Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - CC - 2008.12.15 CITY G BURLIM9 ME m �Fo9 90 $FnTeo.IUNC 6. BURLINGAME CITY HALL 501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME, CA 94010 CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA Monday, December 15, 2008 CLOSED SESSION: 6:00 p.m.—Lane Room a. Conference with Labor Negotiators, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.6 Employee Organization: Police Officers Association, Association of Police Administrators Negotiators: Deirdre Dolan and IEDA Glenn Berkheimer b. Real Property Negotiations: City Parking Lots K and L; Safeway property, Primrose and Howard; Negotiator: Jim Nantell, pursuant to Government Code § 54956.9 1. CALL TO ORDER—7:00 p.m.—Burlingame Library, Lane Room 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG 3. ROLL CALL 4. PUBLIC HEARING a. Commission Appeal for 1452 Drake Avenue 5. STAFF REPORTS a. Reappointment to Transportation Authority Board of Directors Central County 6. STUDY SESSION a. Options pertaining to provision of Solid Waste Services 7. PUBLIC COMMENTS—As this is a special meeting of the Council,only comments regarding the subject matter of the meeting will be received;speakers are requested to limit their comments to no more than three minutes. 1 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 located at 501 Primrose Road during normal business hours. 8. 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.burlin ag me.org. Agendas and minutes are available at this site. NEXT CITY COUNCIL MEETING-MONDAY,JANUARY 5,2009 VIEW REGULAR COUNCIL MEETINGS ONLINE AT WWW.BURLINGAME.ORG-GO TO "CITY COUNCIL VIDEOS" 2 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 located at 501 Primrose Road during normal business hours. CITY OF BURLINGAME '°m``'•a Community Development Department MEMORANDUM °� � GlK/e"XXIAI IXI�/Y!✓N4K DATE: December 12, 2008 Meeting Date: December 15, 2008 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members FROM: Ruben Hurin, Senior Planner:�P4---- SUBJECT: Revised Design Option for Item #4— 1452 Drake Avenue It was noted in the staff report for this application that the project architect may prepare an optional design, which would be presented to the City Council at the appeal hearing. After the staff report was prepared, the architect submitted plans for a revised design option for review prior to the City Council meeting. These plans, date stamped December 12, 2008, are attached for your review. The revised design option includes changes to all four building facades, roof configuration and minor changes to the floor plans. Planning staff reviewed the revised design option for zoning code compliance and determined that there are no new applications required. However, please note that Special Permits for declining height envelope and attached garage are still required, as did the design approved by the Planning Commission. The change on the floor plans include eliminating the 60 SF trellis at the front of the house and adding 60 SF of floor space to Bedroom 2 and adjacent hallway on the second floor (see highlighted area on Second Floor Plan). Therefore, there is no increase in floor area (3,014 SF (0.50 FAR) proposed where 3,020 SF (0.50 FAR) is the maximum allowed). Planning staff would point out that with the removal of the trellis at the front of the house, the proposed lot coverage decreases from 32.1% to 31.1% where 40% is the maximum allowed. Ruben Hurin Senior Planner ATTACHMENTS: Revised Design Option, plans date stamped December 12, 2008 AGENDA ITEM: 5a MEETING DATE: 12/15/08 S— LINGAME 501 PRIMROSE ROAD,BURLINGAME,CA 94010-3997 www.burlingame.or4 TEL: (650)558-7200 ROSALIE UMAHONY,MAYOR FAX: (650)342-8386 ANN KEIGHRAN,VICE MAYOR EMAIL: council Burlin, ame.or CATHY BAYLOCK,COUNCILMEMBER 11-10-2008 TERRY NAGEI.,COUNCILMEMBER .TERRY DEAL,COUNCILMEMBER Chair Sepi Richardson. City Selection Committee 400 County Center Redwood City, CA. 94063 Attention: Ashnita Narayan, Secretary Dear Ashnita, This letter is to inform you of my intention to request reappointment to the Transportation Authority Board of Directors Central County seat. Please inforin City Selection Committee members of my request to enter my name for reappointment to this seat. Under CEO Michael Scanlon's leadership T have found my work with the TA Board to be the most rewarding of the many civic opportunities T cherish,for board.policy benefits every segment of our population and every aspect of business within and without the county. The progress of the Auxiliary Lane Project, from Third to Millbrae Avenue is one of the giant steps successfully moving ahead of schedule. The board is moving forward with future electrification of Caltrain; funding more busses or shuttles; discerning primal grade separation needs from the associated footprint studies;supporting coast highway needs,and most recently the strategic planning of transportation and transit improvements through 2035. Thank you, Sepi, for enabling this request. Very truly yours, Rosalie M. O'Mahony Register online with the City of Burlingame to receive regular City updates at www.Burlingame.org suR AGENDA ITEM NO: 4a STAFF REPORT MEETING DATE: December 15,2008 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTED BY. lam/ DATE: December 11, 2008 APPROVED BY: �/1� FROM: William Meeker, Community Development Director— (650) 55 255 SUBJECT: APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF AN APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMITS FOR DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE AND ATTACHED GARAGE FOR A NEW, TWO STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING, ON PROPERTY AT 1452 DRAKE AVENUE, LOCATED WITHIN A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-1) ZONE. RECOMMENDATION: The City Council should conduct a public hearing on the appeal of the application for Design Review and Special Permits for declining height envelope and attached garage for a new, two story single family dwelling at 1452 Drake Avenue, and consider public testimony and the analysis contained within the staff report. Action regarding the appeal should include specific findings supporting the Council's decision, and should be affirmed by resolution of the City Council. The reasons for any action should be stated clearly for the record. The City Council may consider the following alternatives: 1. deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission's action approving the application for Design Review and Special Permits for declining height envelope and attached garage for a new, two story single family dwelling; or 2. uphold the appeal, and modify the Planning Commission's decision by providing specific direction to the project applicant regarding further changes to be made to the project; this action could include referring the project back to the Planning Commission for review of the changes; or 3. uphold the appeal, and deny the project. (Note: the project architect has indicated that an optional design treatment may be presented to the City Council at the appeal hearing. See discussion at end of this report for more details.) BACKGROUND: Project Description: On May 29, 2007, the Planning Commission approved an application for Design Review, Special Permit for declining height envelope and Conditional Use Permit for garage height for a new, two-story single family dwelling and detached garage at this site. A building permit was issued on October 19, 2007 and the existing house was demolished shortly thereafter. During that time, the property was sold. The current property owner does not wish to build the previously approved project (Craftsman style) (see attached previously approved site plan and building elevations) and is now proposing a new design. The applicant is proposing to build a new, two-story single family dwelling and attached one-car garage. The proposed house and attached garage will have a total floor area of 3,014 SF (0.50 FAR) where 3,020 SF (0.50 FAR) is the maximum allowed. The proposed project is 6 SF below the maximum allowed FAR. CITY COUNCIL MEETING—December 15,2008 Public Hearing—Appeal RE:1452 Drake Avenue The project includes an attached garage which provides one covered parking space (12' x 20' clear interior dimensions)for the proposed four-bedroom house. There is one uncovered parking space(9'x 20') provided in the driveway. All other Zoning Code requirements have been met. The applicant is requesting the following: • Design Review for anew,two-story single family dwelling and attached garage(CS 25.57.010); • Special Permit for declining height envelope(105 SF along the left side and 31 SF along the right side extend beyond the declining height envelope)(CS 25.28.075);and • Special Permit for attached garage(CS 25.28.035,a). The latest Planning Commission staff report(dated November 24, 2008) is attached to this report and contains a detailed analysis of the proposal. Environmental Review Status: The project is Categorically Exempt from review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA),per Section 15303(a),which states that construction of a limited number of new, small facilities or structures including one single family residence or a second dwelling unit in a residential zone is exempt from environmental review. In urbanized areas,up to three single-family residences maybe constructed or converted under this exemption. Prior Planning Commission Action: Planning Commission Approval:The project was reviewed by the Planning Commission on November 10 (study meeting)and November 24, 2008 (action meeting). At its meeting of November 24, 2008, the Planning Commission approved the property owner's request for Design Review and Special Permits for declining height envelope and attached garage for a new,two story single family dwelling at 1452 Drake Avenue,Zoned R-1 (see attached November 24,2008 Planning Commission minutes). The Commission approved the applications on a vote of 3-2-0-2 (Commissioners Auran and Cauchi dissenting, Commissioners Lindstrom and Yie absent). Dissenting Commissioners expressed concern that the project,as designed,was incompatible with the character of the neighborhood within which the project is to be situated. Appeal of Planning Commission's Action: On November 26, 2008, City Council Member Jerry Deal appealed the Planning Commission's action(see attached e-mail dated November 16,2008). Potential Revisions to Proposed Project: The project architect has indicated that he may prepare an optional design, which would be presented to the City Council at the appeal hearing. If the optional design is completed in time, they will be included along with the staff report. In the event that the optional design plans are unavailable with the staff report,but become available prior the appeal hearing, staff will attempt to review them for zoning code compliance in advance of the hearing and will provide the results of this review at the hearing. If this occurs,the Council may consider the design changes if they so choose. In the event that staff is not afforded adequate opportunity to review the revised plans for compliance prior to the appeal hearing, and the City Council wishes to consider the revisions, the Community Development Director will recommend that the project be continued or remanded to the Planning Commission for review of the revised design to permit an adequate evaluation of code compliance to occur prior to action on the revised project. 2 CITY COUNCIL MEETING — December 15, 2008 Public Hearing —Appeal RE: 1452 Drake Avenue Attachments: Appeal e-mail from City Council Member Jerry Deal, dated November 26, 2008 November 24, 2008 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes November 24, 2008 Planning Commission Staff Report Notice of Appeal Hearing — Mailed December 5, 2008 City Council Resolution (proposed) 3 Page 1 of 1 CLK-Mortensen, Doris From: Jerry Deal [ferry@jdealassociates.comj Honorable Mayor 8 City Council : Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2008 12:17 PM Please schedule a hearing for To: CLK-City Clerk 1452 Drake to be heard at the January 5 , 2009 Council meeting . Subject: 1452 Drake City Clerk Doris: I would like to call up 1452 Drake for review by the City Council. Sincerely, Jerry Deal 12/1/2008 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION— Unapproved Minutes November 24, 2008 VIII. REGULAR ACTION ITEMS 2. 1452 DRAKE AVENUE, ZONED R-1 —APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMITS FOR DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE AND ATTACHED GARAGE FOR A NEW, TWO STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING (TRG ARCHITECTS, APPLICANT AND ARCHITECT; AND GINKGO BURLINGAME LLC, PROPERTY OWNER) STAFF CONTACT: RUBEN HURIN Reference staff report dated November 24, 2008, with attachments. Community Development Director Meeker presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Fourteen (14) conditions were suggested for consideration. Chair Cauchi opened the public hearing. Randy Grange and Yossi Zinger, 205 Park Road; represented the applicant: ■ Presented revised plans reflecting more traditional "Craftsman" details. ■ The enclosed "living area" of the proposed structure (excluding the garage and trellises) falls more than 600-feet below the maximum lot coverage. Commission comments: ■ Liked the revised design a bit better than the original design. ■ Support the attached garage because more yard space is created in the rear. ■ Requested clarification regarding the thought behind having the front door receded into the fagade (Grange: the massing concept is to have simple forms bridged by a glass porch/entry connecting the two elements). ■ Concerned about what will happen at the rear of the property; particularly with respect to drainage and maintenance (Grange: trees are on the top of the retaining wall. Zinger: are planning to fill in the area and make it a landscape element; the channel will drain to the sump pump). ■ Clarified that the wall at the rear of the property will be treated with a stone veneer. ■ Agreed that achieving a "Craftsman" style doesn't require total adherence to traditional details. ■ Building green and building sustainable doesn't require designing "Contemporary" architectural style; concerned about creating a stigma for green design tying it to only"Contemporary" architecture. ■ Supportive of application. ■ Asked if the "rain screen" siding is a real wood material (Grange: yes, real wood furred out from the wall to permit rapid drainage behind it). ■ Asked if the siding comes with more of a texture (Grange: any type of siding may be used as a "rain screen"). ■ What is intended for the wall edge at the top of the flat roof portion of the structure (Grange: a small copper flashing is installed; will patina with age). There might be a better way to treat this detail (Grange: looked at pitched roofs, plates and other designs; this seemed to provide the most punch). Perhaps provide a cap on this feature (Grange: needed to have the membrane for the green roof roll up under the flashing). ■ Perhaps provide a bit more of an entry statement at the porch. 