommend and implement financial management systems and computer applications. KNOWLEDGE/ABILITIES/SKILLS (The following are a representative sample of the knowledge/abilities and skills necessary to perform essential duties of the position.) Knowledge of:  Principles, practices, methods and techniques used in budgeting, and municipal accounting, including Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP),  Quantitative and management analysis techniques to determine fiscal impacts on the City.  Computer based accounting and financial systems.  Principles and practices of effective supervision.  Contract administration.  Laws, statues, ordinances, and regulations of municipal finance and investment of public funds. Ability to:  Use effective leadership and supervisory skills to promote full performance and high morale.  Supervise, train, and evaluate Financial Services Division personnel.  Plan, organize, and complete special projects.  Design, implement, and evaluate programs that may affect more than one unit of the City organization.  Apply professional accounting principles, knowledge and skills to the maintenance of complex fiscal accounting records.  Perform internal auditing of governmental and enterprise functions.  Establish and maintain satisfactory working relationships with the public and City employees.  Negotiate and administer contracts.  Prepare, administer and monitor the budget.  Prepare costing anal ysis for projects and negotiations.  Analyze financial information.  Oversee the automation of financial applications.  Communicate clearly and concisely in both written and oral form. DEPUTY FINANCE DIRECTOR Page 3 of 3 QUALIFICATIONS (The following are minimal qualifications necessary for entry into the classification) Education and Experience:  Bachelor’s Degree in Accounting, Finance, Business Administration or a related field. A Master’s Degree in one of the above fields is preferred. CPA or CPFO is highly desirable.  Five (5) years increasingly responsible experience in accounting or auditing work preferably in a public sector environment.  Three (3) years supervisory experience.  Effective leadership, management, and supervisory skills. Licenses: California Driver’s License Significant Environmental Conditions: Ability to operate office equipment and to work in a standard office environment. *Depending on assignment(s), essential duties and responsibilities may be expanded or reduced as necessary. B104 DEPUTY FINANCE DIRECTOR BAMM EXEMPT REVISED: November 10, 2014 1 STAFF REPORT AGENDA NO: MEETING DATE: November 17, 2014 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: November 17, 2014 From: William Meeker, Community Development Director – (650) 558-7255 Subject: Introduction of an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Burlingame, Amending Chapter 25.63 of the Burlingame Municipal Code to Comply with State Law Requiring Incentives or Concessions for Qualifying Developments (Density Bonus Ordinance) RECOMMENDATION The City Council should: 1. Introduce the following ordinance by title only, waiving further reading: “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Burlingame, Amending Chapter 25.63 of the Burlingame Municipal Code to Comply with State Law Requiring Incentives or Concessions for Qualifying Developments (Density Bonus Ordinance)”. 2. Conduct a public hearing and consider all public testimony related to the ordinance. 3. Following conclusion of the public hearing, provide direction to staff regarding any desired changes to the proposed ordinance. 4. Direct staff to place adoption of the proposed ordinance on the December 1, 2014 regular meeting agenda of the City Council. BACKGROUND State Density Bonus Law, Government Code Section 65915, was first enacted in 1979. The law requires local governments to provide density bonuses and other incentives to developers of affordable housing who commit to providing a certain percentage of dwelling units to persons whose income does not exceed specific thresholds. Cities also must provide bonuses to certain developers of senior housing developments, and in response to certain donations of land and the inclusion of childcare centers in some developments. Essentially, state density bonus law establishes that a residential project of five or more units that provides affordable or senior housing at specific affordability levels may be eligible for:  a “density bonus” to allow more dwelling units than otherwise allowed on the site by the applicable General Plan Land Use Map and Zoning; Introduction - Density Bonus Ordinance November 17, 2014 2  use of density bonus parking standards;  incentives reducing site development standards or a modification of zoning code or architectural requirements that result in financially sufficient and actual cost reductions;  waiver of development standards that would otherwise make the increased density physically impossible to construct;  an additional density bonus if a childcare facility is provided. The density bonus may be approved only in conjunction with a development permit (i.e., tentative map, parcel map, use permit or design review). Under State law, a jurisdiction must provide a density bonus, and incentives will be granted at the applicant’s request based on specific criteria. The amount of the density bonus is set on a sliding scale, based on the percentage of affordable units at each income level, as shown on Table 1 on the following page: Introduction - Density Bonus Ordinance November 17, 2014 3 Table 1: Density Bonus Chart Affordable Unit Percentage* Very Low Income Density Bonus Low Income Density Bonus Moderate Income Density Bonus Land Donation Density Bonus Senior Housing Density Bonus 5% 20% - - - 20% 6% 22.5% - - - 20% 7% 25% - - - 20% 8% 27.5% - - - 20% 9% 30% - - - 20% 10% 32.5% 20% 5% 15% 20% 11% 35% 21.5% 6% 16% 20% 12% 35% 23% 7% 17% 20% 13% 35% 24.5% 8% 18% 20% 14% 35% 26% 9% 19% 20% 15% 35% 27.5% 10% 20% 20% 16% 35% 29% 11% 21% 20% 17% 35% 30.5% 12% 22% 20% 18% 35% 32% 13% 23% 20% 19% 35% 33.5% 14% 24% 20% 20% 35% 35% 15% 25% 20% 21% 35% 35% 16% 26% 20% 22% 35% 35% 17% 27% 20% 23% 35% 35% 18% 28% 20% 24% 35% 35% 19% 29% 20% 25% 35% 35% 20% 30% 20% 26% 35% 35% 21% 31% 20% 27% 35% 35% 22% 32% 20% 28% 35% 35% 23% 33% 20% 29% 35% 35% 24% 34% 20% 30% 35% 35% 25% 35% 20% 31% 35% 35% 26% 35% 20% 32% 35% 35% 27% 35% 20% 33% 35% 35% 28% 35% 20% 34% 35% 35% 29% 35% 20% 35% 35% 35% 30% 35% 20% 36% 35% 35% 31% 35% 20% 37% 35% 35% 32% 35% 20% 38% 35% 35% 33% 35% 20% 39% 35% 35% 34% 35% 20% 40% 35% 35% 35% 35% 20% * All density bonus calculations resulting in fractions are rounded up to the next whole number. ** Affordable unit percentage is calculated excluding units added by a density bonus. *** No affordable units are required for senior housing units to receive a density bonus. Introduction - Density Bonus Ordinance November 17, 2014 4 Furthermore the State Density Bonus law provides maximum parking requirements upon the applicant’s request. Requesting these parking standards does not count as an incentive or concession. Table 2 outlines the maximum parking requirements set forth by the State Density Bonus law compared to multifamily parking standards in the Burlingame Municipal Code: Table 2: Density Bonus Parking Standards Compared to Burlingame Municipal Code Type of Use Density Bonus Standards Burlingame Municipal Code Standards except for Downtown Specific Plan Area Downtown Specific Plan Area West of Rail Corridor Downtown Specific Plan Area East of Rail Corridor Studio 1 space/unit 1.5 space/unit 1 space/unit 1 space/unit 1 Bedroom 1 space/unit 1.5 space/unit 1 space/unit 1.5 space/unit 2 Bedroom 2 spaces/unit 2 spaces/unit 1.5 spaces/unit 2 spaces/unit 3 Bedroom 2 spaces/unit 2.5 spaces/unit 2 spaces/unit 2 spaces/unit Guest parking None required Apartments: none required None required None required Condominiums: 1 for 2-4 units 2 for 5-15 units 3 for 15 or more units If a child care center is also included in the affordable or senior housing development, the local agency shall grant either an additional density bonus equal to or greater than the amount of square feet of the child care center or grant an additional incentive that contributes significantly to the economic feasibility of the construction of the child care facility, with the following additional requirements: 1. The child care facility shall remain in operation for a period of time as long as the term of the affordable units; 2. The percentage of children from very low-, low- and moderate income-families reflects the percentage of affordable units in the development; 3. The local agency shall not be required to provide a density bonus or concession for a child care facility if it finds that the community has adequate child care facilities. Burlingame’s current Housing Element was adopted in 2010. A draft of the updated 2015-2023 Housing Element is currently under review by the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). It includes the following implementation programs related to density bonuses: Program H(C-2) - Provide incentives for developers to include affordable units in new residential projects. 1. Amend the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance to comply with local and state legislative requirements Introduction - Density Bonus Ordinance November 17, 2014 5 2. Amend the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance or adopt a Density Bonus Ordinance to accommodate a Low-Income component of required affordable housing. 3. Amend the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance or adopt a Density Bonus Ordinance to encourage smaller unit sizes (i.e. studio, SROs, one- and two-bedroom units). 4. Amend the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance or adopt a Density Bonus Ordinance to extend the affordability time restrictions. 5. Amend the zoning code to provide incentives to developers who provide additional affordable units and/or serve a broader range of income levels than that required by the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance or state density bonus requirements, such as reduced parking requirements, increased height limits, reduced landscaping requirements, flexible setback requirements and reduced fees. The Density Bonus Ordinance must be adopted prior to final certification of the 2015-2023 Housing Element in January 2015. DISCUSSION Relation to Chapter 25.63 Inclusionary Housing: Chapter 25.63 of the Municipal Code, adopted by the City Council in 2003, currently provides for density bonuses and affordable housing units. The provisions in the existing chapter were developed to comply with earlier versions of the State Density Bonus Law, and to respond to community objectives to provide affordable units in new developments. The proposed Density Bonus Ordinance is intended to fully replace the existing Chapter 25.63 Inclusionary Housing chapter. The proposed ordinance combines most of the elements of the existing Chapter 25.63 Inclusionary Housing together with the most recent requirements of the State Density Bonus Law. The most significant modifications to the existing Inclusionary Housing provisions as set forth in Chapter 25.63 would be:  Affordable units would no longer be a requirement of projects; the inclusion of affordable units would be at the discretion of the applicant, in an agreement with the City for the concessions and incentives offered in the Density Bonus Ordinance.  Units affordable to Moderate Income households would be required to remain restricted and affordable for a minimum period of 30 years, rather than the current 10 years.  The list of incentives currently provided in 26.63.030(b) would be expanded to provide additional options.  Applicants would be able to apply for a waiver or modification of development standards that would have the effect of physically precluding the construction of a development at the densities or with the concessions or incentives permitted by the Density Bonus Ordinance. Introduction - Density Bonus Ordinance November 17, 2014 6 Application of Density Bonuses: Density bonuses would be applicable to the maximum residential density of the respective General Plan, Zoning, or Specific Plan designation for a given property. Most residential areas within Burlingame have either a designated range of residential densities and/or a maximum residential density. The exception is the High Density Land Use/R-4 Zoning District, which is designated on the General Plan Land Use map as “51 plus dwelling units per acre.” Developments in the R-4 district would not need to request a density bonus since there is no upper density limit, but would be eligible to request concession(s) or incentive(s) provided in the Density Bonus Ordinance in exchange for building affordable units. The incentive to allow additional building height without a Conditional Use Permit currently provided in 26.63.030(b) was originally intended to provide additional floor area that would be the approximate equivalent to a unit density bonus. The height incentive is proposed to remain in the new ordinance both to provide a mechanism for a bonus in the R-4 district, as well as to provide an incentive for providing affordable units in any residential district. Incentives: Because affordable units would be an option rather than a requirement, it is important that the incentives offered be sufficient to offset the cost of providing the affordable units, and provide sufficient encouragement for developers to participate in the program. Exhibit 1 (attached) lists the multifamily residential developments approved since Chapter 25.63 was adopted in 2003, including the incentives each development utilized. Of the eight developments, five utilized increased building height and five utilized the provision of compact parking spaces (some projects utilized two incentives). No developments requested the reduction of rear yard common open space. In meeting with prospective housing development applicants, staff has found the most commonly requested incentives to be increased building height, reduced parking stall dimensions, and reduced parking ratios. The developments approved since Chapter 25.63 went into effect (as shown in Exhibit 1) would appear to support this observation. There has also been interest from some prospective developers to incorporate a uniform reduced parking stall dimension rather than a mix of standard and compact stalls. Currently an 8½’ x 18’ “unistall” option is available in the El Camino Real North (ECN) and Trousdale West (TW) zoning districts; the Density Bonus Ordinance proposes to allow the unistall option for developments with affordable units in all multifamily districts. Reduction in parking standards for developments with affordable units is mandated by State Density Bonus law and does not count as an incentive or concession. As shown in Table 2, the maximum parking standards outlined in the state law are slightly lower than the City’s base multifamily parking standards, and are relatively comparable to those in the City’s Downtown Specific Plan area. While the State Density Bonus law also allows a developer to apply for a waiver or modification of development standards that it deems to preclude the construction of a development at the densities provided in the ordinance, there are benefits to both the community and developers to Introduction - Density Bonus Ordinance November 17, 2014 7 having a defined “menu” of choices as currently provided in Chapter 25.63 and proposed to be further expanded in the new ordinance. A menu of options offers predictability for both the community and applicants, and allows options to be vetted in advance. In reviewing the draft ordinance, the Council, community members, and prospective developers of affordable housing may want to suggest additional incentives in addition to or in place of those outlined in the draft ordinance. In-lieu Fees, Impact Fees and Alternate Density Bonus Approaches: Burlingame has joined with other San Mateo County jurisdictions in a nexus and financial feasibility study to consider Housing Impact Fees to assess new market rate development for the increased demand that it creates for affordable housing. The nexus study is required to determine and implement impact and in-lieu fees. The study will include a range of recommendations for fees that take a variety of considerations into account, including construction costs and project feasibility. It may also provide data to assist in developing alternative options for density bonuses such as formulas based on floor area. While all San Mateo County jurisdictions are participating in the study, the fee options will be specific to each jurisdiction, and each jurisdiction will make its own determination as to the types and amounts of fees it may adopt. The study is expected to be completed at the end of this year, and further legislative action may be taken at that time. However the City is required to enact a density bonus ordinance in the meantime. Planning Commission Review and Recommendation: The Planning Commission reviewed the Density Bonus Ordinance in its September 22nd and October 14th meetings (October 14th meeting minutes attached). With the objective of encouraging affordable units through incentives, commissioners were asked to consider additional incentives in addition to or in place of those outlined in 25.62.040 (c) of the draft ordinance. Potential additional incentives evaluated by the Planning Commission included:  Relief to upper-floor step-back requirements;  Less costly interior finishes on affordable units;  Further reduction in parking for projects near transit;  Further reduction in parking for projects that have car sharing available. Some commissioners also expressed interest in requiring that the units be affordable for longer than thirty years, establishing a maximum density for the R-4 District, and eliminating the increased building height incentive. Of the potential additional incentives evaluated, the Planning Commission recommended adding the incentive further reduction in parking for projects near transit to those outlined in 25.62.040 (c) of the draft ordinance. There was not a consensus to add any of the other suggested additional incentives that had been evaluated. For the purposes of identifying areas that are convenient to transit, the staff report suggested referencing the “Priority Development Area” (PDA) that approximately corresponds to one-quarter mile from a major rail station (Downtown Burlingame and Millbrae Intermodal) or major transit corridor (El Camino Real with 15 -minute headway Introduction - Density Bonus Ordinance November 17, 2014 8 express bus service), and proposing the existing Downtown Specific Plan parking regulations as a reference for reduced parking ratios. FISCAL IMPACT None. Exhibits:  Density Bonus Ordinance  Exhibit 1: Burlingame Multifamily Project References  Exhibit 2: Multifamily Residential Projects with Planning Approvals since adoption of Code Chapter 25.63  Burlingame Priority Development Area (PDA) map ORDINANCE NO. __________ 1 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME, AMENDING CHAPTER 25.63 OF THE BURLINGAME MUNICIPAL CODE TO COMPLY WITH STATE LAW REQUIRING INCENTIVES OR CONCESSIONS FOR QUALIFYING DEVELOPMENTS (DENSITY BONUS ORDINANCE) WHEREAS State Law requires the adoption of a Density Bonus Ordinance, under Government Code §65915-65919; and WHEREAS the City’s existing Inclusionary Housing provisions require modification to reflect governing state law and account for local conditions; and WHEREAS current regulations should be updated to reflect governing state law and account for local conditions; and WHEREAS efficiency and transparency are served by combining the objectives served by the existing Inclusionary Housing provisions into the required Density Bonus Ordinance; NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council does hereby ordain as follows: DIVISION 1: Section 1: Burlingame Municipal Code Chapter 25.63 is repealed in its entirety and replaced with the following: 25.63.010 Purpose. (a) It is the City Council’s intent that this chapter be implemented in a manner consistent with the provisions set forth in Government Code §§65915-65919, hereinafter the “density bonus law.” This chapter creates procedures for identifying qualifying developments, and the submission, review, and granting of incentives and concessions consistent with state law. (b) All applicable provisions of the density bonus law are hereby incorporated by reference and shall be the default law unless otherwise provided by this chapter. (c) This chapter shall not abrogate the any other requirements set forth by federal, state, or local law, including but not limited to California Environmental Quality Act requirements and Burlingame Municipal Code. 25.63.015 Definitions. The following terms shall have the following meanings when used in this chapter. All other terms shall be interpreted consistent with the meaning set forth in the density bonus law. ORDINANCE NO. __________ 2 (a) “Affordable units” shall collectively mean units qualifying as “very low,” “lower,” and “moderate” income units as used in this chapter and in the density bonus law. (b) “Applicant” shall mean any person, firm, partnership, association, joint venture, corporation, entity, or any combination thereof, who seeks a density bonus and/or concessions as defined in this section. (c) “Child care facility” shall mean a child day care facility other than a family day care home, including, but not limited to, infant centers, preschools, extended day care facilities, and schoolage child care centers. (d) “Concessions” shall be interchangeable with “incentives,” unless otherwise indicated. The meaning shall be consistent with Government Code §65915(k). (e) “Density bonus” shall mean a density increase over the otherwise maximum allowable residential density as of the date of the application. (f) “Development” shall have the meaning set forth in Government Code §65915(i). (g) “Incentives” shall be interchangeable with “concessions,” unless otherwise indicated. The meaning shall be consistent with Government Code §65915(k). (h) “Lower income” shall have the same definition set forth in Health and Safety Code §50079.5. (i) “Moderate income” shall have the same definition set forth in Health and Safety Code §50093. (j) “Specific adverse impact” shall have the same definition as set forth in Government Code §65589.5(d)(2). (k) “Very low income” shall have the same definition as set forth in Health and Safety Code §50105. 