Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - CC - 2017.01.17io (tu Lo RBQUEST TO SPEAK - PLEASE GIVE TO THE CITY CLERK OR A CITY STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THEREAFTER Persons wishing to address the City Council are requested to provide the City Clerk with information for the recorded minutes. Name: (optional)Wr-*<,rrt, yt bw,l,n f Email: (optiona Phone: (optional) ,r VA^ Alv,':% Lonn Remarks: \ MEETING DATE:AGENDA ITEM #:\ rc- Members of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provision ofa name, address or other identifoing information is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in light of the number of anticipated speakers. REQUEST TO SPEAK - PLEASE GIVE TO THE CITY CLERK OR A CITY STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THEREAFTER Persons wishing to address the City Council are requested to provide the Cify Clerk lvith accurate information for the recorded minutes. Name: (optional) Em:ril: (optional) t) rt Phone: (optional)Remarks: (S MEETING DATE:\ fi -l(-?AGENDA ITEM #: Members of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to filI out a ,'request to splak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to stafi although the provision ofa name, address or other identifuing information is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in light of the nurnber of anticipated speakers. /.r.m#?rx\W b^Jrr Dn- REQUEST TO SPEAK _ PLEASE GIVE TO THE CITY CLERK OR A CITY STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THBREAFTER Persons rvishing to acldress the City Council are requested to provide the City Clerk rvith information for the recorded minutes. Name: (optional)9cs tot,t,ooJ '{'tr Email: (optional) Phone: (optional)Remarks:nl..ottP,ir,tl,rwi MEETING DATE:t-7 t1 AGENDA ITEM #: Members of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a ',requeJt to spiak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provision ofa name, address or other identifoing information is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in light of the number of anticipated speakers. II /"ffiffisW REQUEST TO SPEAK - PLEASE GIVE TO THE CITY CLERK OR A CITY STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THEREAFTER Persons lvishing to address the Cify Council are requested to provide the City Clerk with information for the recorded minutes. Name: (optional){.'lts7 Yf /4 Email: (optiona t) Phone: (optional)Remarks:br*r,l fYt h5 \ MEETING DATE:t1 t7 AGENDA ITEM #: Members of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open rneeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to f,rll out a "requeit to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provision ofa name, address or other identifying information is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in light of the number of anticipated speakers. ,ffiW I I P,tn\( REQUEST TO SPEAK - PLEASE GIVE TO THE CITY CLERK OR A CITY STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THEREAFTER Persons rvishing to address the Cify Council are requested to provide the City Clerk lvith information for the recorded minutes. Name: (optional)ru<tr Email: (optional){ t%'d frfi!4,g214 (- Phone: (optional)Remarks: MEETING DATE:// /7/ /7 AGENDA ITEM #:/dx Mernbers of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to stafi although the provision ofa name, address or other identiffing information is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in light of the number of anticipated speakers. REQUEST TO SPEAK _ PLEASE GIVE TO THE CITY CLERK OR A CITY STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THEREAFTER Persons wishing to address the City Council are requested to provide the Cify Clerk with information for the recorded minutes. 6ra E 5,6se 9,/sName: (optional)L)2P Email: (option Phone: (optional)Remarks: MEETING DATE:AGENDA ITEM #:/Oa Members of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open rneeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provision ofa name, address or other identi$ing information is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time lirnit in light of the number of anticipated speakers. /J,aII^ #4EIT\ I BURLTNcAME I LHdrJ].w,Z REQUEST TO SPEAK - PLEASE GIVE TO THE CITY CLERK OR A CITY STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THEREAFTER Persons wishing to address the City Council are requested to provide the City Clerk with information for the recorded minutes. Name: (optional)T-;n /qzrr Email: (option Phone: (optional)Remarks MEETING DATE:AGENDA ITEM #:D^, Members of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council frorn acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a "requeit to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provision ofa name, address or other identiffing information is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in light of the number of anticipated speakers. /ffi.6P,MAW REQUEST TO SPEAK _ PLEASE GIVE TO THE CITY CLERK OR A CITY STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THEREAFTER Persons wishing to address the City Council are requested to provide the Cify Clerk with accurate information for the recorded minutes. Name: (optional)D^o0,",o t-Email: (option /' l-,.j Phone: (optional) l\g Cd n C 50$t\3"3r0 Remarks: tMEETING DATE -l AGENDA ITEM #: Members of the public may speak about any itern not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a ',request to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provision ofa name, address or other identifling information is optional. Speal<ers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor rnay adjust the time limit in light of the number of anticipated speakers. /.?I.I^ffi\W REQUEST TO SPEAK - PLEASE GIVE TO THE CITY CLERK OR A CITY STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THEREAFTER Persons wishing to address the Cify Council are requested to provide the City Clerk with information for the recorded minutes. Name: (optional)o Email: (option e-t o LG.(-o rn Phone: (optional)Remarks: MEETING DATE:Llfrts AGENDA ITEM #:p. Members of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provision ofa name, address or other identifying information is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in light of the number of anticipated speakers. ,ffi.#*nsW REQUEST TO SPEAK _ PLEASE GIVE TO THE CITY CLERK OR A CITY STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THEREAFTER Persons wishing to address the Cify Council are requested to provide the City Clerk with information for the recorded minutes. Name: (optional)Ia^^,Cnn SaTor^ Email: (optional)Lrrt-ik-Q Lo zc,, (o'rl Phone: (optional) 1 tt- 6 7u -fOtl-Remarks: MEETING DATE:| /t-t lrt AGENDA ITEM #:lou Members of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provision ofa name, address or other identifying information is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in light of the number of anticipated speakers. RBQUEST TO SPEAK - PLEASE GIVE TO THE CITY CLERK OR A CITY STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THEREAFTER Persons wishing to address the City Council are requested to provide the City Clerk with information for the recorded minutes. Name: (optional)D*r) G^wd Email: (option Phone: (optional)Remarks:lvaw <ik Fi -.,k l1 1 wfl 0 G r) [O" MEETING DATE:AGENDA ITEM #:Ji lc..'l-; )"1F. Mernbers of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provision ofa name, address or other identifoing information is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in light of the number of anticipated speakers. rffi. /ltfrrr.N\W REQUEST TO SPEAK _ PLEASE GIVE TO THE CITY CLERK OR A CITY STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THEREAFTER Persons lvishing to address the City Council are requested to provide the City Clerk with information for the recorded minutes. Name: (optional)&rah \-lr',,ni\\.,vr Email: (optional)Eoke ,Co Phone: (optional) ULbl,J;b4qq\ Remarks:A Q*wt<-- MEETING DATE:\l\+\r+AGENDA ITEM #:--r Ir Members of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provision ofa name, address or other identifoing information is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in light of the number of anticipated speakers. ,ffi,dflEn\W I t:a, To C o REQUEST TO SPEAK - PLEASE GIVE TO THE CITY CLERK OR A CITY STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THEREAFTER Persons wishing to address the City Council are requested to provide the City Clerk rvith accurate information for the recorded minutes. Name: (optional)0 Email: (option I*t,OIJ*^.1*ff,ka Phone: (optional)7tz.ztp,t fuo Remarks:/o MEETING DATE:I I AGENDA ITEM #: Members of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brorvn Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provision ofa name, address or other identifuing information is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in light of the number of anticipated speakers. ,/ffiL\#ffi\ I BURLTNGAME I 1.uJdrr#\W9z krrt REQUEST TO SPEAK _ PLEASE GIVE TO THE CITY CLERK OR A CITY STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THEREAFTER Persons lvishing to address the Cify Council are requested to provide the City Clerk with information for the recorded minutes.&r{ Cc^/</<Name: (optional)(^ Email: (option O.,{. (- LnR e-mtuc Phone: (optional) @ 3gO 6lfiRemarks:Re-"4, C*n -ra7 eq, u MEETING DATE:I ln{n AGENDA ITEM #: lO 4 Mernbers of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provision ofa name, address or other identifoing information is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in light of the number of anticipated speakers. REQUEST TO SPEAK - PLEASE GIVE TO THE CITY CLERK OR A CITY STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THEREAFTER Persons wishing to adclress the City Council are requested to provide the City Clerk with information for the recorded minutes. Name: (optional)/cl C,.,1*o Email: (optional) %pooro Dp@ (r-r+ t u , Cdrr Plrone: (optional) 1 tS-Z I Y..7t'3-&..-n.krt I(-,. ss.|/o,tC <JA Crnr MEETTNGDATE: t/tl /r*AGENDA ITEM #:/oA-----T-T Members of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provision ofa name, address or other identiffing information is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in light of the number of anticipated speakers. REQUEST TO SPEAK - PLEASE GIVE TO THE CITY CLERK OR A CITY STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THEREAFTER Persons wishing to address the City Council are requested to provide the Cify Clerk with information for the recorded minutes. Name: (optional)KtvrN YtrI+ Email: (option Phone: (optional)Remarks:?-r"el no il&l-un MEETING DATE: I I 1 AGENDA ITEM # Members of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council ffom acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provision ofa name, address or other identifoing information is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in light of the number of anticipated speakers. mdg&fi\ I aUELTNGAME I |.kdtrJ]\W,Z REQUEST TO SPEAK _ PLEASE GIVE TO THE CITY CLERK OR A CITY STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THEREAFTER Persons wishing to address the Cify Council are requested to provide the City Clerk with accurate information for the recordecl minutes. O^rn, LtObrfName: (optional) Email: (optional) Phone: (optional) L C t.,'44 Remarks:(s I IMMEETING DATE:AGENDA ITEM #: Mernbers of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provision ofa name, address or other ictentif,ing infonnation is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the tinte limit in light of the nurnber of anticipated speakers. ,ffi. 6,etEIX\W ?u(wt9 REQUEST TO SPEAK _ PLEASE GIVE TO THE CITY CLERK OR A CITY STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THEREAFTER Persons wishing to address the City Council are requested to provide the City Clerk with accurate information for rded minutes. Name: (optiona "\" ,\44(t t,^ Email: (optional)S "t\wt t *u\' co 4r Phone: (option -3o'tr -ZBZ Remarks:\n (t'r rr dF H t(r [c( rr4 lox MEETING DATE:I /tr ltr AGENDA ITEM #: \ Oi Members of the public may speak about any itern not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brorvtr Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provision ofa name, address or other identi$ing information is optional. Speakers are limited to three rninutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in light of the number of anticipated speakers. -I REQUEST TO SPEAK - PLEASE GIVE TO THE CITY CLBRK OR A CITY STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THEREAFTER Persons rvishing to address the City Council are requested to provide the City Clerk with accurate information for the recorded minutes. Name: (optional)a( n"l F hoo il.ron-,Email: (option Phone: (optional)Remarks: s qr IZ;h MEETING DATE:t*(7 AGENDA ITEM #:/Oo Members of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on arly matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provision ofa name, address or other identifying information is optional. Speal<ers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in light of the number of anticipated speakers. /,m#lEn\W I REQUEST TO SPEAK - PLEASE GTVE TO THE CITY CLERK OR A CITY STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MBETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THEREAFTER Persons wishing to address the City Council are requested to provide the City Clerk with information for the recorded minutes. Name: (optional)O t\TA*r,* 1- ,a /*.D2*,/ Email: (optiona Phone: (optional)Remarks:,e MEETING DATE:AGENDA ITEM *, IC 4 Members of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provision ofa name, address or other identifuing information is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in light of the number of anticipated speakers. rffi.