3 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION— Unapproved Minutes November 24, 2008 Public comments: ■ Mary Martocci, 1448 Drake Avenue and Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa Avenue spoke: changes that have been made are an improvement; but the design still does not fit within the neighborhood. Would prefer a more traditional style. Noted that the architect indicated that the home is not being sold; is being built by a non-profit corporation. The property is owned by a limited liability corporation, as are the two properties adjacent. The same owner owned property in the 1400 block of Balboa Avenue; this property generates $190 in property taxes on an annual basis due to the ownership by a non-profit foundation. The home on Balboa is used for school events periodically and creates a disturbance. Will there be events held at the property? Is there a home occupation permit that will be required for any business activities at the property. (Meeker: noted that ownership of property is not the purview of the Commission, it must focus only upon the design issues. If violations of the R1 zoning occur in the future, they will be addressed as a code enforcement matter). There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed. Additional Commission comments: ■ Commissioner Auran noted that he could not support the project, it is not appropriate for this neighborhood. Commissioner Auran moved to deny the application, with prejudice, noting that the design of the home is out of character with the neighborhood. The motion was seconded by Chair Cauchi. Discussion of motion: ■ Don't think it will fit in to the neighborhood, it is a stark, industrial looking building. ■ This block of Drake Avenue is eclectic; includes a mixture of styles; this would be a handsome addition to the block. ■ Project will read as an additional style on the block; there is a project on De Soto that is an example of an instance where the style doesn't fit with the neighborhood. Chair Cauchi called for a roll call vote on the motion to deny with prejudice. The motion failed 2-3-0-2 (Commissioners Brownrigg, Terrones and Vistica dissenting, Commissioners Lindstrom and Yie absent). Commissioner Brownrigg moved to approve the application, by resolution, with the following conditions: 1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Division date stamped November 14, 2008, sheets Al.1, A2.1, A2.2, A3.1, A3.2, and date stamped October 29, 2008, sheet L-1; 2. that any changes to building materials, exterior finishes, windows, architectural features, roof height or pitch, and amount or type of hardscape materials shall be subject to Planning Division or Planning Commission review (FYI or amendment to be determined by Planning staff); 4 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION—Unapproved Minutes November 24,2008 3. that any changes to the size or envelope of the first or second floors,or garage,which would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s),shall require an amendment to this permit; 4. that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's September 26,2008 memo,the City Engineer's October 16,2008 memo,and the Fire Marshal's and NPDES Coordinator's September 29,2008 memos shall be met; 5. that demolition for removal of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the site shall not occur until a building permit has been issued and such site work shall be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District; 6. that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of the project,the project construction plans shall be modified to include a cover sheet listing all conditions of approval adopted by the Planning Commission,or City Council on appeal;which shall remain a part of all sets of approved plans throughout the construction process. Compliance with all conditions of approval is required;the conditions of approval shall not be modified or changed without the approval of the Planning Commission,or City Council on appeal; 7. that all air ducts,plumbing vents,and flues shall be combined,where possible,to a single termination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street;and that these venting details shall be included and approved in the construction plans before a Building permit is issued; 8. that the project shall comply with the Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance which requires affected demolition,new construction and alteration projects to submit a Waste Reduction plan and meet recycling requirements;any partial or full demolition of a structure, interior or exterior,shall require a demolition permit; 9. that during demolition of the existing residence,site preparation and construction of the new residence,the applicant shall use all applicable"best management practices"as identified in Burlingame's Storm Water Ordinance,to prevent erosion and off-site sedimentation of storm water runoff; 10. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes,2007 Edition,as amended by the City of Burlingame; THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET DURING THE BUILDING INSPECTION PROCESS PRIOR TO THE INSPECTIONS NOTED IN EACH CONDITION 11. that prior to scheduling the foundation inspection,a licensed surveyor shall locate the property corners,set the building footprint and certify the first floor elevation of the new structure(s)based on the elevation at the top of the form boards per the approved plans;this survey shall be accepted by the City Engineer; 12. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection the project architect or residential designer,or another architect or residential design professional,shall provide an architectural certification that the architectural details shown in the approved design which should be evident at framing, such as window locations and bays,are built as shown on the approved plans;architectural certification documenting framing compliance with approved design shall be submitted to the Building Division before the final framing inspection shall be scheduled; 5 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Unapproved Minutes November 24, 2008 13. that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall shoot the height of the roof ridge and provide certification of that height to the Building Department; and 14. that prior to final inspection, Planning Department staff will inspect and note compliance of the architectural details (trim materials, window type, etc.) to verify that the project has been built according to the approved Planning and Building plans. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Vistica. Discussion of motion: ■ The home will be a good addition to the architectural styles in Burlingame; the massing handled well. ■ The design is inconsistent with the neighborhood, including having a garage placed at the front of the property, will not support. ■ Noted that the garage is at the front of the property due to grading that occurred on the property previously. ■ Wishes the front door were more prominent, but can accept the design as presented. Chair Cauchi called for a roll call vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed 3-2-0-2 (Commissioners Auran and Cauchi dissenting, Commissioners Lindstrom and Yie absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:46 p.m. 6 i 1 x •,_ ,�, Imo`• m • A _ ' r t R rp• � yy _ d.a v �. •,1<:'' {+tea' .AC„ �^..�MJ :� �-"'"^�. City of Burlingame Item No. Design Review and Special Permits Action Item Address: 1452 Drake Avenue Meeting Date: ii(29/od' Request: Design Review and Special Permits for declining height envelope and attached garage for a new,two story single family dwelling. Applicant and Architect:TRG Architects APN:026-042-140 Property Owner:Ginkgo Burlingame LLC Lot Area:6000 SF General Plan:Low Density Residential Zoning:R-1 Environmental Review Status: The project is Categorically Exempt from review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA),per Section 15303(a),which states that construction of a limited number of new,small facilities or structures including one single family residence or a second dwelling unit in a residential zone is exempt from environmental review. In urbanized areas, up to three single-family residences maybe constructed or converted under this exemption. History: On May 29, 2007, the Planning Commission approved an application for Design Review, Special Permit for declining height envelope and Conditional Use Permit for garage height for a new, two-story single family dwelling and detached garage at this site. A building permit was issued on October 19, 2007 and the existing house was demolished shortly thereafter. During that time, the property was sold. The current property owner does not wish to build the previously approved project (see attached previously approved site plan and building elevations) and is now proposing a new design. Summary: The applicant is proposing to build a new, two-story single family dwelling and attached one-car garage. The proposed house and attached garage will have a total floor area of 3,014 SF (0.50 FAR)where 3,020 SF(0.50 FAR)is the maximum allowed. The proposed project is 6 SF below the maximum allowed FAR. The project includes an attached garage which provides one covered parking space (12'x 20'clear interior dimensions)for the proposed four-bedroom house. There is one uncovered parking space(9' x 20')provided in the driveway. All other Zoning Code requirements have been met. The applicant is requesting the following: • Design Review for anew,two-story single family dwelling and attached garage(CS 25.57.010); • Special Permit for declining height envelope(105 SF along the left side and 31 SF along the right side extend beyond the declining height envelope)(CS 25.28.075);and • Special Permit for attached garage(CS 25.28.035,a). This space intentionally left blank. Design Review and Special Permits 1452 Drake Avenue 1452 Drake Avenue Lot Area: 6000 SF Plans Date Stamped: October 29 and November 14, 2008 PREVIOUS PROPOSED ALLOWED/REQ'D (10/29/08 plans) (11/14/08 plans) Setbacks Garage: 31 '-0" ! no change 25'-0" Front (15t fir): 22'-0" (bay window exempt) no change 22'-0" (block average) (2"d flr): 22'-0" no change 20'-0" Side (right): F-10" no change 4'-0" (left): 6'-9" no change 4'-0" ......................._.._._.........._......_...... _...................---................................---............ ---- Rear(I" fir): 38'-8" (to deck) no change ! 15'-0" (2°d fir): 43'-8" (to deck) no change i 20'-0" ..._............--- .._.._...�----...--.....-..........-.........--- ------ - - —...._ Lot Coverage: 1876 SF 1929 SF I 2400 SF 31 .2% 32.1 % 40% FAR: 2965 SF 3014 SF 3020 SF ' 0.49 FAR 0.50 FAR 0.50 FAR # of bedrooms: 4 no change --- Garage: attached 2 no change special permit required for attached garage Parking: 1 covered — 1 covered (12' x 20') no change (10' x 20') 1 uncovered 1 uncovered (9' x 20') (9' x 20') _Height: _ 22'-5" no change 301_0" _ DH Envelope: extends beyond DH no change I CS 25.28.075 envelope ' ' (0.32 x 6000 SF) + 1 ,100 SF = 3020SF (0.50 FAR) 2 Special Permit for attached garage (CS 25.28.035, a). 3 Special Permit for declining height envelope (105 SF along the left side and 31 SF along the right side extend beyond the declining height envelope) (CS 25.28.075). Staff Comments: See attached comments from the Chief Building Official, City Engineer, Fire Marshal and NPDES Coordinator. Design Review Study Meeting: At the Planning Commission Design Review study meeting on November 10, 2008, the Commission had the following comments and suggestions regarding this project (November 10, 2008 Planning Commission minutes). In response to these comments/suggestions, please refer to the attached letter submitted by the architect, dated November 17, 2008, and revised plans date stamped November 14, 2008. 2 Design Review and Special Permits 1452 Drake Avenue • The design is not compatible with the architectural styles in the neighborhood. • Willing to accept the general design;however,puzzled with the need for modern vocabulary for a "green"house;green structures do not need to be contemporary in design. • Would encourage the applicant to choose the design they prefer;the Craftsman style is a bit more comfortable when viewed in context,but more incongruous with the contemporary left portion of the structure;want to see a design that softens the appearance of the left side of the house. • Questioned the need for a flat roof. • The rear elevation looks friendlier than the front elevation;a trellis element may help the design blend better with the neighborhood. • Like the softer version of the design that will fit better with the neighborhood;soften and make the design more compliant with the neighborhood;used more Craftsman elements on the rear elevation;details like that could soften the appearance of the front. • Blank garage door hurts the design as well;consider installing windows in the door. • The applicant needs to call out the finish of the metal roof. • Add some design gestures that are familiar to neighborhood. • Chimney is not necessary;consider eliminating it. • The design is incompatible with the neighborhood;it is too industrial in appearance. The proposed windows belong in an industrial area. • Proposed house could work in neighborhood by softening the design. • Neighborhood consistency is not necessarily a matter of style;can relate to finishes;the design needs a bit more work. Design Review Criteria: The criteria for Design Review as established in Ordinance No. 1591 adopted by the Council on April 20,1998 are outlined as follows: 1. Compatibility of the architectural style with that of the existing character of the neighborhood; 2. Respect for the parking and garage patterns in the neighborhood; 3. Architectural style and mass and bulk of structure; 4. Interface of the proposed structure with the structures on adjacent properties;and 5. Landscaping and its proportion to mass and bulk of structural components. Findings for a Special Permit:In order to grant a Special Permit,the Planning Commission must find that the following conditions exist on the property(Code Section 25.51.020 a-d): (a) The blend of mass, scale and dominant structural characteristics of the new construction or addition are consistent with the existing structure's design and with the existing street and neighborhood; (b) the variety of roof line, facade, exterior finish materials and elevations of the proposed new structure or addition are consistent with the existing structure,street and neighborhood; (c) the proposed project is consistent with the residential design guidelines adopted by the city; and (d) removal of any trees located within the footprint of any new structure or addition is necessary and is consistent with the city's reforestation requirements,and the mitigation for the removal that is proposed is appropriate. 3 Design Review and Special Permits 1452 Drake Avenue Planning Commission Action: The Planning Commission should conduct a public hearing on the application, and consider public testimony and the analysis contained within the staff report. Action should include specific findings supporting the Planning Commission's decision, and should be affirmed by resolution of the Planning Commission. The reasons for any action should be stated clearly for the record. At the public hearing the following conditions should be considered: 1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Division date stamped November 14, 2008, sheets A1.1, A2.1, A2.2, A3.1, A3.2, and date stamped October 29, 2008, sheet L-1; 2. that any changes to building materials, exterior finishes, windows, architectural features, roof height or pitch, and amount or type of hardscape materials shall be subject to Planning Division or Planning Commission review (FYI or amendment to be determined by Planning staff); 3. that any changes to the size or envelope of the first or second floors, or garage, which would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), shall require an amendment to this permit; 4. that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's September 26, 2008 memo, the City Engineer's October 16, 2008 memo, and the Fire Marshal's and NPDES Coordinator's September 29, 2008 memos shall be met; 5. that demolition for removal of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the site shall not occur until a building permit has been issued and such site work shall be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District; 6. that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of the project, the project construction plans shall be modified to include a cover sheet listing all conditions of approval adopted by the Planning Commission, or City Council on appeal; which shall remain a part of all sets of approved plans throughout the construction process. Compliance with all conditions of approval is required; the conditions of approval shall not be modified or changed without the approval of the Planning Commission, or City Council on appeal; 7. that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall be combined, where possible, to a single termination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street; and that these venting details shall be included and approved in the construction plans before a Building permit is issued; 8. that the project shall comply with the Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance which requires affected demolition, new construction and alteration projects to submit a Waste Reduction plan and meet recycling requirements; any partial or full demolition of a structure, interior or exterior, shall require a demolition permit; 9. that during demolition of the existing residence, site preparation and construction of the new residence, the applicant shall use all applicable "best management practices" as identified in Burlingame's Storm Water Ordinance, to prevent erosion and off-site sedimentation of storm water runoff; 10. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes, 2007 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame; 4 Design Review and Special Permits 1452 Drake Avenue THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET DURING THE BUILDING INSPECTION PROCESS PRIOR TO THE INSPECTIONS NOTED IN EACH CONDITION: 11. that prior to scheduling the foundation inspection, a licensed surveyor shall locate the property corners, set the building footprint and certify the first floor elevation of the new structure(s) based on the elevation at the top of the form boards per the approved plans; this survey shall be accepted by the City Engineer; 12. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection the project architect or residential designer, or another architect or residential design professional, shall provide an architectural certification that the architectural details shown in the approved design which should be evident at framing, such as window locations and bays, are built as shown on the approved plans; architectural certification documenting framing compliance with approved design shall be submitted to the Building Division before the final framing inspection shall be scheduled; 13. that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall shoot the height of the roof ridge and provide certification of that height to the Building Department; and 14. that prior to final inspection, Planning Department staff will inspect and note compliance of the architectural details (trim materials, window type, etc.) to verify that the project has been built according to the approved Planning and Building plans. Ruben Hurin Senior Planner c. Randy Grange, TRG Architects, applicant and architect November 10, 2008 Planning Commission Minutes Response Letter from Randy Grange, architect, dated November 17, 2008 Application to the Planning Commission Special Permit Forms Staff Comments Previously Approved Site Plan and Building Elevations, date stamped May 9, 2007 Neighborhood Photos Planning Commission Resolution (Proposed) Notice of Public Hearing — Mailed November 14, 2008 Aerial Photo 5 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Unapproved Minutes November 10, 2008 PrLGXf49WNSM�N4X'ASF..e3SNtT'bW3NN%G!Fp' FZ.. .. �'M�Y.Ma3. ,Id.M V.Pro' A 5ffit �S '°S�S'4,MWM,S'SIIifRKAStEN 5. 1452 DRAKE AVENUE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMITS FOR DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE AND ATTACHED GARAGE FOR A NEW, TWO STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING (TRG ARCHITECTS, APPLICANT AND ARCHITECT; AND GINKGO BURLINGAME LLC PROPERTY OWNER) STAFF CONTACT: RUBEN HURIN Reference staff report dated November 10, 2008, with attachments. Community Development Director Meeker briefly presented the project description. There were no questions of staff. Chair Cauchi opened the public comment period. Randy Grange, 205 Park Road; represented the applicant. ■ Presented alternate architectural treatments. ■ Declining height envelope encroachment is based upon elevation that was created in anticipation of the former project. Commission comments: ■ Refreshing and workable design. ■ Clarified that the fireplace is not wood-burning and that a chimney is not necessary for the installation. ■ The design is not compatible with the architectural styles in the neighborhood. ■ Willing to accept the general design; however, puzzled with the need for modern vocabulary for a "green" house; green structures do not need to be contemporary in design. ■ Like the proposed modifications that echo Craftsman style. ■ Like having the garage up front. ■ Would encourage the applicant to choose the design they prefer; the Craftsman style is a bit more comfortable when viewed in context, but more incongruous with the contemporary left portion of the structure; want to see a design that softens the appearance of the left side of the house. ■ Questioned the need for a flat roof. ■ The rear elevation looks friendlier than the front elevation; a trellis element may help the design blend better with the neighborhood. ■ Like the softer version of the design that will fit better with the neighborhood; soften and make the design more compliant with the neighborhood; used more Craftsman elements on the rear elevation; details like that could soften the appearance of the front. ■ Blank garage door hurts the design as well; consider installing windows in the door. Public comments: ■ Mary Martocci, 1448 Drake Avenue; Alex Daskalakis, 1449 Drake Avenue and Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa Avenue spoke: When the foundation was installed for the prior building, the lot was raised considerably; concerned about drainage problems. House has lots to recommend it; but it is a large departure from the neighborhood; bulk of it is next to her home (1448 Drake Avenue) and makes it seem larger. Will there be noise from the metal roof; will it be painted or left natural (concerned about glare); also concerned about stainless steel railings on the rear. Concerned that there will not be enough parking. Have a heritage tree on her property (to the right) a Liquid Amber can be a problem; wants it to be noted that a barrier or something would need to be installed to prevent roots from infringing upon the house to be built. Is a 19 year resident; came to city due to quaintness of neighborhood; concerned about how the home will blend with 13 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION— Unapproved Minutes November 10, 2008 neighborhood. The features present somewhat of an industrial look. Flat roof is unattractive. Concerned with the metal roof; aesthetics and maintenance. The design is not appropriate for Drake Avenue, though a nice urban design. Other designs of this type are softened by foliage. Drake Avenue's tree-scape has been dramatically reduced; there will not be much relief in front of the house. Feels that the steel rails are out of character with the Craftsman design. How is a living roof maintained? Will it look unkempt? Metal roof is too industrial for neighborhood. Is the property owner attached to a really modern design; probably being built to be sold. Applicant response: ■ Randy Grange: not meant to be sold; connected to a non-profit foundation; want to prove that you can build a sustainable home and still have a profit margin; there will be someone living on the property that is involved in the development. Durable metal roof with 60-year lifespan; 100% recyclable with 90% recycled content; crisp clean look, non-reflective, no noise. Are are bound by law to contol and deal with drainage on site. Living roof is like a succulent ground cover that will last 100 years and grows only to a certain height. Railing is twisted cable. There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed. Additional Commission comments: ■ The applicant needs to call out the reflectivity and finish of the metal roof. ■ The design includes a lot less lot coverage than normal; below maximum FAR; far below the maximum height. ■ Add some design gestures that are familiar to neighborhood. ■ Chimney is not necessary; consider eliminating it. ■ The design is incompatible with the neighborhood; it is too industrial in appearance. The proposed windows belong in an industrial area. ■ Proposed house could work in neighborhood by softening the design. ■ The scale and height of the structure are appropriate for the neighborhood. ■ Appreciate the architect's effort to try something different. ■ Neighborhood consistency is not necessarily a matter of style; can relate to finishes, scale, texture; the design needs a bit more work. Commissioner Brownrigg made a motion to place the item on the Action Calendar when complete. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Vistica. Discussion of motion: ■ None. Chair Cauchi called for a vote on the motion to place this item on the Consent Calendar when plans have been revised as directed. The motion passed on a voice vote 5-1-1 (Commissioner Terrones absent, Commissioner Auran dissenting). The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 9:08 p.m. Commissioner Auran recused himself from participating on Agenda Item 6 and left the dais. 14 November 17, 2008 Planning Commission RECEIVED City of Burlingame 501 Primrose Rd. N O V 7 7 >0.98 Burlingame, CA 94010 TY OF BURLINGAME �I arJr!!Nr DEPT. Subject: 1452 Drake Ave. Dear Commissioner, Thank you for taking the time to review and comment on our design proposal. At the study session on November 10th,we received some valuable feedback. We took those comments into consideration and have softened the design. The refined design steers in a craftsman direction,utilizing design elements from that time tested Burlingame style while offering a contemporary interpretation of it.New materials, systems, and an environmentally friendly approach to design and construction,provide an updated solution to compliment our time and a 21S`century lifestyle. Since the first submittal,we have refined the details.There is now an overhang with frieze board and craftsman style brackets on the front right roof; the flat roofed porch at the front has been changed to a craftsman style trellis (similar to that on the rear elevation); the vertical bay window on the front has been shortened to a single story bay window(to decrease verticality); bracketed roofs have been added at both second floor windows on the front, and the windows on the left elevation; the garage door has been revised to a more traditional aesthetic with windows; the chimney element has been lowered by 4% the rear fagade includes a gable overhang similar to the revised front overhang. We will present these features in detail,with visual aids, at the public hearing. There are a few other items we'd like to point out as well.While the FAR is technically near maximum, the oversized garage and most of the trellises count in the calculation.The on-site enclosed structure presented here is nearly 600 SF less than the typical home with a two car detached garage.The lot coverage numbers are also boosted higher because the rear deck counts in the calculation due to the down-sloping nature of the lot. We look forward to having the opportunity to discuss the project in detail at the next meeting. Sincerely, Randy Grange AIA Project Architect City of Burlingame Planning Department 501 Primrose Road P(650)558-7250 F(650)696-3790 www.burlingame.or� art CITY G� euRUNGAME APPLICATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Type of application: Design Review Conditional Use Permit Variance Special Permit Other Parcel Number: WDProjectaddress: ��� � ��c(L i✓ fC .� APPLICANT PROPERTY OWNER Name: A _- Name: Address: 4j =��� ., 7p Address: . City/State/Zip: nom, � QA e� ity/State/Zip: r�1 Phone (w): Phone (w):-650 70 0 (h). (h): 65(3.341. R'403 ARCHITECT/DESIGNER rr -- Name: 4ac-- s Address:- "G61 tj _� City/State/Zip: Please indicate with an asterisk Phone (w): the contact person for this project. (h): Ar t?115 N A e�A5 S x 41 `E TY i';= PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A/6K) AFFADAVIT/SIGNATURE: I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the information given herein is true and corre to the best of my knowledge and belief. Applicant's signature: Date: I know about the proposed application and hereby authorize the above applicant to submit this application to the Planning Commission. Property owners signature:(- late: Date submitted: PCAPP.FRM City of Burlingame Planning Department 501 Primrose Road P(650)558-7250 F(650)696-3790 WWW.burlingame.org CITY ,� CITY OF BURLINGAME �! .."•�""'E SPECIAL PERMIT APPLICATION Decuvij- t4e;V EAVelope- 2 '9 2008 CITY OF'8,�JIPFJNGAME Df The Planning Commission is required by law to make findings as defined by the City's Ordinance(Code Section 25.50). Your answers to the following questions can assist the Planning Commission in making the decision as to whether the findings can be made for your request. Please type or write neatly in ink. Refer to the back of this form for assistance with these questions. 1. Explain why the blend of mass,scale and dominant structural characteristics of the new construction or addition are consistent with the existing structure's design and with the existing street and neighborhood. L� T1 2. Explain how the variety of roof line,facade, exterior finish materials and elevations of the proposed new structure or addition are consistent with the existing structure, street and neighborhood. 3. How will the proposed project be consistent with the residential design guidelines adopted by the city (C.S. 25.57)? 4. Explain how the removal of any trees located within the footprint of any new structure or addition is necessary and is consistent with the city's reforestation requirements. What mitigation is proposed for the removal of any trees? Explain why this mitigation is appropriate. SPECPERM.FRM Attachment A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR Declining Height 1452 Drake Avenue 1. The mass, scale, and dominant structural characteristics of the new construction are consistent with the existing street and neighborhood. There is no existing home on this site. There are a wide variety of houses on the street(in terms of style, mass, scale etc...) and the proposed house will fit in. The site characteristics (down sloping lot) create the need for a declining height permit for this project, and this is consistent with the house next door (to the Northeast) which also required the same special permit 2. The rooflines, fagade, materials, and elevations of the proposed house and garage are different from, but not inconsistent with, the neighborhood and street. There is no existing structure on the site. The proposed materials and detailing form a rich combination, with natural wood siding, natural lime plaster, and consistent accent features. The elevations all include a significant amount of articulation with wall offsets and varied roof forms. The house is very low for a two story structure, and has greater than required side setbacks, but due to the down sloping lot it still encroaches into the declining height envelope. 3. 1. The architectural style is compatible with the character of the neighborhood. 2. The attached garage being proposed is appropriate for this site. 3. See items 1 and 2 above for comments about style, mass and bulk. 4. There is a larger than typical setback on both sides of this house. 5. A full landscaping plan is being provided, which will be a significant improvement for the site. Note: there are specifics about this site that make the declining height encroachment appear much more severe than it actually is. The point of departure for a declining height envelope line is taken from the average grade between the front and rear property lines, or as is the case here, the front and rear setback lines. These points are based on what was once there prior to previous construction that included the installation of the retaining walls that leveled out this site. If one were to consider a point of departure based on the existing site topography, it would yield a dramatically different result. 4. No trees are being proposed forrmo at t• City of Burlingame Planning Department 501 Primrose Road P(650)558-7250 F(650)696-3790 www.burlingame.orQ CITY , CITY OF BURLINGAME �r BVIMM9WE SPECIAL PERMIT APPLICATION ° A-A A a h c d Cha Iret e- Al 9 2008 The Planning Commission is required by law to make findings as defined by the City's Ordinance(Code Section 25.50). Your answers to the following questions can assist the Planning Commission in making the decision as to whether the findings can be made for your request. Please type or write neatly in ink. Refer to the back of this form for assistance with these questions. 1. Explain why the blend of mass,scale and dominant structural characteristics of the new construction or addition are consistent with the existing structure's design and with the existing street and neighborhood. -TT*,�--0 C�NT � 2. Explain how the variety of roof line,facade, exterior finish materials and elevations of the proposed new structure or addition are consistent with the existing structure, street and neighborhood. 3. How will the proposed project be consistent with the residential design guidelines adopted by the city (C.S. 25.57)? 4. Explain how the removal of any trees located within the footprint of any new structure or addition is necessary and is consistent with the city's reforestation requirements. What mitigation is proposed for the removal of any trees? Explain why this mitigation is appropriate. SPECPERM.FRM Attachment B SPECIAL PERMIT FOR _ Attached Garage 1452 Drake Ave. This is a proposal to have a one car attached garage. Attaching the garage provides more usable interior parking, creates a larger rear yard, and minimizes on-site pavement which also minimizes storm water run-off. The severe down sloping lot creates a very difficult situation for a detached garage, and the house that was previously approved for this site had the garage sitting way up above natural grade on a series of retaining walls; this solution eliminates that issue. 1. The mass, scale, and dominant structural characteristics of the new construction are consistent with the existing street and neighborhood. There is no existing home on this site. There are a wide variety of houses on the street (in terms of style, mass, scale etc...) and the proposed house will fit in. The site characteristics (down sloping lot) create a situation where the attached garage is the more logical parking solution. 