25.63.020 Density Bonus. This section describes the density bonuses that will be provided, at the request of an applicant, when that applicant provides restricted affordable units as described below. (a) The city shall grant a 20 percent (20%) density bonus when an applicant for a development of five (5) or more dwelling units seeks and agrees to construct at least any one of the following in accordance with the requirements of this Section and Government ORDINANCE NO. __________ 3 Code Section 65915: (1) At least 10 percent (10%) of the total dwelling units of the development as restricted affordable units affordable to lower income households. For each one percent (1%) increase in the percentage of restricted lower income units, a development will receive an additional one and one-half percent (1.5%) density bonus up to thirty-five percent (35%) of the maximum residential density; or (2) At least five percent (5%) of the total dwelling units of the development as restricted affordable units affordable to very low income households. For each one percent (1%) increase in the percentage of restricted very low income units, a development will receive an additional two and one-half percent (2.5%) density bonus up to thirty-five percent (35%) of the maximum residential density; or (3) A senior citizen housing development; or (4) A qualifying mobile home park. (b) The city shall grant a five percent (5%) density bonus when an applicant for a development of five (5) or more additional dwelling units seeks and agrees to construct, in accordance with the requirements of this Section and Government Code Section 65915, at least 10 percent (10%) of the total dwelling units in a common interest development as defined in California Civil Code Section 4100 for moderate income households, provided that all dwelling units in the development are offered to the public for purchase. For each one percent (1%) increase in the percentage of restricted moderate income units, a development will receive an additional one percent (1%) density bonus up to thirty-five percent (35%) of the maximum residential density. (c) No additional density bonus shall be authorized for a senior citizen development or qualifying mobile home park beyond the density bonus authorized by subsection (a) of this section. (d) When calculating the number of permitted density bonus units, any fractions of units shall be rounded to the next highest number. An applicant may elect to receive a density bonus that is less than the amount permitted by this section; however, the city shall not be required to similarly reduce the number of restricted affordable units required to be dedicated pursuant to this section and Government Code Section 65915(b). (e) Each development is entitled to only one density bonus, which shall be selected by the applicant based on the percentage of very low restricted affordable units, lower income restricted affordable units, or moderate income restricted affordable units, or the development’s status as a senior citizen housing development or qualifying mobile home park. Density bonuses from more than one category may not be combined. In no case ORDINANCE NO. __________ 4 shall a development be entitled to a density bonus of more than thirty-five percent (35%). (f) The density bonus units shall not be included when determining the number of restricted affordable units required to qualify for a density bonus. When calculating the required number of restricted affordable units, any resulting decimal fraction shall be rounded to the next larger integer. (g) Any restricted affordable unit provided pursuant to a below market rate housing program adopted by the City shall be included when determining the number of restricted affordable units required to qualify for a density bonus or other entitlement under this chapter. However, the payment of a housing impact or in lieu fee shall not qualify for a density bonus or other entitlement under this chapter. (h) Certain other types of development activities are specifically eligible for a density bonus pursuant to state law: (1) A development may be eligible for a density bonus in return for land donation pursuant to the requirements set forth in Government Code Section 65915(g). (2) A condominium conversion may be eligible for a density bonus or concession pursuant to the requirements set forth in Government Code Section 65915.5. (i) Notwithstanding any provision of this chapter, all developments must satisfy all applicable requirements of any below market rate housing program adopted by the City, which may impose requirements for restricted affordable units in addition to those required to receive a density bonus or concessions. Table 1 summarizes the density bonus provisions described in this Section. Table 1: Density Bonus Summary Table Restricted Affordable Units or Category Minimum Percentage of Restricted Affordable Units Percentage of Density Bonus Granted Additional Bonus for Each 1% Increase in Restricted Affordable Units Percentage of Restricted Units Required for Maximum 35% Density Bonus Very Low Income 5% 20% 2.50% 11% Lower Income 10% 20% 1.50% 20% Moderate Income 10% 5% 1% 40% Senior Citizen 100% 20% ------ ------ ORDINANCE NO. __________ 5 Housing Qualifying Mobile Park 100% 20% ------ ------ Note: A density bonus may be selected from only one category up to a maximum of 35% of the Maximum Residential Density. 25.63.030 Development Standards for Affordable Units. The affordable housing standards are as follows: (a) Concurrent Construction. The required affordable dwelling units shall be constructed concurrently with market-rate units unless both the final decision-making authority of the city and developer agree within the affordable housing agreement to an alternative schedule for development. (b) Moderate income restricted affordable units shall remain restricted and affordable to the designated income group for a minimum period of 30 years (or a longer period of time if required by the construction or mortgage financing assistance program, mortgage insurance program, or rental subsidy program). Very low and lower restricted affordable units shall remain restricted and affordable to the designated income group for a period of 30 years for both rental and for-sale units (or a longer period of time if required by a construction or mortgage financing assistance program, mortgage insurance program, or rental subsidy program). (c) Design. Restricted affordable units shall be built on-site and be dispersed within the development. The number of bedrooms of the restricted affordable units shall be equivalent to the bedroom mix of the non-restricted units in the development; except that the applicant may include a higher proportion of restricted affordable units with more bedrooms. The design and construction of the affordable dwelling units shall be consistent with general plan standards; compatible with the design, unit layout, and construction of the total project development in terms of appearance, construction materials, unit layout, and finished quality and conform to general plan standards; and consistent with any affordable residential development standards that may be prepared by the City. (d) Minimum Dwelling Unit Size. To qualify as affordable dwelling units under this chapter, the affordable dwelling units shall meet the following minimum size requirements, excluding common areas, storage units, and assigned parking areas or spaces: Type of Unit Minimum Size Studio 500 square feet One-bedroom 650 square ORDINANCE NO. __________ 6 feet Two-bedroom 800 square feet (e) A regulatory agreement, as described in Section 25.63.080, shall be made a condition of the discretionary permits for all developments pursuant to this chapter. The regulatory agreement shall be recorded as a restriction on the development. 25.63.040 Development Concessions and Incentives. (a) By Right Parking Incentives. Upon request by the applicant a development that is eligible for a Density Bonus may provide parking as provided in this subsection (a), consistent with Government Code Section 65915(p), inclusive of accessible and guest parking: (1) Zero to one bedroom unit: one on-site parking space; (2) Two to three bedroom unit: two on-site parking spaces; (3) Four or more bedroom unit: two and one-half parking spaces. (b) Other Incentives and Concessions. A development is eligible for other Concessions or Incentives as follows: % very low income units % lower income units % moderate income units 1 incentive 5 10 10 2 incentives 10 20 20 3 incentives 15 30 30 (c) In submitting a request for Concessions or Incentives, an applicant may request the specific Concessions set forth below. The following Concessions and Incentives are deemed not to have a specific adverse impact: (1) A height for structures of forty-six (46) feet in height or less without a conditional use permit; (2) Reduction of common open space in the rear yard of a residential development by up to fifty (50) percent or two hundred (200) square feet, whichever is more, without necessity of a variance, so long as no dimension of the common open space provided is less than ten (10) feet in any direction; or (3) Use of unistall parking spaces each with a clear interior measurement of eight ORDINANCE NO. __________ 7 and one-half (8 1/2) feet in width and eighteen (18) feet in length without necessity of a variance; or (4) Allowance of up to fifty (50) percent of the required parking as compact parking stalls as defined in Chapter 25.70, without necessity of a variance. (d) Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to require the provision of direct financial concessions for the development, including the provision of publicly owned land by the city or the waiver of fees or dedication requirements. 25.63.050 Waiver/Modification of Development Standards An applicant may apply for a waiver or modification of development standards that will have the effect of physically precluding the construction of a development at the densities or with the concessions or incentives permitted by this chapter. The developer must demonstrate that development standards that are requested to be waived or modified will have the effect of physically precluding the construction of a development meeting the criteria of subsection (a) of Section 25.63.020 at the densities or with the concessions or incentives permitted by this chapter. 25.63.060 Child Care Facilities. (a) An applicant otherwise qualifying for density bonuses and/or incentives under this chapter may be eligible for the following density bonuses or incentives if they propose to construct a qualifying child care facility, consistent with §65915(h). (b) The density bonus shall be in an amount of square feet of residential space that is equal to or greater than the amount of square feet in the child care facility. (c) The incentive shall be granted if it contributes significantly to the economic feasibility of the construction of the child care facility. (d) The City may deny the density bonus or incentives described in this section if it finds, based on substantial evidence, that the community has adequate child care facilities. 25.63.070 Application and Review Process. (a) An application for a density bonus or incentive shall be made to the Community Development Department on forms provided by the City. The application shall include the following information: (1) A brief description of the proposed housing development, including the total ORDINANCE NO. __________ 8 number of dwelling units, affordable housing units, and density bonus units proposed. (2) The requested density bonus amount and requested incentives, if any. (3) Site plans showing the location of market-rate, density bonus, and affordable housing units. (4) Any other such information as is necessary to verify that the applicant and/or the housing development meets all requirements set forth by state and local law. (b) The application, or an incentive therein, may be wholly or partially denied for any of the following reasons: (1) The application is incomplete. (2) The application contains a material misrepresentation. (3) The incentive has an insufficient relationship to providing affordable housing. (4) The incentive has a specific, adverse impact as defined in this chapter. (5) The incentive is contrary to federal or state law. (c) The applicant may file an appeal to the City Council within 14 days of being notified of his application’s final denial. 25.63.080 Regulatory Agreement. (a) After approval of the application as detailed in §25.63.050, applicant shall enter into a regulatory agreement with the City. The terms of this agreement shall be approved as to form by the City Attorney’s Office, and reviewed and revised as appropriate by the reviewing city official. This agreement shall be on a form provided by the City, and shall include the following terms: (1) The affordability of very low, lower, and moderate income housing shall be assured in a manner consistent with Government Code §65915(c)(1). (2) An equity sharing agreement pursuant to Government Code §65915(c)(2). (3) The location, dwelling unit sizes, rental cost, and number of bedrooms of the affordable units. ORDINANCE NO. __________ 9 (4) A description of any bonuses and incentives, if any, provided by the City. (5) Any other terms as required to ensure implementation and compliance with this section, and the applicable sections of the density bonus law. (b) This agreement shall be binding on all future owners and successors in interest. The agreement required by this section shall be a condition of all development approvals and shall be fully executed and recorded prior to the issuance of any building or construction permit for the project in question. DIVISION 2: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The Council hereby declares that it would have adopted the Ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. DIVISION 3: This Ordinance shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation in accordance with California Government Code Section 36933, published, and circulated in the City of Burlingame, and shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its final passage. ___________________________________ Michael Brownrigg, Mayor I, Mary Ellen Kearney, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certif y that the foregoing ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 17th day of November, 2014 and adopted thereafter at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 1st day of December, 2014, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ATTEST: ORDINANCE NO. __________ 10 ___________________________________ Mary Ellen Kearney, City Clerk EXHIBIT 1: BURLINGAME MULTIFAMILY PROJECT REFERENCES 1512-1516 Floribunda Avenue Completed 2008 Total Units 9 BMR Units 1 Units per Acre 28.6 Building Height 53’-1” Incentives 50% Compact Parking 1838 Ogden Drive Completed 2012 Total Units 45 BMR Units 5 Units per Acre 49.5 Building Height 46’-0” Incentives Height, 50% Compact Parking 1226 El Camino Real Completed 2010 Total Units 9 BMR Units 1 Units per Acre 30.5 Building Height 45'-5" Incentives Height, 50% Compact Parking 1321 El Camino Real Completed 2014 (estimated) Total Units 5 BMR Units 1 Units per Acre 29.9 Building Height 42'-4" Incentives Height 904 Bayswater Avenue Completed 2014 (estimated) Total Units 6 BMR Units 1 Units per Acre 26.1 Building Height 26'-1" Incentives 50% Compact Parking 1800 Trousdale Drive Completed under construction – approved 2013 Total Units 25 BMR Units 3 Units per Acre 50 Building Height 60'-4" Incentives 50% Compact Parking 1225 Floribunda Avenue Completed under construction – approved 2013 Total Units 6 BMR Units 1 Units per Acre 31.7 Building Height 43'-0 7/8" Incentives Height 1433 Floribunda Avenue Completed approved 2014 Total Units 10 BMR Units 1 Units per Acre 45.9 Building Height 46'-0" Incentives Height EXHIBIT 2: CITY OF BURLINGAME MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS WITH PLANNING APPROVALS SINCE ADOPTION OF MUNCIPAL CODE CHAPTER 25.63 Lot Area (sq ft) Acres Units BMR Units Units/ Acre Type PC Approval Completed/ Finaled 1512-1516 Floribunda Ave 13,709 0.32 9 1 28.6 Condo 10/11/05 4/17/08 508 Peninsula Ave. 5,021 0.12 3 0 26.1 Condo 7/26/04 5/6/09 1840 Ogden Drive 38,905 0.91 45 5 49.5 Condo 7/24/06 3/1/12 1459 Oak Grove Ave 5,790 0.13 3 0 22.6 Condo 6/23/08 4/3/14 1226 El Camino Real 12,874 0.30 9 1 30.5 Condo 5/27/08 6/14/10 1321 El Camino Real 7,311 0.17 5 1 29.9 Apt 1/10/11 under constr 904 Bayswater Ave 10,000 0.23 6 1 26.1 Condo 7/23/12 under constr 1800 Trousdale Drive 21,741 0.50 25 3 50.0 Condo 3/11/13 under constr 1225 Floribunda Ave 8,223 0.19 6 1 31.7 Condo 9/9/13 under constr 1433 Floribunda Ave 9,515 0.22 10 1 45.78 Condo 2/24/14 Caltrain Station Caltrain Station Peninsula Hospital City of Burlingame Priority Development Area (PDA) PDA Boundary School San Francisco B a y Burlingame City Li mits Burlingame City Li mitsBurlingame City Li mits El Camino Real Corridor ROLLINS CA L I F O R N I A EL C A M I N O REAL B A L B O A AIRPORT PA L O M AADELINE D R A K ERAYB E R N A L HOWARD CA R O L A N SUMMI T C O R T E Z LA G U N A A D R I A N C A B R I L L O ANZA CANYONCARMELITADAVISHILLSI D E VA N C O U V E RTROUSDALE OAK GROVEHALECA P U C H I N O EASTON P A R K A N I T A PEPPERBARR O IL HETPALM LO R T O N DW I G H T B L OOM F I E L D BAYSWA TERGI L B R E T H FLORI B U N D ABAYSHORE HWY C O L U M B U S BELLEVUES E Q U O I A MI LLBRA E W A L N U T B E N I T O ELM SHA R O N CHAPINPOPPYPENINSULAMU RCHISOND E S O T O ED GEHILLPINON ACACIA A R U N D E L Q U E S A D A NEW H A L L BURLINGA ME F E Y MILLSLEXING TO NJACKLI N G C A R L O S MA R I N SA NCH E ZMARTINEZGROVE C L A R E N D O N BELLA VISTAEA S TMY R T L ELINCOLNSTANTON C R E S C E N TARMSBYMORRELL W E S T M O O R MAHLERHINCKLEYC A S T I L L O VALDIVIA M O N T E R O O G D E N DAVIDLA S S E N CAROLASTERDEVEREAUXTIPT OE LIN D E N M A R S T E N LA U R E L ARC NO R T H C A R O L A NOXFORD GERIIRWINHILLSBOROUGHGENEVRA C H A T H AMDUFFERIN DONNELLYE A S T M O O R KENMARDOUGLASINGOLDFARRINGDON WARRE NVI S T A GUITTARDJUANITATULIPCADILLACCONC ORDRHINETTE BROADWAYPARKHIGHWAY 101 HI G H W A Y 1 0 1 Millbrae BART/ Caltrain Station City of Millbrae Town of Hillsborough City of San Mateo E L C A M I N O R E A L 1 STAFF REPORT AGENDA NO: MEETING DATE: November 17, 2014 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: November 17, 2014 From: Kathleen Kane, City Attorney – (650) 558-7204 William Meeker, Community Development Director – (650) 558-7255 Subject: Set Public Hearing Date for an Appeal of the Planning Commission's Decision on an Application for a Design Review Amendment for a New Single-Family Dwelling to be Constructed at 1521 Cabrillo Avenue RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council set the date for the public hearing on an appeal of the Planning Commission’s action on 1521 Cabrillo Avenue for December 1, 2014. BACKGROUND At its regular meeting on October 27, 2014, the Planning Commission heard a request for a Design Review Amendment for the new single-family dwelling currently under construction at 1521 Cabrillo Avenue. The Commission granted the request in part and denied it in part. Frank and Linda Ryan submitted an appeal request within ten days of that decision on November 6, 2014, along with payment for noticing costs. Ms. Ryan has requested a waiver of the $485 appeal fee. DISCUSSION Any interested person may appeal approval of a design review project by the Planning Commission within 10 days of that decision, per Burlingame Municipal Code §§ 25.57.030(i) and 25.16.070. The Code does not provide explicitly for an appeal fee waiver.1 FISCAL IMPACT None, except to the degree that the appeal fee set on the master fee schedule does not recoup full staff costs required for processing an appeal: the fee has been set lower than actual cost in the interest of promoting access to administrative justice. 