HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - CC - 2009.06.01 CITY 0
BURLINGAME
�
yffi-,—
90A
BURLINGAME CITY HALL
501 PRIMROSE ROAD
BURLINGAME, CA 94010
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
AGENDA
Monday,June 1, 2009
STUDY SESSION: 6:00 p.m.—Conference Room A
Meeting with AFSCME 829, AFSCME 2190, BAMM relative to City's request for salary freeze
CLOSED SESSION: 6:30 p.m. - Conference Room A
a. Conference with Labor negotiator pursuant to Government Code §54957.6(a):
City Negotiators: Deirdre Dolan, Jim Nantell, Glenn Berkheimer(IEDA)
Employee Organizations: AFSCME 829, AFSCME 2190, BAMM, Fire Administration, IAFF
`- 2400, Police Administrators, Police Officers Association, Teamsters Local 856, and Department
Head/Unrepresented Conference with Labor negotiator pursuant to Government Code
§54957.6(a):
1. CALL TO ORDER—7:00 p.m.—Council Chambers
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
3. ROLL CALL
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES —Regular Council Meeting of May 18, 2009
5. PUBLIC HEARINGS
a. Appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of an application for a design review amendment
for changes to a previously approved first and second story addition to a single family dwelling
on property at 1140 Cortez Avenue, located within a single family residential zone
b. Public Hearing on FY 2009-2010 Proposed Budget and Capital Program
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.
6. PUBLIC COMMENTS — At this time, persons in the audience may speak on any item on the agenda or any other matter
within the jurisdiction of the Council. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits Council from
acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are requested to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the
door and hand it to staff. The Mayor may limit speakers to three minutes each.
7. STAFF REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
a. Ballot Measure to change to an appointed City Clerk position
b. Appointment of subcommittee to meet with the Civil Service Commission
c. Resolution appointing a member representative and alternates to the Peninsula Cities Consortium
pertaining to the High Speed Rail Project
8. APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR
a. Adopt a Resolution reaffirming membership in the San Mateo County Pre-hospital Emergency
Services Group
b. Adopt a Resolution approving agreement for exchange of emergency medical, rescue, and fire
protection services automatic aid and first response
c. Adopt a Resolution in opposition to State property tax raid
9 . COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND ACTIVITIES REPORTS/AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
Council Members report on committees and activities and make announcements.
10. PUBLIC COMMENTS — At this time, persons in the audience may speak on any item on the agenda or any other matter
within the jurisdiction of the Council. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits
Council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are requested to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the
table by the door and hand it to staff. The Mayor may limit speakers to three minutes each.
11 . OLD BUSINESS
12. NEW BUSINESS
13. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
a. Commission Minutes: Library, April 21 , 2009; Beautification, May 7, 2009; Planning, May 11 &
May 26, 2009
b. Letters from Comcast concerning programming adjustment and price increase for equipment and
installation
c. Letter from Astound concerning an increase in video service rates
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.
14. ADJOURNMENT
Notice: Any attendees wishing accommodations for disabilities please contact the City Clerk at 650 558-7203 at least 24 hours
before the meeting. A copy of the Agenda Packet is available for public review at the City Clerk's office, City Hall, 501 Primrose
Road, from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. before the meeting and at the meeting. Visit the City's website at www.burlingame.org.
Agendas and minutes are available at this site.
NEXT MEETINGS
LIBRARY BOARD INTERVIEWS - MONDAY, JUNE 812009
CITY MANAGER MID-YEAR REVIEW - WEDNESDAY, JUNE 10, 2009
NEXT REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - MONDAY, JUNE 15, 2009
3
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 C
BURUNGAME
QWx,
BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL
Unapproved Minutes
Regular Meeting of May 18, 2009
1. CALL TO ORDER
A duly noticed regular meeting of the Burlingame City Council was held on the above date in the City Hall
Council Chambers. Mayor Ann Keighran called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
Led by Sandy Towle.
3. ROLL CALL
COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Baylock, Deal, Keighran, Nagel, O'Mahony
COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: None
CLOSED SESSION:
CA Guinan advised that Council met in closed session and directed staff regarding the following:
a. Real Property Acquisition of Parcel No. 029-231-060, negotiations with Property Owner/Owner's
Representative and City Representatives: Jim Nantell, Jesus Nava, Bill Meeker, pursuant to
Government Code § 54956.8
b. Conference with Labor negotiator pursuant to Government Code §54957.6(a):
City Negotiators: Deirdre Dolan, Jim Nantell, Glenn Berkheimer (IEDA)
Employee Organizations: AFSCME 829, AFSCME 2190, BAMM, Fire Administration, IAFF
2400, Police Administrators, Police Officers Association, Teamsters Local 856, and Department
Head/Unrepresented
4. MINUTES
Councilwoman Nagel made a motion to approve the minutes of the May 4, 2009 regular Council meeting;
seconded by Councilwoman O'Mahony. The motion was approved unanimously by voice vote 5-0.
5. PRESENTATIONS
1
Burlingame City Council May 18, 2009
Unapproved Minutes
a. RECOGNITION OF CITIZENS ACADEMY GRADUATES
Mayor Keighran presented Proclamations to the following graduates of the Citizens Academy: Boris
Brajkovic, Beverly D'Amico, Lily Lau, Linda Scheifler, Sandy Towle, and Jonathan Wolin.
b. RECOGNITION OF JESUS NAVA AS THE HISPANIC CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
RECIPIENT FOR THE CITY OF BURLINGAME
Mayor Keighran presented a Proclamation to Finance Director, Jesus Nava recognizing him as the San
Mateo County Hispanic Chamber of Commerce recipient for the City of Burlingame.
6. PUBLIC HEARINGS
a. ADOPT ORDINANCE 1839 AMENDING TITLE 25 OF THE BURLINGAME
MUNICIPAL CODE (ZONING ORDINANCE) TO ALLOW UP TO FIVE ADDITIONAL
FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS IN CERTAIN PORTIONS OF SUBAREA A OF THE
BURLINGAME AVENUE COMMERCIAL AREA, TO ADD A DEFINITION FOR"READY-
TO-EAT FOOD SHOP", AND TO CLARIFY THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR
SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS
CDD Meeker reviewed the staff report and requested Council hold a public hearing and adopt Ordinance No.
1839 to allow five additional food establishments, create a definition for"ready-to-eat food shops", and
clarify the parking requirements for single family dwellings.
Mayor Keighran opened the public hearing. The following spoke: Joan Endo, 243 California Drive; Louisa
Kao, 1108-1112 Burlingame Avenue & 303-305 California Drive. There were no further comments from the
floor and the hearing was closed.
CDD Meeker addressed the concerns raised by the two speakers with regard to their locations. Council
discussion followed concerning possible locations of the food establishments; expanding the number of
restaurants in the future.
Mayor Keighran asked CC Kearney to read the title of the proposed ordinance. Councilwoman O'Mahony
made a motion to waive further reading of the ordinance; seconded by Councilman Deal. The motion was
approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0.
Vice Mayor Baylock made a motion to adopt the proposed ordinance; seconded by Councilwoman
O'Mahony. The motion was approved unanimously by voice vote 5-0. Mayor Keighran directed CC
Kearney to publish a summary of the ordinance. Mayor Keighran directed CC Kearney to publish a
summary of the ordinance within 15 days of adoption.
7. PUBLIC COMMENTS
Stephen Hamilton, 105 Crescent Avenue spoke on the Family Fun Bike Ride and the Authors Luncheon;
Joan Endo, 1519 Burlingame Avenue spoke about restaurant permits. There were no further comments from
the floor.
2
Burlingame City Council May 18,2009
Unapproved Minutes
8. STAFF REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
a. DECLARING THE RESULTS OF THE MAY 5, 2009 MAIL BALLOT ELECTION OF
BURLINGAME PROPERTY OWNERS STORM DRAINAGE FEE
CC Kearney reviewed the staff report and requested Council adopt Resolution No. 42-2009 declaring the
results of the May 5, 2009 mail ballot election to consider the adoption of the annual storm drainage fee. The
total votes cast were 4,267 and there were 2,706 yes votes, (63.41%) and 1,561 no votes (36.58%). Council
was also requested to adopt Resolution No. 43-2009 directing that the storm drainage fees for Burlingame
parcels be provided to the County of San Mateo for placement on the 2009-2010 tax bills.
Council praised and thanked the staff for all their efforts and the time they volunteered. They also thanked
all the volunteers who devoted endless hours to accomplish the goal and expressed their appreciation to the
Community for their support.
Councilwoman O'Mahony made a motion to approve Resolution No. 42-2009 and Resolution No. 43-2009;
seconded by Vice Mayor Baylock. The motion was approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0.
b. NEW WATER SUPPLY AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN
FRANCISCO
DPW Murtuza reviewed the staff report and requested Council adopt Resolution No. 44-2009 approving and
authorizing the City Manager to execute an individual water sales contract with the City and County of San
Francisco; adopt Resolution No. 45-2009 approving and authorizing the water supply agreement with the
City and County of San Francisco; and adopt Resolution No. 46-2009 adopting findings for purposes of the
California Environmental Quality Act in connection with approval of a water supply agreement with the City
and County of San Francisco.
DPW Murtuza introduced Art Jensen, CEO of the Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency
(BAWSCA) who gave a presentation and reviewed the major provisions of the agreement, outlined the
objectives of the original agreement and the additional water supply provisions.
Council discussion followed. Councilwoman O'Mahony made a motion to approve Resolution No. 44-2009,
Resolution No 45-2009 and Resolution No. 46-2009; seconded by Vice Mayor Baylock. The motion was
approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0.
8. CONSENT CALENDAR
Councilman Deal requested that item 9a be pulled from the Consent Calendar for further discussion.
Councilwoman Nagel made a motion to approve Items 9b, 9c and 9d of the Consent Calendar; seconded by
Vice Mayor Baylock. The motion was approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0.
a. ADOPT RESOLUTIONAPPROVING THE CITY'S MEMBERSHIP IN THE BIO-SOLIDS
JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY
DPW Murtuza requested Council adopt Resolution No. 47-2009 approving the City of Burlingame's
membership in the Bay Area Bio-Solids Joint Powers Authority and authorizing the Mayor to execute the
first amendment to the agreement.
3
Burlingame City Council May 18,2009
Unapproved Minutes
Councilman Deal questioned why the project cost allocation fee was so high for Burlingame and not for the
other cities. DPW Murtuza clarified that the cost was not based on gallons of water that are being treated, but
rather based on the solid waste being sent to the Facility and advised that some cities have more than one
Facility to utilize.
Councilwoman O'Mahony made a motion to approve Resolution No. 47-2009; seconded by Councilwoman
Nagel. The motion was approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0.
b. ADOPT RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE TROUSDALE DRIVE WATER
SUPPLY PIPELINE PROJECT BY K. J. WOODS CONSTRUCTION
DPW Murtuza requested Council adopt Resolution No 48-2009 accepting improvements for the Trousdale
Drive Pipeline Project by K. J. Woods Construction, Inc.
C. REOEUST DIRECTION ON WHETHER TO CANCAL THE JULY 6, 2009 REGULAR CITY
COUNCIL MEETING
CC Kearney requested Council approve the cancellation of the regular City Council meeting scheduled for
July 6, 2009. In the past, due to summer vacations, this meeting has been cancelled.
d. APPROVE WARRANTS AND PAYROLL
FinDir Nava requested approval for payment of Warrants #39210-39842 duly audited, in the amount of
$3,342,206.53; Payroll checks No. 174031— 174202 in the amount of$2,727,151.52 for the month of April
2009.
9. COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND ACTIVITIES REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
Council reported on various events and committee meetings each of them attended on behalf of the City.
10. PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no comments from the floor.
11. OLD BUSINESS
a. WAIVER OF BLOCK PARTY PERMITS AS AN INCENTIVE FOR EMERGENCY
PREPAREDNESS PRESENTATIONS
Councilwoman Nagel requested Council consider approving waivers for block party permits to applicants
who agree to schedule a neighborhood emergency preparedness presentation by Central County Fire
Department during the block party. She said her recommendation would be to have the Fire Department to
present an overview of the programs offered by the City.
FC Dornell addressed the Council and said it is difficult to target when to send a team since people come and
go at a block party and there is no guarantee that a team would be available at a specific time. He said it
might be possible for members of the Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) to give the
presentation.
4
Burlingame City Council May 18,2009
Unapproved Minutes
Council agreed that the CERT volunteers would be more appropriate to give the presentation and also
provide a kiosk with flyers about the programs offered by the City. It was also agreed to bring it back on a
future agenda to implement a specific plan.
12. NEW BUSINESS
Set Appeal Hearing for 1140 Cortez for Monday, June 1, 2009.
13. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
a. Department Reports: Finance, April 2009; Building, April 2009
14. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Keighran adjourned the meeting at 9:15 p.m. in memory of Dorothy Murray, who was a long time
resident of Burlingame.
Respectfully submitted,
Mary Ellen Kearney
City Clerk
5
Burlingame City Council May 18,2009
Unapproved Minutes
BURLINGAIME AGENDA ITEM NO: 5a
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: June 1.2009
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTEDBY:
_
DATE: May 26, 2009 APPROVED BY:
FROM: William Meeker, Community Development Director— (650) 558- 255
SUBJECT: APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF AN APPLICATION FOR
A DESIGN REVIEW AMENDMENT FOR CHANGES TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED
FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION TO A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING, ON
PROPERTY AT 1140 CORTEZ 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 a Design Review
Amendment for changes to a previously approved first and second story addition to a single family
dwelling at 1140 Cortez 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 Amendment for changes to a previously approved first and second story addition to a
single family dwelling with conditions of approval as amended by the Planning Commission; or
2. grant the appeal, and modify the Planning Commission's decision by amending the conditions of
approval; or
3. grant 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.
BACKGROUND:
Project Description: On April 28, 2008, the Planning Commission approved an application for Design
Review and Special Permit for declining height envelope for construction of a first and second story
addition to a single family dwelling (April 28, 2008 Planning Commission Minutes). A building permit was
issued on June 2, 2008, and construction is nearing completion.
The applicant is requesting approval for changes that affect all four building elevations (see revised plans
dated April 29, 2009, which include the originally approved and as-built building elevations). Planning
staff would note that a roof ridge survey was submitted and confirmed that the height of the structure
matches the approved plans. However, an architectural certification letter for this project was not found.
The designer submitted a letter dated April 28, 2009, discussing the reasons for the changes, and is
attached to the May 11, 2009 Planning Commission staff report for review. In addition to the changes
outlined in the applicant's letter, Planning staff would also note that water table beyond the stone base
along the right side of the house below the box bay was eliminated. The following is a summary of the
as-built changes:
CITY COUNCIL MEETING—June 1,2009
Public Hearing—Appeal RE:1140 Cortez Avenue
1. Driveway
• Site Plan and Landscape Plan indicate driveway to be constructed using pavers. A concrete
driveway was installed.
2. Window Trim
• Window sill and apron eliminated from all windows throughout the house.
3. Landscaping
• New 24-inch box swamp myrtle(tristania laurina)not planted in front yard,left corner as required
by Planning Commission in original approval(designer notes required tree will be planted prior to
final inspection).
4. Right Elevation
• Wood water table eliminated from kitchen to rear of house.
• Windows in sun porch have been combined.
• Roof extension and wood knee braces at kitchen box bay have been eliminated.
• Wood deck eliminated and proposed to be replaced with flagstone patio,landing and stairs(deck
was not included in lot coverage since it is less than 30"above grade).
5. Left Elevation
• Wood water table eliminated along side of house.
• Material on blind door changed from shingle to solid material.
• Second window from rear in family room was shifted closer to street side.
6. Rear Elevation
• Wood water table eliminated along rear of house.
• Small windows on either side of large window in family room were reduced in size.
• Corbels eliminated under second floor cantilever at master bedroom.
Other than the proposed changes described above and detailed in the applicant's April 28,2009 letter,
there are no other changes proposed to the design of the house. The applicant is requesting the
following:
• Amendment to Design Review for as-built changes to a previously approved first and second
story addition.
The latest Planning Commission staff report(dated May 11,2009)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 15301 Class 1(e)(2) - additions to existing
structures provided the addition will not result in an increase of more than 10,000 SF in areas where all
public services and facilities are available and the area in which the project is located is not
environmentally sensitive.
2
CITY COUNCIL MEETING —June 1, 2009
Public Hearing —Appeal RE: 1140 Cortez Avenue
Prior Planning Commission Action:
Planning Commission Approval: The project was reviewed by the Planning Commission on May 11, 2009
(action meeting). At that meeting, the Planning Commission approved the property owner's request for
a Design Review Amendment for changes to a previously approved first and second story addition to a
single family dwelling, with the exception of the driveway material which was constructed using solid
concrete instead of pavers as originally approved (see attached May 11, 2009 Planning Commission
Minutes). The Commission approved the application on a vote of 5-0-1-1 (Commissioner Cauchi absent,
Commissioner Yie recused). In their action, the Commission added the following condition regarding the
driveway: "that the driveway shall be installed in accordance with the plans submitted to the Planning
Division, date stamped April 3, 2008; unless an alternative driveway design is reviewed and approved by
the Planning Commission that provides for a similar aesthetic affect and opportunity for percolation of
water, as an FYI item." Commissioners expressed a concern with impervious surface on the property
and suggested installing a strip down the middle of the concrete driveway to be filled in with soft
landscaping or other pervious material; the applicant voiced opposition to this approach, which lead the
Commission to adopt the condition described herein in an effort to provide the applicant with some
flexibility in identifying a solution that could address the Commission's concerns.
Appeal of Planning Commission's Action: On May 14, 2009, Michael Kaindl of JD & Associates, the
project designer, appealed the Planning Commission's action (see attached letter dated May 14, 2009).
In his letter, he requests that the City Council eliminate the condition regarding the driveway design and
approve the as-built concrete driveway without a pervious strip.
Attachments:
Appeal letter from Michael Kaindl, JD & Associates, project designer, dated May 14, 2009
May 11, 2009 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
May 11, 2009 Planning Commission Staff Report
Notice of Appeal Hearing — Mailed May 26, 2009
City Council Resolution (proposed)
3
r
JD & ABSOCIAi ES
Al
Residential Design
'' & Engineering
Jerry Deal
HONORABLE MAYOR AND
CITY COUNCIL:
May 14, 2009 please schedule an appeal
hearing for 1140 Cortez Avenue
Honorable Members to be heard at the Juno.1 , 2009
City Council Members City Council meeting .
City of Burlingame
501 Primrose Rd. City Cleric
Burlingame, CA 94010
Re: 1140 Cortez Ave
As per Planning Commission meeting May 11, 2009 we are herewith, on behalf of our
client Mr. Simon Jang, requesting this appeal for the condition of approval of a
landscape strip in the center of the driveway from back of sidewalk to drive gate.
Respect
y yours,
ichael Max Kaindl, Associate Y
Cc: Simon Jang, Owner
Steve Johnson, Contractor
Ruben Hurin, Senior Planner
Attachment: Check # 1721 in the amount of $480.00
r.
R EG
I
CITY C6
PLJXNNw:
875 Mahler Rd. Suite 20(
Burlingame, CA 9401(
tele: 650-697-137(
fax: 866-899-759'
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION
6URLINGAME
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
Monday, May 11, 2009 —7:00 p.m.
City Council Chambers— 501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, California
4. 1140 CORTEZ AVENUE,ZONED R-1 —APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AMENDMENT FOR AS-
BUILT CHANGES TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION TO A
SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING (SIMON JANG, APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER; AND JD AND
ASSOCIATES, DESIGNER) STAFF CONTACT: RUBEN HURIN
Reference staff report dated May 11, 2009,with attachments. Associate Planner Strohmeier presented the
report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Eleven (11) conditions were suggested for consideration.
Chair Terrones opened the public hearing.
Michael Kaindl, JD&Associates, 875 Mahler Road; Simon Jang, 1140 Cortez Avenue; and Steve Johnson
(contractor), 1136 Cortez Avenue; represented the application.
■ Summarized the design changes.
Commission comments:
■ Asked if the applicant would be willing to install a landscaped strip down the middle of the concrete
driveway? (Jang—pavers did not flow with the design of the home. The strip would allow weeds to
grow. Johnson—Concerned about the stability of the paving if installed in the manner suggested. A
sharp edge will result from cutting the concrete to add the strip down the center. Jang—ok with that
solution as long as it doesn't compromise the driveway. Kaindl—proposed placing pavers in sand in
the strip in the center of the driveway.)
■ The strip doesn't need to be grass; could be another plant material that doesn't require as much
moisture as lawn area.
■ Clarified that the window trim was revised to match the existing window trim.
■ Gravel set the pavers to provide greater permeability than would occur with sand set pavers.
Public comments:
Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa Avenue; spoke:
■ A big deal is made about the use of pavers to reduce impervious surfaces; placing the strip in the
driveway will not prevent water from sheeting off of the driveway.
■ Cutting the driveway now will not look good because it wasn't planned for initially; will create a
potential tripping hazard; leave it as it was installed.
There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed.
Additional Commission comments:
■ Likes the idea of having less pervious surface on the property; agrees with installing a strip in the
driveway; it can be done well.
■ Install the strip in the area in front of the gate.
7
CITY OFBURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION—Unapproved Minutes May 11,2009
Sawing the driveway after the fact will not result in a clean cut;will not look acceptable;should have
followed the original plan.
Believes that the slab can be cut cleanly;edge will be covered with vegetation or other material.
Drippings from vehicles will be filtered by the strip if installed.
Commissioner Brownrigg moved to approve the application, by resolution; with the exception of the
driveway design;providing direction to the applicant to develop an alternate design for the driveway that will
permit percolation of water and create the aesthetic affect of the original design,to be presented to the
Planning Commission as an FYI item;subject to the following amended conditions:
1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Division date stamped
April 3,2008,sheets A-1 through A-6,G-1,SF and L-1,and dated stamped April 28,2009,sheets
A-1,A-2 and A-4.1 through A-6.1,and that any changes to building materials,exterior finishes,
footprint or floor area of the building shall require an amendment to this permit;
2. that the driveway shall be installed in accordance with the plans submitted to the Planning Division,
date stamped April 3,2008;unless an alternative driveway design is reviewed and approved by the
Planning Commission that provides for a similar aesthetic affect and opportunity for percolation of
water,as an FYI item;
3. that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's February 1,2008,memo,and the City Engineer's,
Fire Marshal's and NPDES Coordinator's February 4,2008 memos shall be met;
4. that demolition or 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;
5. that any changes to the size or envelope of the basement,first or second floors,or garage,which
would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), moving or changing windows and architectural
features or changing the roof height or pitch,shall be subject to Planning Commission review;
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 complywith 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 orexterior,
shall require a demolition permit;
9. 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;
2
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Unapproved Minutes May 11, 2009
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET DURING THE BUILDING INSPECTION PROCESS
PRIOR TO THE INSPECTIONS NOTED IN EACH CONDITION
10. 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;
11 . 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
12. 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:
■ Concerned about saw-cutting of the existing driveway, will require cutting through the re-bar; will
affect the structure of the driveway.
■ Driveway does not have re-bar, but will normally have a steel mesh mat.
Chair Terrones called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed 5-0-1-1 (Commissioner
Cauchi absent, Commissioner Yie recused). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:59
p.m.
Commissioner Yie returned to the dais.
3
Item No.
Action It m
, m
B
t
,
t � z
�i
f
z ,
z uC>t x
PROJECT LOCATION
1140 Cortez Avenue
City of Burlingame Item No.
Amendment to Design Review Action Item
Address: 1140 Cortez Avenue Meeting Date: May 11, 2009
Request: Design Review Amendment for as-built changes to a previously approved first and second story
addition to a single family dwelling.
Applicant and Property Owner: Simon Jang APN: 026-162-240
Designer: JD &Associates 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 15301 Class 1(e)(2) -additions to existing structures provided
the addition will not result in an increase of more than 10,000 SF in areas where all public services and facilities
are available and the area in which the project is located is not environmentally sensitive.
History: On April 28, 2008, the Planning Commission approved an application for Design Review and Special
Permit for declining height envelope for construction of a first and second story addition to a single family
dwelling (April 28, 2008 P.C. Minutes). A building permit was issued on June 2, 2008, and construction is
nearing completion.
Request for Approval of As-built Changes: The applicant is requesting an Amendment to Design Review for
as-built changes to a previously approved first and second story addition at 1140 Cortez Avenue, zoned R-1.
The applicant is requesting approval for changes which affect all four building elevations (see revised plans
dated April 29, 2009,which include the originally approved and as-built building elevations). Planning staff would
note that a roof ridge survey was submitted and confirmed that the height of the structure matches the approved
plans. However, an architectural certification letter for this project was not found.
The designer submitted a letter dated April 28,2009,discussing the reasons for the changes,and is attached to
the staff report for review. In addition to the changes outlined in the applicant's letter, Planning staff would also
note that water table beyond the stone base along the right side of the house below the box bay was eliminated.
The following is a summary of the as-built changes:
1. Driveway
• Site Plan and Landscape Plan indicate driveway to be constructed using pavers. A concrete driveway
was installed.
2. Window Trim
• Window sill and apron eliminated from all windows throughout the house.
3. Landscaping
• New 24-inch box swamp myrtle (tristania laurina) not planted in front yard, left corner as required by
Planning Commission in original approval (designer notes required tree will be planted prior to final
inspection).
4. Right Elevation
• Wood water table eliminated from kitchen to rear of house.
Windows in sun porch have been combined.
• Roof extension and wood knee braces at kitchen box bay have been eliminated.
• Wood deck eliminated and proposed to be replaced with flagstone patio, landing and stairs (deck was
not included in lot coverage since it is less than 30" above grade).
Amendment to Design Review 1140 Cortez Avenue
5. Left Elevation
• Wood water table eliminated along side of house.
• Material on blind door changed from shingle to solid material.
• Second window from rear in family room was shifted closer to street side.
6. Rear Elevation
• Wood water table eliminated along rear of house.
• Small windows on either side of large window in family room were reduced in size.
• Corbels eliminated under second floor cantilever at master bedroom.
Other than the proposed changes described above and detailed in the applicant's April 28,2009 letter,there are
no other changes proposed to the design of the house. The applicant is requesting the following:
• Amendment to Design Review for as-built changes to a previously approved first and second story
addition.
Summary of Original Application: The existing one-story house with a detached, oversized one-car garage
(351 SF, 16-10'x 20'-10")contains 2,254 SF (0.38 FAR)of floor area and has three bedrooms. The applicant is
proposing to replace the existing front porch at the front of the house with a smaller footprint (219 SF existing
where 155 SF is proposed) and add a new 1,167 SF second floor. With the proposed first and second story
addition, the floor area will increase from 2,254 SF (0.38 FAR)to 3,371 SF (0.56 FAR)where the Zoning Code
allows a maximum of 3,371 SF(0.56 FAR). A Special Permit is required for encroachment along the left side of
the house (108 SF, 3'-3" x 33'-3" extends beyond the Declining Height Envelope).
With the addition, the number of bedrooms will be increasing from three to four. Two parking spaces, one of
which must be covered, are required on site. The existing detached one-car garage will be demolished and
replaced with the same footprint and location. The new detached one-car garage (14'-3" x 20' clear interior
dimensions) provides one parking space. One uncovered parking space is provided in the driveway(9'x 20').
All other Zoning Code requirements have been met. In the original application, the applicant requested the
following applications:
■ Design Review for a first and second story addition to a single family dwelling (CS 25.57.010); and
■ Special Permit for Declining Height Envelope (108 SF, 3'-3" x 33'-3" along the left side of the house
extends beyond the Declining Height Envelope).
1140 Cortez Avenue
Lot Area: 6000 SF Plans date stamped: April 3, 2008
EXISTING PROPOSED ALLOWED/REQ'D
SETBACKS
Front(1st fir): 22'-10" 23'-10" to porch 16'-6" block average
(2nd fir): none 30'-6" 20'-0"
Side (left): 3'-0" 5'-0" 4'-0"
r� ht) 10'-9" 10'-9" to 2nd floor 4'-0"
( 9
.................................................................................................._................................_........................_..............._......................................................................................_............................................................_......................_..............
................................._.....
Rear(1st fir): 15'-7" no change 15'-0"
(2nd fir): none 46'-6" 20'-0'
-2-
Amendment to Design Review 1140 Cortez Avenue
1140 Cortez Avenue
Lot Area: 6000 SF Plans date stamped: April 3, 2008
PREVIOUS
EXISTING ALLOWED/REQ'D
03/06/08 PLANS
Lot Coverage: 2630 SF 2320 SF 2400 SF
39.3% 38.6% 40%
......... ................................................... ...................... .. ........................................._............................, ......_. . ..._.......................___....._......................_......... ............................. ............ ........... ......._..
FAR: 2254 SF 3371 SF 3371 SF '
0.38 FAR 0.56 FAR 0.56 FAR
......................_.............. ..................... .. .. ......... ...............:................................_........ . . .... . ............ .................................... ...... ...............
# of bedrooms: 3 4 ---
....................... .................................. .. . ........ _ ....... .......... .............. ......... ............ .. _...... ......... ........... ...
Parking: 1 covered 1 covered 1 covered
1 uncovered (14'-3" x 20') (10' x 20')
1 uncovered 1 uncovered
(9'x 20')
(9' x 20')
Height: 16'-0" 28'-7" 30'-0"
....................................................................................................................-................. ...................... _...................................._...._................................................. ............................................................._......................
_........._.....
DH Envelope: complies Special Permit for DHE CS 25.28.075, b, 2
required along left side
of house 2
(0.32 x 6000 SF) + 1100 SF + 351 SF = 3371 SF (0.56 FAR)
2 Special Permit for Declining Height Envelope (108 SF, 3'-3"x 33'-3"along the left side of the house extends
beyond the Declining Height Envelope).
Staff Comments: See attached original memos from the Chief Building Official, Fire Marshal, City Engineer and
NPDES Coordinator.
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.