2. The rooflines, fagade, materials, and elevations of the proposed house and garage are different from, but not inconsistent with, the neighborhood and street. There is no existing structure on the site. The proposed materials and detailing form a rich combination, with natural wood siding, natural lime plaster, and consistent accent features. The elevations all include a significant amount of articulation with wall offsets and varied roof forms. The attached garage is consistent with the neighborhood. There are a variety of garage configurations.in the neighborhood, and, due to the down sloping lots, some houses have garages underneath in the rear. 3. 1. The architectural style is compatible with that of the existing house and character of the neighborhood. 2. The attached garage being proposed is consistent with the neighborhood. 3. See items 1 and 2 above for comments about style, mass and bulk. 4. There will be minimal impact on neighboring properties as the garage is set well back. 5. A full landscaping plan is being provided, which will be a significant improvement for the site. 2. No trees are being proposed for removal. Project Comments Date: September 25, 2008 To: ❑ City Engineer ❑ Recycling Specialist (650) 558-7230 (650) 558-7271 X Chief Building Official ❑ Fire Marshal (650) 558-7260 (650) 558-7600 ❑ City Arborist ❑ NPDES Coordinator (650) 558-7254 (650) 342-3727 ❑ City Attorney From: Planning Staff Subject: Request for Design Review and Special Permits for attached garage and declining height envelope for a new two-story single family dwelling at 1452 Drake Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 026-042-140 Staff Review: September 29, 2008 1) On the plans specify that this project will comply with the 2007 California Building Codes (CBC). 2) Anyone who is doing business in the City must have a current City of Burlingame business license. 3) Provide fully dimensioned plans. 4) Show the distances from all exterior walls to property lines or to assumed property lines. 5) When you submit your plans to the Building Division for plan review provide a completed Supplemental Demolition Permit Application. NOTE: The Demolition Permit will not be issued until a Building Permit is issued for the project. 6) Comply with the 2005 California Energy Efficiency Standards for low-rise residential/non- residential buildings. Go to http://www.energy.ca.gov/title24 for publications and details. 7) Obtain a survey of the property lines for any structure within one foot of the property line. 8) On the plans specify that the roof eaves will not project within two feet of the property line. 9) Rooms that can be used for sleeping purposes must have at least one window or door that complies with the egress requirements. Specify the size and location of all required egress windows on the elevation drawings. Note: The area labeled "Dem/Office" is a room that can be used for sleeping purposes and, as such, must comply with this requirement. 10) Provide guardrails at all landings. NOTE: All landings more than 30" in height at any point are considered in calculating the allowable lot coverage. Consult the Planning Department for details if your project entails landings more than 30" in height. 11) Provide handrails at all stairs where there are four or more risers. 12) Provide lighting at all exterior landings. 13) The fireplace chimney must terminate at least two feet higher than any portion of the building within ten feet. Sec. 2113.9 Reviewed Date: �.2 G f2 6 Project Comments , Date: September 25,2008 To: d City Engineer ❑ Recycling Specialist (650)558-7230 (650)558-7271 ❑ Chief Building Official ❑ Fire Marshal (650)558-7260 (650)558-7600 ❑ City Arborist ❑ NPDES Coordinator (650)558-7254 (650)342-3727 ❑ City Attorney From: Planning Staff Subject: Request for Design Review and Special Permits for attached garage and declining height envelope for a new two-story single family dwelling at 1452 Drake Avenue,zoned R-1,APN: 026-042-140 Staff Review: September 29,2008 1. See attached. 2. Sewer backwater protection certification is required. Contact Public Works— Engineering Division at(650)558-7230 for additional information. 3. This project is subject to the City policy to maximize the planter strip. The new sidewalk is required to be constructed to the property line and transition to the existing sidewalks on both adjacent properties. Both the site and landscape plans need to be revised to meet this requirement. Reviewed by: V V Date: 10/16/2008 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING DIVISION PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS mw -two ,5NWJ Project Name: 5tpJ�-' Th" Y V"AL41 Project Address: 4&7— fV-4" AVMy The following requirements apply to the project 1 _}� A property boundary survey shall be preformed by a licensed land surveyor. The survey shall show all property lines, property corners, easements, topographical features and utilities. (Required prior to the building permit issuance.) -5,tt" S —Cv T7t5 45, , VSD &r--10 2 _ V The site and roof drainage shall be shown on plans and should be made to drain towards the Frontage Street. (Required prior to the building permit issuance.) 3. The applicant shall submit project grading and drainage plans for approval prior to the issuance of a Building permit. 4 The project site is in a flood zone, the project shall comply with the City's flood zone requirements. 5 Mary sewer lateral OR is required for the project in accordance with the City's standards. ( ) 6. The project plans shall show the required Bayfront Bike/Pedestrian trail and necessary public access improvements as required by San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission. 7. Sanitary sewer analysis is required for the project. The sewer analysis shall identify the project's impact to the City's sewer system and any sewer pump stations and identify mitigation measures. 8 Submit traffic trip generation analysis for the project. 9. Submit a traffic impact study for the project. The traffic study should identify the project generated impacts and recommend mitigation measures to be adopted by the project to be approved by the City Engineer. 10. The project shall file a parcel map with the Public Works Engineering Division. The parcel map shall show all existing property lines, easements, monuments, and new property and lot lines proposed by the map. Pagel of 3 UAprivate development\PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS.doc PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING DIVISION 11. A latest preliminary title report of the subject parcel of land shall be submitted to the Public Works Engineering Division with the parcel map for reviews. 12 Map closure/lot closure calculations shall be submitted with the parcel map. 13 The project shall submit a condominium map to the Engineering Divisions in accordance with the requirements of the Subdivision Map Act. 14 _ The project shall, at its own cost, design and construct frontage public improvements including curb, gutter, sidewalk and other necessary appurtenant work. 15 The project shall, at its own cost, design and construct frontage streetscape improvements including sidewalk, curb, gutters, parking meters and poles, trees, and streetlights in accordance with streetscape master plan. 16 By the preliminary review of plans, it appears that the project may cause adverse impacts during construction to vehicular traffic, pedestrian traffic and public on street parking. The project shall identify these impacts and provide mitigation measure acceptable to the City. 17 The project shall submit hydrologic calculations from a registered civil engineer for the proposed creek enclosure. The hydraulic calculations must show that the proposed creek enclosure doesn't cause any adverse impact to both upstream and downstream properties. The hydrologic calculations shall accompany a site map showing the area of the 100-year flood and existing improvements with proposed improvements. 18 Any work within the drainage area, creek, or creek banks requires a State Department of Fish and Game Permit and Army Corps of Engineers Permits. 19 No construction debris shall be allowed into the creek. 20 �_ The project shall comply with the City's NPDES permit requirement to prevent storm water pollution. 21 The project does not show the dimensions of existing driveways, re- submit plans with driveway dimensions. Also clarify if the project is proposing to widen the driveway. Any widening of the driveway is subject to City Engineer's approval. 22 The plans do not indicate the slope of the driveway, re-submit plans showing the driveway profile with elevations Page 2 of 3 UAprivate development\PLANNING REVIEW COMIVffiNTS.doc PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING DIVISION 23 The back of the driveway/sidewalk approach shall be at least 12" above the flow line of the frontage curb in the street to prevent overflow of storm water from the street into private property. 24. For the takeout service, a garbage receptacle shall be placed in front. The sidewalk fronting the store shall be kept clean 20' from each side of the property. 25. For commercial projects a designated garbage bin space and cleaning area shall be located inside the building. A drain connecting the garbage area to the Sanitary Sewer System is required. Page 3 of 3 UAprivate development\PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS.doc rj Project Comments Date: September 25, 2008 To: ❑ City Engineer ❑ Recycling Specialist (650) 558-7230 (650) 558-7271 ❑ Chief Building Official d Fire Marshal (650) 558-7260 (650) 558-7600 ❑ City Arborist ❑ NPDES Coordinator (650) 558-7254 (650) 342-3727 ❑ City Attorney From: Planning Staff Subject: Request for Design Review and Special Permits for attached garage and declining height envelope for a new two-story single family dwelling at 1452 Drake Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 026-042-140 Staff Review: September 29, 2008 Provide a residential fire sprinkler throughout the residence. 1. Provide a minimum 1 inch water meter. 2. Provide backflow prevention device/double check valve assembly— Schematic of water lateral line after meter shall be shown on Building Plans prior to approval indicating location of the device after the split between domestic and fire protection lines. 3. Drawings submitted to Building Department for review and approval shall clearly indicate Fire Sprinklers shall be installed and shop drawings shall be approved by the Fire Department prior to installation. Reviewed by: ;— �;;V Date: z_4 -�� Project Comments Date: September 25, 2008 To: City Engineer 00' Recycling Specialist (650) 558-7230 (650) 558-7271 Chief Building Official Fire Marshal (650) 558-7260 (650) 558-7600 City Arborist ✓ NPDES Coordinator (650) 558-7254 (650) 342-3727 City Attorney From: Planning Staff Subject: Request for Design Review and Special Permits for attached garage and declining height envelope for a new two-story single family dwelling at 1452 Drake Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 026-042-140 Staff Review: September 29, 2008 Any construction project in the City, regardless of size, shall comply with the City's NPDES permit requirement to prevent stormwater pollution from construction activities. Project proponent shall ensure all contractors implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) during construction. Include a list of BMPs and erosion and sediment control measure plan as project notes when submitting plans for a building permit. Please see attached brochures for guidance. Reviewed by: Date: 09/29/2008 Stonnwater Pollution Prevention Program Pollution Pm'atioG Program =p Pollution Prevention — It's Part of the Plan It is your responsibility to do the job right! a Runoff from streets and other paved areas is a major source ofpollution in local creeks,San Francisco Bay and the Pacific Ocean. "ems: Construction activities can directly affect the health of our waters unless contractors and crews plan aheadto keep dirt,debris,and other 5. �r construction waste away from storm drains and creeks.Following these guidelines will ensure your compliance with local stormwater Generalordinance requirements.Remember,ongoing monitoring and maintenance of installed controls is crucial to proper implementation. Construction Heavy Earth-Moving Roadwork&Paving Fresh Concrete Painting&Application Landscaping, &Site Supervision Equipment Activities &Mortar Application of Solvents&Adhesives Gardening, wd<nm plamtimt pm.mspoGvvm Operation ; and Pool Maintenance !s<bmsua e.<...tmn.ne Fadm�w rK,br ary ',, pku raweremroe ceovv4 berom �. 1 M11 Will Jlaa-wd pwua nese ryofaa I , dk MNbmm mGikn wrrreQ penMw JCukel ae,mmmt pfmo ff {y �erypwrWy dwumex<-ann Ibmgb ores � _ lUrwlep aadlmDl<mrm<mtioe/uameostmnol P4m<bt pwwwla.W.xe anmw arwl wnkr mm .. - maanerammnkmmm. � a��rbe n4 Redwrc anrmwanYrwaD'nlocrdu 6l J6dradWauunGw ud htw dry wmww. c wrenrptwYenmk does«berm,wbt[e gnWn6wa f(arnmry hivf PrvJmu mTrwdaW Qvmq Caemv<dm J(T«n all tNwpmcvr for WbaM ayrnrlcakbQagwpmcm J Kam JI LLPJd D,w pmtlua,aM wsw mmey fmm I'Iraie Yore mrTloym and whmeb,ekn.Make IRweur<.wlirN nxcuWumlY w4wetwWr-0Y uwv- PmmMly a^.maul demev PeaaHen rbc NnF artK aed tiv.m d-. iquw rzadun Gwv :ca r.. H Wxnw..wanibMemcarynw wln wrh:en lM1e ,uy. JP,m�^rmm4�•mr<mw Waw aW wuhwg ofquiP lBwb asymryatl ann w<ummcrim aln.,IweYr tram Piuu.wim.r,.wl.wl<.xbrc.aW Jauun DrF4 ue IRorxrvwa.ilc ar.l l.oduaPivg ena4 Goa wrN uM lielon ane.WGnm,rdiwea.br,abwrc Wu ave •ora J.uuwc4w<id. how rby and ora ivlme4 torah.man.worm d Gom buamwm wvua and moa be aapm<e o[ar a hazvroue ram bY,brso[rbm order uw mmiw.tl Dkdu w«Mt pormwuerryobeiboam wmrwlrmWJrdn. Sfm pr�ad➢w.wdn vM/ela mamkevm J$wJw Plur kmyunry raggtriue ruraroriw mpudw /W'benrtu<Joter veblek/ebdpmcormdwemaee mrmbe <dofiG aM nm61•rw«rJn'm-armor bam wind wt<ml an molly(rmvayrwbulswnnvarer Good _ JlxapumarwTlemlY mriumW awaPf is cmuvw- ,kpesw+nm<amsmnrimuewi®olus<IS'Ws d dvorurir4 deiW1<eeampletclY mawaM w<a vwaY prep.uo)wn lSkwlwrki6,rwsilvrr.mlwbrt<br.ivJ,mrWaw pmnkan➢mt Pru<hv ,wdl rww Gram reeamawarrm drami Aom worm aW,and aceta. JS«um n/aacm alk dcy ve opo.B<,rrnbkaT maYM wmm lDmp,b ow mmplmery copmmd mfar mro (m aumudcgrrymmlpmkmt,mNelint,mM rvonw lPNbY Jwnda rWry JDo rad uk diesel od to Wbdmse or clm epWpwm« bo[s Vu1Wx[ PmkWx,vcbiele reRrelms>ed roudm wWPmur n 6c aur+ee.eewru.•rM nam wivd.bbwo eemnr pr.wdu avaY6®Ntlm.+mrm hie<(w6 ekvaap . mamknavu.the JesitmrMmabrvm ba well awe ♦eNWcaMePrvmcvwmw,wa. draw Md WYbalm.remporvydmimpeemakw,il[ Pom' ham,nwfalLavdwnon. !Nestor elm brurMmriow wWt mnrWam Wka J.FJMWe paau6aN eauvmiwr lxymmrfmtlrY wumu. fiom,nem,ar cruor drdm ml<K vdlvmMHnmo— IwceA berm,ar rkm M1aw ieM fiarn. Jveryeie ru<d oik barlene;mmrtrc.4mkm arybJ4 eK ,1rteC tame[rtmm draw.m,bmm. J MarwW ell nmdmuJ buvyagmpmcer.harymrfm- beeever povrldr. !Waw ow moucro mamaaery u d«rpml<d wnbaw uua J Uw I Mete major wpaimoRd,n u^P^aN ckak dm,a arcbu n awes nanlf ewwy IRe a.l,wlNWe Laid- P.mdysmeMmpekilb. lllm chest Been or dik3n,mdivea mnvlY emuvd<uaw- Jibaly aawloyca WuwaQ denburwmbvmmu pru4ae, mYvmY�.mbaewewu«wUllbw mmrnvul®cm !F'a aero-bund aW bsuaLm lu nc�<arar (nest nlnw wairv. mare pmreo[rtmil p' A➢einl uw m enrmkw,s mc,ow«.Cever eaPnad Nlv n( Irom>m pedal run. puxh nr orma Aia.int wmack M1enkn,wl Aispne of u pp,Lla Ribes ro de smikry rewerome vw fiaw Vkvd J Perdrmmmmmamrmuce,rtpabjobr.aM nbinlsaM fhmNt Conahewtloe phe[e.Wbeo<ver b 'vermlm;,4rwiwpludcebwdntor off uk. lAraM pmW rmd vW Du,l l0.iYck wuhaw byPwmW3 PnmlvlevMmaeleulwvuwam.nwm.wroumoAry. Jqur,xenwmdnln inlee niw luY bJc,,bemu,Gbueu4 kmpomy im. agWpmentmubmQ JCnvnelabpRu end muvanM wJ wih mvmdlvpem a cwuiugWwnwmdw,or whwmW back rem miam brreux.Norm Nvpoap of weshom oro NavnpomwW[dowadmk. wader Wes 4 rwm.0 Winro rmww.<mmr ores Wn apo a mm, wekr4w raw,wxm. Illup DOHume eff exWkd wmmen-Plan vuk<u, yes muvdnW mtl J,rediamr vaolmc phweJwdY. me etas,amrm dninw dninye drbbea,a awam. rwydwgrwwmcler moved wesibbmieaue JIf rwkmmabro JCoareM,ul vrcM1 bow eM mmboW wbm epplyW{ JFw oil-heed palvq Wes wlnwrbeab we auuuPw IRcwtemGukmwulkm(arm of<ro,ioe mutrvl dr aM worb Ruida an nra,uv drip pm,or aop ektivm JRepnlY manbar mdmiekiv ellamiauaM,Mimevr radery[luny ae:J,fo[wil.ac. kmvlvg CammuLm .iple auJ<lewr wiw.