1 One such appeal fee was waived administratively, when a noticing error deprived the appellant of actual notice of the Planning Commission action. The appeal was therefore the first hearing at which the appellant could appear before a deciding body. Given that it was the City’s error that arguably necessitated the appeal, the appellant was not charged an appeal fee. Set Appeal Hearing on 1521 Cabrillo Design Review Amendment November 17, 2014 2 Exhibits:  Appeal Letter  Resolution 16-2014, setting forth appellate procedures before the Council 1 STAFF REPORT AGENDA NO: MEETING DATE: November 17, 2014 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: November 17, 2014 From: Syed Murtuza, Director of Public Works – (650) 558-7230 Bill Meeker, Community Development Director – (650) 558-7255 Subject: Review of El Camino Real and Floribunda Avenue Intersection Safety Improvement Project Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council review and approve the attached comments for the El Camino Real (ECR) and Floribunda Avenue Intersection Safety Project DEIR. Staff also recommends that the Council authorize the Mayor to sign the attached revised letter with City comments as the City’s official response to the DEIR. BACKGROUND On October 16, 2014, Caltrans released the DEIR for public review and comments. Caltrans has scheduled an open-house public event on November 13, 2014 as a method to receive public comments on the DEIR. The deadline for submitting public comments for the DEIR is November 30, 2014. DISCUSSION At the November 3, 2014 meeting, the City Council reviewed the DEIR and discussed the draft City comments to Caltrans in response to the DEIR. The Council shared the safety concerns related to left turn collisions at the ECR and Floribunda intersection; however , the Council expressed serious concerns regarding the potential negative impacts resulting from the removal of several trees as indicated in the DEIR. Based on the comments and feedback from the Council, staff has revised the attached draft Mayor’s letter and City comments in response to the DEIR. FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact associated with this action. Exhibits:  Revised Mayor’s Letter to Caltrans with City Comments in response to the DEIR  Copy of the November 3, 2014 staff report with attachments The City of Burlingame MAYOR MICHAEL BROWNRIGG CITY HALL - 501 PRIMROSE ROAD TEL: (650) 558-7200 TERRY NAGEL, VICE MAYOR BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA 94010-3997 FAX: (650) 556-9281 ANN KEIGHRAN www.burlingame.org RICARDO ORTIZ JOHN ROOT November 17, 2014 California Department of Transportation, District 4 Yolanda Rivas, Environmental Branch Chief Office of Environmental A nalysis, Mail Station 8B 111 Grand Avenue Oakland, CA 94623-0660 Email: y olanda_rivas@dot.ca.gov Subject: City of Burlingame Comments to the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the State Highway 82 (EI Camino Real) at Floribunda Avenue Intersection Safety Improvements Project Dear Ms. Rivas: The Burlingame City Council would like to take this opportunity to express our appreciation to Caltrans for the opportunity to submit comments in response to the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the El Camino Real and Floribunda Avenue Intersection Safety Improvements Project. The City of Burlingame would also like to reiterate our position of support for the efforts of Caltrans to evaluate and implement measures to reduce traffic accidents at this intersection. Aside from a shared concern for safety, another fundamental issue for the City of Burlingame has always been the character of El Camino Real within the limits of the City of Burlingame and the Town of Hillsborough. As you are aware, this corridor is uniquely different from the rest of El Camino as it traverses through San Mateo and Santa Clara Counties. Especially for Burlingame, this three-mile stretch of El Camino Real, with its tall trees, sidewalks, and limited commercial frontage, is distinctly tied to the City’s long history and culture. From the outset, the City has always maintained that an evaluation process could be implemented whereby Caltrans would adopt an approach beginning with the least -most invasive interventions and moving forward from there. We see this to be the most cost-effective way of solving the problem for our taxpayers since each successive measure would prove to be Ms. Yolanda Rivas November 17, 2014 Page 2 more invasive and more expensive than the former. The City believes that this approach would also ensure that the most drastic and irreversible solution would be considered last, instead of first. Therefore, the City of Burlingame is disappointed to see that several of the Operational Measures were evaluated and withdrawn by Caltrans in the DEIR. We are further let down that the overall approach of “incremental empiricism”, as was offered by the City in its December 16, 2013 letter, was dismissed by Caltrans. The City still believes that safety improvements may be achieved through combined, and concurrent, implementation of several operational measures. The approach taken in the DEIR to evaluate these measures as isolated, individual actions has led to less than significant results. The City not only believes in the “incremental empiricism” approach, but also believes that safety, historic, cultural, and aesthetic concerns can all be addressed using several actions simultaneously or in close concert, rather than just as individual measures. It is the City’s belief that this approach is better public policy both for California taxpayers as well as for our own city residents. The City has reviewed the DEIR and believes that there are many unanswered questions related to the traffic studies and operational analysis related to the ECR and Floribunda intersection, and has prepared the attached comments (Attachment A) that should be addressed as part of the environmental process. Since the document only considered one Build Alternative and did not adequately study other feasible options, the City of Burlingame does not support the proposed Build Alternative at this time. The City of Burlingame continues to extend the offer to working with Caltrans to arrive at a solution that improves traffic safety at the El Camino Real and Floribunda Avenue intersection without causing adverse impacts to the cultural heritage and environment of our community. Michael Brownrigg Mayor c: Burlingame City Council Hillsborough City Council State Senator Jerry Hill State Assembly Member Kevin Mullin Ms. Carol Roland-Nawi, State Historic Preservation Officer Ms. Elizabeth Krase Green, Office of Cultural Resource Studies, Caltrans District 4 Enclosure: Attachment A The City of Burlingame PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CITY HALL - 501 PRIMROSE ROAD CORPORATION YARD Tel: (650) 558-7230 BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA 94010-3997 Tel: (650) 558-7670 Fax: (650) 685-9310 www.burlingame.org Fax: (650) 696-1598 Attachment A City of Burlingame Draft Comments for SR 82 (El Camino Real) at Floribunda Intersection Safety Improvement Project Draft Environmental Impact Report The City has reviewed the DEIR and believes that it is deficient in providing adequate information about the project alternatives/measures studied as part of the environmental process. Additionally the City believes that there are many unanswered questions related to the traffic studies and operational analysis related to the ECR and Floribunda Ave. intersection, and has prepared the following comments: General Traffic Engineering and Operation Studies: 1. The DEIR does not provide comprehensive traffic collision data at the El Camino Real (ECR) and Floribunda intersection. The document states that there were 22 accidents over a three-year period and does not show year-by-year trends, types, causes, or results/changes from previous improvements undertaken. Please provide a detailed record of collision data by year, type and causes for the last ten-year period. 2. The DEIR states that the ECR and Floribunda intersection has a higher collision rate than the state average. However, the document does not provide the information on what the state’s average collision rate is and the measured time period. Please provide the data on the statewide average collision rate for similar types of intersections and corridors for a fair comparison. 3. The DEIR states that only TASAS (Traffic Accident Surveillance and Analysis System) reported accidents were taken into consideration for the purpose of preparing the environmental document. Please clarify why only TASAS reported accidents were taken into consideration. 4. The DEIR includes traffic collisions for a three-year period up to 2012. Please provide the total number of traffic collisions/accidents at this intersection after 2012. Please also provide traffic analysis for comparison of that data to previous years’ collision records. 5. The DEIR cites 22 accidents over the study period of April 1, 2009 to March 31, 2012, and also cites 55% of them being left-turn broadside accidents, but does not provide information on vehicle speeding as being a contributing factor to the accidents. The City believes that along with a failure to yield, vehicle speeding is also a major contributing factor. Please provide data on vehicle speeding in the accident analysis. 6. The DEIR does not provide collision data about other intersections along the ECR corridor. The City believes it is not only important, but relevant to understand how the Floribunda intersection compares with other intersections along the ECR corridor in terms of traffic safety and Level of Service (LOS). 7. The DEIR does not provide any information about the traffic LOS for the ECR and Floribunda intersection, as well as other intersections in the vicinity under any of the scenarios studied as part of the DEIR. Please provide existing and future LOS for the ECR and Floribunda intersection and other intersections in the vicinity including, but not limited to, Oak Grove Avenue, Bellevue Avenue and Chapin Avenue. In addition, the current and future traffic LOS information should be provided for all other scenar ios discussed in the DEIR. 8. The traffic operation analysis for existing and future conditions for all scenarios should include current and projected future traffic volumes. 9. The DEIR states that traffic signal modifications were studied, and it was determined that they would not address the left-turn collision problem at the ECR and Floribunda intersection. However, no analysis and traffic simulation information was included in the document. Please provide detailed technical data including simulation for each of the discarded alternatives. 10. Provide information on what consideration was given if the City were to implement certain traffic measures on Floribunda such as prohibiting all southbound left-turns, limiting hours of operation for southbound left-turns, or designating Floribunda as a one- way street. 11. The DEIR examined various operational measures individually, but does not make any determination on the results of collective or combined implementation of these measures. Please provide information on any collective and/or combined efforts to analyze the various operational measures. 12. The DEIR acknowledged other plans for the entire El Camino Real corridor within San Mateo and Santa Clara Counties. However, the document does not provide information on overall safety plans regarding the El Camino Real corridor within Burlingame. Provide information on what is planned for El Camino Real within Burlingame. 13. A single Build Alternative was offered in the DEIR based on conventional intersection signalization. Consideration and analysis should be provided regarding the feasibility of a non-signalization method such as a traffic circle or roundabout for the El Camino Real/Floribunda Avenue intersection. 14. Aside from a northern segment at Dufferin Avenue intersection, this portion of El Camino Real at Floribunda Avenue is the only other segment that has a significant horizontal deflection (curve) that affects visibility for oncoming traffic. Please provide analysis on how line-of-sight and sight-visibility deficiencies for opposing left-turning vehicles will be addressed. Build Alternative: 15. The DEIR provides a single Build Alternative and does not fully demonstrate that other potential build alternatives were considered. 16. The DEIR document identifies a total of 14 trees that may be removed as part of the Build Alternative. The City requests Caltrans to explore reducing the number of trees that may need to be removed for the Build Alternative. 17. Provide confirmation that there is no right-of-way acquisition required of private properties for the Build Alternative. 18. Please provide the current and future expected southbound and northbound left-turn volumes on Floribunda along with LOS including storage length and queuing. If the traffic simulation model shows that an installation of dedicated left-turn lanes will increase the left-turn volumes, the City believes that it will likely have an increased traffic circulation impact on local streets. Please provide a detailed study of local impacts to be expected as a result of dedicated left-turn lanes at the ECR and Floribunda intersection, such as increased volume and speeding on surrounding streets. Additionally, the DEIR should identify appropriate mitigation measures to address the potential impacts. 19. The Build Alternative proposes widening of El Camino Real from 40 feet to 60 feet at the Floribunda Avenue intersection. Please provide information to demonstrate that pedestrian safety will also be improved with such a widening of the roadway, especially since pedestrian exposure to vehicle traffic is increased with the Build Alternative. 20. The DEIR does not provide any information about the anticipated construction timing and related impacts to the nearby residential community, as this intersection is located in a dense residential area. 21. The DEIR identifies 14 trees to be removed and states that every attempt will be made to replace the removed trees. Please specify the locations for tree replantation and the actual number of trees to be replanted. The City requests that every tree removed be replaced. Additionally, the City requests Caltrans to consider using larger than 24 inch box trees for replacement, should this Alternative be considered. 22. The DEIR does not provide any information on the health conditions of the trees affected by this alternative. Please provide information on the health conditions of the affected trees. 23. While 5 trees in the Build Alternative are on the historic Howard-Ralston Eucalyptus Tree Row list, the City believes that all trees contribute to the overall feel of the tree canopy along El Camino Real and have an impact on nearby residences as well. This consideration is significant since this portion of El Camino Real is also designated a scenic route in the Burlingame General Plan. No Build Alternative: 24. The City shares the safety concerns related to left turn collisions at the ECR and Floribunda intersection, and believes that that these concerns should be addressed and the ‘No Build Alternative’ is not an option. The City does believe that an incremental solution to address the problem is warranted. Operational Measures Considered but Withdrawn: Operational Measure No. 1 25. The DEIR document states that certain signal timing changes were made at the intersection; however no data was included in the document regarding the changes and the results. Please provide relevant data to support the analysis. 26. The DEIR does not provide any traffic operations data and LOS. Please provide the current and future LOS at all other intersections along the entire corr idor as part of the analysis. 27. The DEIR does not provide any information on traffic volume to quantify DEIR statements about excessive delays, queuing for dismissed Operational Measures. Please provide the data to support the statements. Operational Measure No. 2 28. The DEIR document incorrectly states that Burlingame Police and Fire are in the vicinity of the Floribunda Avenue intersection. Please be advised that Burlingame Police and Fire are not in the vicinity of the intersection and the DEIR must be corrected to accurately reflect the facts. 29. Please provide information regarding if Central County Fire Department and other emergency services have been notified or consulted regarding service route assumptions in the DEIR. 30. The DEIR does not provide information on traffic volumes that may be redistributed if left turns are prohibited at Floribunda intersection. Operational Measures Nos.3, 4, 5, 7 and 9 31. No comments Operational Measures Nos. 6 and 8 32. The DEIR states that the traffic signal split phasing was studied and determined that it resulted in traffic delays. However, it fails to provide specific information on the traffic queues, increased vehicle emissions, and driver frustrations caused by the delays. 33. The DEIR cites that removing existing signals will divert traffic to other streets. However, no specific information on traffic volumes and LOS has been included in the document. Additionally, the City believes it is unwarranted to remove the existing traffic sig nal at the ECR and Floribunda intersection. The City requests Caltrans to address all the above comments and provide requested data to support the DEIR analysis. Please contact Engineering Program Manager Augustine Chou at (650) 558-7230 with any questions regarding the City’s comments on the DEIR. 1 STAFF REPORT AGENDA NO: MEETING DATE: November 3, 2014 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: November 3, 2014 From: Syed Murtuza, Director of Public Works – (650) 558-7230 Bill Meeker, Community Development Director – (650) 558-7255 Subject: Review of El Camino Real and Floribunda Avenue Intersection Safety Improvement Project Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council review the attached draft comments prepared in response to the El Camino Real (ECR) and Floribunda Avenue Intersection Safety Improvement Project DEIR by Caltrans, and provide feedback. Further, staff recommends that the Council authorize the Mayor to sign the attached letter with any amendments as the City’s official response to the DEIR. BACKGROUND In 2008, the Town of Hillsborough contacted Caltrans and the City of Burlingame to relay the town’s concerns regarding left-turn collisions at the intersection of ECR and Floribunda Avenue. Between 2008 and 2014, staff from the three agencies met several times to discuss the issues and concerns in greater detail. Since the ECR corridor is within the jurisdiction of Caltrans, it is the State’s responsibility to evaluate the collision data and examine ways to address safety concerns. Caltrans initially drafted some preliminary concept ideas on the feasibility of adding dedicated left- turn lanes to this portion of ECR. These concepts considered widening of ECR, which would likely result in the removal of several existing trees along the corridor. Both the City of Burlingame and the Town of Hillsborough objected to these concepts. At that time, Caltrans was also informed that such a project would be greeted with high public resistance. In response, Caltrans determined that it would conduct a formal environmental assessment for the project as part of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to determine the project impacts and take next steps. As part of the CEQA process, Caltrans initiated the environmental scoping for the project in November 2013. On November 19, 2013, Caltrans held a public meeting to receive comments on the environmental scoping for the project. During the meeting, Caltrans representatives presented several project alternatives, including the one that would widen ECR to install left turn lanes, which would likely result in the removal of several trees. As predicted, members of the public voiced strong objections to the removal of the trees and supported the concept of improving the Review of El Camino Real and Floribunda Avenue Intersection November 3, 2014 Safety Improvement Project DEIR 2 safety of the intersection, while still preserving the trees along ECR and the historic character of the corridor. Caltrans gathered the public comments and concerns, and informed the public that they would include and address them as part of the CEQA process. As part of the CEQA process, Caltrans completed the project environmental studies and released the DEIR on October 16, 2014. Caltrans also scheduled an open-house public event on November 13, 2014, at the Burlingame Recreation Center, 850 Burlingame Avenue. This open- house event will be an opportunity for the public to ask Caltrans specific questions about the project and the evaluation process, reiterate concerns, and provide additional written and verbal comments regarding the DEIR. The deadline for submitting public comments for the DEIR is November 30, 2014. Staff has requested that Caltrans extend the deadline to provide comments as the current deadline is too soon and inadequate. DISCUSSION Staff from the City’s Public Works, Community Development and Parks Departments have jointly reviewed the DEIR and offer the following summary of their findings: The DEIR presents only one Build Alternative and a No Build Alternative. The document also identifies nine operational measures that were considered, but ultimately withdrawn by Caltrans for the following reasons. 