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
April 3, 2008, sheets A-1 through A-6, G-1, SF and L-1, and dated stamped April 28, 2009, sheets A-1,
A-2 and A-4.1 through A-6.1, and that any changes to building materials, exterior finishes, footprint or
floor area of the building shall require an amendment to this permit;
-3-
Amendment to Design Review 1140 Cortez Avenue
2. that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's February 1,2008,memo,and the City Engineer's,Fire
Marshal's and NPDES Coordinator's February 4,2008 memos shall be met;
3. that demolition or 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;
4. that any changes to the size or envelope of the basement,first or second floors,or garage,which would
include adding or enlarging a dormer(s),moving or changing windows and architectural features or
changing the roof height or pitch,shall be subject to Planning Commission review;
5. 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;
6. that all air ducts,plumbing vents,and flues shall be combined,where possible,to a single termination
and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street;and that these venting details shall be
included and approved in the construction plans before a Building permit is issued;
7. that the 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;
8. 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
9. 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;
10. 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
11. 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.J Deal&Associates,applicant and designer
-4-
Amendment to Design Review 1140 Cortez Avenue
Attachments:
Letter submitted by J Deal Associates, dated April 28, 2009
April 28, 2009 Planning Commission Minutes
Staff Comments
Planning Commission Resolution (Proposed)
Notice of Public Hearing — Mailed May 1 , 2009
Aerial Photo
-5-
JD & ASSOCIATES
k
Residential Design
&EnginoeAng
Jerry Deal
April 28, 2OU9 �����y`� -NED
City ofBurlingame «.� ?004
CornnnunityDave|oprnentD8partnlent ^~`~
SO1Primrose Rd. c|r/u+u�R�|mGf�s
Burlingame, CA94O10 pi�mw|m�oEPT
Attn: Mr. Ruben Hurin, Senior Planner
Re: 1140 Cortez Ave. Design Review Compliance Response
1. Roof Ridge Survey
° Verification 4/23/09 by Kavanagh Engineering attached.
2. Driveway
° Concrete installed inlieu ofpavers.
3. Window Trim
° Eliminated due to (E) did not have sill trim.
4. Landscaping
° 24 inch box Swamp Myrtle to be installed by May 11, 2009.
5. Right Elevation
* Water table see Note
° 3 windows combined as one unit to eliminate narrow shingle posts.
* Kitchen vVindOvv box projection existing only 7" this minor element
did not warrant extensive braces.
° (E) Wood deck/rail eliminated due to confined rear yard open space.
6. Left Elevation
° Water tables sea Note
° Blind to be painted to match shingles, since door partial adjacent to
concrete foundation. Water heater access panel door to be painted
to match shingles.
° (E) Field verification of windows remained as is, not relocated.
7. Rear Elevation
* Water table see Note
° Family room windows as per floor plan, elevation indicated taller.
° Master suite projection minor did not warrant corbels.
Note
During construction the water table was not graphically removed, the intent in
craftsman vernacular most commonly is used to separate two materials, as at front
elevation and side returns with the stone base.
875Mahler Rd. Suite 2[
KaindLAsoodate Burlingame, CA94U1
] Deal Associates
Cc: Simon ]ang, Owner tele: 650'887-13-1
Steve Johnson, General Contractor fax: 8O0'898'75�
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION—Approved Minutes April 28, 2008
7. 1140 CORTEZ AVENUE,ZONED R-1 —APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMIT
FOR DECLINING HEIGHT ENVELOPE FOR A FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION TO A SINGLE
FAMILY DWELLING (SIMON JANG, APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER; AND JD AND
ASSOCIATES DESIGNER) PROJECT PLANNER: RUBEN HURIN
Reference staff report dated April 28, 2008, with attachments. Community Development Director Meeker
presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Eleven (11) conditions were suggested for
consideration.
Chair Cauchi opened the public hearing.
Commission comments:
■ Noted that the proposed FAR is at the maximum allowed.
Michael Kaindl, JD &Associates, 875 Mahler Road; represented the applicant.
■ The CAD measures including the exterior finishes, which leads to the maximum FAR.
Public comments:
■ None
There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Vistica 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
April 3, 2008, sheets A-1 through A-6, G-1, SF and L-1, and that any changes to building materials,
exterior finishes, footprint or floor area of the building shall require an amendment to this permit;
2. that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's February 1,2008, memo,and the City Engineer's,
Fire Marshal's and NPDES Coordinator's February 4, 2008 memos shall be met;
3. that demolition or 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;
4. that any changes to the size or envelope of the basement, first or second floors, or garage, which
would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), moving or changing windows and architectural
features or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to Planning Commission review;
5. 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;
6. that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall be combined, where possible, to a single
termination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street;and that these venting
details shall be included and approved in the construction plans before a Building permit is issued;
10
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION—Approved Minutes April 28, 2008
7. 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;
8. 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
9. 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;
10. 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
11. 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 Terrones.
Discussion of motion:
■ Commissioner Brownrigg noted that he supported the motion, but strongly discourages any changes
to finishing materials. Would not support a future request for a Variance to exceed the maximum
FAR.
Chair Cauchi called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed 5-0-1-1 (Commissioner
Auran absent, Commissioner Yie recused). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 8:38
p.M.
Commissioner Yie returned to the dais.
11
Project Comments
Date: February 1, 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 for a second story addition to an existing
single family welling and Special Permit for Declining Height
Envelope at 1140 Cortez Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 026.162.240
Staff Review: February 4, 2008
1) On the plans specify that this project will comply with the 2007 California Building Codes (CBC).
2) Provide fully dimensioned plans.
3) Provide existing and proposed elevations.
4) Show the distances from all exterior walls to property lines or to assumed property lines
5) Provide a complete demolition plan that indicates the existing walls, walls to be demolished, new
walls, and a legend. 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) Indicate on the plans that exterior bearing walls less than five feet from the property line will be
built of one-hour fire-rated construction. (Table 602)
9) Rooms that can be used for sleeping purposes must have at least one window or door that
!+___:G. the
..1 1...x._1:..... F..IIrequired
.!
complies with the egress requirements. Speedy the size and location of all required egress
windows on the elevation drawings.
10) Provide guardrails at all landings. NOTE: All landings more than 30" in height at any point are
considered in calculating the 'allowable floor area. Consult the Planning iii Ig vepartl i lei It fCr dciaiis 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 bij�,_- - Date: o�
G-
Project Comments
Date: February 1, 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 d NPDES Coordinator
(650) 558-7254 (650) 342-3727
L City Attorney
From: Planning Staff
Subject: Request for Design Review for a second story addition to an existing
single family welling and Special Permit for Declining Height
Envelope at 1140 Cortez Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 026.162.240
Staff Review: February 4, 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: Date: ��
Project Comments
Date: February 1 , 2008
To: a( 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
❑J City Attorney
From: Planning Staff
Subject: Request for Design Review for a second story addition to an existing
single family welling and Special Permit for Declining Height
Envelope at 1140 Cortez Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 026.162.240
Staff Review: February 4, 2008
1. Storm drainage shall be designed to drain towards the street frontage or to the
City storm drain system.
2. Replace all displaced/damaged sidewalk, driveway, curb and gutter.
3. Sewer backwater protection certification is required. Contact Public Works —
Engineering Division at (650) 558-7230 for additional information.
Reviewed by: V V Date: 02/04/2008
Project Comments
Date: February 1, 2008
To: ® City Engineer ® Recycling Specialist
(650) 558-7230 (650) 558-7271
® Chief Building Official ® Fire Marshal
(650) 558-7260 (650) 558-7600
® City Arborist 10 NPDES Coordinator
(650) 558-7254 (650) 342-3727
® City Attorney
From: Planning Staff
Subject: Request for Design Review for a second story addition to an existing
single family welling and Special Permit for Declining Height
Envelope at 1140 Cortez Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 026.162.240
Staff Review: February 4, 2008
1) Any construction project in the City, regardless of size, shall comply with the City
NPDES permit requirement to prevent stormwater pollution including but not
limited to ensuring that all contractors implement construction Best Management
Practices (BMPs) and erosion and sediment control measures during ALL phases
of the construction project (including demolition). Include appropriate stormwater
BMPs as Project Notes. These BMPs include but are not limited to the following:
• Store, handle, and dispose of construction materials and wastes properly
to prevent contact and contamination of stormwater;
• Control and prevent the discharge of all potential pollutants, including
pavement cutting wastes, paints, concrete, petroleum products, chemicals,
wash water or sediments, and non-stormwater discharges to storm drains
and watercourses;
• Use sediment controls or filtration to remove sediment when dewatering
site and obtain all necessary permits;
• Avoid cleaning, fueling, or maintaining vehicles on-site except in a
designated area where wash water is contained and treated;
• Protect adjacent properties and undisturbed areas from construction
impacts using vegetative buffer strips, sediment barriers or filters, dikes,
mulching, or other measures as appropriate;
• Perform clearing and earth moving activities only during dry weather;
• Limit and time application of pesticides and fertilizers to prevent polluted
runoff;
• Limit construction access routes and stabilize designated access points,
• Avoid tracking dirt or other materials off-site; clean off-site paved areas
and sidewalks using dry sweeping method;
• The Contractor shall train and provide instruction to all employees and
subcontractors regarding the construction BMPs.
1 of 2
Request for Design Review for a second story addition to an existing single family
welling and Special Permit for Declining Height Envelope at 1140 Cortez Avenue,
zoned R-1, APN: 026.162.240.
2) The public right of way/easement shall not be used as a construction staging
and/or storage area and shall be free of construction debris at all times.
3) Implement Erosion and Sedimentation Controls:
a. Install and maintain all temporary erosion and sediment controls
continuously until permanent erosion control have been established;
b. Address method(s) for diverting on-site runoff around exposed areas and
diverting off-site runoff around the site;
c. Address methods for preventing erosinn and trapping sediment nn_sites.
4) Provide notes, specifications, or attachments.describing the following:
a. Construction, operation and maintenance of erosion and sediment control
measures, including inspection frequency,
b. Methods and schedule for grading, excavation, filling, clearing of
vegetation, and storage and disposal of excavated or cleared material.
Brochures and literatures on stormwater pollution prevention and BMPs are available for
your review at the Community Development and Engineering departments. Distribute to
all project proponents.
For additional assistance, contact Eva J. at 650/342-3727.
Reviewed by: Date: 02/04/2008
2of2
Remember: The property owner and the contractor share ultimate responsibility for the activities that occur on a construction
sift. You will be held responsible for any environmental damages and associated clean-up costs.
San Mateo Countywide Stonnwater Pollution Prevention Prop am
a
San Mao:o Coun"kk Storynwatcr Pmgr.m Naikip.nle Afl rm ,B<Imom,Orkbanq Htaling.rrc,Colm4 D.ly ,GIB E.1 N.All.,Foeler Cily,H.lf Maan Hag Hilb:bmaugh,Menlo Park,Millbrae,P•cikk P.,WleWky,
Prevention P.gvm RdwoodGry,Sm Brom,San CuloL,S•n Mateo,Sadh Sm Fr 6n,Woodaid4 Cuiy ors• m.im
Pollution Prevention It's Part of the- Plan BUR��NaA j
= � It is your responsibility to do the job right!
Runoff from streets and other paved areas is amajor source of pollutionin local creeks,San Francisco Bay and the Pacific Ocean. Questions?
Construction activities can directly affect the health of our waters unless contractors and crews plan ahead to keep dirt,debris,and other Call the Office,of
construction wastL:away from storm drains and creeks.Following these guidelines will ensure your compliance with local stormwater Environmental Compliance
General ' ordinance requirements.Remember,ongoing monitoring and maintenance of installed controls is crucial to proper implementation. (650)342-3727
Construction Heavy Earth-Moving Roadwork&Paving Fresh Concrete Painting&Application Landscaping, .
&Site Supervision Equipment Activities &Mortar Application of Solvents&Adhesives Gardening,
Ah+nce PLnnInR.+ a f.,fakn Operation and Pool Maintenance
JSrkd.k uea..Rwred polnR,<thlnn kr dry � _
711 p�,d.Tn�.tt,tR<�kLrl.n.,N- 1111 1111
r.b,lewdvn sr rl+v aMrmdv mnwk MYvn ',i
r.bbQbw `
JLxnk udwr.bd d.rw drat..iw U.Hdoiry d,lv , IY,
ahewia,berm vrfihen Lrrinp,wa.reFapmbaa.
J6vin1 toe aw+.l.r ren.0 cnv6R y..r abe C '
(vpeM1R,-w+k[rerubn)byurin[bamm vbmP- � _ .r-r,e-.qC. JD<nk,r sod lmplmtrnlenrbNa•dlmerl mnbd pluu fn -` � '� I����
rvy a pmmnml dnk.{e dkd,a b&tmtwtla nmr., md,nyrn,buk,nenLL ■
ervud tlx tlu.Rdam amrnrw.,a rvmtTrdsMn br ,/$d,duk vurnbri rdgm¢gwvrk fa drytrmlwr- Ha.NgR lNnf fr.dpm _ -
wrekaello{b.Rbnry deck d.namkam.wMn JC2.ek Nl°gdptnnl br kda andC
npk b]dge7dpnwn JKm 0 Vgvld p.1.l rred.d.avd w.sk.coq rnv
,nprTriwa 1)pdaR Gwtln<dnl '
JTnh y.0 evryl.yev.nd Pboelndrca Wk.. ,rR.mp+e ed.ign�{n,fmmywhw•bwkry aero. pr^^TdR acrd R..Jnv.F_,(_ ,4c¢.,nm,Nam4+.a tl.rm drat.,.llgn4lruldue Ron
,hese bvelnrr l.bkb<nryvn.wboxerb pdhh• ,ay. JPan,nn uyunxmbn.nnr,r<p.Ir:.nN x.r4h,{pragaq- ��m.tywry.ta.na mnwmu,kn rna�+n�^n I•m>S+�aw.D,mlrml,,ek,na,.naasarB naN,rn Jn,dml„nangm.na tnd,<.pine mtl.ad,lian,,.:,aw
muwdb.siu.Infonn itDcmlracbn.bwllbc nEw mwtmgfnn ax cwswnmly.dm. beth arYadwn trwbrk6 wMa conn pre, d rnm taa,dmv costs ma puab d"ryrewd era eh.ardom rd^ga,vdn¢,1.m unar,.rp,nracvd MuJ.ahmar.,.
rbmm�,ataq„liemma.rad llo>rmp-swlMas Ske rf-.ka and rr---rebid.-W-.nr< ,/9+d.,A"".m J"..dw brand-wsn.l mr<
pn /Whh.lk{vvdlkld.gvipmenmdmmrncemwM ninrawld
arA [rnxadry ..
m:,ukh I. .%& mtx wumti°n h�RRy(wr•,ny-rlmNnonmwv
J Dmlgmbacwefd,Wyw.bktd ue of 4,- ,b(w,vwkav--im is cot ia,n Wdyplmnd, dram-aha drrl., mwd•dym.mkre ue.pw.y' prepr.n} JSlvn rb,klae,rminrvs,rad abrr<M,n d.mdoen nr
crh...ed.,�L,R rn<d<m n-,ka R+n.wry Ilam tl,mm,.rabm arab ldw, nwr,blm L.imwepraa, Js<wnbge pfns,mtrnalhrywpPra D.sanw�rp I..rn<a pr s°na�btn=L
JDvI{e.lr.eeavpleddy ewrl.leed vn br..l• fvubswdvgakmwtR phkLLNbelb{,mN rw,im rnxet arab JDp m,medkwl dlnkd,rk+,aor<4r.n q.lpmn,v yjild,amwe°mwt rnm tbo,conn relnrh ran l
p.rkh{,y�lek rd.dbp and rwsll.e nqufpved ✓ dvwna6pe ge.p,eaq nre.+a,snd'mm� w rywdvewry [° R ag. SchedWc b uN nmrubn Iha.
m.bto.re.The da nsl.d nv As ld b.wdl. vehideaN egdp,netl rtdtlebtve. dnlm+:NhgWn.twgparylraip.¢esn.bti>1R P drdn4re1tl'rll,ndrmplL' ,/-1,rirl<.,.1v-rcNmepalnl e.olN.cra lol.p / ITb n oral=u fa dry..v
ry r'+Y f•nw,bavu amp-drain kid nhwa, JRerysdr cud dibmerivr,wrvek,lnvbw mphaR,.,<. rhxL{unvr Nrry dr.a naham.
fnm Asea.mabm dd.Idet;rad benrld Rnrma- ✓M•Wxln dlvdklnnldber/eq°IptnmLlmPn ne. ekpn`'a l'°'sbk /Yrtm wt wnad<mhms pray in dmipr.lyd xc,&on(.nu Ju.<,ur�pa.ryd,edc dcnu°r atran.m aiv.n con°n.ny
svy.M.bnjsrq,dnv,Ydea gvnlyfwar,drrg,.klvb. ,/UuckwkArw.rdlxMlvdlxnnmRuumdaor.. JT-6-1drycnb arin{,hn<bvrnvngarnmtpr.cdma i.ywrytldwbucdl.wmawl1MarrJmo-,1- t JForwkrcbud
fKnF,m.rabk wl.r the rA.-prere,(ra.elr �/k',',�, pNnlA pint wt brmhu mUx amort rnm mora dnlnf.
c.vlmlotlbn altk v.,se,cover atPp•d plln.f d-s rad paled yeas. Dwd Gun+akn pndr rcenb din ld epm.x hrrdfpula d'apwe prat PptiAk Rlne blle vohsry uav-¢yw haw�d ry
svllmcen.nedvnmtla:hniA lemlcslevk /Pmfim tmjprmdmwsraq rrpdrjpbA,drrhkkmd' ^R _ ¢erb.¢w Pbmxrm Pm lk,re yekw.A.,,.fpurtpk¢ P^niaien b.n.t6.Ivd w,wevvwruvuasu,bvi JPrvm,smnn drsin minawhhh b.k,ka ,lihvtmu
P t^r egvlpnanlwuNrgpfrdla �/Cpwr.mekp{a lord acmld sdl wRO securN,mta ar JAwM pW,pad wlcwdq iene,wouh+n>rrhenrw ns<k Inv mkaa fpr rvufa Here dhpne+fwu4.vl l.b Newrpw prq d°wnsdnhs vv¢,a M1,k,potrnivn mrvtcv
wryer.ry,-f. - hbrwetbd;tmk parmrtulxdlbx tk-ma.a Ike,tled;A.ry dram,drNvne dlkker.vshe.vu.
JKe pN1.b.4 Nf-.Pad„rkca Pisco rmh vet Ok.,k sherini d.v b„<vdlcw,r.rm.f rr.ak.e.l.v1 r.r
r# ywm,w rqr - JC.rv.N xN exh bnhaW nvkaks whet arrA'k[ JF.r.aaend Pkb,plot wr buahm to U,e mem Pr JRrrcd.
JIf drat.iN ka cover dL r.dium cork+t
udrt�cllrC r<vp,r<krsmniN Lk<aMb.kimk. vaha i%M,+°aha meadr pwu er.ppd vb,han mJ°wl,slunysvL(v¢xd.<x. D.d G.wprdrn ablcsdeMxia,dt4mvvaphsm{n sp.vprmrui,a. rel J,c
l� ,/hvpalywenRw,md m.btins[<nvdw wd aed:nm, ^x
D red amhea 6tl drain bsbnn ddr Lip srMaptR GRwl Nlrpwr n+ieA Horeb evnmk. JUs.elxdr dvtq ditl,e.r nlemu ry N.en rano!!r.vnd J0.n�pdxy<,mm Rm4mvanartcvrcmrkrrryw'nRl fi Wd...d 5,MFnm rad where D(g,ore°fum,
✓ ryax<cpP d"1nr' rrre eenoken,ud k'taiaxra b ar:vdmr. ,ape y IgaM,and-5,1-
Cd.
khxI.KrWIrtNf' knM✓acn.nm
pvansm nmhl M1nm am 'core pnn k^r r•
enha erefiwnh,lf - aarr d'epea dfbld,r.be..dw,wm ./rrvnwy qunf.ibn.e(amkn.Msd'nwn mnwh JNervtv..b vma,mxri.lfmv ngemd-.[[nRticwn- JUaevpr•mie6ssd lbnvw ked dimtimm Rbx con.
u allcpnv6 v+atv,<d.rtge>Iv v+p walnarr and btltakol npmmnxrpMpdry. rae<v,knR�,ram.rm kw ansr.rabm hdn ed. �Sd vrsN epvr.avWtmb.n pv wra erbvvy nlede r.lnr rv.vr.I Wmn,Wmrrin.r..+la,u rrrd.n Di.rv.e.r rimd
ether PllvmR J0.nN.uaind v{b lord-a-ave egaipmcm.r km.,d acTc1,v diap.ubd'n crew dx.1L ft..&k.wd dmt
udv.d Mrnlnv v.v-h.+.rdna dry ddpp6R mmdmn b,k aeh
Jt•.. up leo ddw ua.Ike TYb le.+xi.tdyw , JCmvsb3 bWplbvwmtmedvn mumieM1 rri,k
,�dvnvavneMmb wR yr{Lwdw.,am4ave r q mry DeW,vP
scdlvtd in,delk
Mveu rfrrs Vnd „eLA C<ne�dwd.m.rmdke plmdelrrp.PRam(nm rNdNi•..d prrnnnnofrwllk Whet denb[Wt+ dfl< w4dem4 mnalreetim, Lop eblfi,and dlsrwpd vfulrah JDllPxvfunuaed nenicMn nh.ndmu,.aur.
rwrefn ryeleureP JRrcyd+nad M,kkbwerin JSckedulemrendinW n wok hr ,A¢ ,nq,eury rverssdnde
A—id brmr, .rnh nee.xv dN wwpN dmr,a,e drnex
srharsarpealdv Ifyw nml+x w.,a,mef.a pvdi{ drywn JCrb d.m hhd .bwbm,rubr:l ryrcimo
rw{h to kqs T.don down. b ddP Prow' dl'r^'a•r U,a spud afan hNn /, vdW pdal HrlPplq roldee and chips sod dva ✓Coraco lesnsd pardon dksplr,LlPrvnMp nx+sq wd nuc
J C+ver wds Wl.w dnvpnrs.Cask roc Ir for JP+,t mar.jar.geM,xa.Tdn.w.y aantke)dr rhe. lc 4r•Db.t)rl•mdvdarmadnenkw w[Invan ( unbepdma rcPNeb evmkWRiud M b .tri tdm,nbm..Ltipifusnary•wdmny+cot
Imk.Plw nn oda rpeR yr wnr xilh C(• y pw.kr..<n-'ry rah-dsgh— J clnrtWal spitead kaksuke'd7'mnkvdL(widl Pane gyrgmewwd room driv<wayfrdp em.noien d.mutW dl..V-dofr baradpm wtubw
d-p -, rry"Pnamn cop Yke,nom vnrbcvvd,ides 1 I ,Mvb<nl.tre64Al }v di,W ad tmnre wnbtn} 1lvm arkaiv{„om dn:nL Hvx q[sGs,e xtlh vrd.do J0.nvtpbce ysd m.n.fn Pnva.In rnntm,hies,rla
J N.rbM1 dors A tori meable i/k Fog ^TiFn mevuvly mutl .rs nn Irncd' .d b
aro wkahxtb{aeesrerl ward 6.PbMe vfAe mGm yd-fldbhme Wd Use dmrm ,h- _W..1 ora.uN My dw J1MmvaPpb{vrckule[bdMiv'{_n I.n.N hl[h- mASldeyW wan Y< C hrPl^P rnn F
dammxr notal°Fm<k nrvmnadedbpnc.mr ar M rete bedo--dta meksrhhl aw LMybav+d na.rsy spud° nia,c br k b db ben.(h.coke
l.surgedlkpddr,Harceke.-1-4-Plly by gdt(akorhvn.wLVJA�Ikm,arNorrgs)xha,ery dnern.ore dviu. JCdka sd Lsyek Pyryvgr:,dy dapew+(vast I+mun nnta,bbekabm dbkw id.rmaa-b.dln p k4' spprw ,ga pr canm
k.dq 11 ar+..e6e<rvarr,d6v ake "IiWiNa lryw vrni v.r web, AbM prg4ksaad JH.re kry l.bvebcsms:m-nerds Lr,mdoPsb ora Wsredeinta wR:Onchvk widt delpdwaarnva Invlmwnn,k.l m,rgrma yeN novae
Jh1.keu t kwkh ue vA.Wb db d dl.dvw d.wss. JDa mtnw dlesd dl re lAfictl.a ekmequlomw v.Paa '/Avvidow-yplkmwby rwmr k,a:ks for 8su mntroL qqR w,df m,ryiey maryfamnm,4bm h'n.cfiu m.mledpto Rd wLlfyw an mllrct{mep pr
ova L`+ ,he nsam dna om)beiMb{ds<dp¢rrwca,d abp+r.,e,h+awlmry JD.v.1 M.rr.r r+kc k.ra rh.bn lbc alrat.
r.vrMq.tder by the 1m4w wtnlwrymW lk.lraea ✓S,rwPaP apilleddgnraiNs hdn.dltl Nererv- AapkJsTmnde R<nr,N amra.Sampan{ofthe wa,ermrybe regdn;drownht,he
ve algrexd vfntvpalr askloir. for L:nkfr,+4.wlluwddRrunf.vvrha�urMan-
1 ^Wmy ,w,ntbgr,th rhae,wwf..ib bury beet wnJn.v[ JAwide Ln{rran day ni,=bmklnt Lvhah aeon- Jk mbtekimV Am be sue b pla w a 11 the pian xrvaxruemnxn,sudwdy km.k:{b dshb. r+N/FepwNn/SP,NJruen.ncc
Ma<dN VuuI1M<w.vmpmtbk fardm mond. Ifvydd„v<wdifxn Kobcx{,m brwn,smintlk. — and diq.PnPnir J mru diaclwFc cbierhnld owl vaP.colt m.amn yr
sAnarr h-m.R .ndrn,nddx RcgbrN lPtlef l)a,lkyC-pd Do.M; JMabre46{vp.M Psumml b a ae m tem°ve.11 RnyrJMe..<kJbrm!Noes r.dmrre paWk nn drat.
✓Pn<nm s.yrte rdndl.a-colo Mia.rade wkm JCh.,T ap(]I a Nn Her by al{4 W propcdy d,vanaN nlesafnmnc�aM. JRecyck lsreeeWda eft.vkrn mmnr.M s k WIK J Rcey<I°vrahPox.ramvs+ w4.s ip l lar.
T...rder m,rabh.Orrin-y U..ovum ymr reed d6posingd-tl.mlpaxdadl .Un+swl and mdRb,q,6xdontleawda ✓Mak<whbrvken pmemn,dom nnmme iv coarct nhh Ir-ub°M bea•rbm xax-nation 1.-airy,er°re ryr. ✓lVkn m,ytrylnb.lwd vsnti k,chbris P.t<br3b
,.Ibhhd,ejeb. . Abrdaadadergrvvd tufa nlNJlmnron: JD'rgwu+(m.Awmmrna of e+eem dry mnacta Frwk \Vhm,heyand.Zwyd--Mpvin e.a v,cd T a.,a.Tbe.nsyek mlvby InW.n kptvd,aly veto.
JUx rtry.l.Me mo whevmsr p.Awl mm�s JR.penai[Nrlvan a0&,.6r.pm+p.ku apin rrare.w. nee .dwdb JPrvma rr.rbymvnn rink Idea derie[sm<rnbe-Shunt dn+mrb dw err.,. bushn,rw,wd Lop dvM m.yM rved orm pr- Iwdxapcd a,a vdnin d,c drehlvdnxd r..nre sa,.nn
fvpldcuP d mcydWkN6 udt n..—, .V.ck.l.nlcAtlelr Y. r.gakd by lm,.rrppn • D.dd barrio,dAA,a pronu.c-e,<slrrrr,-6P mad mnovefeet Uw b.paha-m rykdnlL dein
,y�hJ,,ar.p memL xk..q d.pe en.4rq- .11 A..Rkwt nle.edhvabm-m 1,in-di, r'twr.rw J Nrva bvrysorid a Au.Nmu wnx mwc:L
'm,rTw,rwk,W.ekklemdtlm.me ntla66 oR Tonrwn+spnLeHtbe b{m.ln{ge-k.:1)DiN JNanrhwr dorm vrvD nekr.p,n<k<d die Vx dry JRmx know.rA-ked Pbl.DIV-Neem.ngoiy Jalerrimma n+ur m.y be,v dixherpcdmllc msk°ry
nd,t vied.IluUYrsa6medaa,s1 Ura 911y bele mvnbee3 GJI a,regr me,hads inadln[sludpaufic.rdenawmb arner(ifrlimvd by,hebeslsmaR<pebmnlwUlpriry)by
r°w rv'PO1Cy�O^1e ) finrea.uldiry.Fiknr.xnvrine de.nvm janr
JDLPae+r+[wrlea ud drvNlM..drbda p,wpall: tke D.rerwr�OdivdEmapmry Svr:ea M4ni„a rain[•
Mryrmap.mbe,mxrwa-a w..nenbe r.<y<Ird c.wa,(.-IRn-yvo(3ehmn} Jsrmnq,..nky¢corn,.n,hwkrhmk w;m mes.n Muw ,ien
Iwbalnprebera wrmr-bnrdpskb,rd,kkrM1Ms,
Cosmty Evrinnrse„ml Heda,Diridm nprdirg ney<Ih,r
a nwadwa wore 6 D.n.s ae cq.nerJrwacd.IRrmldra Covlml siex whh
bnkm yrbsh.d rowaq mond,ad<kred rr[rs efibrine er nlhe Nxnulrn,emnru�bardPold�em:-
I.w Me,aby.N 66r'¢,hw u,rn.r be.sydd,nmr
b<td,.n,n a,yy..pd.r.l.nammmy.ead.r.. � r•int m•y
hm.dvp.oaae Hera b. 1ed.M1.r fere Storm drain polluters may be liable for fides of up to $25,000 per da;y. J°-nmd rw°( bc.bk bbcmnmd,p,hc `.k.CTP-kbrrmrul re.qurt n<.n ra.e.t
Pin„end.n Oeck xid,env red+rrgemkp la any- .mpk;d)remnred hY ler arwwyelrtnh-.t Pl.n,,
r/w.alr con .� lb3 Mtk,
Iberr b 1hr alreel.r ecu a emeF.r•aan kd.
WHY SHOULD WE WORRY ABOUT SOIL EROSION?
_
'=�, _
Nature slowly wears away land, but human activities such as
=. construc
tion increase the rate of erosion 200, even 2,000 times
that amount. When we remove vegetation or other objects that
hold soil to place, we expose it to the action of wind and water
and increase its chances of eroding.