•: wwlrwraePrwu wnbm. u mk. JDry,<rwp paved muhm that rkdo mamm saes. v¢M1 dAMmM.grilla.fnlle:l nll Hver ddAa,<bwb wvvoh IUr<Vncetdmw auJus.mbamw brbwa mxrH uwnd !Wn'l mixup mom Gmh muraekw camwlwm Yw wJl FAm and mea:estrum W,aWwmlTwo,<nf came >. meekw w<bmn<u.liw.emmn wvWr6 is«cemry, ropmare wmaivma rad r<cycl<vhemaerposTl<,m raw arrobe wleamy. Iprddr aed mWwuhvaNwn wen. Ludw➢iny(i,Nw WLr®avm awew atGWmnbomrdwu wu4, !N<vmwuh ea<m maedd frmo< d-• res aJlPwWswupn, JPropgh report 411uwof masiee and,eaw<u emGds •Wes gQregm<eno- lUmwperdddw evd klbv kpeltlirwdau.0.i d— even wunmK rabeyrwwkp.aa4rrnm ave roaek<.Inmmmmmnrmw;y erzmwaWrd.,Irmmwnw mnaaraawwrn.rw..cal- JSnwaM rgvd<amall miamwmrrr abmw pl..d< Ja.are®pw m,..d ave newwavapmJoet lnspe.r Wrmw /Do mrumdimelMnWbrimrva elm qurpmmrm IwrrM rw.y<k m'dgrov kd'm n: a bW. JPnnl eni !Clem up leak;dap,vd why vlll,imwaaanl>n J Cnu ailPJm ad dbcrawmxaw wlviab Na w< N aM dol(roe nen-baaaNwe d%ahiDDwt <wmmm m tlw.Gees dmY Ju ver wumwkwc wJ w QnuMmrn w tees and amd blesine meY be•mwt w or mGacrcd W plates deposed ot OmeN BaJver hace'ee< Yle4u wpe.Pwna Guw rwJrL asW pweW rwwQwrW JR'bevclmdn[wafbrddvewvy«ddewmhcommMim, dmp cbW and o trmh !u ImeM pamxkavbvutlwm wore. renal m w•M,mmwa.11c dry ckmm mcwurb _ qo,c o wdaoeev Penile.ifyw moa uee warm,we hm JRwyeb«ed<eninebesula. Jv. .,eev.Ww and Yadiogwoh Jordry wrnan. JC,reh drip,(rampna wiaM�� - wmrh Eves Den dream,,eW dewv we aivewrywub ppm.wmww.ar mumkl av armdw,mmaam. Jcbedea.mt m mNvW b kap are duo Juwu. (vkdney[w n<.)oleN ruler wacbme wbm nor W res. P nripp g cnidae and ebiq aM dun I Cotica lavwarrdger4o eGwmp,pmoW1 ICv>er and mWebind C JPmfome maFnrmdpmmrrmwiaawar fmm dols erre. mewepmu mpmuceoumm6lW or niburyl wmmwLL(Au f ompun.C'hmk lMnremly to JCImvuDeG IW aM k•k•vuv{`dry'medamfaad n°m pr n«ueuy,aM mmDwG Ieab.P4ce dumwsun mdmzmmor m.cr wid lm wwlim lmmadk<WY whm w%d•PFm ,0 JPrcvwragpeQakn'ah hmddseway:pa4oeovswewoe tin morn MdLalveed ofu lurammu wen[,. e"P• JNewrbme Bowe ftp—". -ft lWhm mwbm YNrcicJ abeelbevr melerialMagr).or a6uP,nd rtmon eoehmi gnarm dorm,Hrac dm JMlui IercyuJ warn io ri<waWwm:und wmxl we wail.ulnae rims wbem Gula hon IIIMIhe rde refl Jmq ePrrymemmomlmmoevmsr ourNeriL fmm Main agpreVbwuh Dram p Bugon.incommmiliv nirh Jumpekr.A VWdc libk u raormamadb pnwvl M s0 mvPm bedowonrik,woawiwioacemPlaeybmadema awry!Called eM_k enu uA<park 4nv doe /Wnm,mmmP mclueio[bWlan{eatmtan widltigh- <mbvd<yIi., tuyc4rlg,IvwebmmV aM f^min6 oA(ubemhmr marviala,urGWr,oeavmV)wMmau Wmelwu aaw. apDmprvkly aapnw of varus mm wkr,bkhsbm draw.WuE rnlm mroa dies wane ter M k,laBeeflynlM.Nc.w tl.,..wrea�av ray ibk USa res lues c^ou8lrmkew abraMn gm--t lPmcc WYbila orwbm cmrov<mno4 ppw'rr,lopero .waW vpado inm wil.Or,cbmY wiw we MwNwam+wwr roes—wrrDrm ,Y pertmumm p,rake. tmm6 Udawnm wme,mrcriov Nk. wn and a.w�.n� - JDo ow ua JkaAvJblubdukur 0— JMWo pplimtloe by ware lmcke fm dunuurtvl. pore YuJ wore. JMaka me p«I.ble mYera ue vumlumd'u[pod ewarw ue <yuiDmcvrapasra u(nrrc mm�flurryinq mwmrwummdlrrf.itmeMe mnwl eudrMrymfiNaw ifywm mlka(mwm Pm^'•vA Xaa<nanm lBwewwmdDed dry mlaWsrmmerbaklY.nevem- AyiWbCbwmaa6masw/ rbe,row dreg. wehivg wM bl'we tees Wg wm MrcG h dl udyeDdcd Fvmdrvefs tms sq h me- aewe:.5•.uupGrR uC11 welumy W tlepvrai b un'a rW J De mos hbw m Ne InrK ero.lem Oe,wen. i dgru Jolpropra3'.CTmt mikb 6eyruwlYfm nmMmlvahwem,wj'mldr wnm,«banT atm. famiwrW lAwMmewr{exm saes when br�WQuphrlr«cw- JWM1m M1wkin pit up pY.a:v wau<wvnhubmt vukerQ'm n. M1iw3p[Maivf<vav<e testa. Eww.;nQ,be•unm 1 e111W. uWwrirYm hcido PooUpmu Um ulimvwmupemak Wrdm muK I(mr otdww au4run,v.rMmmk ba for<wuwMxaiw <Me' and d¢pws pwvly. JNwadialrm6e<MmioaM,— N,knalWuu hudlJm mdwva'r ds Rrx:m.l WarcrQvGry Cnmhol Pvvd: J.UM dmbie{rgnld P••ammcWmuamrvmnvvdl RecYUMorl.11erspirt w0.-eerwpo�! awma4mu _. curd e<et.<. /Fmllu rurm.WrdNon-minlmr.a wok wAn lflmnw`Pil4manem by AitQlnlw and PnxcrlY uswk..W paa Guru um<iw. lRaydcluv ebrrela a(brokee<ooverearamvd4l. /xwycle or Arawwormms warn-bv - -+^ave T yes aNm m+sad+k.<htlm oelY chs armiulYw vecd aapvaie{uf wvrmo Broil. a UeuW mi3 eaMidery Jiacobntiou wuJor !Make rave bmkev Wvemevt don mlmme iv epaka as-Ah haneM4lGvarrtlwe wet mlkcriov faNiryw,arrervp. JWMlagxyiri9aprol a[pw kl eM1laiee rGairykfor5b delon. m AbeMowA wdmervmd <wyr mala r»parvmd lDbpmeMmilrmwmm Df aa<en drY mmaae.@wr. WLeu they ea Wwur{IJY aY• y pa:ur<am,rd ]Bey,.T..rtcYrk www DYaaWmt itp_1Y rube Jll wrayelaAle nrueria4mnea.m MmTrn ArmnCe Jggrmt<iNifvmeTilhnwe wPrrTnue gall regvru eAnaodoaml weW JPorma wvby uamtr nmlem Mdrq vw^mMnQ.SMM ePdmmruuaen bm.bq re[a,aM drop NarN®Yoe dimo,edo(nPsn Yod cmod gest Jeurde Jecbbrle,kd wnkroa,b® far vkk-w ofrmyWabk mavwk4 rmbneoru+aa, agmeie mmcdinrely.Ywmrevuimd ray mmmmpm] a&Dielh 1debk,w uuh vwanl Nurry apwib aM kmow fiom de bore ke,miuryluAlJL anln upn,lr,ave mebl,v1verrq d—,elwmd<vQ- WWtnGka^rmkua ofl�dmu rmlvlob.hsebMmg rw�acm® INn bury wl4wLuurnry wmtarmtrW. e4lkµgpec mol and veWrbmaletmemem,krW, oJ.'Ye rtpaA,WIIL rail deroGowhnt,pemrn:Il lTel JNvnr Wv<aluwu wwca lrr ulwu uY ner:lml tWcllw ay lxmue leDover oU bawd perp[Uiep«euvms AM, JCTlminnmJ wax mry be rorG,cpmgeJbde,maury u mMeJ,uritis,Wnmin,and ave. Dll orymw lord ewer[eMyrwpeorenumM1c,])GII sw'wp rnr:Wrgb. inrluanQ nndtln,uhaznNarrs uveae. ,e.m(if allmrMby rhe MCJ aemnN nnWmnl amnrniry)hy JDmpon afN waw Wes®aptlm debN propmly. de lbarawi D®uofhmeryevcy GaMcr WmvmQ mnoW6abunroauwrydalmwwm plpo clmwrjma May tolnvuclien mvaiaa and waw cm Krwwk4 Cmkr.(PWIBSJ-]ddp Qd hmw). JSmaGgmnry tavmw,sbwldcbeek wiwmenv Maim mcWNnpaa<va,warer baaMpaWK wAirJa tlwAa, fmmry RnvirmmmullbrrM1 l3iisvmmpmin6lmYtlint m� even M�ulabr aoAdebn k•n�aM<I wleJ nun mbvcaNauavurc dispoul. JDob"iwberdd .don baba ldpe xiw po rcMm bu mkwbnwpepMklardGYwwepwNw:< Storm in polluters may be liable for fines of up to $25,000 j��d=ay! Jl/orgeeMmm nflnu<wYbe aM1k rune rmmrml rn me <al<.CnDOmkkarmlbl4eyu,llt SIR,ed meet be huuam<.ark.Nerm Wry wuk maaiJa ar ka.e .weM.CloiwiM1 do voodw mlprahotb Mry- wmykkh rmmN kY r4a ww,Q,beawmr Dlmr. rpen u Iha rsis or our a wuk or mean bcd. !ct"W4vY WHY SHOULD WE WORRY ABOUT SOIL EROSION? Nature slowly wears away land, but human activities such ; ::: _ construction increase the rate of erosion 200, even , 0 00 tim, that amount. When we remove vegetation or other objects th iii n 't t the action of wind h i i expose 1 o old soil n Lace we and wat and increase its chances of eroding. The loss of soil from a construction site results in loss of topse minerals and nutrients, and it causes ugly cuts and gullies in tl Water and wind carry soil from our Bay Area land down into our landscape. Surface runoff and the materials it carries with it c1( streams, lakes and the Bay. This soil carries with it pollu- our culverts, flood channels and streams. Sometimes it destro, tants such as oil and grease, chemicals, fertilizers, animal wildlife and damages recreational areas such as lakes and r wastes and bacteria, which threaten our water quality. servoirs. Such erosion also costs the home construction industry, local As an example, road and home building in the Oakland hill government, and the homeowner untold millions of dollars above Lake Temescal filled the lake to such an extent that it ha. a year. to be dredged in 1979 at a public cost of$750,000. NEED MORE INFORMATION? ABAG has produced a slide/tape show on soil erosion addresses problems and solutions as they apply tc called "Money Down the Drain." It is available for showing California and the Bay Area. It can be purchased from to any interested group. Call ABAG Public Affairs at (415) ABAG and is available on reference at many local libraries 841-9730. and in city and county public works and planning depart- ments. ABAG has also published a "Manual of Standards for Sur- face Runoff Control Measures" which deals extensively USDA Soil Conservation Service personnel are willing to with designs and practices for erosion prevention, sedi- provide more information on specific erosion problems. ment control, and control of urban runoff. The manual This brochure is a cooperative project of the Association of Bay Area Governments and the East Bay Regional Park District. �wr pp6 ASSMAi1GN EAST BAY REGIONAL 9l' /� oF BAY AREA GOVERNMENTS PARK DISTRICT Hotel Claremont 11500 Skyline Blvd. Berkeley,California 94705 Oakland,CA 94619 (415)841-9730 531-9300 PROTECTING YOUR P P TY RO ER � FROM } EROSION ...................... EROSION CONTROL CAN PROTECT YOUR PROPERTY AND PREVENT FUTURE HEADACHES 4V Vegetation-stabilized Bare Slope: Headaches s` Slope: Security and Liability '� • �r (� ;�� • soil in place • mudslide danger '� • minimum of loss of topsoil Zry erosion • clogged storm ����/ • fewer winter clean- drains, flooding up problems problems r ✓ L< • protection for expensive ' house fours- cleanup dations • eroded or buried house foundations �J / r' TIPS FOR THE HOMEOWNER \° _ _ "Winterize" your property by mid-September. Don't Seeding of bare slopes wait until spring to put in landscaping. You need • Hand broadcast or use a "breast seeder." A typical winter protection. Final landscaping can be done yard can be done in less than an hour. later. • Give seeds a boost with fertilizer. • Mulch if you can, with grass clippings and leaves, Inexpensive measures installed by fall will give you bark chips or straw. protection quickly that will last all during the wet • Use netting to hold soil and seeds on steep slopes. season. • Check with your local nursery for advice. Winter alert In one afternoon you can: • Check before storms to see that drains and ditches • Dig trenches to drain surface runoff water away are not clogged by leaves and rubble. from problem areas such as steep, bare slopes. • Check after major storms to be sure drains are clear • Prepare bare areas on slopes for seeding by raking and vegetation is holding on slopes. Repair as the surface to loosen and roughen soil so it will necessary. hold seeds. • Spot seed any bare areas. WHAT YOU CAN DO TO on all areas that are not to be paved or otherwise covered. CONTROL EROSION AND PROTECT YOUR PROPERTY o— Soil erosion costs Bay Area homeowners millions of dol- lars a year. We lose valuable topsoil. We have to pay for damage to roads and property. And our tax money has to be spent on cleaning out sediment from storm drains, channels, lakes and the Bay. Control dust on graded areas by sprinkling with water, restricting traffic to certain routes, and paving or gravel- You can protect your prop- ing access roads and driveways. erty and prevent future headaches by following these guidelines: TEMPORARY MEASURES TO STABILIZE THE SOIL BEFORE AND Grass provides the DURINCs cheapest and most ef- fective short-term ero- CONSTRUCTION sion control. It grows quickly and covers the ground completely. To find the best seed mix- • Plan construction activities during spring and summer, �Ir % tures and plants for so that erosion control measures can be in place when lJ / _ your area, check with the rain comes. : ':'u.' <. = _.;_ '"' your local nursery, the U.S. Department of Ag- • Examine your site carefully before building. Be aware of riculture Soil Conserva- .�» ;,°. the slope, drainage patterns and soil types. Proper site - .,�..xr, _„;�;Y;:, tion Service, or the design will help you avoid expensive stabilization work. University of California Cooperative Extension. • Preserve existing vegeta- tion as much as possible. Limit grading and plant removal to the areas =_ = Mulches hold soil moisture and provide ground protection remo r r: . under current construc- ''`r " "' from rain damage. They also provide a favorable envi- tion. (Vegetation will ronment for starting and growing plants. Easy-to-obtain naturally curb erosion, mulches are grass clippings, leaves, sawdust, bark chips improve the appearance and straw and the value of your property, and reduce the Straw mulch is nearly 100%effective when held in place by cost of landscaping later.) spraying with an organic glue or wood fiber (tackifers), by punching it into the soil with a shovel or roller, or by tack- • Use fencing to protect plants from fill material and traffic. ing a netting over it. If you have to pave near trees, do so with permeable as- phalt or porous paving blocks. Commercial applications of • Preserve the natural contours of the land and disturb the wood fibers combined with earth as little as possible. Limit the time in which graded various seeds and fertilizers areas are exposed. (hydraulic mulching)are effec- tive in stabilizing sloped areas. • Minimize the length and Hydraulic mulching with a steepness of slopes by tackifier should benching, terracing, or be done in two constructing diversion separate appli- structures. Landscape cations: the first - �~' benched areas to stabilize composed of seed fertilizer and half the mulch,the second the slope and improve its composed of the remaining mulch and tackifier. Commer- appearance. tial hydraulic mulch applicators—who also provide other erosion control services—are listed under"landscaping"in • As soon as possible after grading a site, plant vegetation the phone book. • Riprap (rock lining)—to protect channel banks :. ...... ••...<:::, from erosive water flow •' - "• - r • Sediment trap—to -' stop runoff carrying ' •• �: sediment and trap the sediment Mats of excelsior,jute netting and plastic sheets can be ef- fective temporary covers, but they must be in contact with the soil and fastened securely to work effectively. Storm drain out 1 e --i protection—to reduce the speed of water flow ing from a pipe onto Roof drainage can be collected in barrels or storage con- ;' a open ground or into a tainers or routed into lawns, planter boxes and gardens. natural channel Be sure to cover stored water so you don't collect mos- quitos, too. Excessive runoff should be directed away from Diversion dike or perimeter dike—to divert excess your house. Too much water can damage trees and make water to places where it can be disposed of properly foundations unstable. STRUCTURAL RUNOFF CONTROLS • Straw bale dike—to stop and detain sediment from Even with proper timing and planting, you may need to small unprotected areas protect disturbed areas from rainfall until the plants have (a short-term measure) time to establish themselves. Or you may need permanent ways to transport water across your property so that it perimeter swale—to divert doesn't cause erosion. runoff from a disturbed area -'»w:' or to contain runoff within :M•. ; <<-:`='> . s;z;<::<:>•:..:;. To keep water from carrying soil from your site and dump a disturbed area :.:.....:..:.:,... ing it into nearby lots, streets, streams and channels, you need ways to reduce its volume and speed. Some exam- Grade stabilization structure—to carry concentrated ples of what you might use are: runoff down a slope jute netting \ M, w,tt ,M landscaping ;I hydraulic mulch 1l. plastic sheeting %''-r"•. - y'=1 fr: 1 111 -•' perimeter dike t- r, ` " "' diversion dii ;lo :; '.`.'�..:••,...�:': .':'�:�'.,>...-:' . ::;:;:.';: :::::..:•::."a bench , 'Y straw mulch sediment trap outlet protection Conservatree Jr c�. I R.lxf - ----- -- - ._ .. s A DRIVEWAY PROFILE r.5. 1#�a L-1 sole lnnro- y�p bo s <' It 6 U r . CUT &FILL: 50 CY rrEw res� ] gOJONER'S REOIDENC! R ADJOINER'S RESIDENCE _— I +y; IE fATRO%FgTE EOOT'R1NT1 ID fdpRR7XRfgTE ROOTPRMT) ��� VIII._ �gI�S p/lQS a} .OAR `1f16Rap! f{((j''' 'yp6 �qC J, 4 _ mill {{Ee[l 9 J.�.....e..�,.... �J l br 2.Mrr wm B TIOSECN X.LLe IRyI'-0' B y ct 5] i SETBA IXS >w.a"a NS i M W 1351 i"� '� l9ID 1°• NOTES, Q W C 11 Irn neecrla! ter. �/ -— -- — w l la.�bfCw n.x rcb CnK awabv.lo. .l Urals art w. Z r�L Q fV . Nie M` f.dsMYnr4Mrx1UV[v®,IlRlE rbt�1 4C41bl RMclvl x�w rmMM [I.1�Th ll !!. O�.x IDo xr roabR%w rally n�aleau `�°waew�rular Mioran �/�a a Nv ya,[ ~ sa�swl wnr r.M.Nfella bP Hbftsl.lNYnl6l KaIrq K1 ry�/aas 21IlUDtaiRl.¢.1tII2 to C a. NarsMWR xxU 4rblM rerun x z""W G flolU.i rbf on ib¢ \^/ oM.wa vwl�r.<anm em.� LEGEND �o rm.wvaen m �p�a®e rq�¢E qp{��a! f MIIHOlRZ CRC n.un re Mabrt �®� — _ _ _�_ —1— __,r — _ � 2a RIR1Uf aD R IQv.Fo lAal�lwgl le�irtl Uxaa¢v:anl�U RRR� ^ v ` O SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN © r A MAY 0 9 2007 t] CITY OF BURLINGAME J PLANNING DEPT. Pre��o�s� APProved .nom EEt .k_ e r ® ® ® 4 y � � x T IS I t\1.MIIw oaa W.Nn �� b "p FRONT ELEVATIONy ® p � /EE d �v wntl \l2Mele yy` RIGHT ELEVATION(DRMWA)) "E IV -- --__ AA CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING DEPT. Pr�v�o�s �y �pPr�ved e•o1! �� EE ee.wrc.w.ca nT.m ma� uvr Kto f+�¢ wom�+uw y. w u b z W<Onn U aAk REAR ELEVATION / ' €a. e 1ELP0HNe - ED a / - 9 �q Nty zb Z� Q * 4RECENED LEFT ELEVATION z A.5 MAY 0 9 2007 CITY OF BURLINGAME J PLANNING DEPT. Prav;ouslyArproved .aace+e...ee om. r R U Z 1'-a' — auG1Elpn n z s I ® ® w e000 race 9 we alt Z u..tr.a uwcwn.x �7��„m 4 _ < RIGHT ELEVATION FRONT ELEVATION F N i g 3 GARAGE FLOOR PLAN {a 8 7 i tw.