1. Signal timing adjustments – rejected because signal timing changes were already made and showed no identifiable reductions in left-turn collisions. 2. Left-turn prohibition/intersection closure – rejected because it was deemed impractical from a highway operational and safety perspective. 3. Widen west side of ECR with private right-of-way (ROW) acquisition – rejected because of design infeasibility with worse environmental impacts than the Build Alternative. 4. Widen both sides of ECR with private ROW acquisition – rejected same as No. 3 above. 5. Widen east side of ECR with private ROW acquisition – rejected same as No. 3 above. 6. Signal split-phasing/removal of existing traffic signal – rejected because it would cause vehicle traffic delays and vehicle queuing. Signal removal would increase left-turn collisions. 7. Speed enforcement – rejected because it would reduce the existing speed limit and not address left-turn collisions. 8. Other signal modifications (traffic barriers and delineators) – rejected because of maintenance concerns, private ROW acquisition, reduction in travel lanes, reduction in through-traffic capacity, potential to cause traffic delay and congestion. 9. Intersection lighting improvements – not rejected, but included in the Build Alternative. Review of El Camino Real and Floribunda Avenue Intersection November 3, 2014 Safety Improvement Project DEIR 3 No Build Alternative The No Build Alternative calls for a status quo situation with no improvements. The existing roadway and lane configurations would be unchanged, with two lanes in each direction and no dedicated lanes for left-turns. There would be no mitigation to address the left-turn collisions. The Build Alternative The proposed Build Alternative would result in the widening of El Camino Real in the intersection area from its current width of 40 feet to 60 feet, and tapering back to its current 40 feet width at Oak Grove Avenue and towards Bellevue Avenue, with a project length of approximately 500 feet. The project would consist of installing two new, opposing dedicated left-turn lanes on ECR at Floribunda Avenue for northbound and southbound left-turn traffic. The two existing through- travel lanes in each direction (two northbound and two southbound) would be maintained; although they would be shifted outward to accommodate the new opposing left-turn lanes in the center. The vast majority of the work for the Build Alternative is within Caltrans right-of-way. The only exceptions would be at the northeast and southeast corners of the ECR and Floribunda Ave. intersection, where new Americans with Disabilities Act-compliant access ramps would be constructed. Upon thorough review of the DEIR, it is staff’s understanding that the proposed Build Alternative is a significantly scaled-down version of previous concepts, which are presently identified as the Operational Measures listed above (No. 3 “Widening West Side of SR 82 with Private ROW Acquisition”, No. 4 “Widening Both Sides of SR 82 with Private ROW Acquisition”, and No. 5 “Widening East Side of SR 82 with Private ROW Acquisition”). Based on the previous concepts, Operational Measures Considered but Withdrawn, and an earlier Project Study Report produced by Caltrans, dated October 3, 2011, the total number of trees to be removed under the above concepts was cited as being up to 30 trees. Considerable private right-of-way would also have been necessary under these concepts. Under the current Build Alternative, a total of 14 trees are identified for potential removal. Of these 14 trees, nine are non-historic, and five belong on the historic Howard-Ralston Eucalyptus Tree Row list. Of the five trees that belong to the historic list, four are mature eucalyptus trees and one is a young elm tree. The DEIR proposes to replace these trees with Elm or a similarly approved species. The Community Development staff conducted a review of the environmental and cultural impact portions of the DEIR. After reviewing the pertinent sections, it was determined that the project impacts (i.e. removal of four contributing Eucalyptus trees and one Elm tree) to the Howard- Ralston Eucalyptus Tree Rows are less than significant, especially in light of the overall impact upon the entirety of the historic resource. The DEIR acknowledges that Caltrans proposes to replace the removed trees with a contributing tree species where possible. This would be in an effort to return the appearance of the Tree Rows in the vicinity of El Camino Real and Floribunda back to its original appearance over time and when the replacement trees are mature. In addition to, and as part of the City’s formal comments, staff is also strongly urging Caltrans to investigate in greater detail the preservation of three of the 14 trees currently identified in the Build Alternative for removal. The apparent locations of these particular trees are shown to be along Review of El Camino Real and Floribunda Avenue Intersection November 3, 2014 Safety Improvement Project DEIR 4 the edges of the curb lines of the proposed Build Alternative alignment. As such, their locations in relation to the curb lines may present an opportunity to further explore preserving these trees. After reviewing the DEIR and analyzing the Build Alternative, No Build Alternative, and the Operational Measures Considered but Withdrawn, Public Works and Community Development staff have drafted comments for Council review and feedback . These comments include specific analyses, questions, and clarifications pertaining to the lack of quantitative information and data contained in the DEIR. Additionally, the Traffic Safety and Parking Commission held a special meeting on October 23, 2014 in an effort to review the DEIR and collect public comments prior to the City Council meeting. The comments and concerns from that meeting focused on the aesthetic impact related to the Build Alternative. There were also concerns and questions regarding the level and amount of technical data in the DEIR pertaining to the operational measures that were ultimately withdrawn. These comments are incorporated in the attached draft letter with the Mayor’s signature to be submitted to Caltrans as part of the City’s official response to the DEIR. FISCAL IMPACT None. Exhibits: • Draft Mayor’s letter to Caltrans with City comments on the DEIR • Copy of Executive Summary of DEIR • City Arborist Memo regarding trees The City of Burlingame MAYOR MICHAEL BROWNRIGG CITY HALL - 501 PRIMROSE ROAD TEL: (650) 558-7200 TERRY NAGEL, VICE MAYOR BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA 94010-3997 FAX: (650) 556-9281 ANN KEIGHRAN www.burlingame.org RICARDO ORTIZ JOHN ROOT November 3, 2014 California Department of Transportation, District 4 Yolanda Rivas, Environmental Branch Chief Office of Environmental Analysis, Mail Station 8B 111 Grand Avenue Oakland, CA 94623-0660 Email: y olanda_rivas@dot.ca.gov Subject: City of Burlingame Comments to the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the State Highway 82 (EI Camino Real) at Floribunda Avenue Intersection Safety Improvements Project Dear Ms. Rivas: The Burlingame City Council would like to take this opportunity to express our appreciation and thanks to Caltrans for the opportunity to submit comments in response to the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the El Camino Real and Floribunda Avenue Intersection Safety Improvements Project. The City of Burlingame would also like to reiterate our position of support for the efforts of Caltrans to evaluate and implement measures to reduce the number of accidents at this intersection. Aside from a shared concern for safety, another fundamental issue for the City of Burlingame has always been the character of El Camino Real within the limits of the City of Burlingame and the Town of Hillsborough. As you are aware, this corridor is uniquely different from the rest of El Camino as it traverses through San Mateo and Santa Clara Counties. Especially for Burlingame, this three-mile stretch of El Camino Real, with its tall trees, sidewalks, and limited commercial frontage, is distinctly tied to the City’s long history and culture. From the outset, the City has always maintained that an evaluation process could be implemented whereby Caltrans would adopt an approach beginning with the least-most invasive interventions and moving forward from there. We see this to be the most cost-effective way of solving the problem for our taxpayers since each successive measure would prove to be Ms. Yolanda Rivas November 3, 2014 Page 2 more invasive and more expensive than the former. The City believes that this approach would also ensure that the most drastic and irreversible solution would be considered last, instead of first. Therefore, the City of Burlingame is disappointed to see that several of the Operational Measures were evaluated and withdrawn by Caltrans in the DEIR. We are further let down that the overall approach of “incremental empiricism”, as was offered by the City in its December 16, 2013 letter, was dismissed by Caltrans. The City still believes that safety improvements may be achieved through combined, and concurrent, implementation of several operational measures. The approach taken in the DEIR to evaluate these measures as isolated, individual actions has led to less than significant results. The City not only believes in the “incremental empiricism” approach, but also believes that safety, historic, cultural, and aesthetic concerns can all be addressed using several actions simultaneously or in close concert, rather than just as individual measures. It is the City’s belief that this approach is better public policy both for California taxpayers as well as for our own city residents. The City has reviewed the DEIR and believes that there are many unanswered questions related to the traffic studies and operational analysis related to the ECR and Floribunda intersection, and has prepared the attached comments (Attachment A) that should be addressed as part of the environmental process. The City of Burlingame continues to look forward to working with Caltrans to arrive at a solution that improves traffic safety at the El Camino Real and Floribunda Avenue intersection without causing adverse impacts to the cultural heritage and environment of our community. Michael Brownrigg Mayor c: Burlingame City Council Hillsborough City Council State Senator Jerry Hill State Assembly Member Kevin Mullin Ms. Carol Roland-Nawi, State Historic Preservation Officer Ms. Elizabeth Krase Green, Office of Cultural Resource Studies, Caltrans District 4 Enclosure: Attachment A The City of Burlingame PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CITY HALL - 501 PRIMROSE ROAD CORPORATION YARD Tel: (650) 558-7230 BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA 94010-3997 Tel: (650) 558-7670 Fax: (650) 685-9310 www.burlingame.org Fax: (650) 696-1598 Attachment A City of Burlingame Draft Comments for SR 82 (El Camino Real) at Floribunda Intersection Safety Improvement Project Draft Environmental Impact Report The City has reviewed the DEIR and believes that it is deficient in providing adequate information about all the project alternatives/measures studied as part of the environmental process. Additionally the City believes that there are many unanswered questions related to the traffic studies and operational analysis related to the ECR and Floribunda intersection, and has prepared the following comments: General Traffic Engineering and Operation Studies: 1. The DEIR does not provide comprehensive traffic collision data at the El Camino Real (ECR) and Floribunda intersection. The document states that there were 22 accidents over a three-year period and does not show year-by-year trends, types, causes, or results/changes from previous improvements undertaken. Please provide a detailed record of collision data by year, type and causes for the last ten-year period. 2. The DEIR states that the ECR and Floribunda intersection has a higher collision rate than the state average. However, the document does not provide the information on what the state’s average collision rate is and the measured time period. Please provide the data on the statewide average collision rate for similar types of intersections and corridors for a fair comparison. 3. The DEIR states that only TASA (Traffic Analysis Study Area) reported accidents were taken into consideration for the purpose of preparing the environmental document. Please clarify why only TASA reported accidents were taken into consideration. 4. The DEIR includes traffic collisions for a three-year period up to 2012. Please provide the total number of traffic collisions/accidents at this intersection after 2012. Please also provide traffic analysis for comparison of that data to previous years’ collision records. 5. The DEIR does not provide collision data about other intersections along the ECR corridor. The City believes it is not only important, but relevant to understand how the Floribunda intersection compares with other intersections along the ECR corridor in terms of traffic safety and Level of Service (LOS). 6. The DEIR does not provide any information about the traffic LOS for the ECR and Floribunda intersection, as well as other intersections in the vicinity under any of the scenarios studied as part of the DEIR. Please provide existing and future LOS for the ECR and Floribunda intersection and other intersections in the vicinity including, but not limited to, Oak Grove Avenue, Bellevue Avenue and Chapin Avenue. In addition, the current and future traffic LOS information should be provided for all other scenarios discussed in the DEIR. 7. The traffic operation analysis for existing and future conditions for all scenarios should include current and projected future traffic volumes. 8. The DEIR states that traffic signal modifications were studied, and it was determined that they would not address the left-turn collision problem at the ECR and Floribunda intersection. However, no analysis and traffic simulation information was included in the document. Please provide detailed technical data including simulation for each of the discarded alternatives. 9. Provide information on what consideration was given if the City were to implement certain traffic measures on Floribunda such as prohibiting all southbound left-turns, limiting hours of operation for southbound left-turns, or designating Floribunda as a one- way street. Build Alternative: 10. The DEIR document identifies a total of 14 trees that may be removed as part of the Build Alternative. The City requests Caltrans to explore reducing the number of trees that may need to be removed for the Build Alternative. 11. Provide a confirmation that there is no right-of-way acquisition required of private properties for the Build Alternative. 12. Please provide the current and future expected southbound and northbound left-turn volumes on Floribunda along with LOS including storage length and queuing. If the traffic simulation model shows that an installation of dedicated left turn lanes will increase the left turn volumes, the City believes that it will likely have an increased traffic circulation impact on local streets. Please provide a detailed study of local impacts to be expected as a result of dedicated left turn lanes at the ECR and Floribunda intersection. Additionally, the DEIR should identify appropriate mitigation measures to address the potential impacts. 13. The DEIR does not provide any information about the anticipated construction timing and related impacts to the nearby residential community, as this intersection is located in a dense residential area. 14. The DEIR states that every attempt will be made to replace trees. Please clarify if new locations for tree replantation have been determined. The City requests Caltrans to consider using larger than 24 inch box trees for replacement, should this Alternative be considered. 15. The DEIR does not provide any information on the health conditions of the trees affected by this alternative. Please provide information on the health conditions of the affected trees. No Build Alternative: 16. The City shares the safety concerns related to left turn collisions at the ECR and Floribunda intersection, and believes that that these concerns should be addressed and the ‘No Build Alternative’ is not an option. The City does believe that an incremental solution to address the problem is warranted. Operational Measures Considered but Withdrawn: Operational Measure No. 1 17. The DEIR document states that certain signal timing changes were made at the intersection; however no data was included in the document regarding the changes and the results. Please provide relevant data to support the analysis. 18. The DEIR does not provide any traffic operations data and LOS. Please provide the current and future LOS at all other intersections along the entire corridor as part of the analysis. 19. The DEIR does not provide any information on traffic volume to quantify DEIR statements about excessive delays, queuing for dismissed Operational Measures. Please provide the data to support the statements. Operational Measure No. 2 20. The DEIR document incorrectly states that Burlingame Police and Fire are in the vicinity of the Floribunda Avenue intersection. Please note that Burlingame Police and Fire are not in the vicinity of the intersection. 21. Please provide information regarding if Central County Fire Department and other emergency services have been notified or consulted regarding service route assumptions in the DEIR. 22. The DEIR does not provide information on traffic volumes that may be redistributed if left turns are prohibited at Floribunda intersection. Operational Measures Nos.3, 4, 5, 7 and 9 23. No comments Operational Measures Nos. 6 and 8 24. The DEIR states that the traffic signal split phasing was studied and determined that it resulted in traffic delays. However, it fails to provide specific information on the traffic queues, increased vehicle emissions, and driver frustrations caused by the delays. 