The loss of soil from a construction site results in loss of topsoil,
minerals and nutrients, and it causes ugly cuts and gullies in the
Water and wind carry soil from our Bay Area land down into our landscape. Surface runoff and the materials it carries with it clog
streams, lakes and the Bay. This soil carries with it pollu- our culverts,flood channels and streams.Sometimes it destroys
tants sucl-i as oil and grease, chemicals, fertilizers, animal wildlife and damages recreational areas such as lakes and re-
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 hills
government, and the homeowner untold millions of dollars above Lake Temescal filed the lake to such an extent that it had
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 to
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/ 13AG ASSOCIATION EAST BAY REGIONAL
oF BAY AREA
a[� GOVERNMENTS PARK DISTRICT
:�i Giff""Aw# +#596-,'icyfirte 91vd.
B 0�9
�; o _
fr -mow 7.
PROTECTING
YOUR
PROPE ...........ICY
FROM
EROSION ....... _ _
EROSION CONTROL CAN PROTECT
YOUR PROPERTY AND PREVENT
:.:.:,.
FUTURE HEADACHES
Vegetation-stabilized Bare Slope: Headaches
Slope:Security and Liability
lr (/ ;�� • soil in place mudslide danger
• minimum of loss of topsoil
erosion • clogged storm �'-
• i
d
l
i
fewer winter clean- drains, flooding
/� �� • di
up problems problems
• protection for expensive `
house foun- cleanup r'
dations eroded or
r buried house
foundations �J
.;vim... ..r•.t.,�.--��--,: _ ,
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.
V ;��; �
Winter alert
In one afternoon you can: • Check before storms to see that drains and ditches
• Dig trenches to drain surface runoff water awalT
are not a clogged by leaves reaves and rubble.
o i ule.
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
G G
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, Control dust on graded areas by sprinkling with water,
channels,lakes and the Bay restricting traffic to certain routes, and paving or gravel-
ing access roads and driveways.
You can protect your prop-
erty an d prevent future
headaches by following
these guidelines:
TEMPORARY MEASURES TO
ZTA RTT_TZE THE S®IL
mJtFlly.:
BEFORE AND Grass provides the
cheapest and most ef-
DURING fective short-term ero-
sion
CONSTRUCTION quickly
control. It grows
quickly and covers the
ground completely. To
find the best seed mix-
• Plan construction activities during spring and summer, i J/ / tures and plants for
so that erosion control measures can be in place when rI I�1f_ your area, check with
the rain comes.
"r your local nursery, the
_':: ;'' "': -_:_::" r_ =v ,...
-_�Y�•=�-: U.S. Department of Ag
• Examine your site carefully before building. Be aware of ::-
riculture Soil Conserva-
:.:....:_ _the slope,slope, drainage patterns and soil types. Proper site :_: =; 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
Mulches hold soil moisture and provide ground protection
areas
removal to the =_
under current construe- 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 1GO%effective when held in place by
cost of landscaping later.) spraying with an organic glue or wood fiber(tackifiers), 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
J
• Sediment trap—to -
stop runoff carrying
sediment and trap the
sediment _ _
Mats of excelsior,Jute netting and plastic sheets can be ef-
fective to mporary covers, but they must be in contact with
the soil and fastened securely to work effectively. Storm drain out 1 e t
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 needto 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 'u»..-.,,:
or to contain runoff within <:•;. ; ..,h.
yrwt:
a disturbed sew. :..:.....
rbe area ,.
To keep water from carrying soil from your site and dump- � -"
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
IM, r{I
landscaping \ s, i:
hydraulic mulch
plastic sheeting
11 �
diversion ditch
perimeter dike
L •�\ ,-�;: _ _ ,. bench
straw mulch sediment trap \ outlet protection
4WConse vahee
RESOLUTION APPROVING CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION AND
DESIGN REVIEW AMENDMENT
RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame that:
WHEREAS, a categorical exemption has been proposed and application has been made for
Design Review Amendment for as-built changes to a previously approved first and second story
addition to a single family dwelling at 1140 Cortez Avenue, Simon Jang, property owner, APN:
026-162-240;
WHEREAS, said matters were heard by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame on
May 11, 2009, 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 15301 Class
1(e)(2) - additions to existing structures provided the addition will not result in an
increase of more than 10,000 SF in areas where all public services and facilities are
available and the area in which the project is located is not environmentally sensitive, is
hereby approved.
2. Said Design Review Amendment is approved subject to the conditions set forth in
Exhibit "A" attached hereto. Findings for such Design Review Amendment 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 11th day of May, 2009 by the following
vote:
Secretary
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME, DENYING THE APPEAL
OF MICHAEL KAINDL AND UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S MAY 11, 2009,
APPROVAL OF THE APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AMENDMENT FOR CHANGES TO A
PREVIOUSLY APPROVED FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION TO A SINGLE FAMILY
DWELLING AT 1140 CORTEZ 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 May 11, 2009, the Planning Commission approved an application for Design
Review Amendment for changes to a previously approved first and second story addition to a single
family dwelling located at 1140 Cortez Avenue (APN: 026-162-240), and owned by Simon Jang, 1140
Cortez Avenue, Burlingame, California, 94010; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission's May 11, 2009 approval was appealed by Michael
Kaindl, and the City Council conducted a public hearing on the appeal on June 1, 2009; 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 May 11, 2009
approval of the application for Design Review Amendment, based upon the Council's finding that
the first and second story addition 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 June 1, 2009.
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: 15301 Class 1(e)(2) - additions to existing structures
provided the addition will not result in an increase of more than 10,000 SF in areas where all
public services and facilities are available and the area in which the project is located is not
environmentally sensitive..
3. Said Design Review Amendment is 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,Mary Ellen Kearny,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 Vt day of June,2009
by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
City Clerk
EXHIBIT "A"
Conditions of approval for Categorical Exemption and Design Review Amendment.
1140 Cortez Avenue
Effective May 21, 2009
1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Division
date stamped April 3, 2008, sheets A-1 through A-6, G-1, SF and L-1, and dated
stamped April 28, 2009, sheets A-1, A-2 and A-4.1 through A-6.1, and that any changes
to building materials, exterior finishes, footprint or floor area of the building shall require
an amendment to this permit;
2. that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's February 1, 2008, memo, and the City
Engineer's, Fire Marshal's and NPDES Coordinator's February 4, 2008 memos shall be
met;
3. that demolition or 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;
4. that any changes to the size or envelope of the basement, first or second floors, or
garage, which would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), moving or changing
windows and architectural features or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject
to Planning Commission review;
5. that prior to issuance of a building pen-nit 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;
6. that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall be combined, where possible, to a
single termination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the street; and
that these venting details shall be included and approved in the construction plans
before a Building permit is issued;
7. that the 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;
8. 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
9. 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
EXHIBIT "A"
Conditions of approval for Categorical Exemption and Design Review Amendment.
1140 Cortez Avenue
Effective May 21, 2009
compliance with approved design shall be submitted to the Building Division before the
final framing inspection shall be scheduled;
10. 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
11. 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 � pp )
y r, _rte •' 9l11,}'�t.�i� �t�1 fu
BURLINGAME 501 PRIMROSE ROAD
BURLINGAME, CA 94010
PH: (650) 558-7250 ® FAX: (650) fig -
www.burlingame.org rZa y
Site: 1140 CORTEZ AVENUE _
The City of Burlingame Planning Commission announces PUBLIC HEART
NG
the following public hearing on MONDAY, MAY 11 , NOTICE
2009 at 7:00 P.M. in the City Hall Council Chambers,
501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA:
Application for Design Review Amendment for
changes to a previously approved first and second
story addition to a single family dwelling at 1140
CORTEZ AVENUE zoned R-1 . APN 026-162-240
Mailed: May 1 , 2009
(Please refer to other side)
city ®f 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
PUBLICI NOTICE
(Please refer to other side)
w
S�Fn
qhs.. `
.5f
l2 N J k
POV
17
' _�� �*� "' ��� � �•� _yew j, -rfx ���� � Jj9�A^ � �' �,lJ�� �' f { 1��J
�r � {f+ z � z. x 'f'o� #�es+�.+'�e t�` +1►rt, �� a w. ' �.. �-s, _'tJ?i�.^.. ,.' e
x mar 4 Igo
J .�'N� `, •.�Fy4 k k ��d, 't. '' /
P 4.
x
i
m
7' Z-4,tr
,
k
4�'
rT
�► -
.
140 Cortez Avenue
V.
J
CITY OF BURLINGAME
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
BURLINGAME 501 PRIMROSE ROAD
BURLINGAME, CA 94010 '
_ .� �
` PH: (650) 558-7250 ® FAX: (650)696:379 s
_.
www.burlingame.org
- ' e ads POS74;1"o—
>
4..
E
> CORRECTED MEETING DATE Q
PUBLIC HEARING
Site: 1140 CORTEZ AVENUE NOTICE
The City of Burlingame City Council announces the following public
hearing on MONDAY, JUNE 1, 2009 at 7:00 P.M. in the City
Hall Council Chambers,501 Primrose Road,Burlingame,CA:
Appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of an application
for Design Review Amendment for changes to a previously
approved first and second story addition to a single family
dwelling at 1140 CORTEZ AVENUE zoned R-1. >
APN 026-162-240
Mailed: May 26,2009
(Please refer to other side)
city of ur1ffiMA ne
A copy of the application and plans for this project mt vi ed prior to
the meeting at the Community Development Department
se
Road, Burlingame, California.
If you challenge the subject application(s) in court,you may be limited to
raising only those issues you oe else lsed.at the delivered tolltheec ty at or
described in the notice or in written correspondence
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)
EXHIBIT"A"
Conditions of Approval for Categorical Exemption and Design Review Amendment.
1140 Cortez Avenue
Effective June 1,2009
Page 1
1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Division date
stamped April 3, 2008, sheets A-1 through A-6, G-1, SF and L-1, and dated stamped April 28,
2009,sheets A-1,A-2 and A-4.1 through A-6.1,and that any changes to building materials,exterior
finishes,footprint or floor area of the building shall require an amendment to this permit;
2. that the driveway shall be installed in accordance with the plans submitted to the Planning Division,
date stamped April 3,2008;unless an alternative driveway design is reviewed and approved by the
Planning Commission that provides for a similar aesthetic affect and opportunity for percolation of
water,as an FYI item;
3. that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's February 1,2008,memo,and the City Engineer's,
Fire Marshal's and NPDES Coordinator's February 4,2008 memos shall be met;
4. that demolition or 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;
5. that any changes to the size or envelope of the basement,first or second floors,or garage,which
would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), moving or changing windows and architectural
features or changing the roof height or pitch,shall be subject to Planning Commission review;
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 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 and Design Review Amendment.
1140 Cortez Avenue
Effective June 1, 2009
Page 2
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET DURING THE BUILDING INSPECTION PROCESS
PRIOR TO THE INSPECTIONS NOTED IN EACH CONDITION
10. 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;
11. 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
12. 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 0 STAFF REPORT
BURUNGAME AGENDA
ITEM # 5b
MTG.
'ACOA HATED JYNE 6`90 DATE June I, 2009
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMI ` ".--
BY
DATE: June 1, 2009
APPR VED
FROM: Jesus Nava, Finance Director/Treasurer BY
SUBJECT: Public Hearing on FY 2009-2010 Proposed Budget d Capital Program
Recommendation
That the City Council hold a public hearing on the Proposed Budget and Capital Program for fiscal year 2009-
2010.
Background
The proposed budget totals $86,738,558, an overall decrease of$296,535 from the FY 2008-09 adopted
budget of$87,035,093. The recommended totals for the city's major funds are as follows:
General Fund.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .$ 37,790,794
Water, Sewer, Parking, Building & Solid Waste Enterprise Funds ...$ 27,391,671
Burlingame Financing Authority. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$ 3,587,699
Public Access TV & Peninsula Congestion. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .......$ 199,394
Capital Improvements Fund. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$ 17,769,000
Total Budget..................................................................$ 86,738,558
Budget Review
The budget review and approval process is as follow:
Monday, June 1, 2009, 7:00 p.m. — Public Hearing On Proposed FY08-09 Budget
Monday, June 15, 2009, 7:00 p.m. — Budget Adoption and Gann Appropriation
Members of the public can review the proposed budget document at the Burlingame Library, the City Clerk's
Office or the Finance Department. The proposed budget transmittal letter is also posted on the city's website.
1
CITY STAFF REPORT
BURUNGAME AGENDA
ITEM# 7a
MTG.
D QDNATEDI.,IYC 6'®D DATE/ JUNE 1, 2009
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTED
BY
DATE: May 25,2009
APPROVED
FROM: Jim Nantell 558-7205 BY
SUBJECT: Ballot Measure to Change to an Appointed City Clerk Positi
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council adopting the attached resolution to place on the November ballot the question of"Shall the Office
of City Clerk of the City of Burlingame be appointive?".
BACKGROUND:
With the retirement of Doris Mortensen at the end of last year the City Council appointed Deputy City Clerk Mary Ellen
Kearney to fill the Clerk's unexpired term until November 2009. It is staff recommendation that, as is the clear current
prevailing practice, the Council place a measure on the upcoming ballot to change the elected City Clerk position to an
appointed position.
Unfortunately the only qualifications for the elected position are residency and age. While Burlingame has been
fortunate in getting good elected City Clerk other cities have had difficulties. Staff believes that a key factor contributing
to Burlingame's past success is that the last three elected City Clerk's and the current Interim City Clerk have been
former staff members with experience supporting the City Clerk.
The shift from elected to appointed position appears to be driven by the increasing technical aspects of the Clerks duties
and the value associated with previous experience in a City Clerk support position. In the past the City's Clerk's Office had
been staffed by a part time elected Clerk and a full time Deputy Clerk, however, some years ago the two positions were
combined into one. For the following reasons staff recommends that the Council place the question of making the position
an appointive one before the voters as part of the November elections:
1. The administrative and technical requirements of the job make it difficult to assume those duties without
previous related experience.
2. The desire to change the qualifications beyond that provided under state law and the only means provided in state
law to increase the qualifications beyond age and residence is to make it an appointed position.
3. In the past the City's Clerk's Office had been staffed by a part time elected Clerk and a full time Deputy Clerk,
however, some years ago the two positions were combined into one. This creates a potential problem should an
incumbent City Clerk, who is currently filling the elected and appointed positions, be defeated at the polls.
4. Returning to a part time elected City Clerk at a salary of $590 could reduce the desirability of the position and
therefore the skills and abilities to do the work.
5. In 1991 the Council and City Treasurer, and Joe Hardy, were successful in securing the voters approval to make
the elected City Treasurer's position appointive.
6. As is the case with the appointed City Manager, City Attorney and city department heads, an appointed City
Clerk is non political and responsible to implement the policies as determined by the elected City Council
regardless of political alignment or relationships.
7. As an elected position is political by design and therefore an elected City clerk may find themselves subject to
the typical pressure to form political alliances that will undermine their ability to remain politically neutral.
8. The majority of cities in San Mateo County(70%)have appointed City Clerks.
Approval of the measure by the voters would mean that the position would become an appointed position at the end of the
four year term of the next elected clerk or upon their resignation should that occur prior to the end of the four year term.
BUDGET IMPACT: The cost for participating in the November election has been included in the proposed budget.
ATTACHMENTS:
A. List of City Clerks in San Mateo County
B. Politics and the City Clerk-Daily Journal Article of 3-30-09
City Clerks of San Mateo County
(Updated September 02, 2008) ATTACHMENT A
Atherton Belmont Brisbane
Ms. Kathi Hamilton, Interim Clerk Honorable Terri Cook Ms. Sheri Spediacci
91 Ashfield Road One Twin Pines Lane Suite 375 50 Park Place
Atherton, CA 94027 Belmont, CA 94002 Brisbane, CA 94005
650.752.0529 650.595.7413 415.508.2113
khamilton@ci.atherton.ca.us tcook@ci.belmont.ca.us cityhall@ci.brisbane.ca.us
Burlingame Colma Daly City
Honorable Doris Mortensen Ms. Laura Allen, Interim Clerk Honorable Maria E. Cortes
501 Primrose Rd. 1198 EI Camino Real 333 901h St.
Burlingame, CA 94010 Colma, CA 94014 Daly City, CA 94015
650.558.7203 650.997.8318 650.991.8091
dmortensen@burlingame.org laura.allen@colma.ca.gov mcortes@dalycity.org
East Palo Alto Foster City Half Moon Bay
Ms. Minnette Warren, Deputy Ms. Therese Calic Ms. Siobhan Smith
2415 University Ave. 610 Foster City Blvd. 501 Main St.
East Palo Alto, CA 94303 Foster City, CA 94404 Half Moon Bay, CA 94019
650.853.3100 650.286.3250 650.726.8271
mwarren@cityofepa.org tcalic@fostercity.org sesmith@ci.half-moon-bay.ca.us
Hillsborough Menlo Park Millbrae
Ms. Miyuki Yokoyama Ms. Margaret S. Roberts Ms. Deborah Konkol
1600 Floribunda Ave. 701 Laurel St. 621 Magnolia Ave.
Hillsborough, CA 94010 Menlo Park, CA 94025 Millbrae, CA 94030
650.375.7400 650.330.6620 650.259.2334
myokoyama@hillsca.org msroberts@menlopark.org dkonkol@ci.millbrae.ca.us
Pacifica Portola Valley Redwood City
Ms. Kathy O'Connell Ms. Sharon Hanlon Ms. Silvia Vonderlinden
170 Santa Maria Ave. 765 Portola Rd. 1017 Middlefield Rd.
Pacifica, CA 94044 Portola Valley, CA 94028 Redwood City, CA 94063
650.738.7301 650.851.1700 650.780.7222
o'connellk@ci.pacifica.ca.us shanlon@portolavalley.net svonderlinden@redwoodcity.org
San Bruno San Carlos San Mateo
Honorable Carol Bonner Honorable Christine Boland Ms. Norma Gomez
567 EI Camino Real 600 Elm St. 330 W. 20`h Ave.
San Bruno, CA 94066 San Carlos, CA 94070 San Mateo, CA 94403
650.616.7058 650.802.4219 650.522.7040
cbonner@ci.sanbruno.ca.us cboland@cityofsancarlos.org ngomez@cityofsanmateo.org
South San Francisco Woodside
Honorable Krista Martinelli-Larson Ms. Janet Koelsch
400 Grand Ave. 2955 Woodside Rd.
P.O. Box 711 P.O. Box 620005
South San Francisco, CA 94083 Woodside, CA 94062
650.877.8518 650.851.6790
Krista.martinelli-larson@ssf.net jkoelsch@woodsidetown.org
5
TEE DAILYJpURNAL OPINION
ATTACHMENT 6
Politics and the c*ity clerk .3-30
T
ere's an uproar in Daly
ity because the City `It is the city manager who is responsible for the
ouncithas reduced the day-to-day operations of the city, who is in the best
salary of the city clerk by half.
Unlike many cities in San Mateo position to decide who would make a good clerk, to
County, Daly City has an elected hire that person and to evaluate him/her regularly.'
city clerk. Recently elected Annette ,
Hipona, whose salary has been
reduced, has also been active in Daly California were elected. But times more and more difficult and you
City politics. In fact, she recently have changed and so has the job. need to have the skills to do a good
was an unsuccessful City Council The job of today's clerk is more job," she said. By the way, she
challenging, involving a knowledge receives $50 a meeting wearing her
candidate. And when she ran for the
position of city clerk she was not of technology, sophisticated record elected hat and regular pay wearing (' a )COT
supported by the present council. keeping, etc. An elected clerk does the appointed one. San Carlos may JWon P�
Her salary was cut after she was not need those skills to be elected. consider going to the voters to make
elected. She and her supporters Decades ago, the San Mateo city a change. administrative positions appoint-
s a political vendetta and clerk and treasurer were re-elected Burlingame also has a full-time ments is taking away your rights.
claim thisi
may not legal. The council says time after time even though, accord- elected city clerk and by good for- But good government practices sug-
this is acost-saving measure during ing to legend, one used to sleep dur- tune, as in San Carlos, the current gest otherwise — it may be protect-
ing council meetings and the other office holder was originally a city ing them. The average citizen can
difficult budget times, but even their
supporters are saying this was a bad was too drunk to know what was employee. When its longtime former evaluate their elected officials at
going on. Eventually, with prodding clerk retired, the city appointed council meetings and watch how
move. from the of Women Voters,League M Ellen Kearneythe assistant
You would never get such goings g �' anthey vote. But how do you know if
on in San Mateo, Foster City or San Mateo changed its charter and city clerk as the interim. Kearney your clerk is doing a good job? How
Redwood City, for example, where these positions became appointed. will have to run in November. But do you know if she or he has the
Many other Peninsula cities fol- Burlingame may also be looking to skills to do what the job requires?
the city clerk is one of the profes- lowed suit. ask voters to make the position an ***
sionals appointed by and responsible San Carlos has had a difficult time appointed one. Burlingame has Finally the practice of mixing
to the city manager. These city trying to make the shift. The former attempted to make this change twice local government operations and
clerks do not get involved in city city manager, Mike Garvey, was and failed, but the third time may be politics opens the door to graft and
politics. Their salaries are handled in concerned that a situation might a winner, helped in part by the Daly corruption. That is why the refotm-
the same manner as other employee develop similar to the one Daly City City fiasco. ers created the city manager form of
salaries. If they mess up, it is the city has today. When the elected clerk In Belmont, the present clerk is a government, to take politics out of
manager's job to fire them or reduce retired, the city created the position former member of the city council. the operations of city hall. In the
their salary. This is the way local
~ of-6sstitant city clerk and appointed Terri Cook was involved in city poli- days of Tammany Hall and the for-
government is supposed to run withChristine Boland to the position and tics for many years, but since win- mer Chicago Mayor Richard Daley,
clear lines of authority and responsi- at the same time appointed her to the ning the post as clerk she has been city staff were political appointees or
bility._In cities where the city clerk is job of interim clerk. She was ulti- smart enough to stay out of the fray. somebody's relative. Fortunately,
still elected (and that would include mately elected to the post. In the And in Belmont, that's tricky. As San Mateo County cities are clean
Daly City, San Bruno, South San meantime, the city changed the much as I admire Tem, I believe the and graft is not the issue. Some of
Francisco, Burlingame, San Carlos salary of the elected clerk to $1 a position should be appointed and not the elected administrators are doing
and Belmont), the clerk is not year. Her better half, the appointed elected. And maybe after this - an outstanding job. The point is
responsible to the city manager but one, was paid a full-time salary. unpleasant experience, Daly City some cities are using an obsolete
to the voters. And can the voters Someone complained to the Grand will decide their next city clerk method for choosing the best person
really provide the necessary over- Jury. The Grand Jury said San should be appointed too. to fill an administrative position and
sight? It is the city manager who is Carlos' action was inappropriate and Voters have enough on their plate. that could mean trouble.
responsible for the day-to-day opera- suggested the city go to the voters to They are supposed to evaluate their
tions of the city, who is in the best make the change. Christine Boland city council and their representative
position to decide who would make who continues in the dual jobs, a on the Board of Supervisors, not to Sue Lempert is the former mayor of
a good clerk, to hire that person and hybrid is how she described it, mention their legislators in San Mateo. Her column runs every
to evaluate him/her regularly. believes the city clerk should be Sacramento and Washington, D.C. Monday. She can be reached at
When cities were first incorporat- appointed. "This position is getting Some will argue that making these
ed, most city clerks and treasurers in sue@smdailyjounuzl.cont.
Page 1 of 2
Open auditions for `Idol' spin-off
`Burlingame Idol' to last 2 months with showdown on May 22
BY KYVELI DIENER
BAY AREA NEWS GROUP
Musical enthusiasts of all ages are welcome to hone their audition skills while
competing for gift certificates and performance opportunities in "Burlingame Idol,"an
"American Idol"spin-off that's being put on by the Burlingame Parks and Recreation
Department.
The weekly competition, which will last nearly two months, held its preliminary
auditions Thursday night.
Cathy Foxhoven, a drama instructor who teaches acting classes for the Parks and
Recreation Department, said she came up with the idea for"Burlingame Idol" about
six months ago after having seen local talents perform at the Burlingame Centennial
Show in January 2008.
'We found there was an awful lot of talent in this town," she said. "What I want to
do with `Burlingame Idol' is to help discover them and give them the opportunity to
shine."
The competition is broken down into four age categories: 5-12 years old; 13-17
years old; 18-50 years old; and 50 and over. Auditions will be held every Thursday
at 7 p.m. at the Burlingame Parks and Recreation Department at 850 Burlingame
Ave.
After four weeks of auditions, eliminations will begin until the top 12 — three
singers from each category— are chosen. These finalists will compete in a closing
showdown at 7 p.m. on May 22 in the department's auditorium, which has seating
for about 126 people.
One winner will be selected from each category by three mystery celebrity judges,
whose identities will not be revealed until the final performance, which Foxhoven
said will be filmed by Peninsula TV.
Each winner will get a gift certificate and the opportunity to perform at a local
restaurant that has yet to be determined, Foxhoven said. Residents from throughout
the Bay Area who sign up through the Parks and Recreation Department and pay
the$35 entry fee are welcome to audition during the first four weeks, where they will
receive guidance on their song selection and performance similar to the coaching
given to"American Idol"finalists, Foxhoven said.
"This isn't Hollywood. We aren't auditioning thousands and thousands of people,"
she said. "We can afford to be more assisting in the way they make their
presentation."
At the preliminary auditions on Thursday, two children under age 12, three under
17, one adult and three senior citizens showed off their vocals, Foxhoven said. One
of them was Burlingame Intermediate School seventh-grader Peter Scattini, 12,who
said he has been singing since the fourth grade.
Scattini, who recently portrayed Young Scrooge's friend Davey in a run of "A
Christmas Carol"with the American Conservatory Theater in San Francisco, said he
would sing"whatever I'm feeling three or four minutes before"the audition.
He was leaning toward either "Electricity" from the musical "Billy Elliot" or "What
About Now" by Daughtry, a rock band led by Chris Daughtry, a former "American
Idol"finalist.
"It's sort of another way of expression," said Scattini, who turns 13 on April 3.
"When you can't get it all out in words, you sing."
For more information, call 650-6976936.
http://burlingamedailynews.ca.newsmemory.coin/ecbrowser/frame/3_Okp/php-script/fullpa... 3/31/2009
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME:
1) ORDERING THE SUBMISSION TO THE QUALIFIED ELECTORS
OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME, AT THE GENERAL MUNICIPAL
ELECTION TO BE HELD TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 2009, A
BALLOT MEASURE MAKING THE OFFICE OF THE
BURLINGAME CITY CLERK AN APPOINTIVE OFFICE,
EFFECTIVE AT THE END OF THE TERM COMMENCING
DECEMBER 7, 2009 OR UPON A VACANCY IN THE OFFICE
DURING THAT TERM.
2) REQUESTING CONSOLIDATION WITH ANY OTHER ELECTION
CONDUCTED ON THE SAME DATE; AND
3) REQUESTING ELECTION SERVICES BY COUNTY CLERK; AND
4) REQUESTING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE AN
IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS OF THE MEASURE.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Burlingame, by adoption of Resolution No.
29-09, has called a general municipal election to be held on Tuesday, November 3, 2009; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined to submit to the voters at the general
municipal election on November 3, 2009, a ballot measure making the office of the Burlingame
City Clerk an appointive rather than an elected office, effective at the end of the term
commencing December 7, 2009 or upon a vacancy in the office during said term; and
WHEREAS, it is important for the City of Burlingame to obtain the best qualified person
to fill the office of the City Clerk because that office is vital to the administrative function of the
City government; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code section 36502, the qualifications for an
elected City Clerk are only that the person 1) be an elector of the City at the time of assuming
office and 2)be a registered voter of the City at the time nomination papers are issued; and
WHEREAS, in order to ensure that the Office of City Clerk is filled by the best qualified
individual who can competently and accurately perform the detailed and highly technical duties
required of that office, the Burlingame City Clerk should be an appointive rather than elected
office;
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
1
Section 1: The Burlingame City Council, pursuant to Government Code sections
36508 and 36509 and other laws of the State of California, does hereby order submitted to the
qualified electors of the City of Burlingame at the general municipal election to be held Tuesday,
November 3, 2009, the following measure, to wit:
CITY OF BURLINGAME
APPOINTIVE OFFICE OF CITY CLERK
MEASURE
"Shall the Office of City Clerk of the City of Burlingame be YES
appointive?"
NO
Section 2: Pursuant to California Elections Code Section 10002, the City Council
hereby requests the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Mateo to make available the
services of the County Clerk as County Elections Official for the purpose of performing the usual
and customary services necessary in the conduct of the consolidated general municipal election,
including the provision of election supplies and voters' pamphlets.
Section 3: Pursuant to California Elections Code Section 10400 and following, the
City Council hereby requests the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Mateo to order the
consolidation of the general municipal election to be conducted within the boundaries of the City
of Burlingame on November 3, 2009, with respect to which the Board of Supervisors of the
County of San Mateo has the power to order a consolidation. The City Council further consents
to and orders the consolidation of the general municipal election hereby called with the elections
in public districts to be held the same day. Upon consolidation, the consolidated election shall be
held and conducted, election officers appointed, voting precincts designated, ballots printed,
polls opened at 7:00 a.m. and closed at 8:00 p.m., ballots counted and returned, returns
canvassed, and all other proceedings in connection with the election shall be regulated and done
by the County Clerk of the County of San Mateo in accordance with the provisions of law
regulating the elections so consolidated.
Section 4: The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to publish a notice of the
general municipal election within the time and in the manner and form specified in California
Elections Code Section 12101. The City Clerk is further authorized and directed to perform any
and all actions required by law to hold the general municipal election above provided.
Section 5: The City Council of the City of Burlingame hereby authorizes and directs
the City Clerk to select, from those direct arguments properly submitted, an argument for and an
argument against the measure, to be printed and distributed pursuant to Elections Code section
9287.
2
Section 6: The City Council of the City of Burlingame hereby authorizes and directs
the City Clerk to accept rebuttal arguments submitted to the Clerk within ten (10) days after the
final date for filing direct arguments pursuant to Elections Code section 9285.
Section 7: The City Council of the City of Burlingame hereby directs the City
Attorney to prepare an impartial analysis of said ballot measure pursuant to California Elections
Code Section 9280.
Section 8: This Resolution of the City Council submitting to the qualified electors of
the City of Burlingame this ballot measure amending the Burlingame Municipal Code to change
the office of the City Clerk of the City of Burlingame from an elected office to an appointed
office, at the general municipal election to be held Tuesday,November 3, 2009, shall be effective
June 2, 2009.