€trr\W * I REQUEST TO SPEAK - PLEASE GIVE TO THE CITY CLERK OR A CITY STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THEREAFTER Persons wishing to address the City Council are requested to provide the City Clerk with accurate information for the recorded minutes. &iAru \'+"tuzlName: (optional) Email: ( Phone: (optional) tod0- q lt- tt 2f,.-n.k*Qo", n I + fcr P{ruK0 MEETING DATE: i AG ENDA ITEM *: \ 0 q Members of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provision ofa name, address or other identiling information is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in light of the number of anticipated speakers. ,ffiW REQUEST TO SPEAK _ PLEASE GIVE TO THE CITY CLERK OR A CITY STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THEREAFTER Persons wishing to address the City Council are requested to provide the City Clerk with information for the rec rded minutes.ILName: (optional)I Email: (optional),*z v *4n lo n%fa Jo/, Qlt< Phone: (optional)Remarks: MEETING DATE:2r2 AGENDA ITEM #:/D q Members of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provision ofa name, address or other identifoing information is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in light of the number of anticipated speakers. /ffi./gflIl\W REQUEST TO SPEAK _ PLEASE GIVE TO THB CITY CLERK OR A CITY STAFF MBMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THEREAFTER Persons wishing to address the City Council are requested to provide the City Clerk with accurate information for the, recorded minutes. l'vl,^ Clnn,-Name: (optional) .CdnErnail: (option Phone: (optional)Remarks:t lr.t/1 MEETING DATE:I l AGENDA ITEM #:lD o- Mernbers of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provision ofa name, address or other identifuing information is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in light of the nurnber of anticipated speakers. ,ffi.#IEfr\W RBQUEST TO SPEAK _ PLEASE GIVE TO THE CITY CLERK OR A CITY STAFF MEMBBR PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THEREAFTER Persons wishing to address the City Council are requested to provide the City Clerk lvith accurate information for the recorded minutes. Name: (optional)GI L. Email: (optional) Phone: (r)Remarks: .t t ,a Go(C Gn@t MEETING DATE:AGENDA ITEM #:t0 Members of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a ',requeit to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to stafl although the provision ofa name, address or other identifling infonnation is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each, the Mayor may adjust the time limit in light of the number of anticipated speakers. /m#llDmW t REQUEST TO SPEAK _ PLEASE GIVE TO THE CITY CLERK OR A CITY STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THEREAFTER Persons wishing to address the City Council are requested to provide the City Clerk with information for rded minutes. l,L,trName: (optional)Ct'n Email: (optional) phone: (optionar) Lll i ' b}t iT$Remarks: MEETING DATE:AGENDA ITEM #: Members of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provision ofa name, address or other identifying information is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in light of the number of anticipated speakers. ,ffiW RBQUEST TO SPEAK _ PLEASE GIVE TO THE CITY CLERK OR A CITY STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THEREAFTER Persons wishing to address the City Council are requested to provide the City Clerk with information for the recorded minutes. Name: (optional)Jou ln 5*; rc Email: (option Phone: (optional)Remarks: MEETING DATE:vtll 17 AGENDA ITEM #:fu t Ort* i (< rint Members of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provision ofa name, address or other identi$ing information is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in light of the number of anticipated speakers. REQUEST TO SPEAK - PLEASE GIVE TO THE CITY CLERK OR A CITY STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THEREAFTER Persons lvishing to address the City Council are requested to provide the City Clerk with information for the recorded minutes. Name: (optional)AA,rl\ q.e | {wid rcq(v'"A;l , Lo*Email: (optional) Phone: (optional)Yrs 701 l6sj Remarks: MEETING DATE:r/ltltT AGENDA ITEM #I 0"- 1 66 I ).rt t Members of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provision ofa name, address or other identifying information is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in light of the number of anticipated speakers. REQUEST TO SPEAK - PLBASE GIVE TO THE CITY CLERK OR A CITY STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLB THEREAFTER Persons wishing to address the City Council are requested to provide the City Clerk rvith information for the recorded minutes. Name: (optional)DA-Avt TH ofr&5 Emait: (optionat)?frr.f cf THo t-55 O hrAgLcon Phone: (optional)Remarks: MEETING DATE:t1 721 AGENDA ITEM #: Members of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council fiom acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provision ofa name, address or other identifoing information is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in light of the nurnber of anticipated speakers. ,ffi.pfrrr\W ID N REQUEST TO SPEAK - PLEASE GIVE TO THE CITY CLERK OR A CITY STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THEREAFTER Persons wishing to adclress the City Council are requested to provide the City Clerk rvith accurate information for the recorded minutes. Name: (optional)/fl,tso Fr-,rrun Email: (Q)a sr +l otl^W&wf^ ^- o-<3^^ Phone: (optional)-L6 707ft[-u.u,, MEETTNGDATE: r lrr lrf AGENDA rrEM *, B.a,&cr*- Members of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open rneeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provisiott ofa name, address or other identifoing information is optional. Speakers are lirnited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in light of the nurnber of anticipated speakers. /,mdr{En\W ,ry REQUEST TO SPEAK - PLEASE GIVE TO THE CITY CLERK OR A CITY STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THEREAFTER Persons rvishing to address the Cify Council are requested to provide the City Clerk with information for the recorded minutes. Name: (optional)fso L" HosA,n-o Email: (optional) Phone: (optional)Remarks: MEETING DATE:r/tT AGENDA ITEM #: / D A. Members of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any rnatter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provision ofa name, address or other identifuing information is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in light of the number of anticipated speakers. /ffi.44iln\W REQUEST TO SPEAK _ PLEASE GIVE TO THE CITY CLERK OR A CITY STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THEREAFTER Persons wishing to address the City Council are requested to provide the City Clerk with accurate information for the recorded minutes. Name: (optional)Sawt9s Le-e- A*-zry Email: (ontional) Phone: (optional)Remarks: 9v Pg crrhvla fhq-n )<- J (M MEETING DATE:tlt? ltT AGENDA ITEM #:ID a --T-Members of the public may speak about any itern not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provision ofa name, address or other identifying information is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in light of tlre number of anticipated speakers. v REQUEST TO SPEAK _ PLEASE GIVB TO THE CITY CLERK OR A CITY STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THEREAFTER Persons wishing to address the City Council are requested to provide the City Clerk with information for the recorded minutes. Name: (optional) Email: (option Phone: (optional)Remarks: NzO )1Y< - (t ot< \c.. MEETING DATE:t lr d1t*AGENDA rrEM o. R.lvlrc(ouuq y- Members of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provision ofa name, address or other identiSing information is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in light of the number of anticipated speakers. ,ffi.pnm\W l) il.e en (unua4 REQUEST TO SPEAK _ PLEASE GIVE TO THE CITY CLERK OR A CITY STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THEREAFTER Persons wishing to address the Cify Council are requested to provide the City Clerk lvith accurate information for the recorded minutes. Name: (optional) Email: (optional) C,.1U\/A- Phone: (optional)Remarks: MEETING DATE:AGENDA ITEM #: Members of the public may speak about any iteur not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provision ofa name, address or other identifying inforrnation is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the tirne limit in light of the nurnber of arrticipated speakers. ,ffiW REQUEST TO SPEAK _ PLEASE GIVE TO THE CITY CLERK OR A CITY STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THEREAFTER Persons wishing to address the Cify Council are requested to provide the City Clerk with information for the recorded minutes. Name: (optional)Rte cL V\ q o,4 r U.4n Email: (option Phone: (optional)Remarks: MEETING DATE:AGENDA ITEM #: LO q Members of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to stafl although the provision ofa name, address or other identif,ing information is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in light of the number of anticipated speakers. /ffi.detrtt\W REQUEST TO SPEAK _ PLEASE GIVE TO THE CITY CLERK OR A CITY STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THEREAFTER Persons wishing to address the City Council are requested to provide the City Clerk with information for the reco utes. Name: (optional)n L A"n Ar fEmail: (o Phone: (optional)Remar t0 MEETING DATE:\t AGENDA ITEM #: Mernbers of the public may sPeak about any item not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State loc ,l agency meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the identiffing information is optional. Sp the number of anticipated speakers. table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provision of a name, address or other eakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in light of /ffi.lgen\W 4(tuhm, REQUEST TO SPEAK - PLEASE GIVE TO THE CITY CLERK OR A CITY STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THEREAFTER Persons wishing to address the City Council are requested to provide the Cify Clerk with information for the recorded minutes. Name: (optional)V Jer dEmail: (optional)a.9ou Phone: (optional)Remarks MEETING DATE: U ]I; I IZ AGENDA ITEM #: ID4--J',1" Members of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provision ofa name, address or other identif,ing information is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in light of the number of anticipated speakers. rm.