25. The DEIR cites that removing existing signals will divert traffic to other streets. However, no specific information on traffic volumes and LOS has been included in the document. Additionally, the City believes it is unwarranted to remove the existing traffic signal at the ECR and Floribunda intersection. The City requests Caltrans to address all the above comments and provide requested data to support the DEIR analysis. Please contact Engineering Program Manager Augustine Chou at (650) 558-7230 with any questions regarding the City’s comments on the DEIR. 1 SUMMARY The proposed project is a joint project by the California Department of Transportatio n (Caltrans) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and is subject to state and federal environmental review requirements. Project documentation, therefore, has been prepared in compliance with both the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Caltrans is the lead agency under both NEPA and CEQA. In addition, FHWA’s responsibility for environmental review, consultation, and any other action required in accordance with applicable federal laws for this project is being, or has been, carried-out by Caltrans under its assumption of responsibility pursuant to 23 United States Code (USC) 327. Some impacts determined to be significant under CEQA may not lead to a determination of significance under NEPA. Because NEPA is concerned with the significance of the project as a whole, quite often a “lower level” document is prepared for NEPA. One of the most common joint document types is an Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Assessment (EIR/EA). After receiving comments from the public and reviewing agencies, a Final EIR/EA will be prepared. Caltrans may prepare additional environmental and/or engineering studies to address comments. The Final EIR/EA will include responses to comments received on the Draft EIR/EA and will identify the preferred alternative. If the decision is made to approve the project, a Notice of Determination will be published for compliance with CEQA, and Caltrans will decide whether to issue a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for compliance with NEPA. A Notice of Availability (NOA) of the FONSI will be sent to the affected units of federal, state, and local government, and to the State Clearinghouse in compliance with Executive Order 12372. This project proposes to improve the safety of the intersection of State Route (SR) 82 at Floribunda Avenue, most specifically, to reduce left-turn collisions. There is a need to construct safety improvements at this intersection to significantly reduce the occurrence of left-turn related accidents. The lack of dedicated left-turn lanes and left-turn signals contributes to the occurrence of intersection accidents. The estimated project cost would be approximately $3.6 million, funded from State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP) funds. Construction is estimated to begin sometime in 2018. After public circulation of this DEIR/EA, a Final Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Assessment (EIR/EA) would be prepared for this project. Caltrans may undertake additional environmental and/or engineering studies to address comments. The Final EIR/EA will include responses to comments received on the Draft EIR/EA and will identify the preferred alternative. Overview of Project Area State Route (SR) 82 is a California State highway that begins at Interstate 880 (I-880) in San Jose and ends at Interstate 280 (I-280) in San Francisco, forming a central artery through several San Francisco peninsula communities including Palo Alto, San Carlos, San Mateo, Burlingame and Millbrae. Commonly referred to as “El Camino Real” (Spanish for The King’s Highway) it was part of the 600-mile Mission Trail connecting the 21 Spanish Missions from San Diego to Sonoma. SR 82 runs south to north for approximately 42 miles, with 17 miles in Santa Clara County, 25 miles in San Mateo County, and terminates a short distance into San 2 Francisco County at I-280. Throughout San Mateo County, SR 82 serves as a parallel arterial to I-280 and US 101. SR 82 is functionally classified by the Federal government, as a ‘Principal Arterial-Urban.” The proposed project is located at the intersection of SR 82 and Floribunda Avenue, within the jurisdiction of both the city of Burlingame and the town of Hillsborough in San Mateo County. SR 82 at Floribunda Avenue is a four-lane, undivided highway with two 11-ft. through lanes with uncontrolled left-turn movements in both directions at the signalized intersection with Floribunda Avenue. SR 82 at this location has two bus stops served by the San Mateo County Transit Agency (SamTrans). Floribunda Avenue is a designated bicycle route. Related Plans and Projects Regional Planning In addition to the proposed project there are state, regional and local plans in the vicinity of SR 82 including on State Highway 101 and selected interchanges. At the regional level, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) is responsible for regularly updating the Regional Transportation Plan, a comprehensive blueprint for the development of mass transit, highway, airport, seaport, railroad, bicycle and pedestrian facilities. The MTC’s 2040 Regional Transportation Plan (Plan Bay Area), adopted July 18, 2013, lists programmed and planned projects throughout the nine counties of the Bay Area. Plan Bay Area is the successor to Transportation 2035, the long-range plan adopted by MTC in 2009. Plan Bay Area will address new requirements flowing from California’s 2008 Senate Bill 375 (Steinberg), which calls on each of the state’s 18 metropolitan areas to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from cars and light trucks. The transportation sector represents about 40 percent of the GHG pollution that scientists claim is causing climate change.1 State Planning In the summer of 2013 there was an existing Caltrans project completed to improve the drainage system along both sides of SR 82 in the vicinity of Floribunda Avenue to address flooding on the east side of SR 82 that occurs after heavy rainfall. There is a Caltrans America Disability Act (ADA) Sidewalk Safety Project that is programmed for July, 2014 which will repair and improve existing sidewalk pedestrian infrastructure, specifically existing damaged sidewalks along SR82 (SR 82 Boulevard). Please see Section 2.23 Cumulative Impact Assessment, for a more detailed discussion about this project. Local Planning The federal The Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) act, enacted in August 2005 as the reauthorization of The United States federal Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21), provided the following expenditures on or near SR 82: 1. High Priority project #1942: SR 82 “Grand Boulevard” initiative in San Mateo County. $3,000,000. The Grand Boulevard Initiative is a collaboration of 19 cities, counties, local and regional agencies united to improve the performance, safety, and aesthetics of SR 82 Boulevard. This project has multi-modal streetscape improvement components at locations to the north and south of this safety project at the intersection of SR 82 and Floribunda Avenue. 1 MTC Bay Area Plan. Retrieved on May 14, 2014 from http://www.mtc.ca.gov/planning/plan_bay_area/. 3 The San Mateo SMART Corridor project, begun in the summer of 2011, installed equipment on various State Routes and local arterials in San Mateo County to reduce congestion and improve traffic operations. The project included installation of camera and optical fiber cables and conduits along SR 82, including the intersection with Floribunda Avenue. Purpose and Need The purpose of the proposed project is to improve intersection safety of SR 82 at Floribunda Avenue to reduce the occurrence and potential for collisions involving left-turn movements. According to state accident monitoring data, the intersection has a higher left-turn related collision rate than the statewide average. There were 22 reported collisions over a three year period, (according to most recent available data) with over 54.5% of those collisions identified as broadside accidents related to left-turns, followed by 13.6% rear end, 9.1% sideswipe, 9.1% head-on and 4.5% auto-pedestrian collisions.2 The proposed project is needed to address the following:  vehicles not having enough time or gaps to turn left safely;  inadequate sight distance to turn left due to opposing vehicles making left-turns and blocking the view of opposite oncoming through vehicle traffic;  no protected green arrow for left-turns  vehicles stopping in the SR 82 inner through lanes to make left-turns, creating traffic flow congestion cues during peak hours. Proposed Action Caltrans’ environmental scoping process includes an analysis of reasonable build alternatives. A No Build Alternative is also considered and represents the existing condition. All build alternatives are compared to the No Build. A reasonable range of alternatives were compiled based upon input from Caltrans project development team (PDT), cities of Burlingame and Hillsborough and the public. After a thorough alternatives analysis, Caltrans identified a Build Alternative which is presented in this draft environmental document with the No Build Alternative. The other alternatives considered are summarized under Alternatives Considered and Withdrawn. Alternatives were identified based on meeting the purpose and need for this project to increase traffic safety by reducing left-turn collisions. The No Build and Build Alternatives are described below. 1. Build Alternative: Widen both sides of SR 82 (majority within existing Caltrans right-of-way) The proposed Build Alternative would widen SR 82 at the Floribunda Avenue intersection at Post Mile (PM) 13.69 between Oak Grove Avenue and Bellevue Avenue, to install left-turn pockets and left-turn signals in the northbound and southbound directions. The project is approximately 500 ft. long and 60 ft. wide and includes the north and south approaches to Floribunda Avenue on SR 82. Two existing, through lanes would be maintained in both the north and southbound directions on SR 82. 2 California Department of Transportation Traffic Accident Surveillance and Analysis Systems (TASAS), Data collected over three year period from 4/1/09 to 3/31/12. 4 The signalized intersection of SR 82/Floribunda Avenue would be widened on both sides of SR 82 to construct a 10 ft. wide left-turn channel along both northbound and southbound of SR 82. A 10-ft. wide, center left-turn lane, including approach tapers would be added, as well as 1.5-ft. shoulders in both directions of SR 82 for the majority of the 500 ft. by 60 ft. project limits. Currently, there is no roadway shoulder at the SR 82 and Floribunda Avenue intersection. The proposed roadway cross-section would consist of two 11 ft. wide travel through lanes in each direction, and 10-ft. wide left-turn pocket in both directions, with 1.5 ft. shoulder and maintain the existing 4 to 5 ft. wide sidewalks. The roadway within the project limits would be approximately 60 ft. wide and the left-turn pocket in the southbound direction would be 50 ft. long with a 50 ft. taper. The left-turn pocket in the northbound direction would be 75 ft. long with a 60 ft. taper. The construction limit length for this alternative would be approximately 500 ft. long by 60 ft. wide. The total Construction Site Area would be 0.87 acres. The total disturbed Soil Area would be 0.32 acres. The majority of work would occur within the state right-of-way except for some minor work at specific points. Partial acquisition of right-of-way from two properties at northeast and southeast intersection quadrants would be required for construction of the curb ramps. Permits to Enter and Construct (PECs) would be required from the Town of Hillsborough and City of Burlingame local streets. This includes a small landscaped portion of Hillsborough's municipal site known as Centennial Park. Temporary Construction Easements (TCEs) would be required on 4 parcels for the grading and construction of driveways. Under the Build Alternative 14 trees would be removed. Of the 14 trees, 9 are non- historic (sweet gum, blue gum, blackwood acacia, and young eucalyptus trees) and (5) five trees (four mature eucalyptus trees and one young elm tree) have been identified as contributors to the Howard-Ralston Eucalyptus Tree Rows, a National Register of Historic Places-listed property. Please see the Cultural Section 2.7.2. A Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) overhead electrical line along the west side of SR 82 is in conflict with the roadway widening. Burying the PG&E electrical line within the State right of way is anticipated. In addition, the PG&E gas line, the AT&T underground line and the City of Burlingame water line on the east side of SR 82 are in conflict and relocating them within the State Right of Way are anticipated. Several existing utility boxes and manholes need to be relocated or adjusted to the finished grade. Potholing will be required to identify the underground utilities and detailed utility verification will be done during the PS&E phase. The existing utilities will be determined during the Plans, Specifications and Estimates (PS&E) phase of the project. The PS&E phase follows the environmental review and final document public release for the project. The size of utility trenches will be determined by the utility companies. Usually, utility trenches are 2.5 to 3 ft. deep and 1.5 to 2 ft. wide. The need for lane closures and detours will be identified in a Transportation Management Plan (TMP), which will be prepared during the PS&E phase. Figure 3, displays the draft plan for the Build Alternative including the five trees (four mature eucalyptus trees and one young elm tree) that are contributors to the Howard- Ralston Eucalyptus Tree Rows as well as the nine other non-historic trees that would require removal. Please see Visual/Aesthetic section for more information about trees. 2. No Build (No Action) Alternative 5 The existing facility is a four lane, undivided, conventional state highway, SR 82, approximately 40 ft. wide, consisting of approximately two 11-ft. wide through lanes with uncontrolled left-turn movements in the north and southbound directions. The posted speed limit on SR 82 is 35 miles per hour (mph). In the northbound d irection, toward McKinley Elementary School, 1 block north of Floribunda Avenue, the speed limit is 25 mph when school children are present. While this alternative would not meet the purpose and need, it serves as the baseline to which the Build Alternative can be compared. As traffic volumes on SR 82 increase, it is expected that accidents would increase, including broadside collisions at the intersection with Floribunda Avenue. The No Build Alternative would not reduce the high broadside collision rate involving left-turn traffic movements nor reduce the congestion and traffic flow for left-turning vehicles on SR 82 at Floribunda Avenue. Project Impacts Project impacts that would require avoidance, minimization, and/or mitigation measures as a result of the proposed SR 82 (SR 82) at Floribunda Intersection Safety Improvement Project include impacts to Traffic and Transportation/Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities, Cultural Resources, Visual/Aesthetics, Noise, Paleontological Resources, Geology/Soils/Seismicity/Topography, Hazardous Waste/Materials, and the Biological Environment. A summary of the avoidance, minimization and mitigation measures for the Build Alternative is included in Table S-1. 6 Table S-1: Build Alternative Project Impacts Resource Area Potential Impacts Avoidance, Minimization and/or Mitigation Measures Traffic and Transportation/ Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities Disruption to transportation, transit, pedestrian and bicycle facilities during construction. Traffic and Transportation: A Transportation Management Plan (TMP), Construction Zone Enhance Enforcement Program (COZEEP), Portable changeable message signs and notification of impacted groups (public transit, bicyclists, pedestrians). Construction Impacts: Construction activities would result in temporary traffic detours and possibly single lanes impacting traffic/transportation, pedestrian circulation and bicycles on the Floribunda Avenue bicycle route. These impacts would be minimized through coordination with the Town of Hillsborough, City of Burlingame and emergency providers. Efforts would be made to concentrate the majority of road closures and construction activity during off-peak hours to reduce traffic impacts. Traffic would be diverted to one side of SR 82 and traffic would be controlled by flaggers stationed at both ends of the closure. Cultural Resources The proposed Build Alternative would remove (5) five contributor trees to the Howard-Ralston Eucalyptus Tree Rows, a National Register of Historic Places listed property, within the 500 ft. project boundary at the intersection of SR 82 and Floribunda Avenue. Caltrans will make every effort to minimize the impact of tree removal by planting (5) five new contributing Accolade © elm or similar approved trees where space is available within the Howard-Ralston Eucalyptus Tree Rows on SR 82.3 Non-contributing trees within the Howard-Ralston Eucalyptus Tree Rows may be removed to provide space for the replanting of contributing Accolade © elm or similar approved variety. Caltrans may remove and replace the last Sweetgum (Liquidamber styraciflua), located on the northeast quadrant of SR 82 near Oak Grove Avenue, with an Accolade © elm or similar species to help maintain the integrity of the landscape/visual character of the tree rows. The replacement trees would be Accolade ® elm or similar species and would be 24” box size (6-8 ft. tall and 1.5”-2” caliper trunk). At maturity, in 30 years, it is anticipated the elm 3 Contributing trees are tree species that are considered to be contributing elements of the historic resource and continue to strengthen the integrity of the Howard-Ralston Eucalyptus Tree Rows as they carry out McLaren’s original design of a landscaped, shaded avenue. These contributing trees include the mature eucalyptus and mature elm trees planted originally between 1873 and 1876. Elms planted as replacements are also considered contributors. Non-contributing trees are trees that do not contribute to the Howard-Ralston Eucalyptus Tree Rows. There are 201 non-contributing trees within the resource which include orange gum (E.bancrofti), desert box gum (E. microtheca), flowering gum (E.ficifolia), Nichol's willow-leaf peppermint, swamp mahogany (E. robusta), swamp gum (E. rudis), silver dollar gum, pink iron bark (E. sideroxylon 'Rosea'), and acacia, as well as redwood, sycamore, horse chestnut and sweet gum trees. 7 Resource Area Potential Impacts Avoidance, Minimization and/or Mitigation Measures trees would grow to 40-60 ft. in height and have a 35-40 ft. wide crown.4 Visual/Aesthetics The Build Alternative would remove 14 (5 historic and 9 non-historic) trees. The proposed project Build Alternative would have a moderate-low impact to the landscape/visual character of the tree rows. Caltrans would make every effort to minimize the impact of tree removal by planting (5) five new contributing Accolade © elm or similar approved trees where space is available within the Howard-Ralston Eucalyptus Tree Rows on SR 82. Non-contributing trees within the Howard-Ralston Eucalyptus Tree Rows may be removed to provide space for the replanting of contributing Accolade © elm or similar approved variety. Caltrans may remove and replace the last Sweetgum (Liquidamber styraciflua), located on the northeast quadrant of SR 82 near Oak Grove Avenue, with an Accolade © elm or similar species to help maintain the integrity of the landscape/visual character of the tree rows. The replacement trees would be Accolade ® elm or similar species and would be 24” box size (6-8 ft. tall and 1.5”-2” caliper trunk). At maturity, in 30 years, it is anticipated the elm trees would grow to 40-60 ft. in height and have a 35-40 ft. wide crown.5 Noise NEPA conclusion: The federal noise abatement criteria were met or exceeded at 556 and 707 El Camino Real property addresses and McKinley Elementary School Yard with existing noise. CEQA conclusion: Noise levels are not expected to increase above the existing, or baseline, levels. Temporary construction noise. There are no reasonable and feasible abatement measures for existing and future noise that could be implemented. No sound walls required. Construction noise abatement would be implemented as required by Caltrans’ Standard Specification 14-8.02, “Noise Control”. Paleontological Resources Under the proposed Build Alternative, planned ground-disturbing activities within the project foot print could potentially impact paleontological resources. The following mitigation measures for paleontological resources are recommended and in accordance to Caltrans' Standard Environmental Reference Guidelines (Caltrans, 2007). It is recommended that Caltrans implement the following measures:  It is recommended that a Paleontological Evaluation Report (PER) be prepared prior to construction to define actual locations where monitoring will be necessary based upon the project design. For budgeting, the PER will provide enough information about the level of effort needed. 4 The Morton Arboretum. Retrieved from http://www.mortonarb.org/trees-plants/tree-plant-descriptions/elm-cultivars, on 6/23/14. 5 The Morton Arboretum. Retrieved from http://www.mortonarb.org/trees-plants/tree-plant-descriptions/elm-cultivars, on 6/23/14. 8 Resource Area Potential Impacts Avoidance, Minimization and/or Mitigation Measures Paleontological Resources (cont’d)  Based on the findings from the PER, a Paleontological Mitigation Plan (PMP) may be recommended to define the specific mitigation measures and methods that will be implemented.  