Section 9: The City Clerk is directed to submit a certified copy of this Resolution to
the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Mateo.
Ann Keighran, Mayor
I, Mary Ellen Kearney, Clerk of the City of Burlingame, hereby certify that the foregoing
Resolution was duly and regularly introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the Burlingame
City Council on Monday, the 1 st day of June, 2009 by the following vote,to wit:
AYES: Councilmembers:
NOES: Councilmembers:
ABSENT: Councilmembers:
Mary Ellen Kearney, City Clerk
3
CITY STAFF REPORT
BURL WGAW AGENDA
ITEM# 7b
MTG.
DATE JUNE 1, 2009
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL suBMTMD \ o I
BY Lt I
DATE: June 1, 2009
APPROVED
FROM: Deirdre Dolan, Human Resources Director BY
SUBJECT: Appointment of Subcommittee to Meet with the Civil Service Commission
RECOMMENDATION•
Staff recommends that the Council appoint an ad hoc subcommittee to meet with the Civil Service
Commission to review the role and purpose of the Commission and consider its continuation.
BACKGROUND:
At their meeting on May 18, 2009, the Civil Service Commission continued discussions regarding the role and
purpose of the Civil Service Commission, and directed staff to invite an ad hoc subcommittee of the City
Council to attend the next Civil Service Commission meeting to provide input on the future direction of the
Civil Service Commission.
Over the last several Civil Service Commission meetings, the Commission has discussed the role and purpose
of the Civil Service Commission. In these meetings the Commission has reviewed information regarding the
number and role of Civil Service Commissions and Personnel Boards in other bay area jurisdictions, and has
discussed alternative means of accomplishing the functions the Civil Service Commission currently performs.
The Commission would now like Council's input on whether a viable role for the Commission exists in the
current legal and professional human resources environment.
The Civil Service Commission would like Council to appoint a subcommittee to meet with them to develop a
recommendation for Council's approval on the future role of the Civil Service Commission. The next
regularly scheduled Civil Service Commission meeting is Monday, July 20, 2009.
BUDGET IMPACT:
None.
ATTACHMENTS
None.
Agenda
Item # 7c
Meeting
BURLINGAME STAFF REPORT Date: _ JUNE 1, 2009
�
SUBMITTED*BY APPROVED
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
DATE: JUNE 1, 2009
FROM: PUBLIC WORKS
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION APPOINTING A MEMBER REPRESENTATIVE AND
ALTERNATES TO THE PENINSULA CITIES CONSORTIUM
PERTAINING TO THE HIGH SPEED RAIL PROJECT
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that Council approve the attached resolution
appointing a member representative and two alternates to the Peninsula Cities Consortium
pertaining to the High Speed Rail project.
BACKGROUND: In order to collectively work together and respond to High Speed Rail project
issues, a group of Peninsula cities from San Mateo and Santa Clara counties have formed a
group called Peninsula Cities Consortium (Consortium). At Council direction, City Council
member Jerry Deal has been informally attending the Consortium meetings to observe and
report back to the Council on how other cities are dealing with and responding to issues similar
to Burlingame that are associated with the High Speed Rail project.
The Consortium group has developed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that specifies
the rules and the objectives of the group (see attached). At the May 4, 2009 meeting, after a
careful review and consideration of the MOU, the Council decided to join the group. The MOU
specifies that the participating City must appoint one member representative and two alternates
with at least one being an elected official. The role of the member representative and the
alternates will be to represent the City's position on the High Speed Rail project and cast vote(s)
whenever necessary in accordance with Council direction.
Due to the current work load and other priorities, staff will not be able to attend the group
meetings on a regular basis, however if the member representative and the Council alternate
are not available, staff may be able to attend those meetings on case by case basis provided
there is adequate advance notice. It is recommended that Art Morimoto, Assistant Public Works
Director be authorized as staff alternate to attend the meetings and cast vote(s) when the
member representative and Council alternate are not able to attend the meetings.
BUDGET IMPACT: None
EXHIBITS: Resolution, MOU, May 4, 2009 staff report
C: Jim Nantell, City Manager, Gus Guinan, City Attorney
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME
APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO APPOINT A
BURLINGAME RESPRESENTATIVE AND TWO ALTERNATES TO THE
PENINSULA CITIES CONSORTIUM REGARDING THE HIGH SPEED RAIL
PROJECT
WHEREAS, the State of California has initiated the planning process for the
construction and operation of a High Speed Rail connection between Northern and
Southern California and a portion of the high speed rail will be located on the San
Francisco Peninsula; and
WHEREAS, in order to collectively work together and respond to High Speed
Rail project issues, a group of Peninsula cities from San Mateo and Santa Clara counties
has entered into a Memorandum of Understanding entitled the Peninsula Cities Consortium
(MOU); and
WHEREAS, at its May 4, 2009 meeting, after careful review and consideration,
the City Council adopted a Resolution by which the City of Burlingame approved the MOU
and became a member of the Consortium; and
WHEREAS, the MOU specifies that the Mayor of each participating City must
appoint one member representative and two alternates to the Consortium with two being
elected officials;
NOW,THEREFORE,THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
BURLINGAME RESOLVES AND ORDERS AS FOLLOWS:
The City Council approves and authorizes the Mayor to appoint the following as
the City of Burlingame's representative and alternates to the Peninsula Cities Consortium:
1. Representative: Councilmember
2. Alternate 1: Councilmember
3. Alternate 2: City Staff:
Ann Keighran,Mayor
I, Mary Ellen Kearney, Clerk of the City of Burlingame, hereby certify that the
foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of
the Burlingame City Council on Monday, the 1st day of June, 2009 by the following vote,
to wit:
AYES: Councilmembers:
NOES: Councilmembers:
ABSENT: Councilmembers:
Mary Ellen Kearney, City Clerk
ITY G
�� A
eupuNc3aME STAFF REPORT
AGENDA
rrEM# 8c
MTG.
DATE May 4, 2009
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
SUBMITTED
DATE: April 15, 2009 BY Jim Nantell
FROM: Jim Nantell APPRO ,,� -e
Tel.No.: 558-7204 BY
SUBJECT: Membership in the High Speed Rail Consortium
RECOMMENDATION: That the Council determines whether or not to join the Peninsula
Cities Consortium that has been proposed to provide information and input on the High Speed
Rail proj ect.
BACKGROUND: A few peninsula cities have been meeting to discuss the possible formation
of a consortium of cities on the Peninsula to work towards collective policy and procedural
positions to represent united interests shared by Peninsula cities regarding the construction of a
high speed train project through the peninsula. Councilmember Jerry Deal was invited to attend
the Friday morning meetings that have been held in south San Mateo County; and Mayor
Keighran asked Councilmember Deal to attend and keep the Council informed of the activities of
the participating cities. Recently the group drafted a Memorandum of Understanding for
consideration by peninsula cities that may want to join a proposed Peninsula Cities Consortium.
Councilmember Deal has shared the draft MOU is(see Attachment A) for Council consideration.
In addition to the"south county"discussion the Mayors of San Mateo,Millbrae, and Burlingame
convened a meeting of Mayors and staff to work with the High Speed Rail(HSR)representatives
to discuss concerns about adequate and appropriate public input in the High Speed Rail project.
As a result of the first meeting with Council and staff from all three cities and the HSR it was
agreed that the HSR staff would develop a draft of process milestones that would help inform the
public as to the process and the points for public input and that the three city staffs would
develop a recommendation as to how to conduct the public input process.
On Monday, April 6,2009, a meeting was held with the staff from HSR and the three cities to
review the draft of the work assigned to each group. The HSR folks presented a first draft of the
process milestones(See Attachment B) and the city staff presented a draft of the public input
approach.
1
The Suggested Approach to Public Input was as follows:
1. We strongly recommend against the creation of a County wide Citizen Advisory
Committee which we believe could result in circumvent the elected leadership who are
responsible to speak on behalf of their citizenry.
2. It is important that public input be processed through the elected leadership for each city
to ensure that they shape the assumptions for each community and be the official
spokespeople for their communities.
3. Public participation and input should be hosted by each city whose staff would be
responsible to facilitate the meeting and providing the written summary;with HSR staff
providing technical information specific to each community,responsible for the public
noticing,presentation of information and responding to questions.
4. Whenever possible,public meeting should include known information relative to the
needs and interest of adjacent cities,to reinforce the need for each city to try and address
the needs of their neighboring cities.
5. At the completion of the initial individual city public meetings,if appropriate,joint city
meetings with a high-speed rail may be scheduled to work on shared interest and issues.
Staff recommends that regardless of what the Council decides at this time relative to
participation in the Peninsula Cities Consortium that you continue to support the recommended
approach for public participation presented as a draft to the HSR folks at the April 6th meeting.
Staff feels that the draft MOU is well drafted,however,there continued to be some concerns
about the Consortium as follows:
1. That a couple of the lead cities involved are also involved in a lawsuit against High
Speed Rail project and cities are concerned joining the consortium may result in a
misconception that they are empathetic to the lawsuit.
2. The Consortium leaders are contacting groups of citizens in other cities and inviting
them to participate in the Consortium and it is unclear what role those groups would play
in the Consortium.
3. The leadership of the Consortium may end up being led/dominated by the cities involved
in its formation and is that the leadership that would be best for all concerned.
4. A Consortium of all 16 peninsula cities that the train would pass through may be too big
geographically which may result in less than full participation by city representatives
from the farther reaches of the two counties. The suggestion was to form a consortium
for each county to facilitate attendance at meetings.
ATTACHMENTS:
A.Draft Memorandum of Understanding for Peninsula Consortium
B.Draft of HSR Outreach Strategy and Schedule
C.Notes from April 6,2009 meeting
D. Letter from Mayor Keighran to the High Speed Rail Authority
2
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
AMONG THE CITIES OF , AND
FOR THE PENINSULA CITIES CONSORTIUM
This Memorandum of Understanding (this "Agreement,") dated , 2009, is
among the Cities of
(collectively referred to as"Peninsula Cities").
RECITALS
THIS AGREEMENT is made with reference to the following:
A. The Peninsula Cities of collectively
have agreed to come together as a group to form the Peninsula Cities Consortium
("Consortium") for the purpose of providing information and input for the purpose of
working collaboratively with the California High-Speed Rail Authority, Caltrain, and any
other entity involved, as of the date of this agreement or in the future, in approving and
constructing the high-speed train project on the Peninsula(collectively"Rail Authority").
B. The individual Peninsula Cities have come together to form the Consortium because they
recognize that, although each individual city faces unique and location-specific
challenges with respect to the high-speed train project, all of the Peninsula Cities also
share many similar concerns and the strong underlying belief that particular care must be
taken to integrate high-speed rail into the living fabric of the Peninsula.
C. The purpose of the Consortium is to work toward collective policy and procedural
positions to represent the united interests shared by all Peninsula Cities, while also
supporting each city in achieving goals and solutions appropriate to their individualized
location and needs.
D. The Consortium desires to inform the Rail Authority of its concerns about environmental
issues including, but not limited to, comments about the Environmental Impact
Report/Environmental Impact Statement to be prepared pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act and the National Environmental Policy Act.
E. While all of the Peninsula Cities may have different points of view on some issues, this
Agreement outlines a set of objectives that are common to all Peninsula Cities. The
Consortium intends to speak as one voice on these and other issues of mutual agreement
concerning the future of the High-Speed Rail.
F. The Consortium's intent is to be the principal representative of the Peninsula Cities on all
common interests concerning High-Speed Rail as it continues up the Peninsula.
G. The Peninsula Cities continue to support Caltrain and its efforts to upgrade its rail service
on the Peninsula and intends to supplement Caltrain's role regarding high-speed train
090310 mb 0111112 1
service by providing more direct interaction with the cities potentially affected by High-
Speed Rail.
NOW, THEREFORE,the Peninsula Cities Consortium hereby agrees as follows:
1. This Agreement shall create the Peninsula Cities Consortium whose purpose shall be
furthering the Peninsula Cities' mutual interests by conveying their opinions, input and
information to the Rail Authority, while also supporting each city in achieving goals and
solutions appropriate to their individualized location and needs.
2. The members of the Peninsula Cities Consortium agree to the following objectives:
a. The Rail Authority should consult with and obtain input from the Peninsula
Cities Consortium prior to and throughout designing, analyzing and determining the final
alignment of the High-Speed Rail through the Peninsula Cities.
b. The Rail Authority should consult with the Peninsula Cities Consortium in
order to determine the range of project alternatives and mitigation measures to be evaluated in
the Environmental Impact Report.
c. The Rail Authority should consult with the Peninsula Cities Consortium in
order to determine the ultimate design of the train tracks, equipment, and technology.
d. The Rail Authority should consult with the Peninsula Cities Consortium in
order to determine where the High-Speed Rail shall be located; be it underground, in a trench or
any other design. The Rail Authority should evaluate the full range of grade options. The final
design should minimize the impacts upon local communities and incorporate best practices of
urban design ideas from rail communities around the world.
3. The Mayor of each participating City shall appoint one member and two alternates.
The alternates may attend the meeting with the voting member, but each City will have one vote.
One of the alternates may be a staff member of the City. The member and at least one alternate
shall be an elected member of the governing body of the City.
4. Voting shall be by a majority vote of all Consortium Cities eligible to vote. A
majority vote by all Cities eligible to vote is required to set the policy for the Consortium. The
Chair shall determine all tie votes. However, each individual City may choose to take a policy
position which is independent of the Consortium, and positions taken by the Consortium shall
not be binding on any City.
5. The Consortium shall be established after five cities have formally agreed to join the
Consortium. Once established, the Consortium shall select a Chair and a Vice Chair. The Chair
shall call and chair each meeting and is appointed to speak on behalf of the Consortium
consistent with the principles listed above. The Vice Chair shall serve in the event that the Chair
is unavailable. The term of the Chair and Vice Chair shall be one year from the original date of
election. The Chair and Vice Chair shall be from different cities and must be elected officials.
090310 mb 0111112 2
6. The Chair may appoint subcommittees which shall study issues and report back to the
Consortium to further additional policy positions.
7. Any City may join the Consortium at any time upon approval of this Agreement by
its City Council, and any City may withdraw from membership at any time by providing notice
to the Chair.
8. A quorum shall consist of 50% of the member cities plus one.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the Parties have executed this Agreement as of the date first set
forth above.
CITY OF PALO ALTO CITY OF
By: By:
Mayor Mayor
By: By:
City Manager City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney City Attorney
CITY OF CITY OF
By: By:
Mayor Mayor
By: By:
City Manager City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney City Attorney
090310 mb 0111112 3
CITY OF CITY OF
By: By:
Mayor Mayor
By: By:
City Manager City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney City Attorney
CITY OF CITY OF
By: By:
Mayor Mayor
By: By:
City Manager City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney City Attorney
CITY OF CITY OF
By: By:
Mayor Mayor
By: By:
City Manager City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney City Attorney
090310 mb 0111112 4
4� CITY ob
STAFF REPORT
BURLINGAME AGENDA 8a
ITEM#
tico� ,9,a MTG.
RATED DYNE® DATE June 1,2009
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTED
BY ban Dornell Fire Chief
DATE: May 18,2009
APPROVE ,
FROM: Central County Fire Department BY
SUBJECT: Resolution Reaffirming Membership in the San Mateounty Pre-Hospital Emergency
Services Group
Recommendation:
Adopt the Resolution reaffirming membership in the San Mateo County Pre-Hospital Emergency Medical
Services Group.
Background:
In May 2008, a sub-committee of JPA Board Members, along with staff,began to review and revise the Joint
Powers Agreement Establishing the San Mateo County Pre-Hospital Emergency Medical Services Group.
The JPA Board recognized that the current agreement would require review and revisions prior to the end of
the current 911 ambulance contract which will terminate June 30, 2009.
The current JPA agreement was finalized in 1997. During the life of the agreement there have been three
amendments. The agreement required extensive review and modification to bring it current and in anticipation
of operating under different contractual arrangements set to begin on July 1, 2009. The revised JPA
Agreement was presented to the JPA Board of Directors and was adopted by resolution on February 9, 2009
The City Council approved the revisions of the existing JPA Agreement at the April 6th Council meeting.
Each participating JPA member agency needs to reaffirm their membership in the San Mateo County Pre-
Hospital Emergency Medical Services Group prior to the new agreement going into effect on July 1, 2009.
Budget Impact:
Continued reimbursement to the City from San Mateo County for paramedic services per ALS response unit.
Approximately$160,000 in revenue to the City of Burlingame.
Attachments:
1.Resolution Reaffirming Membership in the San Mateo County Pre-Hospital Emergency Services Group
2.Joint Powers Agreement Establishing the San Mateo County Pre-Hospital Emergency Medical Services Group
3.Agreement Between the County of San Mateo and the Pre-Hospital Emergency Medical Services JPA
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF BURLINGAME REAFFIRMING
ITS MEMBERSHIP IN THE SAN MATEO COUNTY
PRE-HOSPITAL EMERGENCY SERVICES MEDICAL GROUP
JOINT POWERS AGENCY
WHEREAS, the City of Burlingame is a member of the San Mateo County Pre-
Hospital Emergency Medical Services Group Joint Powers Agency("GROUP"), a joint
powers authority established by the member public entities of San Mateo County through
their individual approval of a joint powers agreement; and,
WHEREAS, the purpose of the GROUP is to provide pre-hospital advanced life
support emergency medical services within San Mateo County(except within the
jurisdictional boundaries of the City of South San Francisco); and
WHEREAS, the GROUP will provide pre-hospital advanced life support
emergency medical services pursuant to the Designated Paramedic First Response
Service Provider Agreement with the County of San Mateo;
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
BURLINGAME HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
The City Council of the City of Burlingame hereby reaffirms its membership
in the San Mateo County Pre-Hospital Emergency Medical Services Group in accordance
with the provisions of the Joint Powers Agreement which established the GROUP.
Ann Keighran, Mayor
I, Mary Ellen Kearney, Clerk of the City of Burlingame, hereby certify that the
foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced and adopted at a regular meeting
of the Burlingame City Council on Monday, the 1st day of June, 2009 by the following
vote, to wit:
AYES: Councilmembers:
NOES: Councilmembers:
ABSENT: Councilmembers:
Mary Ellen Kearney, City Clerk
Joint Powers Agreement Establishing
the San Mateo County Pre-Hospital Emergency Medical Services Group
I. Background to Agreement
A. The San Mateo County Board of Supervisors, acting through its Emergency
Medical Services Agency, is legally responsible for the provision of Advanced Life Support
("ALS") services within the county including paramedic first-responder service and ambulance
transport service.
B. Each of the Parties to this Agreement shall provide pre-hospital emergency medical
services through its employees in order to improve the quality and level of emergency medical
services within their communities as part of the emergency medical service response network
within San Mateo County.
C. The first response services provided by the Parties to this Agreement are necessary
for the efficient functioning of an integrated system of pre-hospital emergency medical services.
D. The Parties to this Agreement would like to work cooperatively and collaboratively
to achieve the purposes of this Agreement as outlined in Section II.
E. The similarity of pre-hospital emergency medical services provided by the Parties,
their shared interest in improving quality of care and achieving economic savings in the delivery of
services has led to the Parties to jointly exercise powers to provide these services and achieve these
objectives.
II. Purposes of this Agreement
The purposes of this Agreement are:
A. To establish the San Mateo County Pre-Hospital Emergency Medical Services
Group ("JPA"), a joint powers authority capable of providing through employees of the Parties, or
through a contract with a third party, first responder pre-hospital emergency medical services in
San Mateo County.
B. To provide a mechanism to monitor and improve the quality of advanced life
support services throughout San Mateo County.
C. To provide a means of monitoring the effectiveness of the public/private partnership
to be established between the JPA and the Countywide ambulance provider under contract with
San Mateo County.
1
D. To provide in agreement with the County and/or Countywide ambulance provider,
pre-hospital emergency medical services.
E. To devise and administer mechanisms to receive and share revenues through the
cooperative provision of pre-hospital emergency medical services in San Mateo County.
F. To establish a uniform level of service for ALS first response in San Mateo County.
G. To develop and maintain operational deployment plans to carry out the purpose of
this Agreement while maintaining ongoing fire suppression activities.
H. To implement operational changes as deemed appropriate.
I. To devise and administer cooperative mechanisms to efficiently provide fire
protection and suppression services within San Mateo County.
III. Definitions
Certain words as used in this Agreement shall be defined as follows:
A. "Advanced life support" ("ALS") shall be as defined in California Health& Safety
Code
section 1797.52.
B. "Board" shall mean the governing board established pursuant to this Agreement to
administer and implement this JPA Agreement.
C. "JPA" shall mean the San Mateo County Pre-Hospital Emergency Medical
Services Group.
D. "JPA Management Committee" shall mean six voting and one non-voting ex officio
member as more specifically described in Section VIII(A).
E. "Parties" shall mean the entities who are signatories to this Agreement, all of which
provide first responder medical services.
F. "Pre-hospital emergency medical services" shall mean basic life support, advanced
life support emergency medical service performed prior to the patient's transport to the medical
facility.
G. Quorum. A majority of the members of the Board shall constitute a quorum for the
transaction of business.
2
IV. Creation of the San Mateo County Pre-Hospital Emergency Medical Services Group
There is hereby created the San Mateo County Pre-Hospital Emergency Medical Services
Group ("JPA")to exercise in the manner set forth in this Agreement the powers common to each
of the Parties. The JPA shall be a public entity separate from the Parties.
V. Powers of the JPA
The JPA shall have the following powers and duties:
A. To provide for the delivery of pre-hospital emergency medical services by
employees of the Parties or through a contract with San Mateo County or a third party;
B. To make and enter into contracts;
C. To develop and implement an annual apportionment among the Parties of the
revenues received from sources other than the Parties for pre-hospital emergency medical services.
D. To solicit and accept grants, advances, and contributions from all sources, public
and private;
E. To negotiate for, acquire, hold, manage,maintain, control, or dispose of real and
personal property;
F. To employ or contract for the services of agents, administrative employees,
consultants and such other persons or firms as it deems necessary;
G. To sue and be sued in its own name;
H. To incur debts, liabilities or obligations in accordance with duly approved budgets;
I. To levy and collect fees and charges, including administrative and operating costs,
as provided in this Agreement or by law;
J. To invest any surplus funds not required for the immediate necessities of the JPA as
the Board determines is advisable, in the same manner and upon the same conditions as local
agencies pursuant to Government Code section 53601;
K. To enforce all provisions of this Agreement.
L. To support or cause delivery of efficient fire protection and suppression services, as
approved by the Board, that enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of fire services on behalf of
the Parties to this JPA.
VI. Operating Principles
3
The Parties adopt the following operating principles which shall both guide the actions of
the Board established pursuant to Paragraph VII, and help to resolve issues not anticipated at the
time this Agreement was executed:
A. The JPA shall be governed by the Board established by Paragraph VII. This is a
delegation of authority, not responsibility. Therefore the Board, in carrying out this delegation,
shall be accountable to the Parties.
B. The work of the JPA is of vital public interest. Therefore, the Parties strongly
support the principles of maximum public access and input. Questions, suggestions, comments
and concerns about the JPA's operations shall be encouraged by the Board.
C. The Parties shall have free and thorough access to the Board and to the JPA
Management Committee established pursuant to Paragraph IX.
D. The Parties agree that the JPA shall have the exclusive right and obligation to
negotiate an agreement with San Mateo County or the Countywide ambulance provider to provide,
through the Parties' employees or through contract with a third party,pre-hospital emergency
medical services in San Mateo County. None of the Parties shall negotiate or enter into any
agreement with the County or Countywide ambulance provider to provide pre-hospital emergency
medical services in San Mateo County except as defined in VI (E), (F) & (G).
E. The Parties may negotiate and enter into independent contracts to provide
ambulance transport for the current San Mateo County ambulance provider.
F. The Parties acknowledge and agree that the City of South San Francisco, one of the
Parties to this agreement, maintains certain legal rights and responsibilities pursuant to California
Health & Safety Code §1797.201 ("201 Rights"). It is not the intent of this Agreement, nor any
action taken thereunder, nor the City of South San Francisco in joining the JPA, to modify, change
or in any way interfere with the 201 Rights of the City of South San Francisco.
G. Not withstanding any of the provisions of this Section VI, given South San
Francisco's unique position due to its historical provision of ambulance and paramedic services, no
policy, practice, regulation, or agreement shall be adopted by the group, or any committee or
subcommittee thereof, including but not limited to the JPA Management Committee, that affects or
amends in any way South San Francisco's delivery of pre-hospital ambulance services or
paramedic pre-hospital emergency medical services without the prior written consent of South San
Francisco.
VII. Governing Board
A. Creation of Governing Board. There is hereby created a governing board("Board")
to govern the JPA. The Board shall exercise all powers and authority on behalf of the Parties and
may do any and all things necessary to carry out this Agreement.
4
B. Membership on the Board. The Board shall be constituted of one elected
representative from the governing body of each of the Parties. Each Party shall select one
representative and one alternate to serve on the Board. The alternate will have voting privileges
when attending in place of the primary Board member.
• Belmont
• Brisbane
• Burlingame
• Coastside Fire Protection District
• Colma Fire Protection District
• Daly City
• Foster City
• Hillsborough
• Menlo Park Fire Protection District
• Millbrae
• Pacifica
• Redwood City
• San Bruno
• San Carlos
• San Mateo
• San Mateo County Fire
• South San Francisco
• Woodside Fire Protection District
C. Terms: Each Board member shall serve as appointed by their respective parties.
D. Voting: Each member of the Board shall have one vote. The affirmative vote of
the majority of the Board shall be required to take action.
D.1. When the Board is considering agreements which, if approved, would result in an additional
financial obligation being imposed on the Parties, these special voting procedures should be used.
For those agreements, a two-step voting process shall be required. The Board shall first allow each
Party to indicate whether it wishes to be a party to the agreement under consideration. Those
Parties wishing to be a party to the agreement shall then vote on the item. Parties which have
opted out of participation in the proposed agreement shall not vote. A simple majority of those
who have not opted out shall be required for approval.
E. Special Voting Procedures: Each member of the Board shall have one vote. The
affirmative vote of a simple majority of the members present shall be required to take action unless
any Party requests the Board to vote on a particular action item by using "special voting
procedures."Requests for"special voting procedures"must be made prior to the vote. If"special
voting procedures" are requested, then taking action using"special voting procedures" shall
require the affirmative vote of a simple majority of the Parties to this Agreement that represent a
majority of the population of the Parties to this Agreement.
5
F. Meetings of the Board.
1. Regular Meetings. The Board shall hold at least three meetings each year. One
meeting will be held to include approval of the budget and revenue allocation plans. A second
meeting will be held to include a mid-year status report from staff. Meetings will be held on the
third Wednesday of May, September, and January. Cancellation of a Board meeting will require
discussion between the Executive Director and the Board Chair.
2. Special Meetings. Special meetings of the Board may be called in accordance with
Government Code §54956 (the Brown Act). Upon the request of at least four Parties, the
Chairman of the Board of the JPA shall call a special meeting of the Board.
3. Notice of Meetings. All meetings of the Board shall be held subject to the
provisions of the Ralph M. Brown Act(Government Code sections §54950 and following), and
other applicable laws of the State of California requiring notice of meetings of public bodies.
4. Minutes. The Board shall cause minutes of all open meeting to be kept and shall, as
soon as possible after each meeting, cause a copy of the minutes to be forwarded to each member
of the Board.
5. Agenda Items. Any member of the Board can request that a specific agenda item be
included for review by the Board at an upcoming meeting. The request should be provided to the
JPA Executive Director who will then include the item in the agenda consistent with notification
requirements required by the Ralph M. Brown Act
7. Rules and regulations for the conduct of the Board's affairs. The Board shall adopt
from time to time such rules or regulations for the conduct of its affairs as may be required.
8. Notice to Secretary of State. The Board shall cause to be filed within 30 days of the
effective date of this Agreement, or any amendment to this Agreement,notices of this Agreement
or any amendment to this Agreement with the office of the Secretary of State pursuant to
Government Code §6503.5.
VIII. JPA Management Committee
A. There is hereby created a JPA Management Committee composed of six voting and
one non-voting ex-officio members. The voting members shall include: The Board Chair or his or
her designee and, five individuals who are either city managers, fire chiefs or special district
administrators, each selected from and representing one of the five zones created by the Board.
The non-voting ex-officio member shall be the President of the San Mateo County Fire Chiefs
Association or his or her designee. With the exception of the representative from the Fire Chiefs
Association, the members of the JPA Management Committee shall be selected by the Board as
follows: The Board shall select the members of the JPA Management Committee (a)by asking
members of the Board within each zone to make a recommendation to the Board for that zone's
representative on the JPA Management Committee and then (b) by adopting those
6
recommendations as the JPA Management Committee. The JPA Management Committee will
appoint one voting member as the Chair of the Committee.
1. The JPA Management Committee shall have all those powers necessary and proper
to carry out the Purposes of the JPA(defined in Section II) in accordance with the Operating
Principles (defined in Section VI) except the power: (a) to enter into a contract with San Mateo
County or a Countywide ambulance provider; (b)to adopt a budget and(c)to determine the
apportionment between the Parties of revenues from that contract
2. All meetings of the JPA Management Committee shall be held subject to the
provisions of the Ralph M. Brown Act(Government Code §54950 and following), and other
applicable laws of the State of California requiring notice of meetings of public bodies.
IX. Staffing
The JPA Management Committee may appoint and retain staff as maybe provided for in
the JPA's adopted budget to fulfill its powers, duties and responsibilities under this Agreement,
including, but not limited to, appointment of temporary or permanent staff, contracting with
technical experts, legal counsel, and other consultants, or contracting with any of the Parties.
X. Funds and Budget
A. Fiscal Year. The fiscal year for the JPA shall be July 1 through June 30.
B. Annual Budget and Long Range Forecast. Not later than 30 days before the end of
each fiscal year, the Board shall adopt by resolution a budget for the following fiscal year setting
forth all anticipated administrative, operational, and capital expenses and sources of funds for the
JPA. In conjunction with its annual budget, the Board may adopt by separate resolution a long-
range budget forecast estimating all anticipated administrative, operations and capital expenses and
sources of funds for the JPA for the next five years.