•emw b 4 O ttuenrd �y���� Jul 1 wo 4 - LEFT --_--_______ T 1e� ELEVATION REAR ELEVATION Wei >u U WW��yy o z�dp cv Z a z�Cga RECEIVED MAY 0 9 2007 A.6 BURLINGAME PLANNING DEPT. � �►'o�sl Approved RESOLUTION APPROVING CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION, DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMITS RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame that: WHEREAS, a categorical exemption has been proposed and application has been made for Design Review and Special Permits for declining height envelope and attached garage for a new, two-story single family dwelling at 1452 Drake Avenue, zoned R-1, Ginkgo Burlingame LLC, property owner, APN: 026-042-140; WHEREAS, said matters were heard by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame on November 24, 2008, at which time it reviewed and considered the staff report and all other written materials and testimony presented at said hearing; NOW, THEREFORE, it is RESOLVED and DETERMINED by this Planning Commission that: 1. On the basis of the Initial Study and the documents submitted and reviewed, and comments received and addressed by this commission, it is hereby found that there is no substantial evidence that the project set forth above will have a significant effect on the environment, and categorical exemption, per CEQA Article 19, Section: 15303 (a), which states that construction of a limited number of new, small facilities or structures including one single family residence or a second dwelling unit in a residential zone is exempt from environmental review. In urbanized areas, up to three single-family residences maybe constructed or converted under this exemption, is exempt from environmental review. 2. Said Design Review and Special Permits are approved subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. Findings for such Design Review and Special Permits are set forth in the staff report, minutes, and recording of said meeting. 3. It is further directed that a certified copy of this resolution be recorded in the official records of the County of San Mateo. Chairman I, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 241h day of November, 2008 by the following vote: Secretary EXHIBIT"A" Conditions of Approval for Categorical Exemption,Design Review and Special Permits. 1452 Drake Avenue Effective December 4,2008 1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Division date stamped November 14, 2008, sheets A1.1, A2.1, A2.2, A3.1, A3.2, and date stamped October 29,2008,sheet L-1; 2. that any changes to building materials,exterior finishes,windows,architectural features, roof height or pitch, and amount or type of hardscape materials shall be subject to Planning Division or Planning Commission review(FYI or amendment to be determined by Planning staff); 3. that any changes to the size or envelope of the first or second floors,or garage,which would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), shall require an amendment to this permit; 4. that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's September 26, 2008 memo, the City Engineer's October 16, 2008 memo, and the Fire Marshal's and NPDES Coordinator's September 29,2008 memos shall be met; 5. that demolition for removal of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the site shall not occur until a building permit has been issued and such site work shall be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District; 6. that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of the project, the project construction plans shall be modified to include a cover sheet listing all conditions of approval adopted by the Planning Commission,or City Council on appeal;which shall remain a part of all sets of approved plans throughout the construction process. Compliance with all conditions of approval is required; the conditions of approval shall not be modified or changed without the approval of the Planning Commission, or City Council on appeal; 7. that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall be combined, where possible, to a single termination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street;and that these venting details shall be included and approved in the construction plans before a Building permit is issued; 8. that the project shall comply with the Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance which requires affected demolition, new construction and alteration projects to submit a Waste Reduction plan and meet recycling requirements; any partial or full demolition of a structure,interior or exterior,shall require a demolition permit; 9. that during demolition of the existing residence,site preparation and construction of the new residence, the applicant shall use all applicable "best management practices" as identified in Burlingame's Storm Water Ordinance, to prevent erosion and off-site sedimentation of storm water runoff; EXHIBIT "A" Conditions of Approval for Categorical Exemption, Design Review and Special Permits. 1452 Drake Avenue Effective December 4, 2008 Page 2 10. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes, 2007 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame; THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET DURING THE BUILDING INSPECTION PROCESS PRIOR TO THE INSPECTIONS NOTED IN EACH CONDITION: 11. that prior to scheduling the foundation inspection, a licensed surveyor shall locate the property corners, set the building footprint and certify the first floor elevation of the new structure(s) based on the elevation at the top of the form boards per the approved plans; this survey shall be accepted by the City Engineer; 12. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection the project architect or residential designer, or another architect or residential design professional, shall provide an architectural certification that the architectural details shown in the approved design which should be evident at framing, such as window locations and bays, are built as shown on the approved plans; architectural certification documenting framing compliance with approved design shall be submitted to the Building Division before the final framing inspection shall be scheduled; 13. that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall shoot the height of the roof ridge and provide certification of that height to the Building Department; and 14. that prior to final inspection, Planning Department staff will inspect and note compliance of the architectural details (trim materials, window type, etc.) to verify that the project has been built according to the approved Planning and Building plans. CITY OF BURLINGAME COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BURLINGAME 501 PRIMROSE ROAD . L, ya ,4 BURLINGAME, CA 94010 1 PH: (650) 558-7250 • FAX: (650)1 . www.burlingame.org _ Site: 1452 DRAKE AVENUE The City of Burlingame Planning Commission announces the PUBLIC HEARING following public hearing on MONDAY, NOVEMBER 24, 2008 NOTICE at 7:00 P.M. in the City Nall Council Chambers, 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA: Application for Design Review and Special Permits for declining height envelope and attached garage for a new, two story single family dwelling at 1452 DRAKE AVENUE zoned R-l. APN 026-042-140 Mailed: November 14, 2008 (Please refer to other side) City of Burlingame A copy of the application and plans for this project may be reviewed prior to the meeting at the Community Development Department at 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, California. If you challenge the subject application(s) in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing, described in the notice or in written correspondence delivered to the city at or prior to the public hearing. Property owners who receive this notice are responsible for informing their tenants about this notice. For additional information, please call (650) 558-7250. Thank you. William Meeker Community Development Director PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE (Please refer to other side) '?�s F .: "`3 M�. �a ,��,,�Y�a1 �. hV` qf•A � � ._} �� 1`Y+I-` ='` v+ , .J. m �h a 411 IN ' Ar • h _ J47 �•, n,, �3#' �h o ti 1t ..d� I`. ,'_ }a �� A � �`". ^o� err � x4 nAat ... t•��; � '°"'�J �. "(1� ` \ Y r, F n , p.. O� Ile- 4r les1: t # fi, � �, ,,�, {•�QcQ r y�� y�.'y�_ y��_ � * t � � rbc "�•�� " �� '�' Y � x4 A�4 • :� �RH r may;: Y.. 4 . �� , ?.. k `i' '' ,�- ., :=$%c � O6L 7v � �; ``� per,,.-,• ,�.� :�"`y, w +ss a ,gt .�,t ',✓ ..,� s' '�' 4s.� J"'e^ � .' �. �. '76:, 9'�s4is5a �`� •fit �+�• ,*I �•' CITY OF BURLINGAME COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BURLINGAME 501 PRIMROSE ROAD 016HI6504325 BURLINGAME, CA 94010 : PH: (650)558-7250 • FAX: 650 ¢' ` 70 www.burlingame.org r . . . L Vi _. 5 -` % hiaiiehFrori 94j1l Site: 1452 DRAKE AVENUE �t US P0"i'-GF Appeal to the City Council of the Planning Commission's decision on PUBLIC HEARING an application for Design Review and Special Permits for declining height envelope and attached garage for a new, two story single NOTICE family dwelling at 1452 DRAKE AVENUE zoned R-1 (APN 026-042-140). The City of Burlingame City Council announces the public hearing on Monday,December 15,2008 at 7:00 P.M.in the Lane Room, Burlingame Public Library,480 Primrose Road,Burlingame, (A. For additional information,contact the Planning Division at (650)558-7250. Mailed: December 5, 2008 (Please refer to other side) City of Burlingame A copy of the application and plans for this project may be reviewed prior to the meeting at the Community Development Department at 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, California. If you challenge the subject application(s) in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing, described in the notice or in written correspondence delivered to the city at or prior to the public hearing. Property owners who receive this notice are responsible for informin their tenants about this notice. 9 For additional information, please call (650) 558-7250. Thank you. William Meeker Community Development Director PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE (Please refer to other side) RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME,DENYING THE APPEAL OF JERRY DEAL AND UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S NOVEMBER 24,2008, APPROVAL OF THE APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMITS FOR DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE AND ATTACHED GARAGE FOR A NEW,TWO STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AT 1452 DRAKE AVENUE,ON PROPERTY SITUATED WITHIN A SINGLE- FAMILY RESIDENTIAL(R-1)ZONE RESOLVED,BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME THAT: WHEREAS, on November 24, 2008, the Planning Commission approved an application for Design Review and Special Permits for declining height envelope and attached garage for a new,two story single family dwelling located at 1452 Drake Avenue(APN:026-042-140),and owned by Ginkgo Burlingame LLC,P.O.Box 513,Burlingame,California,94011;and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission's November 24, 2008 approval was appealed by Jerry Deal,and the City Council conducted a public hearing on the appeal on December 15,2008;denying the appeal and upholding the Planning Commission's approval. NOW,THEREFORE,IT IS RESOLVED AND DETERMINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL THAT: 1. The City Council hereby denies the appeal and upholds the Planning Commission's November 24, 2008 approval of the application for Design Review and Special Permits, based upon the Council's finding that the new two story single family dwelling and attached garage is well- designed,is consistent with the mass and bulk in the neighborhood,that the architectural style is consistent throughout the house and that it will improve the character of the block and enhance the design of the community. Additional findings for the City Council's action are as set forth in the minutes and recording of the City Council meeting of December 15,2008. 2. On the basis of the Initial Study and the documents submitted and reviewed, and comments received and addressed by this council, it is hereby found that there is no substantial evidence that the project set forth above will have a significant effect on the environment,and categorical exemption, per CEQA Article 19,Section: 15303(a),which states that construction of a limited number of new, small facilities or structures including one single family residence or a second dwelling unit in a residential zone is exempt from environmental review. In urbanized areas,up to three single-family residences maybe constructed or converted under this exemption. 3. Said Design Review and Special Permits are approved subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit"A'attached hereto. 4. It is further directed that a certified copy of this resolution be recorded in the official records of the County of San Mateo. Mayor I, Doris Mortensen, 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 15`" day of December, 2008 by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: City Clerk EXHIBIT "A' Conditions of Approval for Categorical Exemption, Design Review and Special Permits. 1452 Drake Avenue Effective December 15, 2008 Page 1 1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Division date stamped November 14, 2008, sheets A1.1, A2.1, A2.2, AV, A3.2, and date stamped October 29, 2008, sheet L-1; 2. that any changes to building materials, exterior finishes, windows, architectural features, roof height or pitch, and amount or type of hardscape materials shall be subject to Planning Division or Planning Commission review (FYI or amendment to be determined by Planning staff); 3. that any changes to the size or envelope of the first or second floors, or garage, which would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), shall require an amendment to this permit; 4. that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's September 26, 2008 memo, the City Engineer's October 16, 2008 memo, and the Fire Marshal's and NPDES Coordinator's September 29, 2008 memos shall be met; 5. that demolition for removal of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the site shall not occur until a building permit has been issued and such site work shall be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District; 6. that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of the project, the project construction plans shall be modified to include a cover sheet listing all conditions of approval adopted by the Planning Commission, or City Council on appeal; which shall remain a part of all sets of approved plans throughout the construction process. Compliance with all conditions of approval is required; the conditions of approval shall not be modified or changed without the approval of the Planning Commission, or City Council on appeal; 7. that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall be combined, where possible, to a single termination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street; and that these venting details shall be included and approved in the construction plans before a Building permit is issued; 8. that the project shall comply with the Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance which requires affected demolition, new construction and alteration projects to submit a Waste Reduction plan and meet recycling requirements; any partial or full demolition of a structure, interior or exterior, shall require a demolition permit; 9. that during demolition of the existing residence, site preparation and construction of the new residence, the applicant shall use all applicable "best management practices" as identified in Burlingame's Storm Water Ordinance, to prevent erosion and off-site sedimentation of storm water runoff; 10. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes, 2007 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame; EXHIBIT "A" Conditions of Approval for Categorical Exemption, Design Review and Special Permits. 1452 Drake Avenue Effective December 15, 2008 Page 2 THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET DURING THE BUILDING INSPECTION PROCESS PRIOR TO THE INSPECTIONS NOTED IN EACH CONDITION: 11. that prior to scheduling the foundation inspection, a licensed surveyor shall locate the property corners, set the building footprint and certify the first floor elevation of the new structure(s) based on the elevation at the top of the form boards per the approved plans; this survey shall be accepted by the City Engineer; 12. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection the project architect or residential designer, or another architect or residential design professional, shall provide an architectural certification that the architectural details shown in the approved design which should be evident at framing, such as window locations and bays, are built as shown on the approved plans; architectural certification documenting framing compliance with approved design shall be submitted to the Building Division before the final framing inspection shall be scheduled; 13. that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall shoot the height of the roof ridge and provide certification of that height to the Building Department; and 14. that prior to final inspection, Planning Department staff will inspect and note compliance of the architectural details (trim materials, window type, etc.) to verify that the project has been built according to the approved Planning and Building plans. Final Document City of Burlingame ® lid Waste Service Options Jesus Nava Finance Director/Treasurer City Council Study Session December 15, 2008 December 15, 2008 1 Presentati® n ® Overview of Solid Waste Services • History of SBWMA ® JPA Provisions ® SBWMA Staffing - Becker Study ® SBWMA Budget ® Shoreway Environmental Center Master Plan • Council Options On SBWMA & Master Plan • Solid Waste Collections Options • Questions from the Council • Council Direction & Requests for Information December 15, 2008 2 ,I Administration Franchise Management JPA Management Facilities Management Collection Services Processing Services Residential Municipal Solid Waste Solid Waste Recyclables Recyclables Green Waste Bulk Items Solid Waste Green Waste Household Hazardous Waste Services Food Waste Construction Debris Commercial Universal Waste Solid Waste Recyclables Household Hazardous Waste Specialized Waste Disposal Services Landfill Operations December 15,2008 3 Administration Franchise Management JPA Management Facilities Management Collection Services Processing Services Residential Municipal Solid Waste Solid Waste Recyclables Recyclables Green Waste Bulk Items Solid Waste Green Waste Household Hazardous Waste Services Food Waste Construction Debris Commercial Universal Waste Solid Waste Recyclables Household Hazardous Waste Specialized Waste Disposal Services Landfill Operations December 15,2008 4 2 Program Administration • Franchise Management — City of Burlingame (performance standards) — SBWMA Staff (contract compliance) • JPA Management — Initially Working Board of Directors — SBWMA Staff (after Becker Study) • Facilities Management — SBWMA Staff — Allied Staff (by management contract) December 15,2008 5 Administration Franchise Management JPA Management Facilities Management Collection Services Processing Services Residential Municipal Solid Waste Solid Waste Recyclables Recyclables Green Waste Bulk Items Solid Waste Green Waste Household Hazardous Waste Services Food Waste Construction Debris Commercial Universal Waste Solid Waste Recyclables Household Hazardous Waste Specialized Waste Disposal Services Landfill Operations December 15,2008 6 3 Collection Services o Residential — Solid Waste (putrescible waste) • Weekly Curbside Service — Recyclables (fiber, glass, plastic, metals) • Bi-weekly Curbside Service • Separate bins (paper, glass & plastic, metals) — Green Waste (grass clippings, yard waste) • Bi-weekly Curbside Service • Separate container (64 or 96 gallons) December 15,2008 Collection Services © Residential (continued) — Bulk Items (appliances, furniture, electronics) • By Appointment — Hazardous Household Waste • Curbside (batteries, cell phones, used oil) • Special Collection Events (city managed) • Residential Drop-off • County of San Mateo Programs — Holiday Tree Service December 15,2008 8 J.. Collection Services • Commercial — Solid Waste (exclusive franchise) • Bin containers • Compactors — Recyclables (non-exclusive franchise) • Bin containers • Compactors — Specialized Waste (third party contractors) • Medical & Industrial Waste • Document Shredding & Destruction December 15,2008 9 Administration Franchise Management JPA Management Facilities Management Collection Services Processing Services Residential Municipal Solid Waste Solid Waste Recyclables Recyclables Green Waste Bulk Items Solid Waste Green Waste Household Hazardous Waste Services Food Waste Construction Debris Commercial Universal Waste Solid Waste Recyclables Household Hazardous Waste Specialized Waste Disposal Services Landfill Operations December 15,2008 10 5 Waste Processing rvic ® All franchised solid waste is taken to South Bayside Recycling and Disposal Center (SRDC) an SBWMA owned facility — Residential trash collected at curbside — Commercial trash collected from bins — Compactors are pulled from businesses EIIII,flbw December 15,2008 11 Waste Processing Services ® Municipal Solid Waste (just trash) — Dumped at transfer station after collection truck is full — Pushed into pit and loaded on trailers — Load compacted for space and weight limits — Hauled to Allied landfill in Half Moon Bay —Allied pays SBWMA $63 tipping fee at SRDC — SBWMA pays Allied tipping fee at landfill — Both payments passed-through in rates December 15,2008 12 6 Waste roc in Services ® Separated Recyclables — taken to SRDC when collection trucks are full — Material is aggregated and baled —Allied sells materials to commodities brokers — SBWMA collects commodities revenue ® Up to $4.5 million, then shares with Allied 50% up to annual profit cap. Annual payments to Allied are roughly $400,000 given profit cap. Kk December 15,2008 13 Waste Processing Services ® Residential Green Waste — Dumped at SDRC after collection truck is full — Allied pays SBWMA $52.50 per ton fee — Waste is aggregated and hauled to Allied's Newby Island — Waste is filtered for contaminants (trash) — Waste is mulched and composted — End uses include mulch, compost (72%), landscaping December 15,2008 14 7 Waste rc i Services Construction & Demolition Materials — Burlingame city ordinance requires 60% diversion from landfills — Contractors free to choose waste processing facility to send materials — SBWMA rate is $71 .50 per ton — Materials are aggregated and shipped to Zanker Road (Green Waste Recovery, Inc.) — Waste facility provides proof of recycling December 15,2008 15 Waste Processing Services Universal Waste (heavy metals & chemical contaminants) — Electronics, computers, copiers, faxes — Fluorescent bulbs (six per drop-off) — Household batteries (drop-off or curb side) — Cell phones (drop-off or curb side) U-waste is aggregate and sent to dissemblers and recycling facilities December 15,2008 16 8 Waste Processing Services ® Household Hazardous Waste — Provided by County of San Mateo Health Department • Collection Events • Collection Center • No home pickup — SDRC does accept (picked up by County) • Used motor oil (up to 15 gallons) & oil filters • Used anti-freeze (up to 10 gallons) • Latex paint (up to 10 gallons) December 15,2008 17 Administration Franchise Management JPA Management Facilities Management Collection Services Processing Services Residential Municipal Solid Waste Solid Waste Recyclables Recyclables Green Waste Bulk Items Solid Waste Green Waste Household Hazardous Waste Services Food Waste Construction Debris Commercial Universal Waste Solid Waste Recyclables Household Hazardous Waste Specialized Waste Disposal Services Landfill Operations December 15,2008 18 9 Disposal Services ® All putrescible waste is disposed at the ox Mountain Landfill, owned and operated by Allied Waste ® SBWMA has a contract with Allied for use of the Landfill until 2019 ® SBWMA pays a per ton tipping fee to Allied for all waste disposed - $33.24 December 15,2008 19 Customer Base City of Burlingame Solid Waste Accounts —�-Residential Commercial 7,000 6,000 5,000 6,376 6,343 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,475 1,425 1,000 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 December 15,2008 20 10 Solid Waste Collection Amounts City of Burlingame, CA Solid Waste Tons 22,000 21,000 20,000 19,000 18,000 17,000 16,000 15,000 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 December 15,2008 21 SBW NIA Diversion Rates.2002-2006 Reported to CIIVIIB as Part of the Annual Report Process Jurisdiction 2002 2003 2004 2005' 20061 Atherton 62% 65% 69% 68%2 67%2 Belmont 49% 48% 54% 59% 61% Burlingame 47% 47% 54% 53% 60% East Palo Alto 71% 75% 84% 83% 82% Foster City 39% 35% 43% 45% 50% Hillsborough 64% 68% 65% 68%2 59%2 Menlo Park 44% 45% 53% 55% 55% Redwood City 46% 53% 61% 55% 61% San Carlos 42% 39% 46% 42% 47% San Mateo 1 46% 47% 52% 49% 55% December 15,2008 22 11 History of the SBWMA © Initially formed in 1982 as the South Bayside Transfer Station Authority (S BTSA) ® organized as the South Bayside Waste Management Authority (SBWMA) Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement on December 9, 1999 December 15,2008 23 SBWMA JPA ® Provisions of the 1999 JPA — Agreement shall continue until 12/31/2019 — Established "Equity" and "Non-Equity" members • Burlingame is an equity member ® There are no non-equity members — Made the City of San Carlos Director the permanent Chairperson of the Board Former City Manager Mike Garvey December 15,2008 24 12 SBWMA JPA ® Gave the Chair the following powers — Administer any and all meeting agendas — Conduct board meetings — Cause meeting minutes to be taken — Decide all issues resulting in tie votes — Supervise any and all SBWMA employees — Manage all SBWMA contracts & agreements —Approve all payments — Sign all official SBWMA documents December 15,2008 25 SBWMA JPA 7.1 SBWMA Powers. The SBWMA is authorized, but is in no way required, to act in its own name on any or all of the following matters, as each Member could act separately, and as it deems in the best interest of its Members, to the extent permitted by any and all applicable laws, codes, ordinances, resolutions and regulations December 15,2008 26 13 • Acquire, construct, finance, refinance, operate, regulate, and maintain Facilities. • Acquire, improve, hold, lease, and dispose of real and personal property of all types. • Enter into agreements to operate Solid Waste, Recyclable Material, and Plant Material Transfer, Transport and Processing Facilities. • Plan, study, and recommend proper and appropriate Solid Waste Recyclable Material and Plant Material Transfer, Transport and Processing management practices. Research and study issues related to Solid Waste Generation, Collection, Transfer, Processing, Diversion, and Disposal, including but not limited to source reduction, re-use, Recycling, and recovery. December 15,2008 27 SBWMA POWERS ® Resolve disputes between the public and any entities providing Solid Waste, Recycling Material, and Plant Material Transfer, Transportation and Processing services. Plan, design, and implement programs that address CIWMA transfer, processing and diversion requirements. Educate the public as to Solid Waste, Diversion, and Recycling matters. December 15,2008 28 14 SBWMA POWERS • Provide for or enter into agreements to provide for financial,engineering, legal,audit,and any other professional services supporting any of the SBWMA programs including,but not limited to,Solid Waste, Recyclable Material,and Plant Material Transfer, Transport and Processing Facility operations and Disposal.Such agreements can be made with any Person,including any Member. • Apply for,accept,and receive grants,gifts,donations, advances,and contributions. • Hire agents and employees. December 15,2008 29 SBWMA POWERS • Sue and be sued in its'own name. • Incur and discharge debts, liabilities,and obligations. • Issue bonds or notes and associated covenants,for designated purposes,subject to the provisions and limitations of the California Government Code. • Issue and receive loans. • Establish rates and fees at Solid Waste, Recyclable Material,and Plant Material Transfer,Transport and Processing Facilities. December 15,2008 30 15 SBWMA POWERS • Require Members to pass-through the cost of the SBWMA operations to the rates assessed on Facility users. • Adopt, as authorized by California law, ordinances and resolutions necessary to carry out the purposes of this Agreement. • Enter into Franchise Agreements for use of the Transfer Station and pay a Franchise fee. • Require Members to direct all of their Solid Waste, Recyclable Materials and Plant Materials generated and Collected by Collectors within their respective boundaries to the Facilities, except as provided in Exhibit D hereto. December 15,2008 31 JPA Amendments • 2005 Amendments — Redefined composition of Board of Directors • Solved attendance issues and use of alternatives with non-voting status • Affirmed "non-electeds" serving on Board — Requires that the Board of Directors select the Chairperson annually • Instead of the San Carlos Director serving in perpetuity • Avoids conflicts of interest given the City of San Carlos direct financial gains from the JPA December 15,2008 32 16 JPA Amendments • Established regular monthly meetings — Formerly "at least two meeting per fiscal year • Created the position of Executive Director — Appointed by the Board to serve "at-will" — Position recommended by Becker Study — Defined the powers of the executive director • Added "other distributions" category to distribution of funds received by SBWMA December 15, 2008 33 SBWMA Staffing -Becker Study ® SBWMA commissioned Rahn Becker, former Burlingame ACM to perform staffing analysis — 3 permanent fulltime positions were recommended • Executive Director • Recycling Program Manager • Recycling Coordinator — Continue other staff positions as part-time or contract and evaluate over time December 15, 2008 34 17 Table 5: SBWAIA RECOMMENDED ORGANIZATION CHART Green:SBIVAU,Board or Staff Yellow:Cousultauts Blue:Board Policy Decision I_._-SEWMA -. L.Board of directors _ egal ve -_OA FTE (To BeConsidered) ne - s I EzecuIN Director. `�'`Clerical Integrated WasFacility Contract Mgt. Mgt Programste Management I &Financial ESA COMRM HFH Contact 0.32 FTE t.D FTE RGS Cnlact ESA C'tr-t (FT Manage B Nup) (AB 939 Report.) DA9 FTE SBWMA Current Staffing FY08-09 Budget authorizes 8 full-time positions 1. Executive Director 2. Finance Manager 3. Administrative Assistant (Office Manager) 4. Recycling Program Manager 5. Recycling Specialist 6. Recycling Outreach & Sustainability Manager 7. Recycling Coordinator 8. Facility Operations & Contract Manager December 15,2008 36 18 Organization unart SBWMA Board of Directors Kevin McCannylPxectn(ve Direnar(RGS( Cathy Hldalpo/OHice Manager Marshall MoranlFinance Manager iRGS) (RGS) TBDIAdmin. Assistant � ----------- . ;RECYCLING PROGRAMS,OUTREACH ECYCLING PROGRAMS,OUTREACHI I'SHOREWAY NTRACTS RATE .�ACCOUNTING& S CONTRACT COMPLIANCE S CONTRACT COMPLIANCE AND MANAGCOEMENT MANAGEMENT AUDITING I F�fdmWJRacyepnp=:" Hila G-1Fadlt b s 7BD/Recyeling Outreach& ry tY R Marbp OS) Sustanablity Manager Contract Marsala-(RGS) TBD/Recycling Specialist '78D/ (Cathy Hidalgo to transition) Raryding Co. G-een=S2',V111A s'aii Red=Contractors/Shared Services SBWMA Organization Budget Expenditure FY 05-06 1 FY 06-07 1 FY 07-08 1 FY 08-09 Summary Actual Actual Budget Budget Administrative $ 719,417 $ 1,004,135 $ 1,506,535 $ 1,544,500 Rate Review 225,841 224,985 185,000 160,000 Contractor 687,518 553,103 679,552 455,000 Recycling Admin 170,328 68,262 63,908 55,000 Long Range Plan 158,843 120,416 190,000 145,000 Commercial Programs 89,055 126,280 229,182 312,000 Residential Programs 137,282 222,602 431,848 570,000 SBWMA Totals: $ 2,188,284 $ 2,319,783 $ 3,286,025 $ 3,241,500 Burlingame's Portion $ 286,665 $ 303,892 $ 430,469 $ 424,637 Percentage of Total 13.1%O 13.1%O 13.1%O 13.1%O December 15,2008 38 19 SBWMA Annual Payments to City of San Carlos Expenditure FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Summa Actual Actual Budget Bud et Property Taxes 24,554 30,176 30,780 44,000 Franchise Payment 1,121,728 1,204,744 1,206,131 1,273,433 Total Payment: $ 1,146,282 $ 1,234,920 $ 1,236,911 $ 1,317,433 Burlin ame's Portion $ 150,163 $ 161,775 $ 162,035 $ 172,584 Percenta Total 13.1% 13.1% 13.1% 13.1% December 15,2008 39 Burlingame Portion of SBWMA Administration and Payments to the City of San Carlos Expenditure FY 05-06 1 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 1 FY 08-09 Summary I Actual Actual I Budget Budget SBWMA Administration $ 286,665 $ 303,892 $ 430,469 $ 424,637 Payments to San Carlos $ 150,163 $ 161,775 $ 162,035 $ 172,584 Totals: $ 436,828 $ 465,666 $ 592,505 $ 597,220 Note: Does not include Debt Service or Allied Operating Contract Costs December 15,2008 40 20 South Say Disposal & Recycling Center (SDRC) • Located in San Carlos • Purchased from BFI in 1999 • Financed using tax-exempt revenue bonds • Operated by Allied (formerly BFI) under separate operating agreement • Operating costs financed by tipping fees set by SBWMA and revenue from recycling commodities sales December 15,2008 41 Shoreway Environmental Center • Name given to proposed new transfer station and recycling facility • Master-plan presented to Board for approval in April 2007 — New single-stream materials recovery facility (MRF) to accommodate commingled recycling — Expanded transfer station building — Traffic improvements — New administrative building December 15,2008 42 21 horeway Environmental Center ® Board asked to approve master plan based on project costs of $25,948,306 April 26, 2007 Project Costs New Materials Recovery Facility Building $ 11,252,520 Single Stream Sorting Equipment $ 8.500.000 (including installation) Subtotal MRF: $ 19,752,520 Transfer Station Improvements $ 6,195,786 Total Costs: $ 25,948,306 Source: SBWMA Staff Report-Shoreway Master Plan Preferred Alternatives December 15,2008 43 Shoreway Environmental Center Project costs increase to $41 .5 million - April 2008 — Staff indicates that FY07-08 budget had revised the earlier Board approved estimate from original $25,948,306 to $28,882,724 — Staff indicates that original estimate did not include equipment installation (previous report indicates that installation was included) — Staff indicates that MRF equipment costs were adjusted to reflect costs submitted in RFP responses ($15,000,000) and provides a separate cost for installation of the equipment ($2,500,000) December 15,2008 44 22 Shoreway Environmental Center April 2007 April 2008 Increase In Costs Costs Costs Building Improvements $ 17,448,306 $ 24,000,000 $ 6,551,694 MRF Processing Equipment $ 8,500,000 $ 15,000,000 $ 6,500,000 Subtotal: $ 25,948,306 $ 39,000,000 $ 13,051,694 MRF Equipment Installation&Start Up $ - $ 2,500,000 $ 2,500,000 Total Project Costs: $ 25,948,306 $ 41,500,000 $ 15,551,694 December 15,2008 45 Shoreway Environmental Center April 24, 2008 Revised Project Costs Compared to Original Est. $Difference %Difference Original April 2007 Project Costs: $ 25,948,306 Revised Project Costs(June 2007): $ 28,882,724 $ 2,934,418 11% Revised Project Costs(April 2008): $ 41,500,000 $ 15,551,694 60% Source: SBWMA Staff Report, "Shoreway Master Plan and Financing Update" December 15,2008 46 23 Shoreway Environmental Center • Project costs increase to $59.4 million — June 2008 (2 months later) — Staff indicates that increase is due to "soft costs" for planning, building & LEED fees, landscaping, signage, etc... — Construction management costs listed as $1 ,859,500 — MRF equipment installation costs listed as $2,779,000 December 15,2008 47 Shoreway Environmental Center April 2007 April 2008 Increase In June 2008 Increase In Costs Costs Costs Costs Costs Building Improvements $ 17,448,306 $24,000,000 $ 6,551,694 $ 36,182,300 $ 12,182,300 MRF Processing Equipment $ 8,500,000 $ 15,000,000 $ 6,500,000 $ 15,000,000 $ - Subtotal: $ 25,948,306 $ 39,000,000 $ 13,051,694 $51,182,300 $ 12,182,300 MRF Equipment Installation&Start Up $ - $ 2,500,000 $ 2,500,000 $ 2,779,000 $ 279,000 Total Project Costs: $25,948,306 $41,500,000 $ 15,551,694 $53,961,300 $ 12,461,300 Added 10%Contingency: $ 5,396,130 $ 5,393,130 $ 59,357,430 $ 17,854,430 December 15,2008 48 24 Shoreway Environmental Center June 26, 2008 Revised Project Costs Compared to Original Est. $Difference I%Difference Original April 2007 Project Costs: $ 25,948,306 Revised Project Costs(June 2007): $ 28,882,724 $ 2,934,418 11% Revised Project Costs(April 2008): $ 41,500,000 $ 15,551,694 60% Revised Project Costs(June 2008): $ 59,357,430 $ 17,857,430 129% Source: SBWMA Staff Report,"Resolution Requesting Member Agenies to Approve Sale of Bonds" December 15,2008 49 Shoreway Environmental Center Options: 1 . Concur with project costs as presented and vote to authorize issuance of bonds 2. Disagree with project costs and vote not to authorize the issuance of bonds 3. Postpone authorization of bonds and: A. request that a set of "realistic cost saving scenarios and alternatives" be developed by the SBWMA staff prior to approval of bonds December 15,2008 50 25 Shoreway Environmental Center • Options: 3. Postpone authorization of bonds (continued) B. Organize meeting with SBWMA agencies' elected officials to build consensus on: ➢ Cost containment of Shoreway project costs ➢ Cost containment of SBWMA administrative costs ➢ Renegotiation of payments to City of San Carlos ➢ Additional amendments to the JPA Agreement to address ownership of assets ➢ Political oversight of board governance &activities ➢ Defeasance of existing bonds December 15,2008 51 Shoreway Environmental Center • Options: 3. Postpone authorization of bonds (continued) C. Investigate and explore exit strategies from JPA, including, but not limited to: ➢ Timing of potential exit from JPA ➢ Negotiated "fair" resolution of ownership issues and distribution of assets and liabilities ➢ Legal remedies to resolve issues pertaining to ownership and distribution of assets and liabilities ➢ Legality of 4/5 majority vote of Board to approve withdrawal (if Board denies exit upon meeting conditions of the JPA) December 15,2008 52 26 Franchise for Waste Collection and Disposal Services ® State of California Constitution "A county or city may make and enforce within its limits all local, police, sanitary, and other ordinances and regulations not in conflict with general laws" (Article XI,§7). December 15,2008 53 Burlingame Municipal Code Section 8. 16 — Solid Waste Municipal Code Section 8.16.040 "Obligations of customers" specifies: (a) Unless otherwise expressly excepted by this chapter, the owner, occupant or other person responsible for the day-to-day operation of all residential, commercial, or industrial properties in the city shall contract with a city franchisee for the removal and disposal of solid waste generated from the use of the property. (b) The franchisee is authorized to charge all customers a fee for the collection and transportation of solid waste, subject to the approval by the city council of the fee. Such fees may include charges for collection, landfills, recovery or recyclables, composting and may include the cost of preparing and implementing source reduction, recycling elements and integrated waste management plans. December 15,2008 54 27 Franchise Agreement Between The City of Burlingame And BFI Waste Systems of North America, Inc. For Solid Waste, Recyclable Material and Plant Materials Collection Services December 15,2008 55 Franchise Agreement ® Superseded prior franchise — Former franchise dates were August 1987 to September 2004 — Resulted from the SBWMA purchase of the transfer station facilities — Was negotiated with service provider (BFI) — Recognized the use of the transfer station for the disposal of waste, recyclables and plant materials December 15,2008 56 28 City of Burlingame Franchise ® Granted BFI (now Allied) exclusive franchise for residential and commercial solid waste services — Non-exclusive for commercial recycling — Non-exclusive for debris box service — Initial term January 1 , 2000 to December 31 , 2006 • Extended to December 31, 2009 • Extended to December 31, 2010 December 15,2008 57 City of Burlingame Franchise ® Franchise Amendments: — First Amendment added the commercial plant material collection program — Second Amendment added the commercial organics collection program — Third Amendment extended the term of the agreement to December 31 , 2010 • As part of negotiated settlement on tipping fees at the Ox Mountain Landfill December 15,2008 53 29 City of Burlingame Franchise Current franchise can still be extended for additional six years 2.05 Additional Option to Extend Term. Agency shall have the additional option to extend this Agreement after the termination of the initial extension as provided in Section 2.04 from one to seven years in periods of at least 12 months on the same terms and conditions. If Agency elects to exercise this Option,it shall give written notice not later than 12 months prior to the termination date. December 15,2008 59 Overview of Collections RFP • Required all respondents to price new vehicles and equipment for comparison — Companies to choose their own vendors • Automated residential curbside pickup — Backyard service an option for agencies © Weekly solid waste collection December 15,2008 60 30 v rvi w of Collections ® Weekly single-stream recyclables collection — Including batteries, cell phones & motor oil ® Weekly organics (green waste) collection — Including home food scraps buckets • On-call bulk items pickup (twice per year) — Limitations on weight and size ® Annual holiday tree pickup and recycling — Assistance to elderly and physically challenged December 15,2008 61 Unique Collection Requirement ® City of Burlingame — City wide clean up event for single-family customers for curbside pickup of excess solid waste, bulky items, and e-waste — Offered in addition to twice-annual, on-call bulk item pickup — Contractor to work with City of Burlingame to promote city-wide event — Event to require separation of recyclables December 15,2008 62 31 City-wide Tan®u Acceptable Materials ® Solid waste (trash) ® Recyclables ® Organic materials (grass clippings, leaves, branches, food waste) ® Sulky items weighing 200 pounds or less ® Tires ® Major household appliances ® Electronic Waste December 15,2008 63 RFP Respondents • Allied Waste Services of San Mateo Co. ® Norcal Waste Systems of San Mateo Co. ® Republic Services of California Bayside Environmental Services & Transfer ® Proposals submitted for geographic areas — North District & South District — Combined Districts December 15,2008 64 32 SBWMA Evaluation of Proposals ® Proposals submitted to SBWMA by due date ® Proposals reviewed by Evaluation Committee — Kevin McCarthy, SBWMA Executive Director — Cliff Feldman, SBWMA Recycling Program Manager — Marshall Moran, SBWMA Finance Manager — Tim Flanagan, Asst. Gen Mgr. Monterey Regional Waste Management District — Richard Tagore-Erwin, R3 Consultants — Ric Hutchinson, R3 Consultants December 15,2008 65 SBWMA Evaluation of Proposals © Evaluation Committee Work — Proposals were evaluated using RFP criteria — Proposals were numerically scored and weighted using RFP criteria — Proposals were ranked by the committee based on their review — Rankings and recommendations were presented to the Selection Committee • Burlingame served on Selection Committee December 15,2008 66 33 Table A Pro oser Evaluation Score proposer and Score Maximum Percent of Evaluation Criteria Total Total Score for Evaluation ALLIED BESTNORCAL REPUBLIC Five Points Evaluators 1)Responsiveness to pass/Fail n/a P P P P the RFP 2)Company's Qualifications and 750 25% 551 665 647 661 Experience 3)Technical Proposal for Collection 750 25% 453 638 653 510 Services 4)Cost Proposal 1,000 33.3% 802 719 884 649 5)Number and Materiality of 250 8.3% 250 215 250 20 Exceptions 1 6)Environmental 250 8.3% 40 190 225 40 Enhancements TOTAL POINTS 3,000 100% 2,096 2,427 2,659 1,880 PERCENT OF TOTAL POINTS AWARDED 69.7% 80.9% 88.6%, 62.6% [ RANKING 3 2 1 4 7 Table B Estimated Annual Collection Services Rate Impact Company Allied BEST Norcal Republic Operating Cost $43,502,035 $49,717,944 $44,470,447 $61,433,400 Pass-Through Costs(10- $1,447,192 $2,447,688 $1,769,105 $2,378,456 year annual average) Total $44,949,227 $52,165,632 $46,239,552 $63,811,856 Percent Increase Over Allied 2008 Rate 6.89% 24.06% 9.96% 51.75% Application Cost of $42,050,000 December 15,2008 68 34 Disputes By Proposers © Over inclusion and exclusion of costs within the proposals © Over appropriateness of reference checks • Over ratings given for experience of management ® Over values given to environmental enhancements • Claims of subjectivity and biases in reviews and ranking of proposals December 15,2008 69 Actions By San Mateo County Allegations of bias and misrepresentations in selection process Concern over growing cost of Shoreway Environment Center Allegations of "bias and wrongful actions" on the part of Executive Director ® Formal complaint filed with Civil Grand Jury (Supervisor Hill) Civil Grand Jury conducting interviews December 15,2008 70 35 Pragmatic conclusions o All proposers are capable companies All proposers have the managerial and financial means of providing solicited services ® All proposers have history of providing services locally and regionally All proposers have "positive and negative" attributes All proposers rely on some labor pool December 15,2008 71 Pragmatic conclusions ® SBWMA recommendation is just that "a recommendation to member agencies" ® Each agency must undertake its own due diligence to gain assurances about costs, process and service delivery Most importantly, there are options December 15,2008 72 36 City of Burlingame Interests • Automating curbside collection • Further increasing waste diversion • Providing weekly single-stream recycling collection • Providing weekly organics collection • Minimizing costs of new services • Receiving excellent customer service • Solid waste rate certainty and stability December 15,2008 73 City of Burlingame Interests • Minimal disruption in new service delivery • Assistance in litter abatement in city parks, parking lots and business districts Excellent labor relations Excellent relations with city staff • Accountability to elected city officials December 15,2008 74 37 Common Models of Solid Waste Service Delivery o Single —district, winner-take-all ® Multi-district competitive contracting Negotiated contracting ® "Free-for-all" competition ® Nonexclusive franchising ® Competitive exclusive franchising December 15,2008 75 Collection Services Options 1 . Adopt the SBWMA Recommendation and award a 10-year franchise to Norcal — Known increase of 9.96% (or 10%) based on 2008 rates — Note that rates will increase prior to the effective date of new franchise ® 2009 proposed rate increase = 5% average 0 2010 proposed rate increase = 5% average ® Cost of new contract in addition to these increases December 15,2008 76 38 Collection Services Options 2. Negotiate an extension of the current franchise agreement with Allied — Take advantage of assets already in place — Minimize potential service disruptions to residents and businesses — Implement service enhancements provided in RFP at a fraction of the cost — Would still require use of the Shoreway Facility unless exit strategy is pursued December 15,2008 77 Collection Services Options 3. Negotiate franchise agreement with other service providers — Bayside Environmental Services and Transfer(BEST) • Would require purchase of new vehicles and equipment similar to Norcal • Negotiations may result in additional savings than those resulting from the SBWMA process • Would still require use of the Shoreway Facility unless exit strategy is pursued December 15,2008 78 39 General Illustration of Option Two • Extend and amend franchise agreement with Allied for full term allowed — Six, one-year extensions left — Seven years if franchise is amended effective January 1, 2010 • Implement automated curbside services using vehicles taken out of service in other SBWMA agencies — Avoid costs of new vehicles — Take advantage of depreciated assets December 15,2008 79 General Illustration of Option Two • Prevent stranded assets for commercial customers (multifamily and businesses) — Avoid costs for new bins plus pickup and delivery of equipment (roll-out) — Avoid costs of new trucks for servicing bins — Avoid service disruption to commercial accounts due to changes —Avoid errors in service billing due to transfer of accounts and billing information December 15,2008 80 40 General Illustration of Option Two ® Prevent stranded assets for residential customers — Solid waste and green containers stay to be used for automated service — New cost will be associated with new single stream recycling bins (simpler roll-out) — Minimal service disruptions due to changes ® Keep drivers familiar with Burlingame routes to minimize service disruptions December 15, 2008 81 Future Council Decisions ® Decide on city's future participation as member of SBWMA JPA © Decide on financing of Shoreway Environmental Center and issuance of $65.4 million in bonds © Decide on collection services provider • Decide on franchise payments to City of San Carlos (if continue with SBWMA) December 15, 2008 82 41 Options Pertaining to Shoreway Environmental Center & SBWMA Option 1: Concur with project costs and authorize bonds Option 2: Disagree with project costs and vote not to authorize issuance of bonds Option 3: Postpone issuance of bonds and pursue the following: A. Request set of"realistic cost savings scenarios and alternatives" prior to approval of bonds B. Organize meeting with SBWMA agencies' elected officials to build consensus on comprehensive strategies pertaining to JPA and Shoreway project C. Investigate &explore exit strategies from JPA including negotiated resolution and/or legal remedies December 15,2008 83 Options Pertaining to Collections Services Agreement Option 1: Adopt SBWMA recommendation and award 10-year franchise to NORCAL Option 2: Negotiate an extension of the current franchise agreement with Allied Waste Option 3: Negotiate a new franchise agreement with another service provider(i.e. BEST given readily available cost information) December 15,2008 84 42 Next Steps Gather and analyze information and data requested by Council to help them make decisions ® Develop timelines for reporting back to Council with information ® Schedule formal actions on future Council agendas December 15,2008 85 43