These recommendations may include: a. A qualified paleontologist be present to consult with grading and excavation contractors at pre-grading meetings. b. The Principal Paleontologist also have an environmental meeting to train grading and excavation contractors in the identification of fossils. c. When fossils are discovered, the paleontologist (or paleontological monitor) will be called to recover them. Construction work in these areas will be halted or diverted to allow recovery of fossil remains in a timely manner. d. Fossil remains collected during the monitoring and salvage portion of the mitigation program will be cleaned, stabilized, sorted, and cataloged. e. Prepared fossils, along with copies of all pertinent field notes, photos, and maps, will then be deposited in a scientific institution with paleontological collections. f. A final report will be completed that outlines the results of the mitigation program. g. Geology/Soils/ Seismicity For the Build Alternative, excavation, trenching and possible deep foundation work for light signals would be required during construction. Environmental borings show mostly silts, clays and silty sands surrounding the site. A geotechnical investigation should be performed to determine Exploration and Investigations: Field and subsurface exploration, laboratory tests and analysis shall be performed to evaluate foundation designs, and if necessary slope ratios, and to determine soil strengths and mitigation. For each traffic signal location a geotechnical boring should be completed in advance to 9 Resource Area Potential Impacts Avoidance, Minimization and/or Mitigation Measures Geology/Soils/ Seismicity, continued stability of excavations and if shoring will be needed. To our knowledge there is no hazardous waste within the project site. Soil properties will be evaluated during geotechnical investigation. determine groundwater levels, soil types and strengths, and structural conditions in rock if encountered. Several investigative methods may be used, including but not limited to: soil borings, rock coring, Cone Penetrometer Tests (CPTs), and geophysical studies. Laboratory testing may be required to determine soil strength, permeability, moisture content, and grain size. Groundwater: Groundwater levels can be determined with borings as part of the Geotechnical Design Report investigation. Groundwater levels fluctuate seasonally and should be monitored through the winter to find the highest levels. CPTs may be used to determine groundwater depth, and subsurface soil types. It may also be useful in locating or characterizing thick, potentially expansive clays. Dewatering: The exploratory drilling during the Geotechnical Design Report phase will discover any areas that will require dewatering. Corrosion: Corrosivity tests shall be conducted where appropriate as part of the drilling program for the any proposed retaining walls. Hazardous Waste/Materials An environmental regulatory database search did not reveal any known hazardous waste sites that could negatively impact the project. Shallow soils to be excavated within the unpaved areas adjacent to the roadway likely contain elevated levels of aerially deposited lead (ADL) from historic vehicle emissions. A site investigation that ascertains the presence and concentrations of metals, particularly lead, in soils will be conducted during the project’s PS&E phase. The findings of the site investigation will be used to prepare the appropriate standard special provisions that address the proper soil handling requirements and worker health and safety concerns. Biological Environment No impacts to listed species are anticipated. Potential impact to migratory bird species nesting. Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) avoidance measures shall be implemented including surveys and avoiding nesting periods. (Please see Threatened and Endangered Species Section 2.20.4, Avoidance, Minimization and/or Mitigation, for details on surveys and nesting period avoidance measures.) Coordination with public and other agencies Collaborative efforts have taken place throughout the planning process with the project development team from as early as 2011 when initial conceptual road widening alternatives at the intersection were developed and analyzed. These alternatives were further evaluated and refined to reduce environmental impacts until the recommended Build Alternative was proposed, which reduces environmental impacts including minimizing tree removal. Consultation has occurred with the Town of Hillsborough, City of Burlingame, the State Historic Preservation Officer, the Burlingame Historical Society and the Native American Heritage Commission on the proposed project to improve intersection safety. In addition, both Hillsborough and Burlingame 10 are members of the project development team and participated in several meetings and were consulted in the development of the proposed safety improvement project. The Town of Hillsborough’s General Plan Circulation Element has identified this intersection as needing safety improvements and the intersection of SR 82 and Floribunda Avenue was included in a study Hillsborough completed of the intersection, calling for safety improvements. Under Section 106, consultation is required with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO). A Water Pollution Control Plan is required from the U.S. EPA and would be completed before project construction. The following reviews and approvals would be required for project construction: Agency Consultation Agency Permit/Approval Status California State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) Section 106 National Historic Preservation Act and PRC 5024.5 SHPO concurrence on the National Register of Historic Places eligibility of historic properties within the Area of Potential Effects was received on April 21, 2014. SHPO consultation and concurrence regarding the Finding of Effect will be completed by the final environmental document. Town of Hillsborough and City of Burlingame Encroachment Permits to enter and construct in Floribunda Avenue. During Plans, Specifications and Estimates (PS&E) Caltrans would request permit. Environmental Process The Final EIR/EA evaluates the environmental effects of the proposed project and when warranted, identifies mitigation measures to reduce project effects. After publishing and circulating the Draft EIR/EA for public review and comment, Caltrans followed typical CEQA/NEPA procedures and:  Conducted a public scoping meeting (November 19, 2013) on the Notice of Preparation of the EIR/EA and potential project options that would be analyzed for the project. The public was invited to provide comments on the scope and content of the EIR/EA until December 21, 2013.  Caltrans will conduct a public “open house” community meeting to present the Draft EIR/EA to the public in October, 2014. A 45 day public comment period will be provided where interested parties submitted written comments on this Draft EIR/EA  Caltrans will Identify the preferred Project Alternative with the Project Development Team (PDT)  Will prepare and distribute a Final EIR/EA with NOA. This Final EIR/EA will include responses to comments received on the Draft EIR/EA and identify the Preferred Alternative. The next steps will include circulation of the Final EIR/EA and issuance of the CEQA Notice of Determination (NOD). 11 Alternatives Considered but Withdrawn from Further Discussion The following five alternatives summarized below were analyzed but withdrawn from further discussion because they would not meet the purpose and need of the project, were not physically feasible or would have significant environmental and community impacts. Four additional options are discussed in Chapter 1, Section 1.3.4 Alternatives Considered but Withdrawn from Further Consideration including: Other Signal Timing Options, Speed Enforcement, Traffic Barriers (Calming) and Improve Lighting. 1. Signal Timing Adjustment Alternative This alternative would not meet the purpose and need of the project. This alternative would not improve safety for left-turn movements from SR 82 to Floribunda Avenue and solely involves signal timing adjustments of the existing traffic signals. Signal timing adjustments have already been made in 2005, 2011 and most recently in January of 2013 at the intersections of SR 82 at Bellevue Avenue, Floribunda Avenue and Oak Grove Avenue. These signal timing adjustments included adding additional green time on SR 82 at Bellevue and Floribunda Avenues. At Oak Grove Avenue the through traffic signal time was shortened, stopping traffic southbound on SR 82 early, thus allowing a gap for the SR 82 northbound traffic to turn left when the green through phase begins. There was no significant improvement for left-turn accidents as a result of the timing adjustment. Although creating a gap for SR 82 northbound left-turn at Floribunda Avenue helps, it is not a long term solution to reducing left-turn collisions at the intersection since it does not address southbound left-turn movements. There would continue to be inadequate sight distance for left turn movements from SR 82 to Floribunda Avenue when vehicles from both directions on SR 82 are attempting to turn left simultaneously, blocking each other’s view of approaching through traffic in the curbside lane. Operationally, the signal modification option would function poorly causing vehicle congestion and pedestrian crossing delay. For example, if a dedicated left-turn signal is installed on SR 82 at Floribunda Avenue without a left-turn lane, the other three legs of the intersection would experience delays to accommodate the left-turn movements and pedestrian crossings. The Level of Service (LOS) and delays for the AM and PM would be C (33.1) seconds and D (48.6) seconds, respectively. Finally, the operation of the intersection would preclude this intersection from being coordinated with other intersections on SR 82 in the middle of the Burlingame system and northbound, southbound signal progression would be negatively affected. Long back-ups or queues may increase the potential for rear-end types of accidents. 2. No Left-turn/Intersection Closure Alternative Prohibiting the left-turn movement from SR 82 onto Floribunda Avenue was considered but was determined to be impractical from an operational and safety perspective as the two local agencies (Town Hall of Hillsborough and City of Burlingame’s City Hall and their fire and police stations) are situated on both sides of the intersection. Fire trucks, police, safety, maintenance and related emergency response vehicles from both local agencies would need to make left-turn movements at the intersection. Prohibiting left- turn movements may delay emergency and public safety response and it is anticipated that there would be enforcement challenges on closure implementation. The prohibition 12 of left-turn movements at SR 82 and Floribunda Avenue would most likely shift the occurrence of left-turn traffic accidents to the intersections of Willow Avenue heading north and to Bellevue Avenue heading south of Floribunda Avenue. 3. Widen West Side of SR 82 (Widened to Caltrans dimension standards) This alternative proposed to install left-turn channelization for both north and southbound direction on SR 82 with protected left-turn signal phase at Floribunda Avenue. Widening would only be on the west side of SR 82, and would require an additional 30 ft. of new right-of-way. SR 82 Right-of-Way (ROW) on the west side would widen by approximately 10 ft.-10 inches to 15 ft.-4 inches, including 5 ft. shoulder (Caltrans standard is 8 ft. shoulder, but with Caltrans design exception it would be 5 ft.). Project length would be approximately 1,024 ft. There would be impacts to Centennial Park, the Hillsborough Police Departments’ parking lot, the Adventist Church (northwest leg of the intersections) and 4(f) historic properties (located along the southwest leg of the intersection). Twenty trees (20), including (16) sixteen eucalyptus trees that are contributors to the Howard- Ralston Historic Tree Rows, a National Register of Historic Places listed property, would need to be removed. There would be no impacts to properties or contributors to the Howard-Ralston Historic Tree Rows located on the east side of SR 82. Retaining walls would be needed on the northwest and southwest sides of SR 82 due to the elevation difference between the roadway and sides. This alternative would require partial right- of-way (ROW) acquisition from the 1615 Floribunda Avenue property and 50 Kammerer Court property. 4. Widen Both Sides of SR 82 (Widened to Caltrans dimension standards) This alternative proposed to install left-turn channelization for both north and southbound direction on SR 82 with protected left-turn signal phase along SR 82 at Floribunda Avenue. There would be widening on both sides of SR 82 Boulevard. ROW on the east side of SR 82 would increase approximately 3 ft.-8 inches. ROW on the west side of SR 82 would widen approximately 10 ft.-9 inches to 11 ft.-1 inch, including 5 ft. shoulder (Caltrans standard is 8 ft. shoulder, but with Caltrans design exception it would be 5 ft.). Project length would be approximately 1,024 ft. There would be no impacts to Centennial Park, the Hillsborough Police Departments’ parking lot, the Adventist Church (northwest leg of the intersections) and historic properties (located along the southwest leg of the intersection). There would be impacts to thirty trees, including sixteen contributors to the Howard-Ralston Historic Tree Rows located on both sides of SR 82. Retaining walls would be needed on the northwest and southwest sides of SR 82 due to the elevation difference between the roadway and sides. This alternative would remove 16 trees that are contributors to the Howard-Ralston Eucalyptus Tree Rows and would require partial right-of-way (ROW) acquisition from the 1615 Floribunda Avenue property and 50 Kammerer Court property. 5. Widen East Side Only of SR 82 (Widened to Caltrans dimension standards) This alternative proposed to install left-turn channelization for both north and southbound direction with protected left-turn signal phase along SR 82 at Floribunda Avenue. Widening would only be on the east side of SR 82 Boulevard. ROW on the east side of SR 82 would widen approximately 30 ft. from the existing curb, including 5 ft. shoulder (Caltrans standard is 8 ft. shoulder, but with Caltrans design exception it would be 5 ft.). Project length would be approximately 1,024 ft. After initial analysis of the right-of-way required for this alternative, it was eliminated from further consideration because of its community impacts. To widen SR 82 on the east side only, right-of-way would need to be acquired and 4 large apartment complexes would have to be demolished. It would not be feasible to relocate the community residents of 74 units in 4 apartment complexes 13 located east of SR 82 for this alternative. There also would be impacts to trees. Twenty four trees would need to be removed, including (10) ten trees that are contributors to the Howard-Ralston Eucalyptus Tree Rows, A National register of Historic places listed property, located on the east side of SR 82. 14 CHAPTER 1 – PROPOSED PROJECT Introduction Caltrans is the lead agency under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Caltrans proposes to address reducing left-turn accidents at the intersection of SR 82 and Floribunda Avenue by widening the intersection of SR 82 at Floribunda Avenue to construct a left-turn channelized lane in both directions and modify the signal to provide protected left-turn signals on SR 82 at Floribunda Avenue. State Route (SR) 82 is a California State highway that begins at I-880 in San Jose and ends at I-280 in San Francisco, forming a central artery through several San Francisco peninsula communities including Palo Alto, San Carlos, San Mateo, Burlingame and Millbrae. Commonly referred to as “El Camino Real” (Spanish for The King’s Highway) it was part of the 600-mile Mission Trail connecting the 21 Spanish Missions from San Diego to Sonoma. SR 82 runs south to north for approximately 42 miles, with 17 miles in Santa Clara County, 25 miles in San Mateo County, and terminates a short distance into San Francisco County at I-280. Throughout San Mateo County, SR 82 serves as a parallel arterial to I-280 and US 101. SR 82 is functionally classified by the Federal government, as a ‘Principal Arterial-Urban.” An Urban principal arterial primarily functions to provide continuity for through traffic between major centers within an urban area. SR 82 is a conventional facility serving mainly local travel demand and is not included in the Interregional Road System (IRRS) designated by the state. SR 82 allows use by trucks under both the federally-classified STAA (Surface Transportation Assistance Act) designation, and the California Legal Truck designation (65 ft. maximum length). These allowances enable accommodation of 5+ axle trucks. The posted speed limit on SR 82 is 35 miles per hour (mph). The total length of the proposed project is about 500 ft. The project is located at post mile 13.69 at the intersection of SR 82 and Floribunda Avenue along the limits of the City of Burlingame and the Town of Hillsborough in San Mateo County. SR 82 at Floribunda Avenue is a four-lane, undivided highway with two 11-ft. through lanes and no shoulders, with uncontrolled left-turn movements in both directions at the signalized intersection with Floribunda Avenue. The Town of Hillsborough requested that Caltrans study this intersection because the actual accident rate is greater than the statewide average for traffic involving vehicles with left-turn movements. A total of 22 accidents occurred at the intersection of SR 82 and Floribunda Avenue within the project limits during the three-year period from April 1, 2009 through March 31, 2012. The following accident rates for this period show the total actual accident rate of 0.86 accidents per million vehicle miles (acc/mvm) is higher than the average accident rate of 0.27 for similar facilities statewide. There are a sufficient number of accidents to warrant the intersection safety improvement project to address this safety and operational concern. Conceptual approval for the funding of this Safety Improvement Project was granted to District 4 on November 5, 2009 by the Headquarters Office of Traffic Safety Program. Purpose and Need The purpose of this project is to improve the safety of the intersection to reduce the occurrence and potential for collisions involving left-turn movements. The project is needed to improve safety at the intersection to reduce left-turn related accidents and collisions rates involving left- turn traffic movements at the intersection of SR 82 and Floribunda Avenue. 15 The State Traffic Accident Surveillance and Analysis System (TASAS) data from April 1, 2009 through March 31, 2012 (most recent available data) identified the intersection as a location of high left-turn related accidents with an accident rate greater than the statewide average rate for similar intersection facilities statewide. There were a total of 22 accidents that occurred at this intersection with 55% of them left-turn broadside accidents. There is a need to construct safety improvements at this intersection in order to significantly reduce the occurrence of left -turn related accidents. The lack of dedicated left-turn lanes and a modified left-turn signal contributes to the occurrence of intersection accidents. The Town of Hillsborough’s General Plan Circulation Element identified this intersection as needing safety improvements.6 The project is funded under the State Highway Operations and Protection Program. Three-year safety and traffic accident data from April 1, 2009 through March 31, 2012 are provided in Table 1. Table 1 - TASAS Accident Rate Number of Accidents/Significance Accident Rate (accidents/million vehicles) Dark 4 Other 7 Wet 1 Actual Average Injuries 10 Fatalities + Injuries 0.39 0.11 Fatalities 0 Fatalities 0.00 0.01 Total 22 Total 0.86 0.27 Source: California Department of Transportation Traffic Accident Surveillance and Analysis Systems (TASAS) Table 2 below details the accident type, total number of accidents (22) and percentage by accident type. The majority of the accidents occurred under clear weather in daylight (81.8%) and dry roadway conditions (95.5%). No unusual roadway conditions are noted for (90.9%) of the accidents. The highest percentage of accidents was broadside accidents and the primary collision factor of this type of accident was failure to yield to approaching traffic. The proposed project seeks to reduce these types of accidents by creating a left-turn channel and protected left-turn signal at the intersection of SR 82 and Floribunda Avenue. Table 2 - TASAS Accident Type Type of Accident Number of Accidents Percent% Broadside (Left-Turn) 12 54.5 Rear End 3 13.6 Sideswipe 2 9.1 Head-on 2 9.1 Auto-Pedestrian 1 4.5 Hit Object 2 9.1 Overturn 0 0.0 Other 0 0.0 Source: California Department of Transportation Traffic Accident Surveillance and Analysis Systems (TASAS), 4/1/09 to 3/31/12. 6 Town of Hillsborough General Plan, Chapter 3 Circulation Element, Floribunda Avenue/El Camino Real Intersection Safety, 2005. 16 Figure 1 - Project Vicinity Figure 2 - Project Location Project Location º BEGIN PROJECT END PROJECT BURLINGA ME OAK GROVE AVE 17 1.3 Project Description This project is the SR 82 at Floribunda Avenue Intersection Safety Improvement Project located at PM 13.69. The project area is approximately 500 ft. long and 60 ft. wide. Safety improvements would include installing left-turn pockets, protected left-turn signals, upgraded curb ramps at 3 corners and intersection street lighting. 