C. Revenue Allocation Plan. The Board shall adopt, and as may be required from time
to time thereafter shall amend, a plan for the equitable allocation of revenues received annually by
the JPA.
XI. Audit and Accounting Services
A. Depository. The Board shall designate the Treasurer of one of the Parties to be
depository with custody of all JPA funds from whatever source and to perform all functions to
fulfill the requirements of Government Code section 6505.5. The Board shall set the amount of
the bond required for the Treasurer.
7
B. Auditor: The Board shall designate the Auditor of one of the Parties to perform the
functions of Auditor for the JPA. There shall be strict accountability of all funds. The Auditor
shall either make or contract for an audit of the accounts and records of the JPA at least annually as
prescribed by section 6505 of the Government Code. The minimum requirements of the audit
shall be those prescribed by the State Controller for special districts by Government Code section
26909.
XII. Disposition of Property and Funds Upon Termination of the Group
A. Complete Transfer to Successor Entity. In the event of termination of the JPA
where there is a successor public entity which will carry on the activities of the JPA and assume its
obligations, all real and personal property owned by the JPA and all JPA funds including interest
on deposits, remaining upon termination of the JPA, after payment of all obligations shall be
transferred to the successor public entity.
B. Partial Transfer to Successor Entity. If there is a successor public entity which
would undertake some of the functions of the JPA and assume some of its obligations, all real and
personal property owned by the JPA and JPA funds, including any interest earned on deposits,
remaining upon termination of the JPA, and after payment of all obligations, shall be allocated by
the Board between the successor public entity and the Parties,with that property and those funds
returned to the Parties being distributed in proportion to the contribution of each Party during the
term of this Agreement.
C. Transfer to Parties. In the event of termination of the JPA,when there is no
successor public entity which will carry out the activities of the JPA, all real and personal property
owned by the JPA and all JPA funds, including interest on deposits, remaining upon termination of
the JPA, after payment of all obligations, shall be distributed to the Parties in proportion to the
contribution of each Party during the term of this Agreement.
D. A Party that does not contribute funds to the acquisition of real and personal
property owned by the JPA or to the accumulative of funds owned by the JPA shall not have an
ownership interest in such real and personal property or funds or any entitlement to a distribution
of such real and personal property or funds upon termination pursuant to this section XII. A Party
shall only have an ownership interest in such real and personal property or funds and an
entitlement to a distribution of such real and personal property or funds upon termination pursuant
to this Section XII, if the Party has contributed to their acquisition and/or accumulation.
XIII. Liability
A. Except as specifically provided in this section XIIIC, no debt, liability, or obligation
of the JPA shall constitute a debt, liability or obligation of any Party.
B. Except as expressly authorized by the Board and by Section XIV of this Agreement,
no Party shall be responsible for the acts and omissions of another Party's officers or employees
8
nor shall a Party incur any liabilities arising out of the services and activities of another Party's
officers of employees.
C. The JPA may maintain such public liability and other insurance as deemed
appropriate.
D. To the fullest extent permitted by law,the JPA agrees to save, indemnify, defend
and hold harmless each Party from any liability, claims, suits, actions, arbitration proceedings,
administrative proceedings, regulatory proceedings, losses, expenses or costs of any kind, whether
actual, alleged or threatened, including attorneys fees and costs, court costs, interest, defense costs,
and expert witness fees, where the same arise out of, or are in any way attributable in whole or in
part, to negligent acts or omissions of the JPA or its employees, officers or agents; or the
employees, officers or agents of any Party while acting within the course and scope of an agency
relationship with the JPA.
XIV. Maintenance of Membership
A. The requirement to maintain membership is essential to the proper functioning of
the JPA because the JPA will enter into a contract with San Mateo County or the Countywide
ambulance provider(as indicated in Section IID) to provide defined pre-hospital emergency
medical services. The continued participation of each of the Parties in the work of the JPA is
required to fulfill the obligations and duties described in that contract. By executing this
Agreement, each Party is giving its explicit consent to the JPA to provide services within the
consenting Party's jurisdiction and to remain as a member of the JPA, subject to the right to
withdraw from the JPA as provided in Section XIV(C).
B. In the event that a Party to this Agreement fails to maintain its membership in the
JPA, or otherwise fails to abide by its duties and obligation as outlined in the contract referred to in
Section XIV(A), the Board may determine that Party to be in default ("Defaulting Party"). The
Board shall provide thirty(30) days written notice to the Defaulting Party of its determination that
the party is in default and thereafter cause the Defaulting Party's duties and obligations to be
performed by another Party to this Agreement and charge the Defaulting Party for the cost of
providing those duties and obligations during the remaining period of the contract with the
Countywide ambulance provider plus fifteen percent (15%).
C. Each Party to this Agreement shall have the opportunity to provide written notice to
the Board that it will withdraw as a member of the JPA; provided that said notice is given no later
than forty-five (45) days prior to the date a contract between the County of San Mateo and a
potential Countywide ambulance provider is presented to the San Mateo County Board of
Supervisors for its approval. For the purposes of this Section XIV(C), the "date the contract is
presented to the Board" shall be the date the agenda of the Board is posted pursuant to Government
Code §54954.2 or §54956.
D. Unless notice is provided in compliance with the terms of Section XIV(C), each
Party to the Agreement shall remain a party to this Agreement and a member of the Group for the
entire term of the contract between the County of San Mateo and the Countywide ambulance
9
provider, as that term may be amended. The obligation to remain a party in the JPA shall apply to
any successor, reconfigured or consolidated entity of any such Party.
XV. Term, Amendments and Termination
A. This Agreement shall take effect on the date by which a total of any combination of
ten cities and fire districts have executed this Agreement.
B. This Agreement may be amended or terminated by an affirmative vote of two-thirds
of the Board. However, this Agreement may not be terminated during the term of the contract
between the JPA and the Countywide ambulance provider, as that term may be amended.
XVI. Dispute Resolution
When a dispute arises between the JPA and a Party, the following procedures shall be
followed:
A. The Executive Director shall attempt to resolve the matter with the Party.
B. If a satisfactory resolution is not reached with the Executive Director, the Party
may forward the dispute to the JPA Management Committee for resolution. The recommendation
of the JPA Management Committee shall be forwarded to the JPA Board of Directors. The JPA
Board's decision shall be final.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the below public agency has caused its name to be included
among those parties comprising the members this Joint Powers Agreement Establishing the San
Mateo County Pre-Hospital Emergency Medical Services s Group, and confirms adoption of a
resolution or other action by the governing board or legislative body of that entity to that effect.
DATE:
CITY OF a Municipal Corporation
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
10
EXHIBIT C
AGREEMENT WITH THE SAN MATEO COUNTY PRE-HOSPITAL
EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES GROUP
TO BE A DESIGNATED PARAMEDIC FIRST RESPONSE SERVICE PROVIDER
THIS AGREEMENT,entered into this day of ,2009,by and between
the COUNTY OF SAN MATEO,a political subdivision of the State of California,hereinafter
called"County"and The San Mateo Pre-Hospital Emergency Medical Services Group(JPA),
hereinafter collectively called"JPA";
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the JPA is made up of the following entities: City of Brisbane,
City of Burlingame,City of Daly City,City of Foster City,Town of Hillsborough,City
of Millbrae,City of Pacifica,City of Redwood City,City of San Bruno,City of San
Mateo,City of South San Francisco,Belmont Fire Protection District,Coastside Fire
Protection District,Colma Fire Protection District,County of San Mateo, Menlo Park
Fire Protection District,and Woodside Fire Protection District;and
WHEREAS,the JPA shall provide advanced life support services pursuant to
its responsibilities as set forth in the Operating Agreement between the JPA and
American Medical Response West("AMR")and provided for in the agreement
between County and AMR for Countywide Emergency Ambulance Service("EASA")
at paragraph 1.
WHEREAS,County has determined that countywide paramedic first response
prescribed herein is the most appropriate and efficient manner of providing first
responder services to the people of San Mateo County;and
WHEREAS,Division 2.5 of the Health and Safety Code,Section 1797.52
specifies that advanced life support services are provided as part of a local EMS
County/JPA Designation Agreement
Page 1
system; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Title 22, Division 9, Section 100168(b)(4) an EMT-
Paramedic Service Provider shall have a written agreement with the local EMS
agency to participate in advanced life support program and to comply with all
applicable State regulations and local policies and procedures including participation
in the local EMS agency's quality assurance system; and
WHEREAS, County has determined that all requests for emergency
ambulance service shall be met by paramedic equipped and staffed first response
vehicles and paramedic equipped and staffed ambulances; and
WHEREAS, the Agreement between County and AMR for Countywide
Emergency Ambulance Service (EASA) commencing on July 1, 2009 includes the
provision of specific medical equipment, supplies, vehicles, and other services to the
JPA; and
WHEREAS, the Agreement between County and AMR for Countywide
Emergency Ambulance Service commencing on July 1, 2009 includes an annual
AMR payment to the County for JPA first responder services; and
WHEREAS, the system design contained in this Agreement is the result of a
three-year process involving the County, cities, fire districts, hospitals, ambulance
providers, paramedics, physicians, nurses, dispatchers, and consumers;
WHEREAS, the City of South San Francisco is not part of San Mateo
County's exclusive operating area as it has provided continuous paramedic
advanced life support services since 1974;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES HERETO AGREE as follows:
County/JPA Designation Agreement
Page 2
1. Services to be Performed by JPA
The JPA shall provide countywide paramedic first responder services, except within
the City of South San Francisco, as described in the Emergency Ambulance
Services Agreement ("EASA") between County and AMR and in the Operating
Agreement between the JPA and AMR and incorporated herein. All entities that are
presently members and maintain membership with the JPA may provide advanced
life support within the JPA's service area and may respond into other jurisdictional
areas by virtue of automatic aid agreements in accordance with State law and the
policies and procedures of the local EMS agency and any amendments, or
additions, thereto. All entities that are presently members of the JPA are authorized
to provide advanced life support using EMT-Paramedics on JPA's fire apparatus or
on ambulances belonging to American Medical Response West as described in the
EASA and the Operating Agreement between the JPA and AMR.
2. ALS Mandate
JPA members are mandated to and shall respond to all requests for services under
the Operating Agreement and the EASA using an advanced life support ("ALS") first
response vehicle. Each ALS first response vehicle shall be staffed with at least two
personnel, at least one of whom shall be licensed and accredited as a paramedic.
3. Payments
Pursuant to Schedule A Section XIII. D. of the EASA AMR shall remit a monthly
payment of $314,461 to County for payment to the JPA for first responder services.
Contingent on AMR's timely payment to County, County shall remit such payments
from AMR to the JPA on the last day of each month beginning July 31, 2009.
However, in the event that AMR fails to pay County for JPA's first responder
services as specified in Schedule A Section XIII. D. of the EASA, County shall not be
obligated to remit payment to the JPA until AMR remits the payments for the JPA to
the County.
The amount listed in this section may increase annually beginning July 1, 2010,
however, such increases may not exceed the Consumer Price Index (CPI) I-Bay
Area cost index increases for the previous year.
4. Relationships of Parties
It is expressly understood that this is an Agreement made in order to satisfy the
requirements contained in Title 22, Division 9, Article 5, Section 100168, and that no
agency, employee, partnership,joint venture or other relationship is established by
County/JPA Designation Agreement
Page 3
the Agreement. It is expressly understood that the County does not warranty, and is
not responsible for, any services provided under this Agreement.
5. Hold Harmless
It is agreed that JPA shall defend, save harmless, and indemnify County, its officers
and employees, from any and all claims for injuries or damage to persons and/or
property which arise out of the terms and conditions of this Agreement and which
result from the negligent acts or omissions of the JPA, its officers, agents,
employees, and subcontractors, in the performance of this Agreement. It is agreed
that JPA members shall maintain all insurance required by its Operating Agreement
with AMR and that the JPA members shall list County as an additional insured on
such insurance. The duty of the JPA to indemnify and save harmless as set forth
herein, shall include the duty to defend as set forth in Section 2778 of the California
Civil Code.
It is further agreed that County shall defend, save harmless, and indemnify the JPA,
its officers, employees, and members from any and all claims for injuries or
damages to persons and/or property which arise out of the terms and conditions of
this Agreement and which result from negligent acts or omissions of County, its
officers, and/or employees.
In the event of concurrent negligence, the liability for any and all claims for injuries or
damages to persons and/or property which arise out of the terms and conditions of
this Agreement shall be apportioned under the California theory of comparative
negligence as established presently, or as may be hereafter modified.
6. Privacy Compliance
During the term of this Agreement, each party may receive from the other party, or
may receive or create on behalf of the other party, certain confidential health or
medical information (`Protected Health Information" or "PHI," as further defined
below). This PHI is subject to protection under state and/or federal law, including the
Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, Public Law 104-191
("HIPAA") and regulations promulgated thereunder by the U.S. Department of Health
and Human Services ("HIPAA Regulations"). Each party represents that it has in
place policies and procedures that will adequately safeguard any PHI it receives or
creates, and each party specifically agrees to safeguard and protect the
confidentiality of Protected Health Information consistent with applicable law.
Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, each party agrees that it shall have in
place all policies and procedures required to comply with HIPAA and the HIPAA
Regulations prior to the date on which such compliance is required.
For purposes of this section, 'Protected Health Information" means any information,
whether oral or recorded in any form or medium: (a) that relates to the past, present
or future physical or mental health or condition of an individual; the provision of
County/JPA Designation Agreement
Page 4
health care to any individual; or the past, present or future payment for the provision
of health care to an individual, and (b) that identifies the individual or with respect to
which there is a reasonable basis to believe the information can be used to identify
the individual.
This section shall be interpreted in a manner consistent with HIPAA, the HIPAA
Regulations and other state or federal laws applicable to PHI.
JPA agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the County and its respective
employees, directors, officers, subcontractors, agents or other members of its
workforce (collectively, "indemnified party,") against all damages suffered by the
indemnified party and all liability to third parties arising from any breach of this
section by JPA.
County agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the JPA and its directors,
officers, employees and members ("indemnified party") against all damages suffered
by the indemnified parry and all liability to third parties arising from any breach of this
section by County.
7. Assignments and Subcontracts
A. Without the written consent of the Chief, San Mateo County Health System or
his/her designee, this Agreement is not assignable in whole or in part. Any
assignment by JPA without the written consent of the Chief, San Mateo County
Health System violates this Agreement and shall be cause for the County to
terminate this Agreement upon 120 days written notice. Said written consent
shall not be unreasonably withheld when beneficial ownership of the organization
remains unchanged.
B. Other than as provided for in this Agreement, JPA shall not employ
subcontractors or consultants to carry out the responsibilities undertaken
pursuant to this contract without the written consent of the Chief, San Mateo
County Health System.
C. All assignees, subcontractors, or consultants approved by Chief, San Mateo
County Health System or his/her designee shall be subject to the same terms
and conditions applicable to JPA under this Agreement.
D. All Agreements between JPA and any subcontractor and/or assignee for
services pursuant to this Agreement (if applicable) shall be in writing and shall be
provided to County.
8. Meroer and Modification/Alteration of Agreement
This Agreement is the entire agreement between the parties with respect to matters
herein discussed and contains all the terms and conditions agreed upon by the
County/JPA Designation Agreement
Page 5
parties. No alteration or variation shall be valid unless made in writing and signed by
the parties hereto, and no oral understanding or Agreement shall be binding on the
parties hereto.
9. Records
A. JPA agrees to provide to County, to any Federal or State department having
monitoring or reviewing authority, to County's authorized representatives and/or
their appropriate audit agencies upon reasonable notice, access to and the right
to examine and audit all records and documents necessary to determine
compliance with relevant Federal, State, and local statutes, rules and regulations,
and this Agreement, and to evaluate the quality, appropriateness and timeliness
of services performed, to the extent necessary to determine such compliance
and evaluate such quality, appropriateness and timeliness. JPA shall make
available for the County's inspection, to the extent necessary to verify
compliance with this Agreement, its financial records for its services provided
pursuant to this Agreement for review or audit at any place designated by County
and if requested, JPA shall provide copies of such records to County.
B. JPA shall maintain and preserve all records relating to this
Agreement and the Operations Agreement in its possession, for a period of four
(4) years from the termination date of this Agreement, or until audit findings are
resolved.
10. Financial Reports. Accounting, and Auditino Procedures
JPA agrees to make annual audited financial reports available to the
County upon request. JPA shall also share annual operational budget
upon the request of the County.
11. Compliance with Other Aareements and Applicable Laws
All services to be performed by JPA pursuant to this Agreement shall be
performed in accordance with JPA's Operating Agreement with AMR and the
EASA. Each party to this Agreement shall comply with all applicable federal
(including federal anti-kickback statute), state, county and municipal laws,
ordinances, regulations, EMS policies or protocols, including but not limited to
appropriate licensure, certification regulations, provisions pertaining to
confidentiality of records, and applicable quality assurance regulations and/or
policies.
12. Notices
County/JPA Designation Agreement
Page 6
Any notice, request, demand or other communication required or permitted
hereunder shall be deemed to be properly given when deposited in the United
States mail, postage prepaid:
1) In the case of County:
Chief, San Mateo County Health System
County of San Mateo
225 37th Avenue
San Mateo, CA 94403
or to such person or address as County may, from time to time furnish
to JPA.
2) In the case of JPA, to:
Executive Director
San Mateo Pre-Hospital Emergency Medical Services Medical Group
1600 Floribunda Avenue
Hillsborough, CA 94010
13. Controlling Law
The validity of this Agreement and its terms or provisions, as well as the rights and
duties of the parties hereunder, the interpretation and performance of this
Agreement shall be governed by the laws of State of California and shall be brought
and maintained in the Superior Court in and for the County of San Mateo.
14. Term of Agreement
The term of this Agreement shall run concurrent with the term of the Operations
Agreement between the JPA and AMR and the Countywide Emergency Ambulance
Agreement between the County and AMR. The parties agree that if both of the
aforementioned agreements are terminated this Agreement shall automatically
terminate. Additionally, this Agreement may be terminated at anytime by the JPA or
by mutual written agreement of the County and the JPA.
It is understood that if this Agreement is terminated for any reason, JPA or any of its
members, excluding the City of South San Francisco, will not have the approval of
County's EMS Agency to be an EMT-Paramedic Service Provider or Advanced Life
Support Service Provider within San Mateo County and must cease all advanced life
support services immediately. In the event this Agreement is terminated, the EMS
Administrator will meet with representatives of the JPA to discuss the terms and
conditions under which the JPA or any of its members may be re-designated as an
EMT-P Service Provider or Advanced Life Support Service Provider. It is further
agreed that if any of the entities listed in this Agreement, other than the City of South
San Francisco, are no longer members of the JPA, that the entity leaving the JPA
will have no authority to provide ALS services until that entity executes a separate
County/JPA Designation Agreement
Page 7
agreement with the County to be designated as an ALS provider pursuant to Title
22, Division (, Section 1000168 (b) (4).
Declaration of Maior Breach and Takeover of 911 Ambulance Service
In the event that the Chief, San Mateo County Health System determines that a
Major Breach of the EASA has occurred and such determination is brought to the
Board of Supervisors, and if the nature of the breach is, in the Chief, San Mateo
County Health System's and Board of Supervisors' opinion such that there is a
serious and immediate threat to public health and safety, and after JPA has been
given notice and an opportunity to appear before the Board of Supervisors, JPA
shall cooperate completely and immediately with County to continue to provide
paramedic first responder services pursuant to this Agreement and in conformity
with the Major Breach provisions under the EASA. In the event of a Major
Breach under the EASA, the County shall make every effort to enforce section
XIII.D. of the EASA with AMR to allow for continued payments to the JPA under
paragraph 3 of this Agreement. If County is unable to secure payments from
AMR then JPA may terminate this Agreement thirty (30) days after the
declaration of Major Breach. In the event of a termination under this section the
JPA and its members will not have the approval of County's EMS Agency to be
an EMT-Paramedic Service Provider or Advanced Life Support Service Provider
within San Mateo County and must cease all advanced life support services
immediately In the event this Agreement is terminated, the EMS Administrator
will meet with representatives of the JPA to discuss the terms and conditions
under which the JPA or any of its members may be re-designated as an EMT-P
Service Provider or Advanced Life Support Service Provider.
15. Other Provisions
A. Rioht of Inspection: County or any of its duly authorized employees or
agents shall have the right to make inspections or investigations at any time
without prior notice for the purpose of determining whether JPA is complying
with the terms and conditions of the Operating Agreement with AMR, to the
extent required to verify compliance with this Agreement. JPA shall make
available to County, its records with respect to all matters covered by the
Agreement. A county representative may contact the JPA to schedule a ride
as "third person" on any of the paramedic first response vehicles. A county
representative may inspect any paramedic first response vehicle at any time
without prior notice.
B. Compliance With First Responder Standards
Each first responder ALS unit shall be staffed by at least one paramedic.
County/JPA Designation Agreement
Page 8
JPA shall have four JPA EMS Supervisors, who shall have responsibility for
their assigned zones; 1(North Zone, 2) Central Zone, 3) South Zone, and 4)
Coastal Zone. These EMS Supervisors whall have 24-hour responsibility for
EMS issues involving the paramedic first responders within their assigned
zone. At least one of these EMS Supervisors will be available on-call at all
times for all zones during non-business hours 365 days per year.
The JPA and its members agree to comply with the standards of paramedic
professionalism, training, certifications, and recordkeeping outlined in
Schedule A sections 11., 111.6.3., IV. E., and V. of the EASA and paragraphs
V., VI., VII., VIII., IX., X., and XXI of the Operating Agreement.
C. Noncompliance of JPA With Agreements
Any failure of the JPA or its members to comply with the terms of this
Agreement shall be referred, in writing, to the Executive Steering Council
(ESC) for its review and recommended action. Such non-compliance may
include, but is not limited to, paramedic first responder
qualifications/licensing/certification/accreditation/, required training, patient
records, equipment, supplies, quality assurance program. The ESC shall
communicate its findings to the JPA within 30 days of receiving a written
referral.
JPA shall have 60 days to cure any finding of non-compliance by the ESC. If
the ESC determines that the JPA is non-compliant following the 60 day cure
period, it shall review the non-compliance and recommend one of the
following actions:
1) Provide the JPA an additional 30 days to cure the non-compliance;
2) Recommend that AMR withhold a portion of the JPA payments to County;
3) Provide the JPA with a remediation plan designed to cure such non-
compliance. ESC shall have the power to monitor JPA's compliance at
monthly intervals with the purpose of correcting any area of non-compliance.
16. Authority to Enter Into Agreement
The parties executing this Agreement warrant that they have full and
complete legal authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of their agency.
County/JPA Designation Agreement
Page 9
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto, by their duly authorized
representatives, have affixed their hands.
COUNTY OF SAN MATEO
By:
President, Board of Supervisors
Date:
ATTEST:
Clerk of Said Board
San Mateo Pre-Hospital Emergency
Medical Group
By:
Date:
By:
Date:
County/JPA Designation Agreement
Page 10
CITY 0 STAFF REPORT
BURLINGAME AGENDA
ITEM # 8b
MTG.
HCD""DFATED JUNE DATE June 1, 2009
N
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTED
BY Don Dornell Fire Chief
DATE: Mav 18, 2009
APPROVE
FROM: Central County Fire Department BY '"00!
SUBJECT: Resolution Approving Agreement for Exchange of Em gency Medical, Rescue, and Fire
Protection Services Automatic Aid and First Response
Recommendation:
Adopt the Resolution Approving the Agreement for Exchange of Emergency Medical, Rescue, and Fire
Protection Services Automatic Aid and First Response.
BacklZround:
As part of the 1997 San Mateo County Pre-Hospital Emergency Services Group Joint Powers Agreement
(JPA) a Countywide Automatic Aid Agreement was required and approved by all members of the JPA. This
agreement will expire June 30, 2009 and must be renewed and continued.
The San Mateo County Pre-Hospital Emergency Services Group JPA requires the implementation of a
comprehensive automatic aid and full boundary drop plan. The plan will recommend the closest resource
responses, along with "move and cover", by each fire agency regardless of jurisdiction pursuant to the adopted
countywide deployment plan.
Budget Impact:
No impacts identified.
Attachments:
Resolution Approving Agreement for Exchange of Emergency Medical, Rescue, and Fire Protection Services
Automatic Aid and First Response.
Agreement for Exchange of Emergency Medical, Rescue, and Fire Protection Services Automatic Aid and
First Response (available upon request)
RESOLUTION NO. 09-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME
WHEREAS, the cities and fire protection districts within San Mateo County and the
County of San Mateo entered into the Joint Powers Agreement under the heading of San
Mateo County Pre-Hospital Emergency Services Group (JPA) to provide prompt
advanced life support medical services to citizens of San Mateo County; and
WHEREAS, this JPA agreement requires the implementation of a comprehensive and
full boundary drop with closest resource responses and move and cover by each fire
agency regardless of jurisdiction pursuant to countywide deployment plan; and
WHEREAS, the parties to this agreement provide emergency medical, rescue and fire
protection services, as well as mitigate other types of emergency and non-emergency
incidents; and
WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the citizens within San Mateo County and each
individual jurisdiction to provide the most expeditious response to render emergency
medical and rescue assistance and to suppress fires, as well as mitigate other types of
emergencies and non-emergency incidents; and
WHEREAS, each party is desirous of providing to the other reasonable and reciprocal
exchange of emergency medical, rescue, fire and other emergency and non-emergency
services on a day-to-day basis; and
WHEREAS, this agreement is authorized and provided for by provisions of the Health
and Safety and Government Codes of the State of California and acts and statutes of the
Federal Government, where applicable.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of
Burlingame does hereby resolve as follows:
The City Council authorizes the Mayor to sign the Agreement for Exchange of
Emergency Medical, Rescue, and Fire Protection Services Automatic Aid and First
Response as part of the San Mateo County Pre-Hospital Emergency Services Group JPA
participation.
Mayor of the City of Burlingame
I, Mary Ellen Kearney, Clerk of the City of Burlingame, hereby certify that the
foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced and adopted at a regular meeting
of the Burlingame City Council on Monday, the 1st day of June, 2009 by the following
vote, to wit:
AYES: Councilmembers:
NOES: Councilmembers:
ABSENT: Councilmembers:
Mary Ellen Kearney, City Clerk
AGREEMENT FOR EXCHANGE OF
EMERGENCY MEDICAL, RESCUE AND FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES
AUTOMATIC AID AND FIRST RESPONSE
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this day of , 2009, by
and between the County of San Mateo, the cities within San Mateo County and the fire
protection districts within San Mateo County,who names appear below as signatories to this
Agreement.
WHEREAS, the cities and fire protection districts within San Mateo County and
the County of San Mateo entered into the Joint Powers Agreement under the heading of San
Mateo County Pre-Hospital Emergency Services Provider Group (JPA) to provide prompt
advanced life support medical services to citizens of San Mateo County; and
WHEREAS, this JPA agreement requires the implementation of a comprehensive
and full boundary drop with closest resource responses and move and cover by each fire
agency regardless of jurisdiction pursuant to countywide deployment plan; and
WHERAS, the parties to this agreement provide emergency medical, rescue and
fire protection services, as well as mitigate other types of emergency and non-emergency
incidents; and
WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the citizens within San Mateo County and
each individual jurisdiction to provide the most expeditious response to render emergency
medical and rescue assistance and to suppress fires, as well as mitigate other types of
emergencies and non-emergency incidents; and
WHEREAS, each party is desirous of providing to the other reasonable and
reciprocal exchange of emergency medical, rescue, fire and other emergency and non-
emergency services on a day-to-day basis; and
WHEREAS, this agreement is authorized and provided for by provisions of the
Health and Safety and Government Codes of the State of California and acts and statutes of
the Federal Government, where applicable.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of these mutual covenants, the parties
hereto agree as follows:
1. Automatic Aid. Each of the signatory parties to this Agreement shall provide
automatic aid to each other for Fire Department incidents. Automatic aid shall be provided in
accordance with the "Deployment Plan for San Mateo County", herein referenced as the
"Deployment Plan." The cities, fire protection districts and the County intend that this
Agreement will provide mutual benefits to all parties and herein authorize the San Mateo
County Fire Chiefs to revise the Deployment Plan as may be dictated by changing conditions
and the requirements of mutual benefits to all parties. It is agreed that any reductions of
emergency medical and fire protection forces by any agency shall be cause for those agencies
involved to meet and discuss impacts and come to resolution on said impacts.
Rev.5-18-09 -I-
2. Insurance and Liability. No debt, liability, or obligation of one party shall be
the debt, obligation, or liability of another party. Each party shall provide, in its discretion,
insurance for its personnel and entity. Each party shall be responsible for its own acts and/or
omissions.
3. Equipment and Resources. The equipment designated in the Deployment Plan,
the policies and standards adopted by the San Mateo County Fire Chiefs Association, or any
other document as may be adopted by the San Mateo County Fire Chiefs Association, shall
be the equipment and resources that each party shall provide to an automatic aid response. In
the absence of designated equipment and resources, each party shall provide, in its discretion,
the equipment and resources it deems appropriate in any automatic aid response.
4. Third Party Beneficiaries. Nothing set forth in this Agreement shall create, nor
is it intended to create, third party beneficiaries who may rely upon any breach of this
Agreement to assert a cause of action in their behalf.
5. Withdrawal. Each party to this Agreement shall remain a party to this
Agreement for the entire term of the contract between the San Mateo County Pre-Hosptial
Emergency Services Group (JPA) and San Mateo County for fire paramedic first response.
The requirement to maintain membership is essential to the proper functioning of this
Agreement. In the event any party fails to maintain its status as a party and or fails to provide
automatic aid, the services that would have been provided by such defaulting party may be
provided by other parties to this Agreement. The defaulting party shall be responsible for the
cost of the defaulted service performed by the other parties to this Agreement,plus 5% of
such cost.
6. Amendment: The Parties may from time to time, during the life of this
Agreement, vote to amend its provisions to address changes in conditions. All proposed
amendments must be approved by a majority of the Parties to the Agreement in order to be
effective.
7. Effective Date: This Agreement shall be effective on the first day of the
month following the month in which this Agreement shall have been approved by all of the
parties. This Agreement may be executed in counter-part copies which, taken together,
shall constitute a single document.
Balance of this page intentionally left blank
Rev.5-18-09 -2-
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement the day
and year first above written.
City of Brisbane Central County Fire Department
San Mateo County Fire Colma Fire Protection District
City of Daly City City of Foster City
Coastside Fire Protection District Menlo Park Fire Protection District
City of Millbrae City of Pacifica
City of Redwood City City of San Bruno
City of San Mateo Belmont/ San Carlos Fire Department
City of South San Francisco Woodside Fire Protection District
Rev.5-18-09 -3-
A*,CITY o� STAFF REPORT
BURLlNppME AGENDA
ITEM# 8c
MTG.
DATE JUNE 1,2009
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL sUBMITTE A/� �/� r
BY
DATE: May 25,2009
APPRO D �
FROM: Jim Nantell 558-7205 BY
— ;4
SUBJECT: Opposition to State Property Tax Raid
RECOMMENDATION: Concur with staff recommendation to approve proposed resolution finding"A
Severe Fiscal Hardship Will Exist"if this proposed state property tax raid is approved by the State Legislature
BACKGROUND: On May 5 the State Department of Finance announced it had proposed to the Governor
that the state "borrow" over $2 billion in local property taxes from cities, counties and special districts to
balance the state budget, causing deeper cuts in local public safety and other vital service. In order to start that
process, the Governor would have to issue a proclamation declaring the existence of a "severe fiscal
hardship." The legislature would then have to implement the "borrowing" program by passing urgency
legislation(2/3 vote)which identifies how the"loan"will be repaid with interest.
The League of California Cities has developed the attached resolution"Finding A Severe Fiscal Hardship Will
Exist" if this proposed state property tax raid is added to the pressures of the ongoing property tax losses and
the serious revenue losses due to the economic recession. The resolution in effect states that the idea of the
state taking property tax funds from already stressed city budgets is ludicrous and irresponsible. It helps
demonstrate that part of the reason cities are cutting there budgets today, in fact, is because of past and
continuing property tax raids. If possible, we urge that a staff report be prepared with information on property
tax losses (see below) and budget cuts the city has made and is facing.
The attached resolution cites the cumulative property tax losses of cities statewide since the state began taking
these funds in the early 1990s—which is $8.6 billion statewide even after deducting payments cities receive
from the Prop. 172 public safety sales tax the state COPS grant program. The City of Burlingame's share of
that loss is $14,800,000. If the State legislature were to approve the raid on local property taxes the City will
need to implement $1 million from the attached list of$2 million in additional reductions, use 50% of our $2
million economic reserve or a combination of those options.
Attachments:
A. Impacts Of Reductions Should The City Lose Up To An Additional $2 Million Due To Further Declining
Revenues Or State Property Tax Raid
Attachment A
Impacts Of Reductions Should The City Lose Up To An Additional$2 Million
Due To Declining Revenues Or State Property Tax Raid
Should the rate of decline in existing revenues be more substantial than currently
predicted(including the threat of a property tax raid by the State)the staff has developed
the following list of reductions for the Council's consideration.
1. Furlough City non emergency employees for 26 days per year and close city hall
and other facilities one day a week.
This would provide the largest savings of over$1 million but would equate
to a 9%loss in wages; and would reduce public access to service one day
a week.
2. Close a fire station and take a second engine company out of service.
The budget balancing actions for fiscal year 2009-2010 have necessitated
the "browning out"or closure of the Engine Company stationed in our
California Drive fire station. Another 5%cut to the fire department
would require the closure of either the Rollins Road station or the Hillside
Drive station. Closure of a second engine company would impact timely
response to the area east of California Drive or the properties that are
served by the Hillside station north of Broadway between Skyline and El
Camino Real..
3. Discontinue School Resource Police Officer and eliminate the assignment of two
police officers assigned traffic enforcement.
The budget balancing actions for fiscal year 2009-2010 have necessitated
the reduction of two Police officer positions. An additional 5%reduction
to the Police Department would require the reduction of additional two or
three police officers, which would result in the discontinuation of the
School Resource Officer and the traffic bureau.
4. Close the Easton Branch Library
Given the need to close a second fire station and discontinue the Police
Department Traffic Bureau we would not be in a position to continue the
operation of this branch Library when the Main Library is 1.5 miles away.
The $124,000 annual expense would need to be diverted back to help
reduce the number of days we close the fire station or mitigate more
severe reduction in library hours at that facility.
5. Close Village Park Preschool Programs and lease facility or increase preschool
registration fees by 30%.
The budget balancing actions for fiscal year 2009-2010 have necessitated
the elimination of 5 positions (15%) in Parks and Recreation. The loss of
additional positions would require the discontinuation of the preschool
programs or significant increase in fees to continue the program.
6. Discontinue after school sports programs for elementary and middle school
students or increase fees to cover the $122,000 subsidy. .
The budget balancing actions for fiscal year 2009-2010 have necessitated
the elimination of 5 positions (38%) in Parks and Recreation. The loss of
additional positions would require the discontinuation of these partially
subsidized programs.
7. Charge field use fees at $5/hr for youth groups vs. current$15 per season per
player.
The budget balancing actions for fiscal year 2009-2010 have necessitated
the elimination of 5 positions in Parks and Recreation. In order to
maintain sport facilities to an adequate safe level we would have to shift
from a fairly nominal fee for field use to at least$5/hour. At the $5/hour
figure it would increase field use revenues from youth groups from
$64,000/year to over$200,000.
8. Make reductions to Planning Department Staff
An additional 5%reduction in the Planning Department will mean the
loss of one to two positions, which will delay the processing of planning
applications and will jeopardize our ability to meet the permit
streamlining requirements imposed by State law. Additionally, a reduction
in planning staff would necessitate reductions in public counter services,
as well as, limits in remaining staff's ability to undertake work associated
with workpriorities established by the City Council.
9. Cut positions in Public Works street maintenance
The loss of positions in this area will result in further degradation to our
street conditions and will seriously jeopardize our ability to comply with
the clean water act requirements prevent non point discharge into our
street storm water collection system.
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF BURLINGAME FINDING
A SEVERE FISCAL HARDSHIP WILL EXIST
IF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SEIZES
ADDITIONAL CITY PROPERTY TAX FUNDS AND
ADOPTS ADDITIONAL UNFUNDED MANDATES
WHEREAS, the current economic crisis has placed cities under incredible
financial pressure and caused city officials to reopen already adopted budgets to make
painful cuts, including layoffs and furloughs of city workers, decreased maintenance and
operations of public facilities, and reductions of direct services in order to balance
expenditures with declining revenues; and
WHEREAS, since the early 1990s the State of California has seized over $8.6
billion of city property-tax revenues statewide to fund the state budget even after
deducting state public-safety-program payments to cities; and
WHEREAS, in FY 2007-08 alone the State of California seized $895 million in
city property taxes statewide to fund the state budget after deducting public-safety-
program payments and in FY 2008-09, the State of California seized an additional $350
million in local redevelopment funds; and
WHEREAS, the most significant impact of the State's seizure of local property
taxes has been to reduce the quality of public-safety services which cities can provide
because public-safety expenditures comprise the largest part of any city's general fund
budget; and
WHEREAS, in 2004, by an 84% vote margin, the voters of California adopted
substantial constitutional protections for local government revenues, but the legislature
can still"borrow"local property taxes to fund the state budget; and
WHEREAS, on May 5, 2009, the California Department of Finance announced it
had proposed to the Governor that the State "borrow" over $2 billion in local property
taxes from cities, counties and special districts to balance the state budget, and whereas
such "borrowing" would result in deeper cuts to local public safety and other vital
services; and
WHEREAS, in the past the Governor has called such "borrowing" proposals
fiscally irresponsible because the State will find it virtually impossible to repay said
"loans" and such "borrowing" will only deepen the State's structural deficit, preventing
the State from balancing its budget; and
WHEREAS, the Legislature is currently considering hundreds of bills, many of
which would impose new costs on local governments that can neither be afforded nor
sustained in this economic climate; and
WHEREAS, state agencies are adopting, or considering, many regulations
imposing unfunded mandates on local governments without regard to how local agencies
will be able comply with these mandates while meeting their other responsibilities; and
WHEREAS, the combined effects of seizing the City's property taxes,
increasing unfunded state mandates, and the City's revenue losses on account of the
economic downturn, have placed the City's budget under serious fiscal pressure; and
WHEREAS, the City of Burlingame simply cannot sustain the loss of any more
property tax funds and cannot endure the imposition of any more state mandates because
they will only deepen the financial challenge facing Burlingame; and
WHEREAS, a number of the City's financial commitments arise from contracts,
including long term capital leases and debt obligations which support securities in the
public capital markets, that the City must honor in full unless modified by mutual
agreement of the parties; and
WHEREAS, the State of California's seizure of over $1 million of
Burlingame's property taxes is in addition to an existing loss of over $4 million in other
City revenues which has necessitated closure of 20 percent of our fire stations, reduction
of police officers, reduction of library hours and materials, layoff of park and recreation
employees, and significant increases in fees.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
BURLINGAME DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
1. The Burlingame City Council finds that the City of Burlingame will
experience a severe fiscal hardship if the recommendation of the California Department
of Finance to "borrow" $2 billion of local property taxes is supported and acted upon by
the Governor and the Legislature; and
2. The Burlingame City Council strongly and unconditionally opposes the
May 5, 2009 proposal of the California Department of Finance and any other State of
California proposals to borrow or seize any additional local funds, including the property
tax, redevelopment tax increment, and the City's share of the Prop. 42 transportation
sales tax; and
3. The City Council strongly urges the California Legislature and the
Governor to suspend the enactment of any new mandates on local governments until such
time as the economy has recovered and further, the City Council urges the State to
provide complete funding for all existing and any new mandates; and
4. The City Council directs the City Clerk to send copies of this Resolution
to the Governor, our State senator(s), our State assembly member(s) and the League of
California Cities.
Ann Keighran,Mayor
I, Mary Ellen Kearney, Clerk of the City of Burlingame, hereby certify that the
foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced and adopted at a regular meeting
of the Burlingame City Council on Monday, the 1st day of June, 2009 by the following
vote, to wit:
AYES: Councilmembers:
NOES: Councilmembers:
ABSENT: Councilmembers:
Mary Ellen Kearney, City Clerk
BURL i h6AMf
Library Board of Trustees Minutes
April 21,2009
I. Call to Order
Secretary McCormack called the meeting to order at 5:45pm.
II. Roll Call
Trustees Present: Deborah Griffith,Katie McCormack,
Pat Toft,Sandy Towle
Trustee Absent: Nancy Brock
Staff Present: Al Escoffier,City Librarian
Sidney Poland,Recorder
Library Foundation: Jim Cannon, Current Board Member
Kris Cannon,Advisory Board Member
III. Minutes'of the March 17,2009 Trustee Meeting
The Trustees unanimously approved the March 17,2009 minutes.
M/S/C(Toft/Towle)
IV. Correspondence and Attachments
March 2009 statistics show a circulation increase at the main Library of
8.03%and a decrease of 1.58%for Easton Branch. Total increase for
both facilities over March of 2008 is 6.91%. Increases in circulation
are holding steady at approximately 12%. Circulation at Easton has
tripled since 2004.
V. From the Floor-Kris and Jim Cannon invited the Trustees to an
informational meeting they are chairing regarding possible financial
impacts for Easton and the Main Library if the Storm Drain Measure
does not pass.The event will be held at the Easton Library at 7:00pm
Sunday,April 26th.
VI. Reports
A. City Librarian's Report-Highlights
1. Main Information Desk-May 4th is the"opening day"for the
combined Reference and Circulation desk to begin operations.
Patrons will be encouraged to use self-check in order to alleviate
the issue of having to wait in line to check out materials. Staff
will be available to assist patrons who are not familiar with using
the self-check machines.
480 Primrose Road•Burlingame•California 94010-4083
Phone(650)558-7474'Fax(650)342-6295'www.burlingame.org/library
2. Library Trustee Position - Trustee Brock's current term ends
on June 30, 2009; she is eligible to apply for a consecutive 3 year
term. The City has noticed previous applicants regarding the
available position on the Library Board of Trustees.
B. Foundation Report
The spring book sale opens on Thursday afternoon at 4:00pm and
continues throughout the weekend until Sunday, April 26th at
4:00pm. Invitations to the annual Author's Luncheon featuring
Author's Sandra Tsing Loh's "Mother On Fire" and Mike Robbins
" Be Yourself" were mailed the end of March. The event will be
held at Dominic's at Poplar Creek.
VII. Unfinished Business
A. Friday Closure at Easton
Easton will be closed on Friday beginning May 1st and continuing
into the next fiscal year. The Trustees expressed concern that
due process regarding the Easton closure was not followed.
B. Educational Process
The Trustees discussed ways in which they could reach out to the
public in an effort to better,inform them on the subject of library
usage i.e., circulation totals and activity, inter library loans,
additions to the collection, children and adult programs, outreach
services, reference activity and on-line services.
C. Informational Fact Document
The Trustees unanimously passed a motion requesting that the City
Librarian prepare an educational fact sheet for the Trustees detailing
information on library usage and trust funds, including any specific
limitations on fund allocation. M/S/C (Toft/McCormack)
VIII. New Business
The Trustees reviewed two options presented by the City Librarian for
modifying the Library budget. The Trustees unanimously passed the
motion of Trustee Griffith which stated that in the event the City
reduces the Library budget by 15%, the Trustees recommend for a
period of one year that $ 80,000 be re-allocated from the book budget to
retain hourly staff. M/S/C (Griffith/Toft)
IX. Announcements
Trustee McCormack will not be able to attend the Mayl9th Trustee
meeting. The City Librarian noted that the final budget session will be
held in the Lane Community Room at 7:00pm on Wednesday May 27th.
Library Board of Trustee Minutes April 21,2009 2
X. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 7:30pm. M/ S/C (McCormack/Griffith)
The meeting of the Library Trustees will be held on May 19, 2009 in the
Library Conference Room.
Respectfully Submitted,
Alf ed Hffier
City Librarian
Library Board of Trustee Minutes April 21, 2009 3
City Librarian Report
May 12, 2009
Revised
Proposed Budget Issues Change
This week, Mary Asturias, Financial Services Manager for the City, clarified some
major assumptions concerning the City budget. The budget will be based on:
reductions using only Tiers #4 and #5 (not #6 & #7), and an across the board salary
freeze for staff. This information affects the library budget in two ways: a) funding for
print materials remains in the budget at $ 183,732; b) funding for hourly staff is at the
$ 343,808 level.
The specific implications are: the book budget, formerly $ 80,000, is now back up to
$ 183,732; the hourly staff budget was reduced to $ 343,808, instead of the previous
figure of$ 180,000. This is a 56% reduction, instead of a 70% reduction.
These figures could of course change during the budget process, but that is where we
stand today.
All told, this is an 11% reduction in the library budget, instead of a 15% reduction.
Library Service Impacts
Despite these changes for the good, there will be service impacts to our users at the
11% reduction:
• Close Fridays at Easton Branch, effective May 1, 2009
• Merge Reference and Circulation Desks, effective May 4, 2009
• Focus on self service: Self-Checks, Express Holds, Online renewal
• Longer lines at service desks due to single staffing
• No phone service on Sundays
• Story times reduced from 7 to 6 per week
• Adult, Teen, Children's programs reduced
• Longer waits for new materials
• Fewer new titles
At a proposed 15% reduction, the service impacts could include the entire list above
plus:
• Close Lower Level Help Desk; no help for the public with media, non-fiction,
Internet; reduced security on Lower Level
• Consolidate service points to 3: Main Desk, Children's Room, Easton
• Eliminate hourly Easton staff and replace with benefitted staff from the main
library
• Story Times reduced from 6 per week to 4 per week
• No phone service on Saturday or Sunday
• Reduced custodial service: no toilet room cleaning afternoons
1
• No Community room setups;no staff to set up
Hopefully this level of reduction will not be necessary either now or in the future.With
the Storm Drain Measure having passed as of May 6th,I would hope that no further
reductions in library operations would be necessary.
The budget.study session for the City will take place on Wednesday,May 27,6 PM,
Lane Community Room.
Balancing the Library Budget for May&June
In an effort to return a portion of the library budget to the City to help balance the
current year budget,the anticipated July layoffs have been moved up to May.Twenty-
one of 26 hourly staff have been laid off in whole or in part effective May 11th.
Service Reductions to Begin Immediately
Due to the need to capture as much savings as possible,the Library will replace
hourly staff with benefitted staff on public service desks.This comes at the same time
we are moving to the joint"Main Service Desk"on May 4th,combining reference and
circulation staff.
An online catalog module of 5 computers will replace the old reference desk.This will
be the hub for searching the online catalog.This will free up 5 more computers for
Internet use in the Electronic Gallery.This service is about 2 weeks from
implementation.
Freeze on Materials purchase
Effective April 30th,I directed a freeze on ordering new library materials.There is still a
backlog of items toarrivefrom our vendor,and we will continue to receive best sellers
and other popular items on our standing order plan from our wholesaler.Otherwise,
we will be purchasing very little for the next 60 days.
Annual Report from the Board
Attached is the annual report outline as requested by the Board.Please review it and
let staff know how you would like to proceed.
Foundation Report
The Foundation Book Sale made over$6,100.00 for the Foundation!Thanks go to
Fiona Hamilton and her cadre volunteers for doing such a great job.
Members of the Foundation formed a committee to preserve library services at both
the main and branch libraries.Kris and Jim Cannon chair the group.
2
Upcoming Events:
• May 1, Close Easton on Fridays
• May 6, Storm Drain Measure Passes
• May 7, Library Foundation Board, 5:30 PM
• May 9, Foundation Book & Author Luncheon, 11:30 AM, Dominic's Poplar Creek
• May 12, Library Board, 5:30 PM (new date)
• May 13, Citizen's Academy, Lane Room, 6:30 PM
• May 18, City Council, 7 PM
• May 27, City Council Budget Study Session, 6 PM, Lane Room
• June 1, Proposed Budget to City Council, Public Hearing, 7 PM
i
3
BURLINGAME BEAUTIFICATION COMMISSION
MAY 7,2009
The regularly scheduled meeting of the Beautification Commission was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by
Chairperson Lahey.
ROLL CALL
Present: Chairperson Lahey, Commissioners Benson, Carney, Dittman, Hunt, McQuaide, and Wright
(left at 6:35 p.m.)
Staff: Interim Parks Superintendent Foell, Parks & Recreation Director Skeels, and Admin. Secretary
Harvey
Superintendent Foell introduced the new Parks&Recreation Director, Jim Skeels. Director Skeels noted that he
would be working at a 50% capacity for the City of Burlingame and also works for the City of Brisbane in the
same capacity and will be trying to establish a fixed schedule between the two cities over the next several
weeks.
The Commission welcomed Director Skeels.
MINUTES — Minutes were approved as corrected, under OLD BUSINESS/Reconsideration of Denial to
Remove Redwood Tree 0 1533 Meadow Lane (page 2, paragraph 3, first sentence) to read: "Chairperson
Lahey thanked those who had spoken to the issue and.stated all parties concerned would be no ted (omitted)
by mail of the Commission's decision. . . "
CORRESPONDENCE
Letter to Sharon O'Byrne (1533 Meadow Lane) and copied to surrounding property owners, notifying that the
Coinmission voted 7 — 0 — 0 to reverse the Commission's action of February 5, 2009 by denying the appeal of
Erin Stannard, and instead allowing removal of the redwood tree because the tree was deemed structurally
unsound by two certified arborists.
Maintenance of the Broadway Ave. Streetscape submitted by Commissioner Benson identifying maintenance
needs on Broadway.
FROM THE FLOOR
There was no comment `From the Floor'.
Order ofAgenda was changed at the request of Commissioner Wright.
OLD BUSINESS
2009 Business Landscape Award/Committee Recommendation for Review
Commissioner Wright reported that the Committee reviewed and screened all four nominations to determine that
the business sites had met the overall criteria worthy of the award. She stated that although all were eligible the
Committee felt there was one business that stood out over the rest and had the greatest impact to their area.
The Commission discussed changing times for announcing the final winner and perhaps moving the time back,
closer to spring. Superintendent Foell responded that the current schedule was in place to accommodate the time
needed for the artist and the rendering of the business as well as timing conflicts for the award presentation at a
Council meeting during the summer months. He added that the current time line had also been made public and
for these reasons the current time line would need to be followed for this year's announcement and presentation.
The Commission asked that the schedule for the next Business Landscape Award be placed on the July agenda
for finlher review.
The four nomination forms were then submitted to the Commission for their review; the Commission will visit
all nomination sites and vote for the award recipient at the June 4, 2009 Commission meeting. Two of the
Commissioners noted that they would be absent for the June 4,h meeting and asked if they could vote by
"proxy". Staff will clarify"proxy"voting with the City Attorney.
1
OLD BUSINESS—(Contd.)
Broadway Planters
Referring to Commissioner Benson's report Maintenance of the Broadway Ave. Streetscape Superintendent
Foell identified and clarified maintenance jurisdiction and responsibilities on Broadway. Superintendent Foell
noted that of all the items listed,'the City Parks Division is responsible for the following maintenance areas:
• Street trees(pruning and all maintenance)
• Corner"bulb outs"(plantings, maintenance, and irrigation)
• Sidewalk cutouts(plantings, maintenance, and irrigation)
• Broadway alley plantings; (on the Southside of Broadway extending from El Camino to the parking lot
behind the shops)
• Small round planters on north and south sidewalks of Broadway, near the curb-Irrigation only
Superintendent Foell stated that the merchants association, shop owners, and Public Works are responsible for
the other remaining areas:
• "Permanent" flower boxes attached to the buildings are the maintenance and watering responsibility of
the individual shop owners
• 7 "large" planters are the maintenance responsibility of the merchants association with watering
agreements from nearby shop owners
• "Small round planters" are the maintenance responsibility of the shop owners adjacent to the planters
but currently have been maintained by Commissioner Benson's volunteer efforts and the shop owners
paying for the plants or faux flowers.
• Litter cleanup of cigarette butts, food and drinks, napkins from outside tables, bags, newspapers etc. are
the maintenance responsibility of the Public Works employee assigned to Broadway and Burlingame
Avenue.
Commissioner Wright left at 6:35 p.m.
The Commission discussed the different responsibilities and the landscape needs on Broadway. Chairperson
Lahey stated that she is hoping the Conunission will come up with a plan for a volunteer group to provide the
maintenance of the all the planters on Broadway. The Commission discussed different types of plant material;
merchant's desire for seasonal colors; volunteers conducting seasonal plantings or maintenance as well as
regular watering; cost of materials or plants, and who will pay (merchants/donors?); and the adopt-a-planter
concept.
Commissioner Benson noted that Ross Bruce (BID) had indicated that the merchants had discussed removing
the 7 "large planters" from Broadway. Commissioner Dittman responded that if the large planters were
removed, and Coimnissioner Benson is maintaining the small planters, then a volunteer group for the
maintenance of the Broadway landscape (with the exception of watering) would become a moot point.
Superintendent Foell noted that it would be important to first check with Public Works as to jurisdiction of the
large planters. He continued that the merchants would need to pay for any plants or maintenance to their
planting areas. He stated that if the large planters were to be removed, the maintenance of the"bulb outs" taken
care of by City crews, and Commissioner Benson is willing and able to continue her volunteer efforts on the
small planters, then the Commission would need to identify a clear purpose and need for a volunteer group.
Commissioner McQuaide responded that it is always nice to have volunteer groups that contribute hours to work
in the City and added, that if the large planters are removed on Broadway, there should be a plan in place to
beautify Broadway; that, the Commission should have input with regard to the design of the shopping avenues
in Burlingame. She concluded that Kevin Osborne had indicated that some of the adopted planters on
Burlingame Avenue had been abandoned and are not being watered, and now Commissioner Benson had begun
watering those planters too.
2
OLD BUSINESS—(Contd.)-Broadway Planters
Following the discussion, Chairperson Lahey asked that this item be tabled to the next meeting for further
consideration and that, the Commissioners bring 2 ideas of how or where a volunteer group could be used or, if
the Commission wishes to expand the focus to Burlingame Avenue too. Superintendent Foell asked the
Commissioners to provide their ideas in writing to Administrative Secretary Harvey before May 26th so the ideas
would be included in the June agenda packet.
Street Tree Fundraising—Art in the Park Booth(June 13 or June 14)
After a brief discussion, the general consensus was that the Commission would staff a booth on Sunday, June
14'h, at Art in the Park. Commissioner McQuaide stated that the Commission could purchase wild native
California flower seed packets for $35 for 50 packets that could be given to anyone that donates toward the tree
fund. Chairperson Lahey and Commissioner Dittman offered to underwrite the cost of the seed packets. The
following Commissioners volunteered to staff the booth on Sunday, June 14th: Commissioner Dittman (8:00
a.m. to 1:00 p.m.); Commissioner Hunt (10:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.); and Commissioner Carney (1:00 p.m. to 5:00
P.M.).
Superintendent Foell asked if Commissioner Dittman, being the fust person to staff the booth, would be willing
to also set up the booth, and that, Administrative Secretary Harvey would provide her with the 30 year Tree City
USA flag, tree flyers, and the Tree City USA signage. Commissioner Dittman agreed to set up, will meet with
Secretary Harvey, and will contact Commissioner Wright to check on her availability to staff the booth.
NEW BUSINESS
Urban Forest Management Plan Update
Superintendent Foell submitted and reviewed with the Commission the updated Urban Forest Management Plan
and stated that once further information is received from Public Works and Supervisor Disco, it would be
forwarded to Council for approval. He then asked the Commission to further review the plan and to forward any
corrections or comments to Parks Division staff. The Commission thanked and commended Superintendent
Foell for all the good work on the management plan.
REPORTS
Superintendent Foell
1) Two Pine trees will be removed due to structure and disease in front of the Washington Park tennis
courts, on the corner of Burlingame Avenue and East Lane, and will be replaced with Accolade Elms.
2) A hearing will be set for the June 4th Commission meeting regarding an appeal of the denial to remove a
City-owned Monterey Cypress tree at 1812 Easton Drive; the tree is in good condition but is causing
sidewalk, driveway, and other issues to City and private property.
3) Thanked the Commission for their efforts promoting the Storm Drain measure.
Superintendent Foell then announced that he had accepted a full time position as District Administrator with the
Orangevale Recreation and Park District and will be leaving the City of Burlingame effective May 13th. He
added that he loved his time with the City of Burlingame and working with the Commission on some of the
important tasks over the last year. The Commission expressed their disappointment in his leaving, but
congratulated him in his new position, and thanked Superintendent Foell for all his help over the last year; that
he would be really missed.
Commissioner Benson
Commissioner Benson reported that she had deadheaded flowering plants, had conducted weeding and watering
on Broadway and Burlingame Avenue. She concluded that anyone is welcomed to do watering on the business
avenues;just fill up milk gallon jugs (with screw tops)with water and water.
Commissioner Hunt
Commissioner Hunt announced that the 2"d Sunday of every month the Citizens for a Better Burlingame are
sponsoring a Bike ride and will meet at Summit Bikes at 10:00 a.m.
3
REPORTS—(Contd.)
Commissioner McQuaide
Commissioner McQuaide stated that she had attempted to make arrangements so she could make a tree
presentation to the San Mateo County Realtors but had not had any response from the person she had contacted.
Commissioner Hunt,who is a realtor, offered to assist Commissioner McQuaide with the appropriate contacts.
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 7:35 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
j�Karle e Harvey ��r.1
Recording Secretary
4
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION
BURLINGAME UNAPPROVED MINUTES
Monday, May 11, 2009 — 7:00 p.m.
City Council Chambers— 501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, California
I. CALL TO ORDER
Vice-Chair Terrones called the May 11, 2009, regular meeting of the Planning Commission to order at 7:01
p.m.
II. ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Auran, Brownrigg, Lindstrom, Terrones, Vistica and Yie
Absent: Commissioner Cauchi
Staff Present: Community Development Director, William Meeker; Associate Planner, Erica
Strohmeier; and City Attorney, Gus Guinan
III. ROTATION OF OFFICERS
The following Planning Commission Officers were selected for the upcoming 12-month period:
• Chair: Richard Terrones
■ Vice-Chair: Stan Vistica
• Secretary: Sandra Yie
Chair Terrones returned to the regular order of the agenda.
IV. MINUTES
CommissionerAuran moved, seconded by Commissioner Brownrigg to approve the minutes of the April 27,
2009 regular meeting of the Planning Commission, as submitted.
Motion passed 5-0-1-1 (Commissioner Terrones abstained, Commissioner Cauchi absent).
V. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
There were no changes to the agenda.
VI. FROM THE FLOOR
No one spoke.
1
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION— Unapproved Minutes May 11, 2009
VI. STUDY ITEMS
1. 349 LEXINGTON WAY, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS FOR A
WORKSHOP/ART STUDIO IN AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE (BARRY CHANDLER,APPLICANTAND
DESIGNER AND MARIE NASSER PROPERTY OWNER) STAFF CONTACT: LISA WHITMAN
Associate Planner Strohmeier presented a summary of the staff report, dated May 11, 2009.
Commission comments:
■ What was the nature of the complaint?
• Why was the work inspected by a licensed inspector, but not permitted?
■ Obtain copy of the original Assessor's appraisal report.
■ When was the reconstruction completed?
■ What would the Building Permits have cost; what are the fines for proceeding without permits?
■ Get input from the neighbor to the rear.
■ Have property owner make arrangements with the tenant to permit the Commissioners to view the
property.
■ What is present in the "nook" area?
This item was set for the regularAction Calendar when all the information has been submitted and reviewed
by the Planning Department. This item concluded at 7:10 p.m.
VII. ACTION ITEMS —
Consent Calendar- Items on the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine. They are acted upon
simultaneously unless separate discussion and/or action is requested by the applicant, a member of the
public or a Commissioner prior to the time the Commission votes on the motion to adopt.
Chair Terrones asked if anyone in the audience or on the Commission wished to call any item off the
consent calendar. There were no requests. He noted that he would abstain from voting on the item since
he was not present at the meeting when the matter was reviewed as a study item.
2. 85 CALIFORNIA DRIVE, ZONED C-2, SUBAREA D OF THE BURLINGAME AVENUE COMMERCIAL
AREA — APPLICATION FOR COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW FOR FAQADE CHANGES TO AN
EXISTING COMMERCIAL BUILDING (KENT PUTNAM, APPLICANT; PUTNAM TRUST, PROPERTY
OWNER; AND HUGH HYNES PROTO INC. DESIGNER) STAFF CONTACT: RUBEN HURIN
Commissioner Yie moved approval of the Consent Calendar based on the facts in the staff report,
Commissioner's comments and the findings in the staff report, with recommended conditions in the staff
report and by resolution. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Vistica. Chair Terrones called for a
voice vote on the motion and it passed 5-0-1-1 (Commissioner Cauchi absent, Commissioner Terrones
abstaining). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:11 p.m.