1.3.1 Alternatives This section describes the proposed action and the design alternatives that were analyzed by a multi-disciplinary team. They include the No-Build Alternative, a Build Alternative and Alternatives Evaluated but Withdrawn from Further Consideration. 1.3.2 Build Alternative The signalized intersection of SR 82 and Floribunda Avenue would be widened on both sides of SR 82 to construct a left-turn channelization along both northbound and southbo und approached of SR 82 to Floribunda Avenue. A center 10-ft. wide left-turn lane, including approach tapers will be added, as well as 1.5-ft. shoulders in both directions of SR 82 for the majority of the project limits. Currently, there is no roadway shou lder at the SR 82/Floribunda Avenue intersection. The proposed roadway cross-section will maintain both existing travel lanes in each direction as well as existing 4 to 5 ft. sidewalks. The left-turn pocket in the southbound direction would be 50 ft. long with a 50 ft. taper. The left-turn pocket in the northbound direction would be 75 ft. long with a 60 ft. taper. The construction limit length for this alternative would be approximately 500 ft. long. SR 82 would be widened mostly within the existing Caltrans state ROW. There is a designated Class III bicycle route on Floribunda Avenue. There will be no impact to the bicycle route. See Section 2.5 Traffic and Transportation/Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities for more detailed information. Overhead utilities along the west side of SR 82 in the project area will need to be relocated. Burying the utilities within the State ROW is anticipated. Existing utility boxes, manholes and drainage facilities need to be relocated or adjusted to the finished grade. The existing utilities will be determined during the Plans, Specifications and Estimates (PS&E) phase of the project. The size of utility trenches will be determined by the utility companies. Usually, utility trenches are 2.5 to 3 ft. deep and 1.5 to 2 ft. wide. The disturbed area for the utility trenching and foundation for the 4 signal lights would be an estimated 3,100 cubic ft.. In addition, excavation will be needed for foundations for traffic signals with intersection street lighting. The estimated ground-disturbing activities for this project would be foundations for 4 traffic signal poles, 12 ft. deep by 3.5 wide. Table 3 (below) presents the estimated quantities of disturbance from construction excavation. Table 3 - Estimated Quantities of Soil Disturbance Excavation Location Depth ft Length ft Width ft Total ft³ Utilities Trenching 3 400 1 1,200 Foundation 4 Signal Light 12 N/A 3.5 1,900 Total estimated cubic ft. 3,100 The majority of work would be occurring within the state right of way except for some minor work at (specific points) and three intersection corners. Partial acquisition of ROW on two 18 properties at northeast (APN 029100220), and southeast (APN 029111010) intersection quadrants would be required for construction of ADA compliant curb ramps. A Permit to Enter and Construct (PEC) would be required from the Town of Hillsborough for two property parcels, a small landscaped portion of Centennial Park (APN 028141090) and entryway of the local street (Floribunda Avenue). Temporary Construction Easements (TCE) would be required on four (4) parcels (APNs 028141080, 029100330, 029111010 and 029111260) for the grading and construction of driveways. Total TCE would be 3,214.72 square ft. and total PEC would be 3,269.09 square ft. Utilities and Other Owner Involvement Overhead PG&E utilities along the west side of SR 82 in the project area are in conflict with the roadway widening. Burying PG&E electrical utilities within the State right-of-way may occur. In addition, PG&E gas line, AT&T underground line and City of Burlingame water line on the east side of SR 82 are in conflict and relocating of them within the State right-of-way are anticipated. Several existing utility boxes, manholes and drainage facilities need to be relocated or adjusted to the finished grade. Potholing will be required to identify the underground utilities and detailed utility verification will be done during the Plans, Specifications and Estimates (PS&E) phase of the project. The size of utility trenches will be determined by the utility companies. Usually, utility trenches are 2.5 to 3 ft. deep and 1.5 to 2 ft. wide. The need for lane closures and detours will be identified in a Transportation Management Plan (TMP), which will be prepared during the PS&E phase. The following conceptual drawings display the preliminary plan with tree removal and cross section drawing of the preferred build alternative. (see figures 4 and 5). Transportation System and Demand Management (TSM) TSM strategies increase the efficiency of existing facilities; they are actions that increase the number of vehicle trips a facility can carry without increasing the number of through lanes. Examples of TSM strategies include: ramp metering, auxiliary lanes, turning lanes, reversible lanes and traffic signal coordination. TSM also encourages automobile, public and private transit, ridesharing programs, and bicycle and pedestrian improvements as elements of a unified urban transportation system. Modal alternatives integrate multiple forms of transportation modes, such as pedestrian, bicycle, automobile, rail, and mass transit. The City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County and the San Mateo County Transportation Authority, along with the City of Burlingame and Town of Hillsborough have policies that encourage Transit System and Demand Management Alternatives such as ridesharing programs, public transit, shuttle programs, rail, bicycle and pedestrian transportation modes. SR 82 has existing traffic signal coordination with the intersections to the north and south of Floribunda Avenue. In addition, SR 82 is served by public transit (SamTrans) and has sidewalks for pedestrian travel. Both cities have Bicycle Plans and Floribunda Avenue is a designated bicycle route. The City of Burlingame has completed projects to improved pedestrian lighting and bicycle facility improvements. Although TSM measures alone could not satisfy the purpose and need of the project, the following TSM pedestrian improvement measures have been incorporated into the proposed Build Alternative for this project:  Upgraded pedestrian curb ramps  Upgraded pedestrian traffic signals  Intersection traffic street lighting  Installation of left-turn traffic signals 19  Painted crosswalks  Installation of painted medians as part of left-turn channelization lane 1.3.3 No Build Alternative The no build alternative would leave the current intersection configuration intact, with no left-turn storage to accommodate conflicting movements. Potential safety benefits would not be realized. The existing facility is a four lane, undivided, conventional state highway, (SR 82) consisting of approximately two 11-ft. wide through lanes with uncontrolled left-turn movements in the north and southbound directions. The posted speed limit on SR 82 is 35 miles per hour (mph). In the northbound direction, toward McKinley Elementary School, 1 block north of Floribunda Avenue, the speed limit is 25 mph when school children are present. This alternative would not meet the purpose and need of this project. It would not reduce the potential for collisions involving left- turn traffic movements nor reduce congestion and improve traffic flow. 20 Figure 3 – Proposed Build Alternative Figure 3 – Continued, Proposed Build Alternative (Enlarged) 21 22 Figure 4 – Proposed Build Alternative Cross Sections (All facing south on SR 82) 23 1.3.4 Operational Measures Considered but Withdrawn The Caltrans project development team analyzed several traffic operational measures instead of the proposed Build Alternative, including examining suggestions received from the public. The following summarizes the signal timing adjustments and traffic operational measures analyzed and the reasons why they were eliminated from further consideration. 1. Signal Timing Adjustments Caltrans evaluated several signal timing modifications to determine if they would adequately address the left-turn collisions at the intersections of SR 82 and Floribunda Avenue. Signal timing adjustments would not provide left-turn channelization and solely involve signal timing adjustments of the existing traffic signals on SR 82 in the project vicinity. Signal timing adjustments have been made in 2005, 2011 and most recently in January of 2013 at the intersections of SR 82 at Bellevue, Floribunda and Oak Grove Avenues. Despite these signal timing adjustments left-turn collisions have continued to be a problem at this intersection. The Signal timing adjustments were evaluated to adjust signal timing at SR 82 at Bellevue, Floribunda, Oak Grove and Chapin Avenues to create gaps in the traffic flow on SR 82 to improve the opportunities for northbound drivers to make a left-turn by adjusting signal timing at Oak Grove Avenue. This signal modification however, would not increase the opportunity for southbound SR 82 left-turn and these timing adjustments have not reduced the pattern of left-turn collisions at the intersection of SR 82 and Floribunda Avenue. Another possibility was to adjust signal timing at Chapin Ave. similarly as was done at Oak Grove Ave. However, this signal adjustment would not create an opportunity for SR 82 southbound left-turn or have much benefit for the following reasons:  The distance between Chapin Ave. and Floribunda Ave. is considerably much further than Oak Grove Ave. and Floribunda Avenue and therefore gaps will occur naturally.  There are multiple access points to SR 82 which includes Bellevue Ave. and driveways which are not signal controlled. In addition, alternative signal timing adjustments at Floribunda Ave. were explored to provide extra time at the beginning of the green interval for vehicles to make left-turns. Two options were evaluated to create gaps for southbound left-turners at the beginning of the green or the end of the green at Floribunda.  LT at Beginning of Green: Would allow left-turns at beginning of green interval. However, after the beginning green interval ended, drivers would continue to desire to make a left-turn at any point during the green interval for SR 82. Once the "improved" opportunity has passed we would be left with the existing situation of no or small gaps in traffic and drivers trying to “dart” into left-turns. Additionally, the models do show left-turns predominantly during the middle of the green interval.  LT at End of Green: Southbound drivers would be provided an improved opportunity to make a left-turn towards the end of the green interval for the southbound direction. Before this happens, a yellow and red will be displayed for northbound drivers. However, this would give northbound drivers a false sense of security that 24 the southbound drivers are also stopping which would lead to a yellow trap7 situation and is highly undesirable. Despite Caltrans implementation of these signal timing changes, left-turn traffic collisions have continued over the years and there is no direct evidence that these signal timing changes have led to changes in the left-turn collision patterns at the intersection of SR 82 and Floribunda Avenue. In addition, if a left-turn signal were installed at SR 82 at Floribunda Avenue the other three legs of the intersection would experience delays. The Level of Service (LOS) and delays for the AM and PM would be C (33.1) seconds and D (48.6) seconds. The operation of the intersection would preclude this intersection from being coordinated with other intersections on SR 82 in the middle of the Burlingame system and northbound, southbound signal progression would be negatively affected. Long back-ups or queues may increase the potential for rear-end types of accidents. Signal timing adjustment is performed on an as-needed basis to improve intersections and for the San Mateo County Smart Corridors Project (SMART) corridor signal progression operations based on changing traffic conditions on SR 82. The SMART Project is an Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) project designed to improve cross jurisdictional day-to-day traffic signal operation and facilitate naturally diverting traffic off Highway 101 during an incidents on the highway system. SR 82 between I-380 and the Santa Clara County line is designated or identified as the primary diversion route for Highway 101. The Project enables Caltrans and its stakeholders, San Mateo cities and County, to implement traffic management strategies through the deployment of ITS elements such as signal timing adjustments, directional signs, fixed or pan-tilt-zoom, closed-circuit television cameras, communications (conduit, fiber, copper, wireless, software, and associated equipment), arterial changeable message signs, vehicle detection systems, communications between San Mateo County Hub and District 4 Traffic Management Center and power supply line and equipment along state routes and major local streets.8 Therefore, signal timing adjustments are part of a toolbox to facilitate through movements on ECR, and not a stand-alone alternative. Signal timing adjustments have been implemented within the past 10 years at the intersections of SR 82 at Oak Grove Avenue and at Floribunda Avenue. Timing changes were made to Floribunda during this 10-year period but the intent of the timing changes were to improve signal progression on SR 82, not to facilitate left-turn movements. No changes in the pattern of left-turn traffic collisions were observed as a result of these signal timing adjustments. In conclusion, the signal timing adjustment option, to address left-turn collisions, was rejected because signal timing changes have already been made at SR 82 and Floribunda Avenue and Oak Grove Avenue, there has been no identifiable reduction in left-turn collisions at the intersection of SR 82 at Floribunda Avenue. 7 The "yellow trap" is a potentially adverse safety situation inherent in some signal phasing sequences involving lagging left turns in one direction. A left-turning driver, in the intersection waiting for gaps in oncoming traffic in order to turn left on a permissive green signal indication, sees the signals change from green to yellow and mistakenly assumes that oncoming through traffic also has yellow signals at the same time and will be soon coming to a stop. This mistaken assumption "traps" the permissive left turner into thinking it is OK to safely complete the turn when in reality it is not safe, because the opposing traffic continues to move on a green indication along with a lagging left turn, and a severe crash can be the result. Section 4D.05, paragraph 03, item B.4 prohibits the "yellow trap" sequence except in rare and unusual cases and then only with a W25-1 or W25-2 sign to warn drivers of the condition. U.S. Federal Highway Administration, Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, retrieved from http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/knowledge/faqs/faq_part4.htm#tcsfq3, on 9/2/14. 8 San Mateo County SMART Corridor Project, retrieved from http://www.co.sanmateo.ca.us/ on 3/11/14. 25 2. No Left-turn/Intersection Closure This option would prohibit the left-turn movement from SR 82 onto Floribunda Avenue in both north and southbound directions to address the left-turn collisions. This option was rejected because it was determined to be impractical from an operational and safety perspective. Specifically, this option would be impractical for the following reasons: The two local agencies (Town Hall of Hillsborough and City of Burlingame’s City Hall and their fire and police stations) are situated on both sides of the intersection. Fire trucks, police, safety, maintenance and related emergency response vehicles from both local agencies would need to make left-turn movements at the intersection. Prohibiting left-turn movements would delay emergency and public safety response and it is anticipated that there would be enforcement challenges on closure implementation. The prohibition of left-turn movements at SR 82 and Floribunda Avenue may shift the occurrence of left-turn traffic accidents to the intersections of Willow Avenue heading north and to Bellevue Avenue heading south of Floribunda Avenue. These streets would see increased traffic by vehicles turning left from SR 82 and reduce direct access to downtown Burlingame and its City Hall or the Town of Hillsborough. Finally, a left-turn prohibition may lead to an increase in cut through traffic into adjacent neighborhoods via the cross streets north and south of SR 82 at Floribunda Avenue intersection. 3. Widen West Side of SR 82 with Private ROW Acquisition This alternative proposed to install left-turn channelization for both north and southbound direction with protected left-turn signal phase along SR 82 at Floribunda Avenue. Widening would only be on the west side of SR 82 Boulevard. The project length would be approximately 1,024 ft. The SR 82 highway would be widened approximately 30 ft. on the west side. The alternative was rejected because of design infeasibility (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(f)(1)) and would have worse environmental impacts then the Build Alternative. There would be right-of-way impacts to Centennial Park, the Hillsborough Police Departments’ parking lot would lose parking spaces, loss of access to the Adventist Church (northwest leg of the intersections) and impacts to 4(f) resource historic properties (located along the southwest leg of the intersection). There would be no impacts to properties or contributor trees to the Howard-Ralston Eucalyptus Tree Rows located on the east side of SR 82 however, 16 trees on the west side of SR 82 that are contributors to the Howard-Ralston Eucalyptus Tree Rows would be removed. The design would also impact 4(f) resources by requiring partial right-of-way (ROW) acquisition from the 1615 Floribunda Avenue property and 50 Kammerer Court property, two historic properties. 4. Widen Both Sides of SR 82 with Private ROW Acquisition This alternative proposed to install left-turn channelization for both north and southbound direction with protected left-turn signal phase along SR 82 at Floribunda Avenue. Project length would be approximately 1,024 ft. There would be widening on both sides of SR 82. The design would widen the highway to 10-ft. left-turn channel, 11-ft. through lanes with 5-ft. shoulders, including 4-ft. sidewalks and utility relocations. There would be widening of approximately 15 ft. additional on both sides of SR 82, compared to the existing roadway configuration. 26 The alternative was rejected because of design infeasibility (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(f)(1)) and environmental impacts worse than the Build Alternative. There would be right-of-way impacts to Centennial Park, the Hillsborough Police Departments’ parking lot, the Adventist Church (northwest leg of the intersection) and historic properties (located along the southwest leg of the intersection). There would be impacts to contributor trees to the Howard-Ralston Eucalyptus Tree Rows located on both sides of SR 82. This alternative would remove 16 trees that are contributors to the Howard- Ralston Eucalyptus Tree Rows and would require partial right-of-way (ROW) acquisition from the 1615 Floribunda Avenue property and 50 Kammerer Court property. 