2
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION- Unapproved Minutes May 11, 2009
VIII. REGULAR ACTION ITEMS
3. 2538 HAYWARD DRIVE, ZONED R-1 - APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AMENDMENT FOR
CHANGES TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION (AUDREY TSE,
INSITE DESIGN, APPLICANT AND DESIGNER; AND STEVE AND SHANNON CANNON, PROPERTY
OWNER) STAFF CONTACT: LISA WHITMAN (Continued from April 27, 2009 Planning Commission
Meetinq)
Reference staff report dated May 11, 2009, with attachments. Community Development Director Meeker
presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Eleven (11) conditions were suggested for
consideration.
Chair Terrones noted that he listened to the recording of the deliberations from the April 27, 2009 meeting at
which this matter was initially discussed.
Chair Terrones opened the public hearing.
Audrey Tse, 1534 Plaza Lane and Steve Cannon, 2538 Hayward Drive; represented the application.
■ Are still waiting for the window grids for the garage door to arrive.
Commission comments:
■ Why weren't the garage doors installed as shown on the approved plans? Did the property owner
enter into a contract with the contractor for installation of the new doors? Is it the same reason that
'- the front door wasn't replaced? (Tse/Cannon -financial considerations caused the change even
though they agreed to install them per the approved plans. Also the existing doors were relatively
new; it didn't make sense to discard them. Chose to replace the grids on the existing windows on
the doors. Similar reasoning applied to the decision regarding the front door.)
■ Will the grids be of the design shown on the plans? Would be better to have the proportions similar
to the windows on the house. The mullions will need to be very small to include the number of
divided windows shown. (Tse/Cannon - Yes, the grids will be as shown on the plans; they have
already been ordered as shown. The grids will be installed on the outside of the door, rather than
inside.)
■ The upper bay window above and to the left of the main entry has also been changed because the
diamond patterned siding was not installed on the right and left sides of the bay window;the change
makes the siding look"paper thin"; the diamond patterned siding should be installed on the sides as
well. Staff needs to ensure that the siding is installed on both sides of the bay window.
(Tse/Cannon - missed that detail.)
Public comments:
■ None.
There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed.
Additional Commission comments:
■ Understands the cost issues, but the garage is a focal element of the project.
-J Grids on garage door will be too small.
3
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION— Unapproved Minutes May 11, 2009
■ The front door is not appropriate for the house.
■ The detail of the garage door falls short of the details present on the house; if the Commissioi.
considers approval; then the doors should at least be painted to match the color of the siding in the
gable above.
Commissioner Brownrigg moved to approve the application, by resolution; with the exception that the
garage door shall be installed per the originally approved plans unless a revised garage door design is
approved by the Planning Commission as an FYI item, subject to the following amended conditions:
1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date
stamped November 2, 2007 (Sheets A.0 through A.3, A.8, A.9, LS.0, and DM.1), March 26, 2009
(Sheets A.4 and A.6), and April 30, 2009 (Sheets A.5 and A.7), and that any changes to building
materials, exterior finishes, footprint or floor area of the building shall require an amendment to this
permit;
2. that the garage door shall be installed pursuant to the plans submitted to the Planning Department,
date stamped November 2, 2007, unless the applicant receives approval from the Planning
Commission for an alternate garage door design which may be presented to the Planning
Commission as an FYI item;
3. that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's July 27, 2007 memo, and the City Engineer's, Fire
Marshal's, and the NPDES Coordinator's July 30, 2007 memos shall be met;
4. that if the structure is demolished or the envelope changed at a later date the right side setback
variance, as well as any other exceptions to the code granted here, will become void; .�
5. that demolition or 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 any changes to the size or envelope of the basement, first or second floors, or garage, which
would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), moving or changing windows and architectural
features or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to Planning Commission review;
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 the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes,
2001 Edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame;
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET DURING THE BUILDING INSPECTION PROCESS
PRIOR TO THE INSPECTIONS NOTED IN EACH CONDITION
10. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection the project architect or residential designer, or anothe,
architect or residential design professional, shall provide an architectural certification that the
4
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION— Unapproved Minutes May 11, 2009
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;
11. 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
12. 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:
■ Want to leave the option open for the applicant to present an alternate design for the garage door, if
they still choose not to install the garage door as approved.
Chair Terrones called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed 6-0-1-0(Commissioner
Cauchi absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:33 p.m.
Commissioner Yie noted that she would recuse herself from participating on Agenda Item 4 (1140 Cortez
Avenue), since she resides within 500-feet of the property. She left the Council Chambers.
4. 1140 CORTEZ AVENUE,ZONED R-1 —APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AMENDMENT FOR AS-
BUILT CHANGES TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION TO A
SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING (SIMON JANG, APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER; AND JD AND
ASSOCIATES DESIGNER) STAFF CONTACT: RUBEN HURIN
Reference staff report dated May 11, 2009,with attachments. Associate Planner Strohmeier presented the
report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Eleven (11) conditions were suggested for consideration.
Chair Terrones opened the public hearing.
Michael Kaindl, JD&Associates, 875 Mahler Road; Simon Jang, 1140 Cortez Avenue; and Steve Johnson
(contractor), 1136 Cortez Avenue; represented the application.
■ Summarized the design changes.
Commission comments:
■ Asked if the applicant would be willing to install a landscaped strip down the middle of the concrete
driveway? (Jang—pavers did not flow with the design of the home. The strip would allow weeds to
grow. Johnson—Concerned about the stability of the paving if installed in the manner suggested. A
sharp edge will result from cutting the concrete to add the strip down the center. Jang—ok with that
solution as long as it doesn't compromise the driveway. Kaindl—proposed placing pavers in sand in
the strip in the center of the driveway.)
■ The strip doesn't need to be grass; could be another plant material that doesn't require as much
moisture as lawn area.
■ Clarified that the window trim was revised to match the existing window trim.
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION— Unapproved Minutes May 11, 2009
■ Gravel set the pavers to provide greater permeability than would occur with sand set pavers.
Public comments:
Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa Avenue; spoke:
■ A big deal is made about the use of pavers to reduce impervious surfaces; placing the strip in the
driveway will not prevent water from sheeting off of the driveway.
■ Cutting the driveway now will not look good because it wasn't planned for initially; will create a
potential tripping hazard; leave it as it was installed.
There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed.
Additional Commission comments:
■ Likes the idea of having less pervious surface on the property; agrees with installing a strip in the
driveway; it can be done well.
■ Install the strip in the area in front of the gate.
■ Sawing the driveway after the fact will not result in a clean cut;will not look acceptable; should have
followed the original plan.
■ Believes that the slab can be cut cleanly; edge will be covered with vegetation or other material.
■ Drippings from vehicles will be filtered by the strip if installed.
Commissioner Brownrigg moved to approve the application, by resolution; with the exception of the
driveway design;providing direction to the applicant to develop an alternate design for the driveway that will
permit percolation of water and create the aesthetic affect of the original design, to be presented to the
Planning Commission as an FYI item; subject to the following amended conditions:
1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Division date stamped
April 3, 2008, sheets A-1 through A-6, G-1, SF and L-1, and dated stamped April 28, 2009, sheets
A-1, A-2 and A-4.1 through A-6.1, and that any changes to building materials, exterior finishes,
footprint or floor area of the building shall require an amendment to this permit;
2. that the driveway shall be installed in accordance with the plans submitted to the Planning Division,
date stamped April 3, 2008; unless an alternative driveway design is reviewed and approved by the
Planning Commission that provides for a similar aesthetic affect and opportunity for percolation of
water, as an FYI item;
3. that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's February 1, 2008, memo, and the City Engineer's,
Fire Marshal's and NPDES Coordinator's February 4, 2008 memos shall be met;
4. that demolition or 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;
5. that any changes to the size or envelope of the basement, first or second floors, or garage, which
would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), moving or changing windows and architectural
features or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to Planning Commission review;
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
6
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION— Unapproved Minutes May 11, 2009
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 orexterior,
shall require a demolition permit;
9. 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
10. 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;
11. 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
12. 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:
■ Concerned about saw-cutting of the existing driveway; will require cutting through the re-bar,- will
affect the structure of the driveway.
■ Driveway does not have re-bar, but will normally have a steel mesh mat.
Chair Terrones called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed 5-0-1-1 (Commissioner
Cauchi absent, Commissioner Yie recused). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:59
p.M.
Commissioner Yie returned to the dais.
7
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION— Unapproved Minutes May 11, 2009
5. 32 ADRIAN COURT, ZONED RR—APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A HEALTF.
SERVICE USE (COUNSELING SERVICE) IN AN EXISTING OFFICENVAREHOUSE BUILDING(LIZAH B.
MCLAUGHLIN, APPLICANT; AND DONALD SPOLAR, PROPERTY OWNER) STAFF CONTACT:
RUBEN HURIN
Reference staff report dated May 11, 2009, with attachments. Community Development Director Meeker
presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Four (4) conditions were suggested for
consideration.
Chair Terrones opened the public hearing.
Steve and Lizah McLaughlin, 32 Adrian Court; represented the applicant.
Commission comments:
■ None.
Public comments:
■ None.
There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Vistica moved to approve the application, by resolution, with the following conditions:
1. that the counseling service shall be limited to 220 SF at 32 Adrian Court, as shown on the plans
submitted to the Planning Division and date stamped April 13, 2009; any increase in the health
service use shall require an amendment to the Conditional Use Permit;
2. that the counseling service shall be limited to one counselor and two patients on site at any one
time;
3. that any changes to the floor area, use or number of counselors or patients which exceeds the
maximums as stated in these conditions shall require an amendment to this Conditional Use Permit;
and
4. that any improvements for the use shall meet all California Building and Fire Codes,2007 Edition, as
amended by the City of Burlingame.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Yie.
Discussion of motion.-
0
otion:■ None.
Chair Terrones called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed 6-0-1-0(Commissioner
Cauchi absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 8:04 p.m.
8
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION— Unapproved Minutes May 11, 2009
6. 1616 ROLLINS ROAD AND 1625 ADRIAN ROAD, ZONED RR — APPLICATION FOR MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION, CREEK ENCLOSURE PERMITAND AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT FOR AUTOMOBILE STORAGE IN THE DRAINAGE RIGHT-OF-WAY (GEOFF BURNS,
APPLICANT; SANJAYLYN COMPANY, PROPERTY OWNER;AND LEA& BRAZE ENGINEERING, INC.,
ENGINEER) STAFF CONTACT: RUBEN HURIN
Reference staff report dated May 11, 2009,with attachments. Associate Planner Strohmeier presented the
report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Fifty-six (56) conditions were suggested for consideration.
Chair Terrones opened the public hearing.
Geoff Burns, 5202 Kearny Mesa Road, San Diego; represented the applicant.
Commission comments:
■ Why does the culvert need to be 24-feet wide? (Burns—for potential 2-way traffic.)
Public comments:
Andrew Pitzer, 1660 Rollins Road; and Peter O'Hara, 364 Bush Street, San Francisco; spoke:
• Indicated his desire to use his (Pitzer's) property for a similar purpose; assumed the Commission's
action on this matter would set a precedent. (Meeker—indicated that each request is considered on
a case-by-case basis, based upon individual property conditions and circumstances.)
• Expressed support for the proposal (O'Hara).
There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Terrones moved to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project, by resolution.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Vistica.
Discussion of motion:
■ None.
Chair Terrones called for a voice vote on the motion to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. The
motion passed 6-0-1-0 (Commissioner Cauchi absent).
Commissioner Auran 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
March 25, 2009, sheets C-2.1 through C-2.8, C-3.1 through C-3.4, ER-1, ER-2, SW-1, L1.1 and L2.1
through L2.3;
2. that the conditions of the City Engineer's March 13, 2009 memo, the Chief Building Official's
February 25, 2009 memo, the Fire Marshal's February 23, 2009 memo and the NPDES
Coordinator's February 23, 2009 memo shall be met;
—� 3. that the existing K-rail barrier shall be maintained along the top of the drainage ditch; this barrier
9
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION— Unapproved Minutes May 11, 2009
shall include 13 one-way ramps to allow the movement of frogs back into the drainage ditch,shoulr
they be trapped in the parking area;
4. that the entrance to the frog ramps and ramps at the K-rails on the parking lot side shall be checked
and be maintained free of debris at least once a month, or more often if necessary;
5. 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;
6. that an Encroachment Permit must be obtained from the City of Burlingame Public Works
Department, Engineering Division, for any improvements within the 140' drainage right-of-way;
Conditions of Approval for Creek Enclosure Permit
7. that prior to issuance of a building permit and any work in the drainage channel, the project shall
obtain necessary permits to meet the standards of the required permitting agencies including:
California Department of Fish and Game, San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board,
State Water Resources Control Board, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service;
8. that the applicant and/or property owner shall keep the portion of the drainage channel located at..,,
1616 Rollins Road clear of debris and shall adequately maintain the culvert to insure free flow of th,
drainage channel and to minimize erosion;
9. 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;
10. 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;
11. 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;
Conditions of Approval for Parking in the Drainage Right-of-Way
12. that parking within the drainage right-of-way shall be exclusively used for storage of vehicles
associated with the automotive service center located at 1625 Adrian Road (approximately 217
spaces) and for overflow parking for an automobile dealership(approximately 95 spaces); vehicles
stored by the automotive service center shall only be brought to the site by using the road crossing
at the rear of 1625 Adrian Road;
13. that vehicles associated with the automobile dealership shall not be moved during the peak traffic
hours, and shall only be moved during off-peak traffic hours from 9:30a.m. to 4:00 p.m. and 6:30
p.m. to 7:00 a.m. on the weekdays, with no time restrictions on moving vehicles on Saturday anr'--",
Sunday; there shall be no car carriers used to deliver vehicles to the site or remove them, nor shay,
10
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION— Unapproved Minutes May 11, 2009
car carriers be parked in the public right-of-way to load or unload cars from this site;
14. that all the vehicles in the drainage right-of-way shall be relocated during any flood situations and
shall be the responsibility and liability of the property owner; and it is the responsibility of the
business to make tow trucks available to move any vehicles stored on the site that are not in
operable condition;
15. Applicant shall provide a hold harmless agreement in a form approved by the City Attorney that
provides as follows:
A. Owner agrees and understands that some of the parking proposed in the application is to be
located in a drainage area that is subject to periodic flooding. The Owner has obtained
professional analysis of the effects and impacts of the drainage area.
B. Owners agrees and affirms that Owner is relying solely on Owner's own knowledge and the
representations of Owner's own experts and consultants in designing, constructing, and
using the project and in no way relying on any representations or analyses of the City or any
of its officers or employees in proceeding with the construction and uses.
C. Owner agrees that Owner shall defend and indemnify the City, its officers and employees
against, and will hold them and each of them harmless from any and all actions, claims,
damages to persons or properties, penalties, obligations, and liabilities, including any
attorneys fees or associated costs, that may be asserted by any person arising from the
approval, design, location, methods, installation, operation, and existence of the parking
within the drainage area approved by the City.
D. This agreement shall be recorded by the City in the Official Records of the Recorder of San
Mateo County.
16. that all runoff created during construction and future discharge from the site will be required to meet
National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) standards;
17. that each storm water inlet on the site shall be equipped with a sand/oil separator; all sand/oil
separators shall be inspected and serviced on a regular basis, and immediately following periods of
heavy rainfall, to ascertain the conditions of the chambers; maintenance records shall be kept on-
site;
18. that drainage from paved surfaces, including parking lots, driveways and roofs shall be routed to
storm water inlets equipped with sand/oil-separators and/or fossil filters, then the water shall be
discharged into the storm drain system;the property owners shall be responsible for inspecting and
cleaning sand/oil separators and changing fossil filters on a regular basis as well as immediately
prior to, and once during, the rainy season (October 15—April 1);
19. the property owner shall provide access easement rights to the City of Burlingame for maintenance
with the drainage easement. The City of Burlingame shall be held harmless for any property
damage which might occur as a result of flooding within the drainage easement adjacent spur track
right-of-way;
20. the improvements over the drainage channel shall not compromise the surface drainage flow to the
drainage ditch at the rear of 1616 Rollins Road and shall not compromise the holding capacity of the
basin during flooding; all the vehicles shall be relocated during flood situations;
11
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION— Unapproved Minutes May 11, 2009
21. that if required for any improvements, the applicant shall amend the California Department of Fish
and Game and U.S.Army Corps of Engineers permits for any operational or physical changes made
for these uses in this drainage area, and if those permits are not issued and maintained these uses
shall cease;
Mitigations from Initial Study
22. A design-level geotechnical report shall be required for the project. The design-level geotechnical
investigation shall be reviewed by the Burlingame Department of Public Works for compliance with
existing building codes and ordinances. The City field inspectors shall inspect construction for
implementation of the recommend site preparation activities;
23. The project design shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Fire Code, 2007
edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame. The grading plan shall be prepared by a licensed
Engineer and approved by the City Engineer before a grading permit is issued. All applicable
requirements of National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) shall be adhered to in
the design and during construction, including the following listed below;
24. The applicant shall submit a grading plan and erosion control plan for review and approval by the
City Engineer;
25. The applicant shall submit an erosion and sedimentation control plan describing Best Management
Practices (BMP's) to be used to prevent soil, dirt and debris from entering the storm drain system;
the plan shall include a site plan showing the property lines, existing and proposed topography and
slope; areas to be disturbed, locations of cut/fill and soil storage/disposal areas; areas with existinc
vegetation to be protected; existing and proposed drainage patterns and structures;watercourse or
sensitive areas on-site or immediately downstream of a project; and designated construction access
routes, staging areas and washout areas;
26. Off-site runoff shall be diverted around the construction site and all on-site runoff shall be diverted
around exposed construction areas;
27. Methods and procedures such as sediment basins or traps, earthen dikes or berms, silt fences,
straw bale dikes, check dams storm drain inlet protection soil blanket or mats, and covers for soil
stock piles to stabilize denuded areas shall be installed to maintain temporary erosion controls and
sediment control continuously until permanent erosion controls have been established;
28. The erosion and sedimentation control plans should include notes, specifications, and/or
attachments describing the construction operation and maintenance of erosion and sediment control
measures, including inspection frequency; methods and schedule for grading, excavation, filling
clearing of vegetative cover and mulch, including methods and schedules for planting and
fertilization; and provisions for temporary and permanent irrigation;
29. All applicable requirements of NPDES for runoff and drainage will be adhered to in the design and
during construction;
30. The applicant shall implement spill prevention measures to control the storage and handling of any
hazardous materials, including concrete, at the construction site;
31. At no times shall hazardous materials be released and discharged into the drainage channel,-
12
hannel; 12
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION— Unapproved Minutes May 11, 2009
�-' 32. Any accidental spill or hazardous substances shall be reported to the City of Burlingame, the San
Mateo County Environmental Health Department, and the California Department of Fish and Game
within 24 hours of the release or spill. The applicant shall implement a corrective action plan to
contain and cleanup the release within 24 hours of the accident or release;
33. Any additional applicable requirements of NPDES for runoff and drainage, as well as any
requirements of the Department of Fish and Game and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will be
adhered to in the design and during construction;
34. No vehicles or equipment shall be cleaned, fueled or maintained on-site, except in designed areas
where runoff is contained and treated;
35. All clearing limits, easements, setbacks, sensitive or critical areas, buffer zones trees, and drainage
courses are clearly delineated with field markers or fencing and that adjacent properties and
undisturbed areas are protected from construction impacts with vegetative buffer strips, sediment
barriers or filters, dikes or mulching;
36. Clearing, earth moving activities and the application of pesticides and fertilizers shall be performed
only during dry weather(April 15 through October 15);
37. If construction is done during the wet season (October 1 through April 30), that prior to October 15
the developer shall implement a winterization program to minimize the potential for erosion and
polluted runoff by inspecting, maintaining and cleaning all soil erosion and sediment control prior to,
during, and immediately after each storm even; stabilizing disturbed soils throughout temporary or
permanent seeding, mulching matting, or tarping; rocking unpaved vehicle access to limit dispersion
of mud onto public right-of-way; covering/tarping stored construction materials, fuels and other
chemicals;
38. Staging areas and access routes to the work area shall be delineated and inspected by the project
biologist prior to establishment to avoid unnecessary impacts to California red-legged frogs, San
Francisco garter snakes and their habitat;
39. Exclusion fencing shall be erected around the project boundary prior to the onset of project
activities. Fencing will be a minimum of 3 feet in height and buried in the soil to inhibit California
red-legged frogs and San Francisco garter snakes from entering the project area; once the
exclusion fence is installed, a pre-construction survey will be conducted to ensure that no San
Francisco garter snakes or California red-legged frogs are present in the restoration area;
40. A US Fish and Wildlife Service-approved biologist shall be onsite during ground-disturbing activities
and will have the authority to halt any action that might result in impacts to California red-legged
frogs or San Francisco garter snakes. The Service-approved biologist will survey the work site prior
to the start of the day's activities. If California red-legged frogs are found,the approved biologist will
ensure that the individual(s) is moved safely away from the work site before work activities begin. If
San Francisco garter snake(s) are found, DFG will be notified for guidance and the animal will be
allowed to disperse away from the project area. Only Service-approved biologists may participate in
activities associated with the capture, handling, and monitoring of California red-legged frogs and
San Francisco garter snakes;
41. Before any construction activities begin, worker education and awareness training shall be
`-- conducted for all construction crews and contractors that access the site for any period of time.The
13
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION— Unapproved Minutes May 11, 2009
education training will be conducted prior to starting work on the project and upon the arrival of an,'1
new worker. The training will include a brief review of the California red-legged frog and the Sai.
Francisco garter snake life history, field identification, habitat requirements, location of sensitive
areas, possible fines for violations, avoidance measures, and correction actions if sensitive species
are encountered. The program will cover the mitigation measures, environmental permits and
regulatory compliance requirements as applicable. In addition, a record of all personnel trained
during the project will be maintained for compliance verification;
42. During project activities, all trash that may attract predators shall be properly contained, removed
from the work site and disposed of regularly. Following construction, all trash and construction
debris will be removed from work areas;
43. All practicable erosion control Best Management Practices (BMPs) shall be implemented to
minimize the potential of impacts to water quality;
44. No smoking except in vehicles shall be permitted within vegetated areas;
45. Trash dumping, firearms, open fires, hunting, and pets shall be prohibited;
46. To mitigate impacts to the wetland habitat for CRF and SFGS, the project shall a) remove invasive
plant species from the 0.2 acre ruderal area and replant with native riparian floodplain plant species
or contribute an in lieu fee for habitat restoration that assists in the recovery of the California red-
legged frog and/or San Francisco garter snake that is commensurate with the impacts of this project
(i.e. 0.009 acres of freshwater emergent wetland); b) install a drainage collection system on site to
treat stormwater pollutants that currently drain untreated from the parking areas and into the,,,
drainage;
47. To avoid impacts to nesting birds within the project area, including the saltmarsh common
yellowthroat, preconstruction surveys for nesting birds shall be conducted prior to construction
between: February 15 and August 31. If active nests are found, and project activities could
potentially impact nesting success,the US Fish and Wildlife Service Migratory Bird Treaty Office and
the Department of Fish and Game shall be consulted for guidance and all necessary permits would
be obtained;
48. If construction is done during the wet season (October 1 through April 30), that prior to October 15
the developer shall implement a winterization program to minimize the potential for erosion and
polluted runoff by inspecting, maintaining and cleaning all soil erosion and sediment control prior to,
during, and immediately after each storm even; stabilizing disturbed soils throughout temporary or
permanent seeding, mulching matting, or tarping; rocking unpaved vehicle access to limit dispersion
of mud onto public right-of-way; covering/tarping stored construction materials, fuels and other
chemicals;
49. Maintenance of construction equipment within 100 feet of the drainage location shall be prohibited;
50. Areas of bare soil shall be reseeded, planted, or otherwise stabilized with erosion control as soon as
possible after work has ceased and prior to the onset of the rainy season (October 31);
51. Storage of any hazardous materials shall be prohibited within 100 feet of wetlands or other waters;
52. No invasive nonnative plants, as listed by the California Invasive Plant Council on-line databasF---
(Cal-IPC 2008), should be planted on the property at 1625 Adrian Road or within the adjacer,
14
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION— Unapproved Minutes May 11, 2009
drainage channel;
53. The property owner shall provide access easement rights to the City of Burlingame for maintenance
with the drainage easement. The City of Burlingame shall be held harmless for any property
damage which might occur as a result of flooding within the drainage right-of-way;
54. Parking shall be setback from the foot of these towers and adequate access provided by parked
"lanes" on the pavement through parking areas to insure continued access for maintenance and
repair of these structures at all times without damaging sensitive environmental resources on the
site or in the area;
55. Construction of the box culvert and road crossing shall not compromise the surface drainage flow to
the drainage ditch at the rear of 1616 Rollins Road and shall not compromise the holding capacity of
the basin during flooding. No fencing shall obstruct existing surface drainage into and through the
drainage right-of-way from the adjacent parcels. All the vehicles shall be relocated during flood
situations; and
56. If any prehistoric or historic archeological relics are discovered during grading and construction, all
work will be halted until the finding can be fully investigated and proper protection measures, as
determined by qualified experts, can be implemented.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Brownrigg.
Discussion of motion:
■ None.
Chair Terrones called for a voice vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed 6-0-1-0(Commissioner
Cauchi absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 8:15 p.m.
IX. DESIGN REVIEW STUDY ITEMS
Commissioner Yie indicated that she would recuse herself from participating on Agenda Item 7(1109 Cortez
Avenue), since she resides within 500-feet of the property. She left the Council Chambers.
7. 1109 CORTEZ AVENUE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW, FRONT SETBACK
VARIANCES AND PARKING SPACE DIMENSION VARIANCE FOR A FIRST AND SECOND STORY
ADDITION TO A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING (JENNIFER AND ANTHONY LEE, APPLICANTS AND
PROPERTY OWNERS; AND STEWART ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECT) STAFF CONTACT: RUBEN
HURIN
Reference staff report dated May 11, 2009, with attachments. Community Development Director Meeker
briefly presented the project description. There were no questions of staff.
Chair Terrones opened the public comment period.
Commission comments:
■ Asked if two Variance applications are required for the front setbacks; noted that only one was
submitted with the application? (Meeker— noted that the next notice would require clarification.)
Need to provide justification for the Variance requests.
15
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION— Unapproved Minutes May 11, 2009
John Stewart, 1351 Laurel Street, San Carlos; and Anthony and Jennifer Lee, 1109 Cortez Avenue,
represented the applicant.
Additional Commission comments:
■ Asked if the rest of the material on the front bay window is stucco or siding? (Stewart — will be
wood.)
■ Questioned the variety of materials in the gables, vertical siding in front and rear gables and
shingles on right side gable. (Stewart—front and rear gables are larger areas, warranted vertical
siding. Jennifer Lee—want to make the home look like it has been there for a long while.)
■ Can the driveway be made at least partially permeable? (Jennifer Lee—the landscape architect has
noted that this is important to the Commission. Hope to keep the existing driveway where it is as a
cost-saving matter. The landscape plan includes planting strips along the house; there is also a
strip along the neighbor's property as well. Stewart—would think draining rain water onto the site
would be better than draining to the street.)
■ Can the Variance on the upper floor be eliminated by reducing the depth of the bay window?
(Stewart—trying to create a useable window seat.)
■ There may be some give in some other areas of the floor plan to reduce the need for the second
floor Variance. (Jennifer Lee—want to leave enough relief for the window to look proper.)
■ Handsome application; concerned with the extreme difference between the existing versus the
proposed design; feels really tall, but not sure what can be done. (Stewart—there are a lot of large
houses on the street.)
■ Clarify the different finishing materials on the final submittal.
■ Asked if stucco will be removed from ground floor and replaced with siding. (Stewart—yes; there.,
will be very little left of the stucco.)
■ The project is nearly a complete "tear down"; be aware of the potential for cost overruns.
■ Echo the existing gable vent in the new design.
■ On left elevation; concerned about roofline near chimney; steps down for a small distance;why isn't
it tied in. (Stewart—will review to see if there is a better solution.)
Public comments:
Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa Avenue; spoke:
■ Is almost a "tear-down"; will the fireplace be gas, or will it be grandfathered in with a wood-burning
fireplace? Hates the appearance of chimney caps.
■ Are the windows "simulated true divided lights"?
■ When oil drips from cars onto the ground, it percolates into the groundwater; is not filtered by the soil
before entering the groundwater.
There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed.
Further Commission comments:
■ Agreed with speaker's comments with respect to chimney caps; they could be scaled down.
■ Indicate that windows are simulated true divided light windows on the plans.
■ Nice project; glad to see the house refurbished.
■ Either justify or eliminate the second floor Variance.
Commissioner Brownrigg made a motion to place the item on the Consent Calendar when complete.
16
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION— Unapproved Minutes May 11, 2009
- This motion was seconded by Commissioner A uran.
Discussion of motion:
■ None.
Chair Terrones 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 5-0-1-1 (Commissioner Cauchi absent,
Commissioner Yie recused). The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item
concluded at 8:42 p.m.
Commissioner Yie returned to the dais.
8. 1521 LA MESA DRIVE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW, HILLSIDE AREA
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT, FRONT SETBACK VARIANCE AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR ATTACHED
GARAGE FORA NEW, TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING(J DEAL ASSOCIATES,APPLICANT
AND DESIGNER; AND CURTIS AND PATRICIA WALKER, PROPERTY OWNERS) STAFF CONTACT:
RUBEN HURIN
It was suggested that the discussion of the project design occur separately from the code interpretation
matter raised in the staff report. The Commission concurred to proceed in this manner.
Reference staff report dated May 11, 2009, with attachments. Associate Planner Strohmeier briefly
presented the project description. There were no questions of staff.
Chair Terrones opened the public comment period.
Michael Kaindl, JD &Associates, 875 Mahler Road; represented the applicant.
Commission comments:
■ Handsome design; a good solution for the site; asked if the neighbors to the left and right have been
consulted? (Kaindl—owner may have consulted with the neighbors. Residence to the right has a
window at the garage. The home to the left has a view that is blocked by an Oak tree.)