5. Widen East Side of SR 82 with Private ROW Acquisition This alternative proposed to install left-turn channelization for both north and southbound direction with protected left-turn signal phase along SR 82 at Floribunda Avenue. Widening would only be on the east side of SR 82 Boulevard only. ROW on the east side of SR 82 would widen approximately 30 ft. Project length would be approximately 1,024 ft. The alternative was rejected because of design infeasibility (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(f)(1)) and environmental impacts worse than the Build Alternative. The alternative would require Caltrans purchase ROW consisting of several apartment complexes and relocate the community residents of 74 units in 4 apartment complexes located east of SR 82. After relocation of residents Caltrans would demolish the apartment complexes to widen SR 82 on the east side only. This alternative would also adversely impact three apartment driveways with access to tenant parking. The alternative would remove 10 trees on the east side of SR 82 that are contributors to the Howard-Ralston Eucalyptus Tree Rows. 6. Other Signal Timing Modifications These signal timing modifications function to create protected left-turn signals, without changing the lane configuration, for northbound and southbound drivers on SR 82 to make left-turns onto Floribunda Avenue. The following summary describes the signal timing modification and the reasons why they were eliminated from further consideration. a. At SR 82 and Floribunda Ave., maintain existing SR 82 configuration but split the main line with a left-turn signal. Protected left/split phase signal. This signal modification would cause vehicle traffic delay at the intersection in all directions due to the signal phase allowing left-turns in the northbound and southbound directions. It would also cause disruption of SR 82 signal timing progression on SR 82 corridor leading to increased vehicle emissions from idling vehicles and driver frustration due to delays. Queues would extend southbound and northbound during AM/PM peaks. b. Remove the existing traffic signal at SR82 and Floribunda Avenue. The removal of a signal would likely increase left-turn related accidents. This would make the existing left-turn problem worse and does not meet the purpose and need of the project to improve safety at the intersection. A signal warrant study would be needed to remove a signal and the existing high traffic volumes on SR 82 indicate that a traffic signal would be required for safety reasons. 7. Speed Enforcement 27 This measure would reduce the existing 35 mph speed limit on SR 82 to improve safety at intersection of SR 82 and Floribunda Avenue. This measure was eliminated from further consideration for the following reasons: Reducing speeds on SR 82 would not address left-turn collisions and visibility issues (opposing left-turning vehicles blocking visibility of through traffic) at SR 82 and Floribunda Avenue intersection. A 25 mph posted speed limit sign on SR 82 has already been added for McKinley Elementary School Zone. 8. Traffic Barriers (Calming) These measures include installation of traffic calming devices such as speed humps, delineators (plastic safe hit posts), Bott’s dots (Bott’s dots are small, protruding, reflecting ceramic tiles used on some roads instead of painted lines to mark lanes), and zebra striping on roadway pavement to make it appear narrower (road diet), to reduce speeds. These measures were eliminated from further consideration for the following reasons: Speed humps are a speed reduction measure and do not address left-turn collisions. There is a maintenance issue (cost) with installing delineators (plastic safe hit posts) because based on experience they would be constantly knocked down by vehicles. There is also a safety and maintenance issue with delineators being knocked down by vehicle drivers merging out or into the center lane. Botts’ dots would increase noise to adjacent residents by vehicles, especially buses and trucks, driving over them on SR82. There is no space in the SR 82 roadway to install these types of devices, there is no highway shoulder. Installation of these types of devices would require private property acquisition to install. This measure was eliminated from further consideration because it would essentially be a through lane reduction and would reduce through traffic capacity on SR82 causing traffic delay and congestion. Vehicles wanting to proceed through the intersection and caught in the center left-turn delineated lane on SR 82 would be delayed. There is also a safety and maintenance issue with delineators being knocked down by vehicle drivers merging out or into the center lane. Reducing the two lanes on SR 82 approaching the Floribunda Avenue intersection with zebra pavement striping (road diet) would essentially reduce SR 82 to a single lane in both directions and vehicle left-turn movements would occur in the through lane. This was eliminated from further consideration because it would reduce SR 82 to a single lane in both directions at Floribunda Avenue which would increase traffic delays, congestion and vehicle emissions on SR 82. 9. Improve Lighting The improvement of intersection street lighting at SR 82 and Floribunda Avenue would be included in the proposed Build Alternative with the installation of new traffic signals and pedestrian signals. 28 1.3.5 Comparison of Alternatives Typically the environmental process includes a range of reasonable build alternatives. A no Build Alternative represents the existing condition. All other alternatives are compared to the No Build. For this document, several alternatives were studied and rejected including: No Build, Signal Modification Only, Left-turn Prohibition/Closure, Widen Both Sides (Majority within State Right-of-way), Widen West Side of SR 82 Only, Widening on Both Sides SR 82 and Widen on East Side of SR 82 Only. After initial studies, the PDT determined that the signal modification and left-turn prohibition alternatives were not reasonable alternatives. The last three widening alternatives were categorized as Alternatives Considered but Withdrawn from Further Consideration based on having greater environmental and community impacts, operational and traffic issues, costs, and constructability/unfeasibility issues. For these reasons this is why there is only one build alternative presented as reasonable build alternative. The principle criteria used for evaluating the alternatives included: whether the alternative met the purpose and need of the project to improve safety by reducing left-turn collisions and improving traffic operations at the intersection, engineering geometric feasibility, cultural resource impacts, Individual 4(f) Resources impacts, right-of-way impacts, cost, visual and biological impacts. The summary Table 4 on next page offers a comparison of the alternatives. 29 Table 4 - Project Alternatives Comparison ALTERNATIVE Description Geometric Standards Cultural Resources Section 4(f) Resources Right-of-Way (ROW) Impact Paleontology Community Impacts Meets Project Purpose and Need 1.No Build Alternative The no build alternative would leave the current intersection configuration intact. Potential safety benefits would not be realized. Does not meet purpose and need of project. Existing: Four-lane undivided highway, with two, approximately 11- ft through lanes, and no shoulders with uncontrolled left-turn movements in both directions at signalized intersection. No Impacts No Impacts No Impacts No impacts No impacts No 2.Build Alternative: Widen Both Sides SR 82 (Within State right-of-way) Left-turn channelization for both north and southbound direction on SR 82 with protected left- turn signal phase at Floribunda Avenue. Majority of construction within the existing Caltrans right-of- way. 500 ft. long project length. Four-lane undivided highway with two 11 ft. through lanes and north and southbound, 10 ft., left-turn channel and 1.5 ft. shoulders. This alternative reduces the length and width of geometrics for the project. Removal of (5) five trees that are contributors to the Howard-Ralston Eucalyptus Tree Rows Potential indirect visual impacts to 1615 Floribunda Avenue property Removal of (5) five trees that are contributors to the Howard-Ralston Eucalyptus Tree Rows. Potential indirect visual impacts to 1615 Floribunda Avenue property The majority of work will be done within the State right-of-way. Right-of-way encroachment permit would be needed from Hillsborough and Burlingame for the three curb ramps at the northwest, northeast, and southeast corners of SR 82 – Floribunda intersection. Temporary Construction Easements would be needed for two driveways – one at the church on the west side of SR 82, and one at an apartment on the east side of SR 82. No retaining or sound walls needed. Utility relocation required. No impacts No impacts Yes ALTERNATIVES ANALYZED AND WITHDRAWN FROM CONSIDERATION 1.Signal Adjustments Only Maintain existing SR 82 highway configuration but add through and left-turn lane signals on SR 82 at Floribunda Avenue. Four-lane undivided highway, with two, approximately 11-ft through lanes, and no shoulders with signalized through and left-turn movements in both directions at Floribunda Avenue. No left-turn pocket. No impacts No impacts No Impacts No impacts No impacts No 2.Left-turn Prohibition/ Closure Prohibit Left-turn movements from SR 82 onto Floribunda Avenue. Maintain existing four-lane undivided highway with no shoulders. No impacts No impacts No Impacts No impacts No impacts No 3.Widen West Side of SR 82 Only with Private ROW Acquisition Widen west side only. Install left- turn channelization for both NB and SB directions on Rt. 82 with protected left-turn signal. Road widening to current Caltrans standards. Proposed 11 ft. through lanes, 10 ft. left-turn lanes and 5 ft. shoulders. Approximately 900 ft. from southern to northern project boundary. -Removal of 16 trees that are contributors to the Howard-Ralston Eucalyptus Tree Rows. -Partial ROW acquisition from 1615 Floribunda Avenue property. - Partial ROW acquisition from 50 -Partial ROW acquisition from 1615 Floribunda Avenue property. -Removal of 16 trees that are contributors to the Howard-Ralston Eucalyptus Tree Rows. - Partial R/W acquisition from 50 Kammerer Court property.10 -3 trees and hedge vegetation on East side of Centennial Park would be impacted. Partial right-of-way acquisition in the NW and SW quadrants of the intersection. Total ROW take = 8,710 sq. ft. (0.20 acres) -Utilities, traffic signals, signs and lighting impacts in the NW and SW quadrants. -Church driveway will be partially impacted. -Town of Hillsborough Police Dpt. parking lot wall and (7 parking spaces) would be Based on the Paleontologic al Identification Report, High Potential for fossils based on the geologic characteristic s of the site -Church driveway will be partially impacted. -Potential loss of 10 parking spaces behind the Town of Hillsborough Police Department. -3 trees and hedge vegetation on East side of Centennial Park would be impacted. Yes 30 ALTERNATIVE Description Geometric Standards Cultural Resources Section 4(f) Resources Right-of-Way (ROW) Impact Paleontology Community Impacts Meets Project Purpose and Need Kammerer Court property.9 impacted. -Retaining walls needed on southwest and northwest sides of SR 82. on an alluvial fan with potential fluvial deposits. 4.Widen on Both Sides of SR 82 with Private ROW Acquisition Widen both sides of SR 82. Install left-turn channelization for both NB and SB directions with protected turn signal. Road widening to current Caltrans standards. Proposed 11 ft. through lanes, 10 ft. left-turn lanes and 5 ft. shoulders. Approximately 900 ft. from southern to northern project boundary. -Removal of 16 trees that are contributors to the Howard-Ralston Eucalyptus Tree Rows. -Partial ROW acquisition from 1615 Floribunda Avenue property. Partial ROW acquisition from 50 Kammerer Court property.11 -Partial ROW acquisition from 1615 Floribunda Avenue property. -Removal of 16 trees that are contributors to the Howard-Ralston Eucalyptus Tree Rows. - Partial R/W acquisition from 50 Kammerer Court property.12 -3 trees and hedge vegetation on East side of Centennial Park would be impacted. Partial acquisition in the NW and SW quadrants o the intersections. Total ROW take = 8,000 sq. ft. (0.18 acres) -Utilities, traffic signals, signs and lighting impacts in the NW and SW quadrants. -Retaining walls needed on NW and SW sides of ECR -Church driveway would be partially impacted. -Town of Hillsborough Police Dpt. parking lot wall and (7 parking spaces) would be impacted. Based on the Paleontologic al Identification Report, High Potential for fossils based on the geologic characteristic s of the site on an alluvial fan with potential fluvial deposits. -Church driveway will be partially impacted. -Potential loss of 10 parking spaces behind the Town of Hillsborough Police Department. -3 trees and hedge vegetation on East side of Centennial Park would be impacted. Yes 5.Widen on East Side of SR 82 Only with Private ROW Acquisition Widen on east side only. Install left-turn channelization for both NB and SB directions with protected turn signal. Road widening to current Caltrans standards. Proposed 11 ft. through lanes, 10 ft. left-turn lanes and 5 ft. shoulders. Approximately 900 ft. from southern to northern project boundary. Removal of 10 trees that are contributors to the Howard-Ralston Eucalyptus Tree Rows. Removal of 10 trees that are contributors to the Howard-Ralston Eucalyptus Tree Rows. McKinley Elementary School. There would be impact to the school yard. ( the school yard is considered a 4(f) resource because it is a “recreation facility.” -Partial acquisition in the NE and SE quadrants of the intersection. Relocation of residents and demolition of 4 apartment complexes on eastside of SR 82 Boulevard north and south of Floribunda Avenue. -Utilities, traffic signals, signs and lighting impact in the NE and SE quadrants. -Total ROW take = 15,590 sq. ft. (0.36 acres) Based on the Paleontologic al Identification Report, High Potential for fossils based on the geologic characteristic s of the site on an alluvial fan with potential fluvial deposits. 4 apartment complexes with 76 units would be physically impacted with this widening in addition to 3 apartment driveways to tenant parking. Possible impact to McKinley elementary school playground located north of Oak Street on east side of SR 82 requiring partial acquisition of right-of-way and construction of sound wall. Yes 10 Ibid. 9 The 50 Kammerer Court property was outside of the Area of Potential Effects for the current study but appears eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places based on previous evaluations. 11 Ibid. T 12 Ibid. 31 After comparing and weighing the benefits and impacts of all of the alternatives, the Project Development Team has identified the Build Alternative to widen both sides of SR 82 (majority within Caltrans right-of-way), as the alternative with the least environmental impacts, impacts to 4(f) resources (historic trees) and design feasible, subject to public review. Final identification of a preferred alternative will occur after the public review and comment period. The No Build Alternative would not meet the purpose and need of the project to reduce the left-turn collisions and improve intersection safety. After the public circulation period, all comments will be considered, and Caltrans will select a preferred alternative and make the final determination of the project’s effect on the environment. In accordance with the CEQA, Caltrans will certify that the project complies with CEQA, prepare findings for all significant impacts identified, prepare a Statement of Overriding Considerations for impacts that will not be mitigated below a level of significance, and certify that the findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations have been considered prior to project approval. Caltrans will then file a Notice of Determination with the State Clearinghouse that will identify whether the project will have significant impacts, if mitigation measures were included as conditions of project approval, that findings were made, and that a Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted. Similarly, if Caltrans, as assigned by the FHWA, determines the NEPA action does not significantly impact the environment, Caltrans will issue a FONSI in accordance with NEPA. 1.4 Permits and Approvals Needed Table 5 - Agency Permits and Approvals Agency Permit/Approval Status California State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) Section 106 National Historic Preservation Act Individual and under the CEQA Public Resources Code (PRC) 5024.5 SHPO concurrence on the National Register of Historic Places eligibility of historic properties within the Area of Potential Effects was received on April 21, 2014. SHPO consultation and concurrence regarding the Finding of Effect will be completed by the Final Environmental Document Town of Hillsborough and City of Burlingame Encroachment Permits to enter and construction in Floribunda Avenue. During Plans, Specifications and Estimates (PS&E) Caltrans would request permit. City of Burlingame - Parks & Recreation Dept. 850 Burlingame Ave., Burlingame, CA 94010 phone: (650) 558-7330 • fax: (650) 696-7216 MEMORANDUM To: Augustine Chou From: Bob Disco – Park Supervisor/City Arborist Date: 11/7/2014 Re: ECR/CalTrans trees between Bellevue and Oak Grove As requested, I was asked to comment on the 14 trees on El Camino between Bellevue and Oak Grove proposed for removal by CalTrans. I have not evaluated or tested any of these trees but only visually inspected them from a distance to provide the following comments. The 14 trees include: 5 Liquidambar trees 4 historical Blue Gum Eucalyptus trees 2 Eucalyptus microtheca 1 Accolade Elm 2 volunteer trees. The Liquidambars are a species that have shown to damage sidewalks and infrastructures and for that reason they are not recommended by the City of Burlingame as street trees. The Eucalyptus microthecas were planted years ago and have not reached their full potential due to lack of maintenance and water. The microtheca’s are not of protected size, and will never reach their intended size as replacement for the historical eucalyptus that they were intended to replace. The 4 Blue Gum Eucalyptus (2 on the southbound side belong to Hillsbourgh) have been maintained by the CalTrans and are visually in fair to good condition. A full evaluation on health and structure should be provided by CalTrans to obtain a complete understanding of the conditions of these trees. The Accolade Elm was planted several years ago as the new replacement tree for ECR. This particular tree is well established and in excellent condition. It is not a protected size tree with a 3-4 in caliper trunk. The volunteer trees also belong to Hillsbourgh and are not of significant size or species. If any removal should occur, replacement will be required as per the understanding with CalTrans and City of Burlingame. 1 STAFF REPORT AGENDA NO: MEETING DATE: November 17, 2014 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: November 17, 2014 From: William Meeker, Community Development Director – (650) 558-7255 Subject: One Year Review – Off-the-Grid Food Truck Event at the Caltrain Parking Lot Adjacent to the Broadway Caltrain Station RECOMMENDATION The City Council should review the staff report and receive comments from the organizer of Off- the-Grid as well as members of the public. No further action is required. BACKGROUND Off-the-Grid (OTG) began operations as a business staging public food-truck events in June of 2010. OTG events are typically located in urban cores of cities utilizing spaces that are not easily activated effectively throughout the day. Currently, OTG operates a number of weekly markets in the greater Bay Area. OTG launched its first Burlingame event on the Caltrain parking lot adjacent to the Broadway Caltrain Depot on Tuesday, September 26, 2013. Following OTG’s initial weekly event in September 2013, opposition arose from some members of the Broadway Commercial District business community. As a result, the City Council held a public discussion on December 16, 2013, to discuss the perceived impacts to the nearby business community (see attached staff report from that date). Following the public discussion, and after consideration of all public testimony, the City Council moved to support the continuation of the weekly event with the provisos that the day for the event be moved from Thursday evenings to Tuesday evenings and that a yearly review be conducted by OTG and its landlord, the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board (JPB). DISCUSSION Ben Himlan, owner of OTG, will appear at the November 17th City Council meeting to review the event’s operations over the course of the past year. He has also been asked to solicit input from the JPB regarding its perspectives regarding the event’s history over the course of the past year. In preparation for the November 17th review by the Council, staff consulted with the Burlingame Police Department regarding calls for service related to the operations of the event over the year. Chief Eric Wollman reports that there have been no calls for service directly related to the Tuesday evening OTG events. He further notes that he has personally worked with the event organizer regarding issues such as prevention of pedestrian jay-walking. Event staff has been Off-the-Grid Annual Review November 17, 2014 2 posted at problem locations to direct pedestrians to the nearest crosswalks to ensure safety. Further, there have been no traffic or pedestrian collisions related to the event. His final observation is that the event has been running smoothly (see attached November 4, 2014 e- mail). FISCAL IMPACT None. Exhibits:  City Council Staff Report – December 16, 2013  City Council Minutes (excerpt) – December 16, 2013  November 4, 2014 E-Mail from Chief Eric Wollman  November 10, 2014 letter from Ben Himlan, Off the Grid  November 11, 2014 letter from Brian Fitzpatrick, Caltrain