■ On Sheet A-2, could soften the front fapade by having a tree within the area in front of the front door;
landscaping could also conceal the electrical panel and gas meter. (Kaindl — perhaps a Japanese
Maple could be planted in the area.)
■ Is the intention to stain or paint the house? (Kaindl—will use a recycled siding that is painted; most
likely earthtones.)
■ What is the material on the patio wall? (Kaindl —horizontal siding with tongue and groove format.)
■ How do the existing and proposed finished floor compare? (Kaindl—have retained the same overall
height of the house.)
■ Why aren't rainwater leaders hidden? (Kaindl—would then need to be made of cast iron;will look at
it.)
■ On the front elevation,the stucco walls walking up the steps look fine on the drawings, but may look
bulky when built; have glass rails or another design been considered? (Kaindl—glass would give a
commercial appearance. The design identifies where the stairs are located; but will be as low as
allowed by code.)
Concerned with large stucco wall at this location; consider softening. (Kaindl — will look at the
design in that area.)
17
I
i
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION— Unapproved Minutes May 11, 2009
Public comments:
■ None.
There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed.
Additional Commission comments:
■ Setback Variance is not a problem.
■ Asked if utility room counts toward the basement exemption? (Strohmeier— yes.)
■ Suggested looking at other material for fascia boards rather than Redwood, since they will be
painted.
■ Agrees with applicant's calculations of floor areas that are counted and not counted; is a good
example to look at for a hillside lot; acceptable to divorce code interpretation issue from this project.
■ Need to be consistent in requiring story poles, even though there doesn't appear to be a significant
potential impact, given the proposed building envelope.
Commissioner Brownrigg made a motion to place the item on the RegularAction calendar when complete.
This motion was seconded by Commissioner Lindstrom.
Discussion of motion.-
Need
otion:Need to install story poles.
■ Agrees with staff's code interpretations relative to the basement area of this project.
Chair Terrones called fora vote on the motion to place this item on the RegularAction Calendarwhen plans
have been revised as directed. The motion passed on a voice vote 6-0-1-0(Commissioner Cauchi absent).
The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 9:18 p.m.
9. 1561 NEWLANDS AVENUE, ZONED R-1 —APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR ANEW, TWO-
STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING (CHU DESIGN & ENGINEERING, INC., APPLICANT AND
DESIGNER;AND SEAN AND MARIE MCCALLION, PROPERTY OWNERS) STAFF CONTACT: RUBEN
HURIN
Reference staff report dated May 11, 2009, with attachments. Community Development Director Meeker
briefly presented the project description. There were no questions of staff.
Chair Terrones opened the public comment period.
James Chu, 55 West 43rd Avenue, San Mateo; represented the applicant.
Commission comments:
■ Asked if the steps continue all the way down at the bottom? (Chu —yes.)
■ Likes the project details.
■ Nice project in and of itself; but the project needs a porch; the house faces the park across the
streets; other homes in the area have porches that address the park; consider adding a porch. (Chu
— considered when first considered the project. Felt there was enough yard space and that the
18
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION— Unapproved Minutes May 11, 2009
presence of the park across the street warrants not having a porch. Client requested not having
even a sitting area in the front.)
■ Seems like this project is lacking some of the detail that is usually provided; perhaps due to the
scale of the home.
■ Designate the plants on the landscape plan.
■ Including a porch would provide a gathering space; the powder room is very generous, could also
eliminate some space in the den to accommodate a porch.
■ Creating a negative space of a porch will improve the relief on the front fagade.
Public comments:
■ None.
There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed.
Additional Commission comments:
■ A minor flip of portions of the floor plan could accommodate the porch.
Commissioner Brownrigg made a motion to place the item on the Consent Calendar when complete.
This motion was seconded by Commissioner Auran.
Discussion of motion:
■ None.
Chair Terrones 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 6-0-1-0(Commissioner Cauchi absent). The
Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 9:29 p.m.
10. 2509 HILLSIDE DRIVE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A FIRST AND
SECOND STORYADDITION TOA SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING(DANIEL BIERMANN,APPLICANT AND
DESIGNER; AND JOSH GRATCH AND KIM MCKELLAR, PROPERTY OWNERS) STAFF CONTACT:
ERICA STROHMEIER
Reference staff report dated May 11, 2009, with attachments. Associate Planner Strohmeier briefly
presented the project description. There were no questions of staff.
Chair Terrones opened the public comment period.
Daniel Biermann, 1649 Laurel Street, San Carlos; represented the applicant.
Commission comments:
■ Are there plans to do anything with the driveway and other concrete areas at the front? (Biermann—
not at this time.)
■ Check for consistency in window design and rendering to ensure no confusion.
■ Asked if the windows and shutters on second floor front will remain? (Biermann — noted that they
will be replaced on first and second floors.)
19
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION— Unapproved Minutes May 11, 2009
Public comments:
■ None.
There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Vistica made a motion to place the item on the Consent Calendar when complete.
This motion was seconded by Commissioner Auran.
Discussion of motion:
■ Spell out the details on existing and new elements.
Chair Terrones 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 6-0-1-0(Commissioner Cauchi absent). The
Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 9:36 p.m.
11. 2963 FRONTERA WAY, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW, HILLSIDE AREA
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT,VARIANCES FOR LOT COVERAGE AND PARKING,AND SPECIAL PERMIT
TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES ON SITE FOR A SINGLE-STORY ADDITION TO A
SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING (ROBERT NEBOLON, APPLICANT AND ARCHITECT; PAUL LEUNG,
PROPERTY OWNER) STAFF CONTACT: LISA WHITMAN
Reference staff report dated May 11, 2009, with attachments. Community Development Director Meeker
briefly presented the project description. There were no questions of staff.
Chair Terrones opened the public comment period. Noted letters received from neighbors at 2967 Frontera
Way and 2953 Frontera Way.
Robert Nebolon, 801 Camelia Street, Berkeley; and Paul Leung, 384 Oyster Point Boulevard, South San
Francisco; represented the application.
■ Disputed the uphill neighbor's contention that his view is lost with the addition; showed photo from
neighbor's property of East Bay hills.
■ Disputed downhill neighbor's concerns about loss of light to the fruit trees and blockage of open-sky
views.
Commission comments:
■ Clarified intentions of Hillside Ordinance; preservation of distant views from living space.
■ Encouraged architect to visit the neighbor's house at 2967 Frontera Way;the design will significantly
block views. (Nebolon —disputed the Commissioner's contention.)
■ Need to observe the views from within the neighboring properties; story poles will be required.
■ There was an unfortunate past design alteration to the original Eichler design; but little remains of
the original design. (Nebolon — none of the Eichler design remains; have changed the exterior
design in light of this.)
■ The Commission is essentially treating the design as a new home, given the lack of original Eichler
detailing.
20
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION— Unapproved Minutes May 11, 2009
■ The front elevation is uninviting; consider adding a window into the office area that is more vertically
oriented to provide more light inside. (Nebelon — the landscaping will do a lot to mitigate the
appearance of the structure and the additional parking space.)
■ Horizontal siding is not carried through to the east elevation; should be carried through. (Nebolon—
agreed to carry through the siding.)
■ Noted that aluminum detailing is not wrapped around the side elevations.
a Consider having wood siding butt against window trim, rather than the window trim placed on top of
the siding.
■ What is planned for the mechanical system? (Nebolon —will install a forced air system mounted
against the ceiling in the garage, with ducts running through the webbed joists. Is running the hot air
ducts to the lower part of the walls.)
■ Is there a way to lift only a portion of the roof of the house? (Nebolon — sees the point, but didn't
make sense.)
■ Want a colored rendering of the front elevation, including landscaping.
■ Want to see the egress window in the office wrapped around to the front.
Consider a wider entry to make the front more inviting. (Nebolon—attempting to emulate a typical
Eichler entry design.)
■ Not concerned regarding reduction in the garage.
a The applicant makes a good point relative to the lot coverage; are reducing overall square footage;
making a non-conformity somewhat better.
a Provide more information regarding the proposed trees and potential impacts upon the neighbors.
Additional applicant comments:
Spoke to the design of the driveway; it is also design to look more like a walkway, not just a location
for parking cars.
Additional Commission comments:
a Clarified that a planter strip will be provided along the side of the house; not a planter.
Public comments:
Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa Avenue; spoke:
Clarify the type of Bamboo to be planted (i.e. height, clump or runner); best to plant in a container to
control growth.
a If the owner didn't want an Eichler, why did they buy an Eichler?
Does the covered atrium cause the structure to exceed lot coverage?
a Story poles are necessary.
■ Would be more advantageous to restore the radiant heating system or install baseboard heating,
rather than raise the height of the roof.
Further applicant comments:
The home has many structural and mechanical problems; hasn't been maintained for the past 20
years.
There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed.
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION— Unapproved Minutes May 11, 2009
Further Commission comments:
■ Has a concern about approving a"new" box; has lost its Eichler character;would not be approved if
an Eichler had not be present on the property; it is really a new home.
■ Appreciate the effort to stay with the contemporary motif.
■ Need to be sensitive to the views of surrounding neighbors.
■ Is a non-starter if it blocks significant views.
■ Have been good comments on improving the connection to the street.
■ Carrying through details from south elevation to some of the other elevations could be helpful.
■ Could stand out too much if it was heavily articulated; is surrounded by Eichlers.
■ Concerned about the reduction in parking; not a walking neighborhood.
■ Need certified story poles and contact information for the neighbors.
Commissioner Vistica made a motion to place the item on the Regular Action calendar when complete.
This motion was seconded by Commissioner Lindstrom.
Discussion of motion:
■ None.
Chair Terrones called for a vote on the motion to place this item on the RegularAction Calendar when plans
have been revised as directed. The motion passed on a voice vote 6-0-1-0(CommissionerCauchi absent).
The Planning Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. This item concluded at 10:27 p.m. _
X. COMMISSIONERS' REPORTS
DISCUSSION OF INTERPRETATION SECTIONS 25.08.265(B)(1), 25.08.265(B)(2),AND 25.08.265(B)(3)
OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE RELATED TO BASEMENT EXEMPTIONS
Following discussion of information presented in the staff report regarding Agenda Item 8 (1521 La Mesa
Drive), the Commission concurred with staff's interpretation of the Zoning Ordinance provisions related to
basement exemptions; though it was noted that it may be appropriate to have a Planning Commission
subcommittee review the standards as they relate to hillside properties as a future work item.
XI. DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Commission Communications:
■ Noted that appointments to Commission Subcommittees will be agendized for a future agenda.
Actions from Regular City Council meeting of May 4, 2008:
■ Noted that the City Council introduced an ordinance permitting 5 additional full-service food
establishments within portions of Downtown Burlingame; creating a definition for"ready-to-eat food
shop"and amending the parking standards for single-family residences for compliance with current
residential design review policies. The ordinance will be considered for adoption on May 18, 2009.
If adopted on that date, the changes will become effective on June 17, 2009.
22
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION— Unapproved Minutes May 11, 2009
FYI: Peninsula Hospital Complaint Log — May 4, 2009:
S Accepted.
FYI: 2843 Adeline Drive—Review of required landscape changes to a previously approved Design
Review project:
■ Accepted.
XII. ADJOURNMENT
Chair Terrones adjourned the meeting at 10:49 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Sandra Yie, Secretary
V
23
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
IRLINGAME
Monday, May 26, 2009 — 7:00 p.m.
City Council Chambers — 501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, California
I. CALL TO ORDER
Chair Terrones called the May 26, 2009, regular meeting of the Planning Commission to order at 7:00 p. m.
II. ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Auran, Brownrigg, Cauchi (arrived at 7:06 p.m.), Terrones, and Lindstrom
Absent: Commissioners Yie and Vistica
Staff Present: Community Development Director William Meeker and Associate Planner Lisa Whitman.
III. MINUTES
Commissioner A uran moved, seconded by Commissioner Brownrigg to approve the minutes of the May 26,
2009 regular meeting of the Planning Commission, with the following change:
Page 19, Item 10, second bullet under "Commission Comments'; after "rendering" add: relative to
which windows are to be replaced, to ensure no confusion.
Motion passed 4-0-3 (Commissioners Yie, Vistica and Cauchi absent).
IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
There were no changes to the agenda.
V. FROM THE FLOOR
None.
VI. STUDY ITEMS
There were no study items on the agenda.
VII. ACTION ITEMS
Consent Calendar - Items on the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine. They are acted upon
simultaneously unless separate discussion and/or action is requested by the applicant, a member of the
public or a Commissioner prior to the time the Commission votes on the motion to adopt.
Chair Terrones asked if anyone in the audience or on the Commission wished to call any item off the
consent calendar. There were no requests.
1a. 1109 CORTEZ AVENUE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW, FRONT
SETBACK VARIANCE AND PARKING SPACE DIMENSION VARIANCE FOR A FIRST AND
SECOND STORY ADDITION TO A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING (JENNIFER AND ANTHONY
1
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION— Unapproved Minutes May 26, 2009
LEE, APPLICANTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS; AND STEWART ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECT)
STAFF CONTACT: RUBEN HURIN
Commissioner Auran moved approval of the Consent Calendar based on the facts in the staff reports,
Commissioner's comments and the findings in the staff reports, with recommended conditions in the staff
reports and by resolution. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Brownrigg. Chair Terrones called
for a voice vote on the motion and it passed 4-0-3 (Commissioners Yie, Vistica, and Cauchi absent).
Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:07 p.m.
VIII. REGULAR ACTION ITEMS
2. 349 LEXINGTON WAY, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS FOR A
WORKSHOP/ART STUDIO IN AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE (BARRY CHANDLER,APPLICANT AND
DESIGNER AND MARIE NASSER PROPERTY OWNER) STAFF CONTACT: LISA WHITMAN
Reference staff report dated May 26, 2009, with attachments. Associate Planner Whitman presented the
report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Nine (9) conditions were suggested for consideration.
Chair Terrones opened the public hearing.
Maurice Gonzalez, 818 Crestview Drive, Millbrae; and Marie Nasser, 715 Seabury Road, Hillsborough;
represented the applicant.
Commission comments:
■ Clarified that the drawings represent what has been built on the plans submitted with the application.
■ Requested clarification regarding who inspected the structure. (Gonzalez — he inspected the
property; he is a licensed building inspector.)
■ The structure appears to be a living unit, not an art studio; how can the community be ensured that
the structure will not be converted to a living unit? (M. Nasser—intention is to have daughter live in
the house and use the structure as an extra room. Will not be rented out.)
■ Is the structure plumbed for a shower? (Gonzalez— is plumbed for a water closet.)
Public comments:
Steve Dwyer, 324 Dwight Road, spoke;
■ Have observed activities that indicate that the structure is being lived-in (provided photos).
■ Concerned about the utility pole on the property; it is about 3-feet from the property line; is there a
prohibition on locating a structure within a distance of the utility pole?
■ No permits were issued for the project; seems an odd way to add a unit to the property; would have
been more economical to build an addition onto the residence.
■ Requested denial, based upon evidence that it is intended to be a habitable unit.
Additional Commission comments:
■ Asked if gas service is available to the building? (Gonzalez—believes there is gas service. Noted
that the building was inspected by Brooks MacNeil, Senior Building Inspector. Gonzalez only
inspected during the framing stage.)
Additional applicant comments:
2
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION—Unapproved Minutes May 26,2009
Refuted neighbor's contention that the unit is being rented out;the current tenants will move out and
eventually her daughter will move into the residence. The structure is used purely for storage.
Further Commission comments:
• Asked for clarification regarding occupancy of the dwelling.
• Asked if applicant would agree to eliminating window on the rear? (Nasser—yes.)
• Why was no permit received? (Nasser—wasn't aware of need for permit.)
There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed.
More Commission comments:
• Must remove the rearwindow,remove plumbing and gas connections and revert it back to a storage
building.
• Would it be acceptable to allow only a sink,but no toilet or other fixtures?
• Looks like a second unit.
• Not knowing who completed the structure,it is possible that the structure hasn't been completed in a
safe manner.
• Likely would not have approved a toilet with a sink, but would have likely allowed a sink in
association with an art studio.
• Needs to be fully reviewed by the Building Division,and a permit issued.
• Wanted clarification on the location of the utility pole.
Commissioner Auran moved to deny the application,with prejudice.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Cauchi.
Discussion of motion:
• None.
Chair Terrones called for a voice vote on the motion to deny. The motion passed 5-0-2(Commissioners Yie
and Vistica absent). Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 7:31 p.m.
IX. DESIGN REVIEW STUDY ITEMS
Chair Terrones noted that he will recuse himself from participating in the discussion regarding Agenda item
3(1311 Paloma Avenue),since his firm prepared the project plans. He left the Council Chambers.
Commissioner Cauchi assumed the role of Acting Chair.
3. 1311 PALOMA AVENUE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND PARKING
VARIANCE FOR A NEW ONE AND ONE-HALF STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING (CAROLE
VALENTINE,APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER;AND DREILING/TERRONES ARCHITECTURE,
ARCHITECT) STAFF CONTACT:ERICA STROHMEIER
Reference staff report dated May 26,2009,with attachments. Community Development Director Meeker
briefly presented the project description. There were no questions of staff.
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Unapproved Minutes May 26, 2009
Acting Chair Cauchi opened the public comment period.
Jacob Furlong, 1103 Juanita Avenue; represented the applicant.
Commission comments:
■ Nicely designed project; handsome building.
■ Was there any thought to providing a window on the dining room side of the structure? That side of
the structure looks a bit bare. (Furlong — chose to not install a window; it is a location for a piece of
art.)
■ Asked about the ceiling height. (Furlong — 8' 3").
■ Landscaping will likely reduce the appearance of the wall of stucco. (Furlong — have needed to
widen the driveway; but will look at adding landscaping to the area.)
■ A higher plate height on the first floor may be appropriate; perhaps 9', but completely up to the
applicant.
■ Seems clear that the attic space will be used; might wish to install skylights, small windows, or a
dormer to add light and break-up the roof line. (Furlong — have minimized cost by using 8' studs.
Have eliminated dormers for the same reason. Primarily intends to use the attic for storage; will not
be finished as living space; the stairway is for the convenience of the applicant.)
■ Asked about finishing details on south elevation at dining room; the element that juts out; is it a 2" x
10" wood trim piece? (Furlong — yes.)
■ Could add additional trellis detail at this point near the driveway.
Public comments:
■ None.
There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed.
Place the item on the Consent Calendar when complete.
This item concluded at 7:39 p.m.
Chair Terrones returned to the dais.
4. 466 MARIN DRIVE, ZONED R-1 — APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW, FRONT SETBACK VARIANCE
AND SPECIAL PERMITS FOR A NEW BASEMENT AND AN EXTERIOR STAIRCASE FROM A
BASEMENT FOR A FIRST AND SECOND STORYADDITION TOA SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING (STEVE
AND SHEILA DRUSKIN, APPLICANTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS; AND LARRY KAHLE, ARCHITECT)
STAFF CONTACT: ERICA STROHMEIER
Reference staff report dated May 26, 2009, with attachments. Community Development Director Meeker
briefly presented the project description. There were no questions of staff.
Chair Terrones opened the public comment period.
Commission comments:
■ Asked that a proposed landscape plan be provided when the project appears before the
Commission for action.
4
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION— Unapproved Minutes May 26, 2009
Larry Kahle, 445 North Whisman Road, Mountain View; represented the applicant.
Additional Commission comments:
■ What is the material on the north elevation, next to chimney, below window? (Kahle—is brick, and
will be removed.)
■ Clarified that gable vents will be wood.
■ Have different window shapes or treatments been evaluated? (Kahle—felt that existing window was
too narrow; wanted a new window to align with the garage door below it.)
■ Think the window above the garage door is a unique feature on the existing house; is there anything
more interesting that could be proposed to add more life to the elevation? Consider enlarging
middle window and bringing portion of it down. (Kahle—the gable above the cornice will be removed
with the change in the roofline over the garage.)
■ Consider adding corbels at second floor pop-out at rear elevation to reduce plain, flat line on that
elevation.
■ Is there a reason why a ladder could not be used for access to and from the basement, rather than a
stairway. (Kahle — proposed to make it easier to access the rear-yard from within the home.)
■ Not a lot of detailing to the drawings. Call out and enhance trim details.
■ Note material of belly band.
■ Consider changing out the garage door to add more interest. It's a central element and should be
dressed up.
■ Perhaps make one of the windows a picture window.
■ Provide more detail on the front porch. Clarify porch columns will be wood and note dimensions on
the plans.
■ Consider adding iron detailing at window above garage.
Public comments:
■ None.
There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed.
Place the item on the Consent Calendar when complete.
This item concluded at 7:53 p.m.
5. 855 MAHLER ROAD, ZONED IB—APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND PARKING DIMENSION
VARIANCE FOR A NEW WAREHOUSE BUILDING ADDITION AT THE REAR OF THE LOT (AHMAD
MOHAZAB, TECTA ASSOCIATES,APPLICANT AND ARCHITECT;AND RABIH BALLOUT, PROPERTY
OWNER) STAFF CONTACT: LISA WHITMAN
Reference staff report dated May 26, 2009,with attachments. Associate Planner Whitman briefly presented
the project description. There were no questions of staff.
Chair Terrones opened the public comment period.
Ahmad Mohazab and John Pschenica, 2747 19th Street, San Francisco; and Rabih Bailout, 3000 Hillside
Drive; represented the applicant.
■ Provided clarification regarding compliance issues cited in staff report; particularly, seating areas,
u pervious surfaces; no seating is proposed and the impervious surfaces are existing.
5
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION—Unapproved Minutes May 26,2009
• With respect to landscaping;the existing building is at the street-front;it is most beneficial to leave'
as it is.
• With respect to sidewalk design issues;does not apply due to existing development.
• Since the proposed building is in the rear of the lot,the existing building in front meets the design
guidelines.
Commission comments:
• Clarified that front office building services the other building. (Pschenica—yes.)
• Clarified that the smaller parking spaces are employee-related. (Mohazab—yes.)
• Requested clarification regarding the nature of the business,will any manufacturing take place
onsite? (Bailout—purely distribution. Items are shipped by containers.)
• Do customers come to the facility? (Bailout—purely wholesale; not open to the public. Small
showroom on the site. Visitors on the site perhaps once a week; is primarily internet-based
business.)
• Could an area be provided outside for employee breaks? (Ballout—would defer to architects
judgement;doesn't see how it could work. Mohazab—willing to look at an outside seating area for
employee breaks behind the new building.)
• Third-party logistics trucks will deliver product? (Ballout—yes.)
• Trucks will back into loading area from street? (Ballout—yes. Mohazab—the loading area has
been evaluated and found to be workable.)
Public comments:
• None.
There were no other comments from the floor and the public hearing was closed.
Place the item on the Consent Calendar when complete.
This item concluded at 8:12 p.m.
X. COMMISSIONERS'REPORTS
There were no Commissioner's Reports.
XI. DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Commission Communications:
• The applicant for the project at 1140 Cortez Avenue has appealed the Planning Commission's
approval of amendments to the Design Review Permit for the project. The public hearing will be
held by the City Council on June 1,2009.
Actions from Regular City Council meeting of May 18,2008:
• Noted that the City Council adopted an ordinance increasing the number of full-service food
establishments downtown by five (5), creating a definition for "ready-to-eat food shop', and
amending the parking standards for consistency with residential design review policies. The_
amendments will become effective on June 17,2009.
CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION — Unapproved Minutes May 26, 2009
FYI: 1450 Rollins Road — review of landscape plan and LEED certification checklist:
■ Accepted.
XII. ADJOURNMENT
Chair Terrones adjourned the meeting at 8: 13 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
William Meeker
Community Development Director
L
7
RECEIVED
Co2009mcast® Comcast Cable
MAY 1 � 3443 Deer Park Drive
Stockton, CA 95219
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
CITY OF BURLINGAME
May 13, 2009
Mr. Jesus Nava
Finance Director/Treasurer
City of Burlingame
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
Re: HD Channel Launch
Dear Mr. Nava,
Effective on or after June 12, 2009, Comcast will launch KKPX HD on its High Definition channel
lineup as outlined below:
Programming Current Channel/Tier New Channel/Tier
KKPX HD Add 711 /131 HD
Customers will receive notification of this addition by way of a message on the Digital Control
Terminal and no costs are associated with this change.
If you have any questions, please contact your local Government Affairs Director, Lee Ann Peling at
(415) 715-0579.
Sincerely,
Pat Rice
Compliance Manager
Ccomcastcl
Comcast Cabie
3443 Deer Park Drive
Stockton,CA 95219
RECEIVED
May 15,2009 MAY 2 -1 2009
Mr.Jesus Nava
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
nITV OF Bt1Rl.IIVaaAME
Finance Director/Treasurer
City of Burlingame
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
Re: Equipment and Installation Price Adjustments
Dear Mr. Nava,
Effective on or after June 20,2009, Comcast will make the enclosed price adjustments on
equipment and service fees,most of which are being reduced.
Customers are being notified of these changes by way of the enclosed legal notification to be
published in a local newspaper.
If you have any questions,please contact your local Government Affairs Director Lee Ann Pehng at
(415) 715-0579.
Res ectfully,
Pat Rice
Compliance Manager
Enc.
Notice of Price and Package Change
Comcast
All cities in San Mateo County and the County of San Mateo
Effective for billing periods beginning on or after June 20, 2009, Comcast will make the following changes in the area(s)
listed above with respect to its cable television pricing.
MONTHLY EQUIPMENT FEE CURRENT PRICE NEW PRICE
Standard Converter(Addressable Analog Receiver) $3.50 $3.20
Addressable Converter(Addressable Analog Receiver) $3.50 $3.20
2nd CableCARD-TiVo Series 3/CPE requiring 2nd CableCARD $1.79 $1.70
INSTALLATION AND REPAIR FEE CURRENT PRICE NEW PRICE
Other Installation-Downgrade (non-addressable) $10.99 $10.49
Customer Trouble Call $19.99 $27.99
High-Speed Internet CURRENT PRICE NEW PRICE
Extreme 50 with Video and/or CDV $139.95 $99.95
Extreme 50 Only $139.95 $115.95
Important Information:For customers receiving service through commercial accounts or bulk arrangements,some of the product,pricing,and other information contained
herein may not apply.Please refer to the terms and conditions of the separate agreement covering these arrangements.Where such terms are inconsistent with the
information in this notice,the terms and conditions of the separate agreement will apply.Prices for products or services not listed above are not changing on June 20,2009.
All prices are exclusive of franchise fees,regulatory fees and taxes.Pricing,programming,channel location and packaging may change.After notice of a retiering of our
services or rate increase,you may change your level of service at no additional charge for a period of 30 days.Otherwise,changes in the services you receive which are
requested or caused by you,will be subject to upgrade and downgrade charges If you have questions,please contact us at 1-800-COMCAST.
FCC#CA1435, CA#1434. CA#1433. CA#1437,CA#1438 CA#1436 CA#1631.CA#1439,CA#1523.#CA0967,#CA0925.#CA1471,#CA1337,
#CA0280,#CA0440,#CA0575. #CA1200,#CA0076,#CA0078,#CA0079.#CA0099.#CA0077,#CA1270.#CA1461,#CA1463,#CA1502,#CA0578,
#CA1464.#CA0197,#CA0207,#CA0007,#CA0205,#CA0573.#CA1462,#CA1370.#CA0206. #CA1374, CA0074,#CA0282,#CA1501
Headend#H5300A,#H3990.#H2534A,#H2536A,#H2536,#H2536A#H4709A.#H3990E,#H4709A.#H3990D,#H5300B,#H25346,#H2536C,
#H3990A,#H2295A,#H3990G.#H3990
Sys/Prin#8770-2100,Agent#0010-#0570
05/09
cable I internet I phone
astound.
March 20,2009
City of Burlingame
Jim Nantell,City Manager
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame CA 94010
Dear .Nantel:X)'�Z
Astound was founded over five(5)years ago by a team of west coast cable industry veterans with a
strong belief that customers deserve a better experience.Our business practice has been to offer a wide
variety of products at a fair price.We succeed by providing customers a good value and by limiting price
increases for these products.True to this commitment,Astound has never raised prices on our internet
or phone services,while continuing to improve these services year after year.In the last six months,
Astound has become the fastest internet provider in the Bay Area by providing an 18 Mbps downstream
Internet service.In addition,Astound is the only telephone provider offering an unlimited calling plan
covering the greater Bay Area.
Unfortunately,the escalating cost of video service is out of our control. Astound must pay monthly fees
on a per customer basis to the cable networks we make available on our system.Many cable
programming networks require cable operators to carry their channels on our basic service levels and
require carriage of additional networks as a condition of receiving the most popular channels.This
forced carriage of less desirable channels creates a situation where customers may be paying for
channels they do not want.
While Astound continues to make every effort to reduce these video programming fees,the
programming networks are again this year significantly increasing their monthly per customer fees.As a
result,we will be increasing our video service rates as of April 20,2009 to offset a portion of these costs.
• Expanded Basic Cable will increase by$2.00 from$49.95 to$51.95
• Digital Basic will increase by$2.00 from$8.00 to$10.00
• Digital Variety,Digital Sports,Spanish Pack,HBO and Cinemax will increase by$1.00 each
• Showtime Premium Movie Pack will increase by$4.00
• Digital Packages will increase by$2.00 to$6.67
215 Mason Circle,Concord,CA 94520 1-800-4-ASTOUND(1-800-427-8686) fax 925-459-1102 www.astound.net
cable I internet I phone
astound..:,
For the first time this year local broadcasters are charging a monthly fee per cable customer as
compensation for the carriage of their stations. In previous years the broadcasters would receive non-
monetary compensation.As a consequence,these new costs are being passed through to our customers
and their bills reflect a $1.47 charge in addition to the monthly cable television rate.
Astound recognizes that these are challenging economic times for everyone. Keeping this economic
climate in mind,the rate increases to our customers do not cover the full amount of increases that
programmers and local broadcasters have imposed on Astound.Also,as mentioned above,Astound has
not increased the cost for internet or phone services.We look forward to continuing to provide the
residents of the City of Burlingame with a choice for their cable television, internet and telephone
services.
Please do not hesitate to contact me should you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Tim Peters
Vice President Astound Broadband
215 Mason Circle,Concord, CA 94520 1-800-4-ASTOUND(1-800-427-8686) fax 925-459-1102 www.astound.net