#tm\W REQUEST TO SPEAK _ PLEASE GIVE TO THE CITY CLERK OR A CITY STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THEREAFTER Persons lvishing to address the City Council are requested to provide the City Clerk rvith information for the recorded minutes. Name: (optional)CUPA; ot Nl€t,Lt- Email: (optional)Q-Yol\e;([@ Ot-yyW Phone: (optional)\t5 boz 3418 Remarks: yorL 5'wffffi w2- tq tuNlL ?kfdAL va(L 7 ail{L t o?^s? F+zse*s MEETING DATE:etr/t7 /zot7 AGENDA rrEM *, \0^ Members of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provision ofa name, address or other identifying information is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in light of the number of anticipated speakers. REQUEST TO SPEAK _ PLEASE GIVE TO THE CITY CLERI( OR A CITY STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THEREAFTER Persons wishing to address the Cify Council are requested to provide the Cify Clerk with information for the recorded minutes. Name: (optional) Email: (optional l/ 4vh t,.(_04 Phone: (optional)Remarks:o tt/r -GoLP MEETING DATE:Zt AGENDA ITEM #:/a tt Members of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to filI out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provision ofa name, address or other identif,ing information is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in light of the number of anticipated speakers. /ffi.#lm\W \.-s '\ J\ll-\c Ntv\ \ \ \ J>- R ) r$ \s * S S. REQUEST TO SPEAK _ PLEASE GIVE TO THE CITY CLERK OR A CITY STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THEREAFTER Persons wishing to address the City Council are requested to provide the City Clerk with accurate information for the recorded minutes. Name: (optional) Email: (optional) I (, ( Phone: (optional)Remarks: MEETING DATE:AGENDA ITEM #:CL Mernbers of the public may speak about any itern not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provision ofa name, address or other identifying information is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in light of the nurnber of anticipated speakers. I ,ffi.#{Ett4\W REQUEST TO SPEAK - PLEASE GIVE TO THE CITY CLERK OR A CITY STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THEREAFTER Persons wishing to address the Cify Council are requested to provide the City Clerk lvith information for the recorded minutes. Name: (optional),0 Email: (option Phone: (optional)Remarks: MEETING DATE:'Za AGENDA ITEM *, /C 4 coffi{. Members of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provision ofa name, address or other identifying information is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in light of the number of anticipated speakers. b /ffi.lrwn\W / ItA"r- REQUEST TO SPEAK - PLEASE GIVE TO THE CITY CLERK OR A CITY STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLB THEREAFTER Persons wishing to address the City Council are requested to provide the City Clerk with accurate information for the recorded minutes. Name: (optional) .C D Av,4or'o -(fV l rrro.(. [ 0 S * Email: (optiona y sr er.q ", f ts rl 4@gn{i { .c(G +Phone: (optional) ( I Q- Z,t /-?bfd Remarks: MEETING DATE:AGENDA ITEM #: Members of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provision ofa name, address or other identiffing informarion is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in light of the nurnber of anticipated speakers. /.Iff.L\Ar:pfr\W REQUEST TO SPEAK - PLEASE GIVE TO THE CITY CLERK OR A CITY STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THEREAFTER Persons wishing to address the City Council are requested to provide the City Clerk with accurate information for the recorded minu 1"-4) Name: (optional) tes. f,<rn\\ ea-n b Email: (optional) Phone: (optional)Remarks: TING DATE:1 AGENDA rrEM #: lD C\ Members of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provision ofa name, address or other identif,ing information is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in light of the nurnber of anticipated speakers. -/.f,m\LewTt\ I BURLTNGAME I LwwoJ\W#z REQUEST TO SPEAK - PLEASE GIVE TO THE CITY CLERK OR A CITY STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THEREAFTBR Persons wishing to address the City Council are requested to provide the City Clerk rvith accurate information for the recorcled minutes. Name: (optional)Len pusen /rf+ Email: (optiona Phone: (optional)Remarks: MEETING DATE:AGENDA ITEM #: I Members of the public may speak about any itern not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provision ofa name, address or other identifying information is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in light of tlre number of anticipated speakers. -/ffim\#l$n\ IFURLTNGAME I Lk,#6Jltlwgz RBQUEST TO SPEAK _ PLEASE GIVE TO THE CITY CLERK OR A CITY STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THEREAFTER Persons wishing to address the Cify Council are requested to provide the Cify Clerk with accurate information for the recorded minutes. Name: (optional)J.e G*ta.*lr Email: (optional ) Phone: (optional)Remarks: MEETING DATE: I rt rtI AGENDA ITEM #: r0 a.----I r Members of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provision ofa name, address or other identiling information is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in light of the number of anticipated speakers. /mtffi\ I BURLTNGAME I lk,il''r*JW REQUEST TO SPEAK _ PLEASE GIVE TO THE CITY CLERK OR A CITY STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THEREAFTER Persons wishing to address the City Council are requested to provide the City Clerk with accurate information for the recorded minutes. Name: (optional)tn Email: (optional) Phone: (optional)Remarks:o c nu MEBTING DATE:AGENDA ITEM #:t Members of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provision ofa name, address or other identifoing infonnation is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the tirne limit in light of the number of anticipated speakers. ./-iI.IL\ /.eYEn\W REQUEST TO SPEAK - PLEASE GIVE TO THE CITY CLERK OR A CITY STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THEREAFTER Persons wishing to address the City Council are requested to provide the City Clerk with accurate information for the recorded minutes. Name: (optional)N\.N\-*J\L Email: (optional) Phone: (optional)Remarks: MEETING DATE: \rt-AGENDA ITEM #:lo a Members of the pubtic may speak about any item not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any rnatter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provision ofa name, address or other identifoing inforrnation is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in light of the number of anticipated speakers. /.l?I.I^#flfr\ I FURLTNGAME I LlH,#Ellr@92 REQUEST TO SPEAK - PLEASE GIVE TO THE CITY CLERK OR A CITY STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THEREAFTER Persons wishing to adclress the City Council are requested to provide the Cify Clerk with accurate information for the recorcled minutes. Name: (optional),) Emnil: (optional)uA,- Phone: (optional)LttE -e.t Remarks LI,-; kl,l- lo**-t---t MEETING DATE:-T- Members of the public may speak about any itern not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provision ofa name, address or other identifoing infonnation is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in light of the number of anticipated speakers. \l tTltr AGENDA ITEM #: lO..'. /]t?I.I^lelpfi\W REQUEST TO SPEAK - PLEASE GIVE TO THE CITY CLERK OR A CITY STAFF MEMBER PRIOR TO THE MEETING OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THEREAFTER Persons wishing to address the City Council are requested to provide the Cify Clerk with accurate information for the recorded minutes. Name: (optional)S=orr lu Email: (optional) Phone: (optional)Remarks:lCq MEETING DATE:AGENDA ITEM #: Members of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provision ofa name, address or other identiling infonnation is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in light of the nurnber of anticipated speakers. /.mdewlx\ IBURLTNGAME I [HC'6tJ]..W,Z b0l .-,"+{ v P",ta{V f .tllorN ^al++bw City Council City of Burlingame Meeting Agenda - Final BURLINGAME CITY HALL 501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME, CA 94010 Council Chambers7:00 PMTuesday, January 17, 2017 Note: Public comment is permitted on all action items as noted on the agenda below and in the non-agenda public comment provided for in item 7. Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although the provision of a name, address or other identifying information is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in light of the number of anticipated speakers. All votes are unanimous unless separately noted for the record. 1. CALL TO ORDER - 7:00 p.m. - Council Chambers 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG 3. ROLL CALL 4. REPORT OUT FROM CLOSED SESSION 5. UPCOMING EVENTS 6. PRESENTATIONS Home for All San Mateo County Initiativea. PresentationAttachments: Library Strategic Planb. Strategic PlanAttachments: 7. PUBLIC COMMENTS, NON-AGENDA Members of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. Members of the public wishing to suggest an item for a future Council agenda may do so during this public comment period. The Ralph M . Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Page 1 City of Burlingame Printed on 1/12/2017 January 17, 2017City Council Meeting Agenda - Final 8. APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR Consent calendar items are usually approved in a single motion, unless pulled for separate discussion . Any member of the public wishing to comment on an item listed here may do so by submitting a speaker slip for that item in advance of the Council’s consideration of the consent calendar. Adoption of City Council Meeting Minutes from January 3, 2017a. Meeting MinutesAttachments: Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 13.36.040 of the Burlingame Municipal Code to Revise and Establish a ‘Two-Hour Parking’ Restriction from 2:00 P.M. to 6:00 P.M., Monday Through Friday, on Carolan Avenue from North Lane to Oak Grove Avenue b. Staff Report Ordinance Draft Revised Chapter 13.36.040 of the Burlingame Municipal Code TSPC Staff Report dated October 13 2016 Staff Presentation to TSPC dated November 10, 2016 Location Map Attachments: Adoption of an Ordinance Rezoning Property from R -4 (High Density Multi-family Residential) to CAR (California Drive Auto Row) and Adoption of Resolutions Amending the Burlingame General Plan to Designate Property from R -4 Incentive District to California Drive Mixed Use District; Making Findings Relative to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Related to a General Plan Amendment, Rezoning, and all Land Use Applications Related to a Proposed Automobile Service Facility Development; and Approval of Design Review and a Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map for a New Automobile Service Facility at an Existing Automobile Dealership on Property Located at 85 California Drive c. Staff Report Resolution - CEQA Resolution - General Plan Amendment Ordinance - Rezoning Resolution - Project Entitlements Attachments: Page 2 City of Burlingame Printed on 1/12/2017 January 17, 2017City Council Meeting Agenda - Final Adoption of a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Burlingame Making Findings Regarding an Amendment to Title 21 - Historic Resource Preservation of the Burlingame Municipal Code and Adoption of an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Burlingame, Amending Title 21 - Historic Resource Preservation of the Burlingame Municipal Code by Adding Provisions Defining “Adaptive Re-Use” and Outlining Procedures for Granting Approval of a Conditional Use Permit for Adaptive Reuse of Historic Resources within the City of Burlingame d. Staff Report CEQA Resolution Ordinance Attachments: Adoption of a Resolution Committing the City to Continue Working with Other Jurisdictions in the County to Address the Housing Crisis on a Regional Basis, Including through Ongoing Support of the Home for All San Mateo County Initiative e. Staff Report Resolution Attachments: Review of the 2015 and 2016 Housing Element Annual Progress Report (APR) on the Implementation of the Housing Element of the General Plan f. Staff Report Annual Progress Report 2015 Annual Progress Report 2016 Program Implementation Status Attachments: 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Public Comment) Public Hearing to Consider Proposed Amendments to Title 25, Chapters 25.08, 25.26, 25.50, 25.59, 25.60, and 25.70 to Update Existing Secondary Dwelling Unit Regulations to be Consistent with Recently Adopted Amendments to California Government Code Section 65852 Related to Accessory Dwelling Units a. Staff Report Ordinance Current Regulations - Strikeout PC Minutes - December 12, 2016 Government Code Section 65852.2 Attachments: 10. STAFF REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS (Public Comment) Page 3 City of Burlingame Printed on 1/12/2017 January 17, 2017City Council Meeting Agenda - Final Management of the Golf Center Sitea. Staff Report Request for Proposals MIRF Site Plan USBC Site Plan Topgolf Site Plan Comparison Summary Attachments: Informational Report on SB 415, the "California Voter Participation Rights Act"b. Staff Report SB 415 List of SMC Municipalities and Their Respective Actions on SB 415 Attachments: 11. COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND ACTIVITIES REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS Councilmembers report on committees and activities and make announcements. 12. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS 13. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The agendas, packets and meeting minutes for the Planning Commission, Traffic, Parking & Safety Commission, Beautification Commission, Parks and Recreation Commission and Library Board of Trustees are available online at: www.burlingame.org December 2016 Permit Activitya. 14. ADJOURNMENT Notice: Any attendees wishing accommodations for disabilities please contact the City Clerk at (650)558-7203 at least 24 hours before the meeting. A copy of the Agenda Packet is available for public review at the City Clerk's office, City Hall, 501 Primrose Road, from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. before the meeting and at the meeting. Visit the City's website at www.burlingame.org. Agendas and minutes are available at this site. NEXT CITY COUNCIL MEETING - Next City Council Meeting - Goal Session - Saturday, January 28, 2017 at 9am in the Lane Room, Burlingame Library Next regulary City Council Meeting - Monday, February 6, 2017 VIEW REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING ONLINE AT WWW.BURLINGAME.ORG - GO TO "CITY COUNCIL VIDEOS" Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the City Council regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection at the Water Office counter at City Hall at 501 Primrose Road during normal business hours. Page 4 City of Burlingame Printed on 1/12/2017 Presentation to the Burlingame City Council January 17, 2017 Jobs-Housing Gap It’s becoming more difficult for people to call San Mateo County home. Job opportunities are growing rapidly, but with limited housing available, there is a growing need for homes people can afford. Between 2010 –2014: Land Use Challenge The majority (75%) of San Mateo County’s land is preserved for open space and agriculture. Of developed land, more than 2/3 of the current housing stock is single family homes. Increase in Housing Prices 58% 40%43%45% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% House Condo Rent: 2 Bedroom Rent: 1 Bedroom Percent Increase in Housing Prices 2000 to 2015 4 Congestion 40,900 49,200 46,000 77,200 125,900 Of the 339,200 Jobs in San Mateo County, 213,300 Workers Live Outside the County San Francisco Santa Clara Alameda Other Counties San Mateo Business Impacts Recruitment & Retention •Housing cost is #1 business challenge for past four years •Likely to leave Bay Area: 34% of Bay Area Council Poll respondents Source: Silicon Valley Leadership Group Annual CEO Business Climate Survey, Bay Area Council Poll 2016 Jobs-Housing Gap Task Force •March 2015: Housing Study Session •29 Policies and Programs •$63.8 Million in Funding Commitments •$37 million for housing development •$13.3 million for housing preservation and improvement •$13.5 million for homelessness prevention and support 7 Jobs-Housing Gap Task Force Purpose Bring community leaders together to: •Learn about the challenges created by the current housing market •Work together to develop a menu of “solutions” •Commit to taking action to implement solutions Task Force Outcomes Action Plan Home for All Website Public Relations & Education Campaign Partnerships & Community Engagement The Initiative Mission Establish a climate in San Mateo County where a diversity of housing is produced and preserved Vision A future where everyone in San Mateo County has an affordable home Outcome San Mateo County will be a culturally, generationally and economically diverse community with housing for all Home for All Structure Outreach & Education All segments of the community are aware of Home for All Funding Maximize funding for development and preservation of all types of housing Legislation and Policy Develop and promote policies and sponsor legislation the promotes the development of housing Mobility Expand the aspects of the current transportation system to better serve residents of new and existing housing Action Plan Supporting All Types of Housing Development Funding Affordable Housing Securing Land & Strengthening Community Infrastructure •Adoption of Home for All resolutions •Stakeholder convenings •Business outreach •Home for All website •Second Unit Center •Facilitated community meetings for proposed development projects •Housing endowment & community land trust •Proposed Measure A extension •Shared housing credit legislation •Affordable Rental Housing Preservation Fund •Available public land analysis •Regional options to enhance transit •Water-efficient development Building Partnerships & Community Support Work to Date Education Materials •Website: www.Homeforallsmc.com •Brochure •Talking Points Partnerships •City Councils •Faith Community •Foundations •Environmental Groups •School Districts •Business Community 13 Home for All Resolutions Adopted Resolutions Upcoming Presentations •Cities •Brisbane •Burlingame •Menlo Park •Colma •San Bruno •San Carlos •South San Francisco •County of San Mateo •Cities •Belmont •East Palo Alto •Half Moon Bay •Hillsborough •Pacifica •Portola Valley •Redwood City •San Mateo •C/CAG Home for All Resolution The City of Burlingame commits to continue to work with other jurisdictions in the County to address the housing crisis on a regional basis, including through ongoing support of the Home for All San Mateo County Initiative. STRATEGIC PLAN SUMMARY 2017-2019 APRIL NOVEMBER OUR VISION An incubator for sharing INFORMATION, IMAGINATION, and INNOVATION OUR MISSION Burlingame Public Library. awaken your CURIOSITY. spark your CREATIVITY. strengthen your CONNECTIONS. Goal A: Provide engaging, customized experiences Goal B: Build inclusive community connections Goal C: Foster a wide range of literacy and life skills Goal D: Listen to our community & share our stories Goal E: Enable our staff members to thrive, grow and be deeply engaged in realizing our vision and mission Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 1/17/17 Burlingame City Council January 3, 2017 Unapproved Minutes 1 BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL Unapproved Minutes Regular Meeting on January 3, 2017 1. CALL TO ORDER A duly noticed regular meeting of the Burlingame City Council was held on the above date in t he City Hall Council Chambers. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG The pledge of allegiance was led by Ken Putnam. 3. ROLL CALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Beach, Brownrigg, Colson, Keighran, Ortiz MEMBERS ABSENT: None 4. REPORT OUT FROM CLOSED SESSION City Attorney reported that direction was given but no reportable action was taken. 5. UPCOMING EVENTS Mayor Ortiz reviewed the upcoming events taking place in the City. 6. PRESENTATIONS a. PRESENTATION OF PEACE OFFICER STANDARDS AND TRAINING EXECUTIVE CERTIFICATE TO POLICE CHIEF Manuel Alvarez from the California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (“POST”) stated that the Commission sets the standards for police officer and dispatcher hiring and training across the state. Mr. Alvarez discussed the fact that training is not mandated for chiefs or sheriffs but that Chief Wollman took the 80 hour optional course. Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 1/17/17 Burlingame City Council January 3, 2017 Unapproved Minutes 2 Mr. Alvarez presented Chief Wollman with the POST executive certificate. Congratulations to Chief Wollman on earning his executive certificate. 7. PUBLIC COMMENT Burlingame resident Ken Putnam asked Council to consider density around downtown Burlingame in the updates to the general plan. 8. CONSENT CALENDAR City Attorney Kane in compliance with SB 1436 reviewed consent item 8f that amended the City Manager’s employment agreement to provide a salary increase of 3%. Mayor Ortiz asked the Councilmembers and the public if they wished to remove any item from the Consent Calendar. Vice Mayor Brownrigg pulled item 8e. Councilmember Keighran made a motion to approve 8a, 8b, 8c, 8d, 8f, 8g and 8h; seconded by Councilmember Beach. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. a. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES DECEMBER 19, 2016 City Clerk Hassel-Shearer requested Council’s approval of City Council Meeting Minutes for December 19, 2016. b. CONFIRMATION OF THE MAYOR’S COUNCIL ASSIGNMENTS FOR 2017 City Clerk Hassel-Shearer requested Council’s approval of the Mayor’s Council Assignments for 2017. c. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION APPOINTING BARBARA A. DILLION AS AN INTERIM EMPLOYEE UNDER CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 21221(h) City Manager Goldman asked Council to adopt Resolution Number 1-2017. d. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AWARDING A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO MARINA MECHANICAL FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT HVAC IMPORVEMENTS, CITY PROJECT NO. 84330, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT DPW Murtuza asked Council to adopt Resolution Number 2-2017. Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 1/17/17 Burlingame City Council January 3, 2017 Unapproved Minutes 3 e. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AWARDING A CONTRACT WITH IPS GROUP, INC., FOR THE PROCUREMENT AND INSTALLATION OF SMART PARKING METERS IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA, CITY PROJECT NO. 84410, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT DPW Murtuza asked Council to adopt Resolution Number 3-2017. Vice Mayor Brownrigg stated he pulled this item to inform the public that the City would be installing smart meters in the downtown business districts. He stated that these meters would be put on streets and not in parking lots. He explained that the City was researching different options for parking lots such as pay boxes. Vice Mayor Brownrigg stated that one of his main concerns was the 13 cent transaction fee for credit cards. He stated that this was a large overhead when one took into consideration the cost of parking. He asked what assurances staff had that the City was receiving the best deal in respect to the transaction fee. DPW Murtuza stated that staff vetted the credit card fees associated with all companies that submitted proposals. He stated that the costs were very comparable across the board. He explained that a majority of the cities use the same vendors for credit card fees. He stated that if credit card usage gets higher the City can renegotiate their contract and rates. Vice Mayor Brownrigg asked if San Francisco was paying the same rate. DPW Murtuza stated that he hasn’t talked to San Francisco about this but that he knows their vendor and the rates are the same. Vice Mayor Brownrigg asked how staff came up with the suggested list of streets for smart meter installation. DPW Murtuza stated that these are the streets in the two downtown areas. Councilmember Keighran asked about the timeline for when DPW Murtuza would bring back options for meters in the parking lots. DPW Murtuza stated that currently he does not have a timeline but that he believes this item would be brought to Council in the next couple of years. Councilmember Keighran asked if smart meters would be installed on the side streets of Broadway. DPW Murtuza replied in the negative. Vice Mayor Brownrigg stated he felt the City might be putting in too many meters. He explained that with respect to Broadway, as staff stated in the report, the City may lose money on Broadway meters if a majority of people use credit cards. He asked if the Broadway merchants asked for smart meters and knew that parking rates may need to be raised as a result of the high credit card transaction fee. DPW Murtuza replied in the affirmative. Councilmember Colson talked about the fact that outside the scope of the parking meters, IPS’ proposal stated that they would work with the City to set up meters that would be used as fundraising tools for a charity of the City’s choosing. She stated that this was something the City should look into as it might be a good way to raise funds for organizations like Call Primrose. Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 1/17/17 Burlingame City Council January 3, 2017 Unapproved Minutes 4 Vice Mayor Brownrigg made a motion to adopt Resolution Number 2-2017; seconded by Councilmember Keighran. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. f. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AMENDMENT OF THE CITY MANAGER’S EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE A SALARY INCREASE OF 3% City Attorney Kane asked Council to adopt Resolution Number 4-2017. g. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXPENDITURES FOR THE CODE ENFORCEMENT FUNCTION City Attorney Kane asked Council to adopt Resolution Number 5-2017. h. APPROVAL OF THE PURCHASE OF MAX SOLUTIONS FIELD SCHEDULING SOFTWARE Parks and Recreation Director Glomstad requested Council’s approval of the purchase of Max Solutions Field Scheduling Software. 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS a. PUBLIC HEARING AND INTRODUCTION OF AN ORDINANCE REZONING PROPERTY FROM R-4 (HIGH DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) TO CAR (CALIFORNIA DRIVE AUTO ROW) AND CONSIDERATION OF A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO DESIGNATE PROPERTY FROM R-4 INCENTIVE DISTRICT TO CALIFORNIA DRIVE MIXED USE DISTRICT; A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA); DESIGN REVIEW; AND A VESTING TENATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR A NEW AUTOMOBILE SERVICE FACILITY AT AN EXISTING AUTOMOBILE DEALERSHIP ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 85 CALIFORNIA DRIVE CDD Meeker presented the staff report concerning the introduction of an ordinance rezoning property and considering a general plan amendment. He stated that the applicant, Putnam, is proposing to construct a new service facility at its existing automobile dealership at 85 California Drive. He explained that in order to accommodate the new service facility, a portion of the attached property owned by the Putnam automobile group, would need to be rezoned from R-4 to CAR. He showed the property lines and how a portion of Putnam’s property is currently zoned R-4. He explained that this piece of property does not have any structures on it and is currently being utilized as a car lot. CDD Meeker further stated that if this property was rezoned from R-4 to CAR it would still allow residential units above the ground floor. Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 1/17/17 Burlingame City Council January 3, 2017 Unapproved Minutes 5 Councilmember Beach asked if CAR zoning allowed for other retail uses besides automobile on the ground floor. CDD Meeker stated that it would under the conditional use permit. Mayor Ortiz asked the City Clerk to read the title of the proposed ordinance. Vice Mayor Brownrigg made a motion to waive further reading and introduce the ordinance; seconded by Councilmember Colson. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. Mayor Ortiz opened the hearing for public comment. Burlingame resident Kristen Parks discussed her concern that the rezoning would take away the opportunity to create affordable housing. Ken Putnam discussed the lot and stated that it currently is used as a car lot with no plans for construction. Vice Mayor Brownrigg asked if Mr. Putnam considered developing workforce housing above the dealerships. Mr. Putnam replied that this wasn’t currently under consideration. A discussion was had as to what the permitted building height is in CAR zone and whether it would make financial sense to build housing for workforce there. Vice Mayor Brownrigg discussed the need to find ways to assist businesses whose workforce travel great distances to get to work. He stated that workforce housing was one such option. Councilmember Keighran discussed previous conversations the City had about encouraging housing above the car dealerships. She gave the example of San Francisco and the housing that was created above the dealerships on Van Ness. Councilmember Beach discussed how it is a minimal change and that CAR zoning allows for the addition of housing. She stated that workforce housing is an important conversation and was glad that the Council considered it when discussing the rezoning for this item. Vice Mayor Brownrigg made a motion to bring the proposed ordinance back at the next meeting; seconded by Councilmember Keighran. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. b. PUBLIC HEARING AND INTRODUCTION OF AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME, AMENDING TITLE 21 – HISTORIC RESOURCE PRESERVATION OF THE BURLINGAME MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING PROVISIONS DEFINING “ADAPTIVE RE-USE” AND OUTLINING PROCEDURES FOR GRANTING APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR ADAPTIVE RE-USE OF HISTORIC RESOURCES WITHIN THE CITY OF BURLINGAME CDD Meeker presented the staff report concerning a proposed ordinance amending Title 21 – Historic Resource Preservation of the Burlingame Municipal Code by adding provisions defining “Adaptive Re-Use” Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 1/17/17 Burlingame City Council January 3, 2017 Unapproved Minutes 6 and outlining procedures for granting approval of a conditional use permit for adaptive re-use of historic resources within the City of Burlingame. Mr. Meeker explained that on June 16, 2014, the City Council adopted Ordinance 1899 adding Title 21 – Historic Resources Preservation to the Code. As adopted, the ordinance establishes a historic preservation program applicable to any property deemed historic within the Burlingame Downtown Specific Plan. The program established a series of incentives available to owners of historic properties to encourage the preservation of designated structures. He explained that to date, no property owner has taken advantage of the program. The incentives include Mills Act Contract, Federal Historic Preservation Tax Incentives, use of the California Historic Building Code, Historic Variances and fee reduction. Mr. Meeker continued by explaining that as is frequently the case with historic resources, the purpose for which a structure was initially built, may not be one that is appropriate or desirable in the present setting. He added that conversion of such a structure to a use that would be permitted under current zoning regulations can often result in the need for modifications to the property that negatively impact those character-defining features that supported designation as a historic resource in the first place. Mr. Meeker explained that the proposed amendment would define Adaptive Reuse as “repurposing a designated historic resource for different uses or functions than those for which it was originally designed while retaining the original historic features of the resource.” He explained that the Conditional Use Permits process would be used to guarantee that the use qualified as an adaptive reuse. He stated that the Planning Commission considered this amendment and recommended approval. Councilmember Keighran asked if staff believed that the reason no-one had used the historic preservation ordinance yet was because of the lack of flexibility and ADA requirements. CDD Meeker responded that he believed this to be part of the problem. Vice Mayor Brownrigg stated he approved of the incentive based approach. He asked in respect to the Mills Act, if the tax incentive applied to the entire property or only the portion that was considered historic. Vice Mayor Brownrigg gave the example of the post office in Burlingame and the lot it sits on. CDD Meeker stated it wouldn’t be interpreted that broadly as the intention is only to preserve the structure that is the focus. Councilmember Colson voiced her support of the amendment stating that she had seen it used in other communities to benefit schools and historic buildings. Mayor Ortiz asked the City Clerk to read the title of the proposed ordinance. Councilmember Keighran made a motion to waive further reading and introduce the proposed ordinance; seconded by Councilmember Beach. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. Mayor Ortiz opened the public hearing for public comment. No one spoke. Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 1/17/17 Burlingame City Council January 3, 2017 Unapproved Minutes 7 Vice Mayor Brownrigg made a motion to bring back the proposed ordinance to the next meeting; seconded by Councilmember Colson. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. c. INTRODUCTION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 13.36.040 OF THE BURLINGAME MUNICIPAL CODE TO REVISE AND ESTABLISH A ‘TWO-HOUR PARKING’ RESTRICTION FROM 2:00 P.M. TO 6:00 P.M., MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY, ON CAROLAN AVENUE FROM NORTH LANE TO OAK GROVE AVENUE DPW Murtuza presented the staff report concerning a proposed ordinance that would establish a two-hour parking restriction from 2:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, along both sides of Carolan Avenue from North Lane to Oak Grove Avenue. Mr. Murtuza gave the background of the proposed ordinance, stating that the amendment originated from the concerns of students and Burlingame High School. He explained that both had expressed their concern about the lack of student parking, the inconsistent restrictions on Carolan Avenue and that students were getting cited. DPW Murtuza explained that currently, there is a two-hour parking restriction on the west side of the street from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday; and no parking restriction on the east side of the street. He stated that the amendment to change the on-street parking restrictions was the collaboration of the Police Department and Public Works. He explained that the matter was discussed at the Traffic Safety and Parking Commission meetings on October 13, 2016 and November 10, 2016. Police Chief Wollman attended both meetings and answered questions from the Commissioners. He stated that TSP Commission unanimously recommended the amendment. DPW Murtuza explained that the Police and Public Works believe that the amendment will address the needs expressed by the students and school staff, while being consistent and fair in terms of enforcing parking restrictions. He explained that the proposed change would allow students to continue parking on-street during school session and after school activities without fear of getting a parking citation. However, he stated that the amendment would continue to act as a deterrent for employees and commuters that try to park along this section of Carolan Avenue. Councilmember Colson asked for the number of on-campus parking spaces at Burlingame High School. DPW Murtuza stated that there are 1,421 students with 700 eligible to drive and 110 parking spots with 80 reserved for staff. He added that there are 126 parking spots on Carolan Avenue. Councilmember Colson stated that these numbers highlight the problem and that the amendment should help to alleviate the issue. As well, she stated that the BHS athletic department will need to work with students who drive to school on the day of away games, so that they can move their car before leaving. DPW Murtuza stated that the school liaison will be working with the school on these issues. As well, he stated that they had not received any complaints about students parking in the neighborhoods. Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 1/17/17 Burlingame City Council January 3, 2017 Unapproved Minutes 8 Councilmember Beach asked if the TSP Commission discussed the proposed ordinance’s impact on traffic and pedestrian safety. As well, she asked if TSP Commission had discussed the environmental impact and student health factors associated with the proposed ordinance. DPW Murtuza stated that TSP Commission always considers traffic and pedestrian safety but that the other issues that Councilmember Beach discussed were outside the scope of TSP Commission. City Attorney Kane added that the proposed ordinance does not rise to a level that requires a CEQA analysis. Councilmember Beach stated that what she wanted was a discussion/analysis of the benefits of a parking program versus eliminating parking restrictions in the BHS neighborhood. She stated that she wondered if it would reduce the amount of parking in that area and whether it would help encourage more students to seek other forms of transportation to school. City Manager Goldman responded to Councilmember Beach’s concern about other forms of transportation by stating that in her regular meetings with Superintendent Skelly, he discussed his interest in increasing biking to the high school with bike paths and bike racks. Vice Mayor Brownrigg asked if the road diet for Carolan would preserve all the parking spots on Carolan. DPW Murtuza replied in the affirmative. Councilmember Keighran asked if parking permits were originally considered in that area. DPW Murtuza replied in the affirmative but stated that after studying this option it was not recommended. Mayor Ortiz asked the City Clerk to read the title of the proposed Ordinance. Councilmember Keighran made a motion to waive further reading and introduce the proposed ordinance; seconded by Vice Mayor Brownrigg. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. Mayor Ortiz opened the public hearing. No one spoke. Councilmember Colson thanked the Police Department for their efforts in ensuring traffic and pedestrian safety around the school. She made a motion to bring back the proposed ordinance at the next meeting. Councilmember Beach stated that it was the job of Council to not only look at what’s best for one group but what is best for the City. Accordingly, she stated that she was concerned that by amending the parking hours on Carolan Avenue, that the City is making it easier and more appealing for students to drive and park at school. She asked if this should be a goal of the City or if they should instead try to discourage teenagers from driving the short distance to school. She discussed potential effects of having more student drivers including an increase in traffic and greenhouse gas emissions. She stated that while the policy is addressing the concerns of the high school students, that there are bigger questions the Council should be thinking about. She stated she would like to see the TSP Commission think about a parking program or other ways to reduce the number of cars on the street. Councilmember Colson’s motion was seconded by Councilmember Keighran. Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 1/17/17 Burlingame City Council January 3, 2017 Unapproved Minutes 9 Vice Mayor Brownrigg stated he understood Councilmember Beach’s concerns. However, he stated in his opinion the City isn’t adding parking, the City is restoring parking. He explained that the City only began enforcing parking restrictions on this street as a result of the concerns raised about Caltrain commuters using the street for long term parking. Vice Mayor Brownrigg stated that the proposed ordinance would continue to deter the commuters from parking on this street, while allowing for student parking. Councilmember Beach discussed the idea that a majority of Burlingame is flat and therefore the school and City should be encouraging students to bike to school. Councilmember Colson encouraged Councilmember Beach to work directly with the school and student green clubs to see what their ideas were to encourage students to bicycle or carpool to school. Mayor Ortiz called the motion to vote. The motion passed by voice vote; 4-1 (Councilmember Beach voted against). 10. STAFF REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a. ACCEPTANCE OF THE COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2016 Finance Director Augustine presented the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (“CAFR”) for the fiscal year 2015-16. Vice Mayor Brownrigg stated that the Audit Committee (Councilmember Colson and himself) wanted to introduce this item in part because of the long discussion that recently occurred about City bookkeeping. As well, he stated that in reviewing the CAFR it is clear that while the City has made good investments that there are significant expenses ahead. Vice Mayor Brownrigg stated that what the Audit Committee wanted to share with the Council and the community was the profound thumbs up that the outside auditors gave the Finance Department. Councilmember Colson discussed how the City’s new auditors, Maze & Associates, were well versed in government auditing and therefore congratulated the City on receiving the high rating. Finance Director Augustine thanked the Audit Committee and conducted a brief review of the CAFR explaining what was in each section of the report. In looking at the Financial Highlights in the General Fund she stated that general fund revenues saw a 6.86% increase over the prior year. She stated that property taxes were up 5.8% and Transient Occupancy Tax was up 10%. She stated that most of these increases were anticipated. Vice Mayor Brownrigg asked about the $18 million being transferred out of the General Fund. Finance Director Augustine stated that a majority of it was going to CIP funds. She stated that approximately $6 million went to debt service. Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 1/17/17 Burlingame City Council January 3, 2017 Unapproved Minutes 10 Mayor Ortiz opened the item up for public comment. No one spoke. Councilmember Keighran thanked Vice Mayor Brownrigg, Councilmember Colson and the Finance Department for their hard work on this item. Councilmember Beach thanked Vice Mayor Brownrigg and Councilmember Colson for their hard work and stated that as a result of their financial backgrounds they were the right individuals for the Audit Committee. Mayor Ortiz asked if there was any specific mention about Proposition 218 and the City’s compliance with Proposition 218 in the CAFR. Vice Mayor Brownrigg stated that it was his understanding that this wasn’t the purview of the audit. Finance Director Augustine stated that the auditors do check for general compliance with regulations and tax law but only to the extent that there was a material discrepancy in reporting of which there was none. Mayor Ortiz made a cautionary statement about the TOT and how it had doubled since 2011. He reminded the public that the City needed to be cautious with its funds as a down turn in the economy could happen again. Councilmember Colson discussed the analysis in the CAFR that the pension liability increased by $5.2 million. She stated that this wasn’t a result of the City not paying down its pension liabilities but rather the liability is influenced by a number of factors including the actual investment returns the City receives from CalPERS as well as the assumed rate of investment CalPERS believes it will receive in the future. She stated that right now CalPERS has about a 7.5% investment return assumption but if that is moved to 8.5% or down to 6.5% the liabilities move by about twenty million dollars. She stated that there is discussion right now at CalPERS about reducing the assumed rate of investment return to 6.5% which would more accurately reflect what they have been investing. She stated that if they do so then the pension liability is going to jump to about $64 million. She stated that this is an important number for the City to watch. Vice Mayor Brownrigg agreed with Councilmember Colson and stated that the forecast had already been reduced to 7% and he stated that this would be discussed in the upcoming budget cycle. He stated that these are big issues that the City will need to consider. Finance Director Augustine stated that the sensitivity analysis that Councilmember Colson discussed is note 10 in the CAFR. City Manager Goldman stated that she believed CalPERS had already taken some of the steps to reduce the rate. Councilmember Keighran made a motion to accept the CAFR; seconded by Vice Mayor Brownrigg. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 1/17/17 Burlingame City Council January 3, 2017 Unapproved Minutes 11 b. DISCUSSION OF COMMERCIAL LINKAGE FEE AND RESIDENTIAL HOUSING IMPACT FEE NEXUS STUDIES Planning Manager Kevin Gardiner presented the staff report on commercial linkage fee and residential housing impact fee nexus studies. He stated that this was the first opportunity for the City Council to consider housing impact fees as a tool to support affordable workforce housing. Planning Manager Gardiner explained that as part of the San Mateo County “21 Elements” multi- jurisdictional effort, a Commercial Linkage Fee Nexus Study and Residential Impact Fee Nexus Study was prepared for the City. Mr. Gardiner stated that included in the staff report are tables that outline different municipalities’ decisions on using commercial linkage and/or housing impact fees. Mr. Gardiner introduced Sujata Srivastava a Principal from Strategic Economics, to present on the studies. Sujata Srivastava introduced the topic by providing context on where housing impact fees and commercial linkage fees fit in the overall framework of how typical jurisdictions in San Mateo County provide affordable housing. She explained that it is important to distinguish that the fees are used to create workforce housing and not senior housing or homeless shelters. She explained that pursuant to the California Mitigation Act, the nexus study is required and must show the relation between the new development and the impact that it has on demand for affordable housing. She stated that the theory behind commercial linkage fees is that when new commercial space opens there is a need for new workers which creates a need for affordable workforce housing. She stated that the housing impact fee is something that has become utilized by more local jurisdictions because of court decisions that made it difficult to use inclusionary zoning and as a response to the decline of redevelopment housing. She stated that the theory behind housing impact fees is that when new housing units are developed, there becomes a need for more commercial development (grocery stores, coffee shops, etc) which creates a need for new workers and thereby creates a need for affordable workforce housing. She explained that in San Mateo County they measure the affordability gap of what households can afford to buy or rent and the cost of building a new housing unit. She stated that the gap ranged between $280,000 for very low income to $175,000 for moderate income units. Ms. Srivastava went on to explain that in developing recommended fees for Burlingame, they compiled a financial feasibility analysis, looked at existing permits and impact fees (building permit, road, storm drain school, etc) and compared fees to other cities. Councilmember Keighran asked about the current $17 per square foot fee that the report states the City has and asked what that fee includes. Mr. Gardiner and Ms Sirvastava stated that they would need to get back to her on the specifics of that number. Mr. Gardiner added that the fee would include building, permits, school and traffic fees. Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 1/17/17 Burlingame City Council January 3, 2017 Unapproved Minutes 12 Councilmember Keighran asked how this fee compared to other cities. Ms. Sirvastava stated that cities differ. She stated that there really isn’t a hard and fast rule on what the fee would be. She gave the example that some cities include art or parks and recreation fees. Councilmember Keighran stated that this makes it hard to compare fees between cities. She stated she wanted to know what the average fee is in comparison to other cities. Mr. Gardiner stated that staff would bring back a chart comparing the fees for the Council. Councilmember Keighran asked if single family attached homes as defined in the report are townhouses. Mr. Gardiner replied in the affirmative. Councilmember Colson asked if they implemented a fee what would the demarcation be to determine what projects that are already in the pipeline would need to pay a linkage fee. City Attorney Kane stated that staff would review an appropriate point in a development’s progress to define as the cutoff. Councilmember Colson asked how the funds from the fees are invested and utilized. CDD Meeker stated that they would be placed in an impact fee account and would be limited in usage to the provision of affordable housing. City Attorney Kane stated it is limited to the purpose of supporting workforce housing but that some cities are looking at hybrid models where they are used for retention of existing stock. She stated it would need to be analyzed carefully to ensure that the City is in compliance with the law. Councilmember Keighran asked if the funds could be used for rent subsidies. City Attorney Kane stated that she would need to review the law. Councilmember Beach stated her appreciation for the regional approach to the study. She asked if some cities considered giving incentives to developers who will be paying these fees. CDD Meeker stated that giving incentives to increase density is something that the City already has the ability to do. However, if the City wanted to incentivize paying the prevailing wage, that was something that staff could look into. City Attorney Kane stated that the City must be careful in maintaining the integrity of the nexus. Vice Mayor Brownrigg stated that the reports provided a lot of dense information. He discussed the 800,000 square foot development at 301 Airport and stated that if the City used Ms. Srivastava’s numbers, the City would have received $16 million in fees. He asked the staff to develop estimates of how much capital for affordable housing would accrue if the City adopted the recommended fees. As well, he asked for an in depth explanation of how the funds could be utilized. Councilmember Keighran stated that she was concerned about small developments. She asked staff to research minimum thresholds and sliding scales for fees. Councilmember Keighran discussed the fact that the recommended fees for Burlingame were higher than the impact fees of many cities. She asked staff to review San Carlos’ impact fees and find out if the city had seen a decrease or increase in development and what funding San Carlos amassed for affordable housing. Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 1/17/17 Burlingame City Council January 3, 2017 Unapproved Minutes 13 Vice Mayor Brownrigg asked if an individual turned two units into four would they need to pay a housing impact fee. Planning Manager Gardiner replied in the affirmative stating that the individual would be paying a housing impact fee based on the net difference. Mayor Ortiz opened the item for public comment. Burlingame resident Leora Tanjuatco from the Housing Leadership Council thanked the Council for taking on this issue. Burlingame resident Cynthia Cornell discussed her support for higher commercial linkage fees and stated that she would like the Council to consider lower housing impact fees. Mayor Ortiz closed public comment. Councilmember Keighran discussed her concern that the fees were high for residential and low for commercial. She stated that she would have done it the other way, as it is commercial development that is bringing people to the Peninsula. As well, she asked if there were cities that had just done commercial fees and not residential. She stated she didn’t want to discourage the building of housing and therefore would like to see more of a focus on the commercial linkage fees. Councilmember Colson agreed with Councilmember Keighran stating that she could see the linkage between commercial development and the need for workforce housing. However, she stated that the residential nexus study made assumptions that she didn’t find as compelling. Accordingly, she stated she supported the commercial linkage fees. Vice Mayor Brownrigg stated that the recommended $40 a square foot residential impact fee in comparison to other cities fee of $17 to $20 a square foot was too high. However, he stated that housing developers should not get a pass but instead an incentive structure should be constructed. He discussed the idea that if a certain percentage of the units in the development were below market rate, the fee could be waived. Councilmember Beach stated that while it wasn’t a direct nexus the City also needs to be mindful of transportation needs. Mayor Ortiz summarized the Council’s discussion by stating that all members agreed that the City needed to pursue this issue and should set fees in a way that does not discourage housing development. He asked that staff come back to Council with findings on the size of funds collected in other cities, options the City has for spending those funds, sliding tiers for smaller projects and larger fees for commercial versus residential. CDD Meeker replied that staff would work on answering these questions. Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 1/17/17 Burlingame City Council January 3, 2017 Unapproved Minutes 14 c. IMPLEMENTATION OF A PILOT PROGRAM TO INTRODUCE A 15 MPH SCHOOL SPEED LIMIT ALONG QUESADA WAY BETWEEN TROUSDALE DRIVE AND DAVIS DRIVE DPW Murtuza presented the staff report on the implementation of a pilot program to introduce a 15 MPH school zone speed limit along Quesada Way between Trousdale Drive and Davis Drive. He stated that the California Vehicle Code authorizes cities to adopt a 15 MPH prima facie limit in a residential area. He stated that the Traffic Safety and Parking Commission discussed the pilot program and recommended its implementation. DPW Murtuza added that Burlingame School District supported the program. Councilmember Beach asked if the 500 foot limitation had to end at Davis Drive. DPW Murtuza stated he would see if it could be extended further. Mayor Ortiz opened the item up for public comment. No one spoke. Councilmember Colson made a motion to approve the pilot program; seconded by Vice Mayor Brownrigg. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. 11. COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND ACTIVITIES REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS Council reported on various events and committee meetings they each attended on behalf of the City. 12. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS There were no future agenda items. 13. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS There were no acknowledgements. 14. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Ortiz adjourned the meeting at 9:48 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Meaghan Hassel-Shearer City Clerk 1 STAFF REPORT AGENDA NO: MEETING DATE: January 17, 2017 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: January 17, 2017 From: Syed Murtuza, Director of Public Works – (650) 558-7230 Kathleen Kane, City Attorney – (650) 558-7204 Subject: Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 13.36.040 of the Burlingame Municipal Code to Revise and Establish a ‘Two-Hour Parking’ Restriction from 2:00 P.M. to 6:00 P.M., Monday Through Friday, on Carolan Avenue from North Lane to Oak Grove Avenue RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached ordinance amending Chapter 13.36.040 of the Burlingame Municipal Code to revise and establish a ‘Two-Hour Parking’ Restriction from 2:00 P.M. to 6:00 P.M., Monday through Friday, on Carolan Avenue from North Lane to Oak Grove Avenue by: 1. Adopting the proposed ordinance. 2. Directing the City Clerk to publish a summary of the ordinance within 15 days of adoption. BACKGROUND Carolan Avenue between Oak Grove Avenue and North Lane is a two-lane roadway with on- street parking on both sides of the street. Currently, there is a two-hour parking restriction on the west side of the street, from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday; and no parking restriction on the east side of the street. The current parking restriction was initially set to be a deterrent for long-term parking by commuters and downtown employees. Historically, the on- street parking in this area has been primarily used by Burlingame High School students. Recently, a high school student and school staff member requested changes be made to the two- hour parking restriction to allow for more accessibility to students. During a review of the parking conditions, signage, and enforcement practice, it was discovered that although current enforcement practice for this location was favorable to student parking, it was not consistent with the signage. DISCUSSION Staff reviewed the current signage and parking conditions, and met with school officials to try to better understand and address their concerns. After a comprehensive review of available options, staff initially identified a permit parking program to address the matter. Ordinance Adoption for Amending Two-Hour January 17, 2017 Parking Restriction along Carolan Avenue 2 The matter was discussed by the Traffic Safety and Parking Commission (TSPC) at their October 13, 2016, and November 10, 2016 meetings. At both meetings Police Chief Eric Wollman appeared before the commission and answered their questions. After the October TSPC meeting and based on the discussion by the commission, it became evident that this option would require significant staffing resources and create logistical issues to manage a permit program. These concerns included the number of permits issued, potential cost to students, permit abuse, and whether the school or the City should issue the permits. In order to more effectively address the problem, both Police and Public Works staff believe that changing the on-street parking restriction to 2:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. would address the needs expressed by the students and school staff while being consistent and fair in terms of enforcing the parking restrictions. Additionally, this restriction would also be applied to the east side of Carolan Avenue to simplify the restriction limits for both the public and the enforcement staff. At the November 10, 2016 meeting, the TSPC discussed the matter for the second time and unanimously supported the recommendation to the City Council. Based on engineering analysis, public input, and recommendation from the TSPC, staff is requesting that the City Council adopt the attached ordinance to revise the two-hour parking restriction along Carolan Avenue. The proposed change would allow the students to continue to park on-street during school session and after school activities without fear of getting a parking citation, while acting as a deterrent for employees and commuters trying to park along this section of Carolan Avenue. After the implementation, staff will continue monitoring the parking conditions, and may propose additional changes as deemed necessary. FISCAL IMPACT There will be minimal costs associated with making and installing parking restriction signage, which will be absorbed within the Public Works Department’s operation budget. Exhibits:  Ordinance  Draft Revised Chapter 13.36.040 of the Burlingame Municipal Code  TSPC Staff Report dated October 13, 2016  TSPC Presentations dated November 10, 2016  Location Map ORDINANCE NO. ____ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AMENDING CHAPTER 13.36.040 OF THE BURLINGAME MUNICIPAL CODE TO REVISE AND ESTABLISH A ‘TWO-HOUR PARKING’ RESTRICTION FROM 2:00 P.M. TO 6:00 P.M., MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY, ALONG CAROLAN AVENUE BETWEEN OAK GROVE AVENUE AND NORTH LANE The CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF BURLINGAME does hereby ordain as follows: Section 1. Factual Background and Findings. WHEREAS, the City has received requests from Burlingame High School staff and students who park along Carolan Avenue regarding the limitations to the two-hour parking restrictions on the west side of the street; and WHEREAS, the east side of Carolan Avenue, between Oak Grove Avenue and North Lane, currently has no parking restrictions; WHEREAS, the west side of Carolan Avenue, between Oak Grove Avenue and North Lane, currently has a two-hour parking restriction, 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday; and WHEREAS, the Public Works and Police Departments reviewed the current parking restrictions and determined that a revision to the parking restriction along Carolan Avenue, between Oak Grove Avenue and North Lane, would address the parking concerns of the Burlingame High School students and staff; and WHEREAS, on October 13, 2016, and on November 10, 2016, the Traffic Safety and Parking Commission (TSPC) discussed this matter; and at the conclusion of the November meeting, the TSPC unanimously recommended the revision of the on-street parking restriction from 2:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, along both sides of the above mentioned section of Carolan Avenue. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 2. The City Council hereby amends ‘Chapter 13.36.040 Two-hour parking’ of the Burlingame Municipal Code as follows: Section (9) of Chapter 13.36.040 shall be amended to read as follows: “Carolan Avenue, east side, from one hundred (100) feet northerly of Toyon Drive to four hundred sixty (460) feet northerly of Toyon Drive; and east side, from Cadillac Way to Broadway” Sub-Chapter (c), Section (1) of Chapter 13.36.040 shall be added to read as follows: (c) 2:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.: (1) “Carolan Avenue, from Oak Grove Avenue to North Lane” Section 3. The Public Works Director is hereby directed to install required parking signs and to take all other necessary actions to amend this parking restriction along Carolan Avenue, between Oak Grove Avenue and North Lane. Section 4. The City Clerk is directed to publish this ordinance in the manner required by law. _________________________________ Ricardo Ortiz, Mayor I, Meaghan Hassel-Shearer, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing ordinance was introduced at a public hearing conducted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 3rd day of January, 2017, and adopted thereafter at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 17th day of January, 2017, by the following vote: AYES: Councilmembers: NOES: Councilmembers: ABSENT: Councilmembers: __________________________________ Meaghan Hassel-Shearer, City Clerk DRAFT REVISED CHAPTER 13.36.040 OF THE BURLINGAME CODE (WITH EDITS) 13.36.040 Two-hour parking. It is unlawful for the driver of any vehicle to park such vehicle, unless elsewhere in this title otherwise provided, for a longer period than two (2) hours between the hours designated any day, excepting Sundays and holidays, upon any part of the following streets, or portions of streets: (a) 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.: (1) Adrian Road, west side, one hundred fifty-five (155) feet southerly from the southeast end of the curb return of David Road; (2) Anita Road, west side, from Peninsula Avenue one hundred and forty-five (145) feet north toward Bayswater Avenue; (3) Bayswater Avenue from El Camino Real to Park Road; south side, from California Drive to the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way; (4) Bellevue Avenue, except the south side from Primrose Road to Almer Road; (5) Burlingame Avenue, from Myrtle to Carolan Avenue; south side from Occidental to El Camino Real; (6) California Drive, west side, from Carmelita Avenue to Palm Drive; from Burlingame Avenue to Peninsula Avenue; from Oak Grove Avenue four hundred (400) feet northwards to 755 California Drive, except areas designated for thirty (30) minute parking; (7) Capuchino Avenue from four hundred (400) feet southerly of the centerline of Broadway to Lincoln Avenue; (8) Carmelita Avenue, south side, from El Camino Real to Chula Vista Avenue; (9) Carolan Avenue, west side, from Oak Grove Avenue to Burlingame Avenue; east side, from one hundred (100) feet northerly of Toyon Drive to four hundred sixty (460) feet northerly of Toyon Drive; and east side, from Cadillac Way to Broadway; (10) Chapin Avenue, from Chapin Lane to El Camino Real; (11) Chula Vista Avenue from the centerline of Broadway to four hundred ten feet (410) southerly of the centerline of Broadway; (12) Douglas Avenue; (13) East Lane, east side, from Burlingame Avenue to Howard Avenue; (14) El Camino Real service road between Dufferin Avenue and Murchison Drive; (15) Howard Avenue, south side, from Crescent Avenue to El Camino Real and from California Drive to the Southern Pacific Railroad right -of-way; (16) Laguna Avenue from two hundred eighty feet (280) southerly to five hundred ten (510) feet northerly of the centerline of Broa dway; (17) Lorton Avenue, west side, from Bayswater Avenue to Howard Avenue; east side, from Howard Avenue one hundred twenty (120) feet south toward Bayswater and forty (40) feet north toward Burlingame Avenue; (18) Magnolia, west side, from Trousdale Drive to Plaza Lane; (19) North Carolan Avenue with three (3) parking spaces along the lot front of 1361 North Carolan Avenue; (20) Occidental Avenue, from El Camino Real to Ralston Avenue; (21) Paloma Avenue from three hundred ten (310) feet southerly of the centerline of Broadway to Lincoln Avenue; (22) Park Road, except the west side, from Howard Avenue to Bayswater Avenue; (23) Primrose Road, west side, from Howard Avenue to El Camino Real; (24) Ralston Avenue, from Occidental Avenue to El Camino Real; (25) Rollins Road from ninety (90) feet northerly of Toyon Drive to four hundred sixty (460) feet northerly of Toyon Drive; (26) South Lane, both sides; (27) Trousdale Drive, north side, from the curb return of Trousdale Drive and California Drive to ninety (90) feet west of said curb return; (28) Trousdale Drive, south side, from the curb return of Marco Polo Way to forty (40) feet east of said curb return; (29) Marco Polo Way, east side, from the curb return of Trousdale Drive to forty (40) feet south of said curb return; (30) Crescent Avenue, both sides, from the curb return of Ralston Avenue to the curb return of Howard Avenue; (31) 1600 block of Howard Avenue, both sides, from the curb return of Crescent Avenue to the curb return of Occidental Avenue; (32) Newlands Avenue, both sides; (33) Cypress Avenue, both sides, from El Camino Real to twenty (20) feet southerly of the centerline of Central Avenue (between the addresses of 1500 and 5141); (34) Carol Avenue, both sides, from El Camino Real to Barroilhet Avenue; and (35) East Carol Avenue, both sides, from Carol Avenue to Barroilhet Avenue. (b) 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m.: (1) Carmelita Avenue, north side, between Chula Vista Avenue and El Camino Real; (2) Magnolia Avenue, east side, from three hundred (300) feet north of the center line of Trousdale Drive to Murchison Drive; (c) 2:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m.: (1) Carolan Avenue, between Oak Grove Avenue and North Lane. DRAFT REVISED CHAPTER 13.36.040 OF THE BURLINGAME CODE 13.36.040 Two-hour parking. It is unlawful for the driver of any vehicle to park such vehicle, unless elsewhere in this title otherwise provided, for a longer period than two (2) hours between the hours designated any day, excepting Sundays and holidays, upon any part of the following streets, or portions of streets: (a) 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.: (1) Adrian Road, west side, one hundred fifty-five (155) feet southerly from the southeast end of the curb return of David Road; (2) Anita Road, west side, from Peninsula Avenue one hundred and forty-five (145) feet north toward Bayswater Avenue; (3) Bayswater Avenue from El Camino Real to Park Road; south side, from California Drive to the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way; (4) Bellevue Avenue, except the south side from Primrose Road to Almer Road; (5) Burlingame Avenue, from Myrtle to Carolan Avenue; south side from Occidental to El Camino Real; (6) California Drive, west side, from Carmelita Avenue to Palm Drive; from Burlingame Avenue to Peninsula Avenue; from Oak Grove Avenue four hundred (400) feet northwards to 755 California Drive, except areas designated for thirty (30) minute parking; (7) Capuchino Avenue from four hundred (400) feet southerly of the centerline of Broadway to Lincoln Avenue; (8) Carmelita Avenue, south side, from El Camino Real to Chula Vista Avenue; (9) Carolan Avenue, from one hundred (100) feet northerly of Toyon Drive to four hundred sixty (460) feet northerly of Toyon Drive; and east side, from Cadillac Way to Broadway; (10) Chapin Avenue, from Chapin Lane to El Camino Real; (11) Chula Vista Avenue from the centerline of Broadway to four hundred ten feet (410) southerly of the centerline of Broadway; (12) Douglas Avenue; (13) East Lane, east side, from Burlingame Avenue to Howard Avenue; (14) El Camino Real service road between Dufferin Avenue and Murchison Drive; (15) Howard Avenue, south side, from Crescent Avenue to El Camino Real and from California Drive to the Southern Pacific Railroad right -of-way; (16) Laguna Avenue from two hundred eighty feet (280) southerly to five hundred ten (510) feet northerly of the centerline of Broadway; (17) Lorton Avenue, west side, from Bayswater Avenue to Howard Avenue; east side, from Howard Avenue one hundred twenty (120) feet south toward Bayswater and forty (40) feet north toward Burlingame Avenue; (18) Magnolia, west side, from Trousdale Drive to Plaza Lane; (19) North Carolan Avenue with three (3) parking spaces along the lot front of 1361 North Carolan Avenue; (20) Occidental Avenue, from El Camino Real to Ralston Avenue; (21) Paloma Avenue from three hundred ten (310) feet southerly of the centerline of Broadway to Lincoln Avenue; (22) Park Road, except the west side, from Howard Avenue to Bayswater Avenue; (23) Primrose Road, west side, from Howard Avenue to El Camino Real; (24) Ralston Avenue, from Occidental Avenue to El Camino Real; (25) Rollins Road from ninety (90) feet northerly of Toyon Drive to four hundred sixty (460) feet northerly of Toyon Drive; (26) South Lane, both sides; (27) Trousdale Drive, north side, from the curb return of Trousdale Drive and California Drive to ninety (90) feet west of said curb return; (28) Trousdale Drive, south side, from the curb return of Marco Polo Way to forty (40) feet east of said curb return; (29) Marco Polo Way, east side, from the curb return of Trousdale Drive to forty (40) feet south of said curb return; (30) Crescent Avenue, both sides, from the curb return of Ralston Avenue to the curb return of Howard Avenue; (31) 1600 block of Howard Avenue, both sides, from the curb return of Crescent Avenue to the curb return of Occidental Avenue; (32) Newlands Avenue, both sides; (33) Cypress Avenue, both sides, from El Camino Real to twenty (20) feet southerly of the centerline of Central Avenue (between the addresses of 1500 and 5141); (34) Carol Avenue, both sides, from El Camino Real to Barroilhet Avenue; and (35) East Carol Avenue, both sides, from Carol Avenue to Barroilhet Avenue. (b) 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m.: (1) Carmelita Avenue, north side, between Chula Vista Avenue and El Camino Real; (2) Magnolia Avenue, east side, from three hundred (300) feet north of the center line of Trousdale Drive to Murchison Drive; (c) 2:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m.: (1) Carolan Avenue, between Oak Grove Avenue and North Lane. 1 STAFF REPORT AGENDA NO: MEETING DATE: October 13, 2016 To: Traffic Safety & Parking Commission Date: October 13, 2016 From: Eric Wollman, Chief of Police – (650) 777-4123 Subject: Item 6.b - Consideration of Adding Carolan Avenue to the Residential Permit Parking Program RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Traffic Safety and Parking Commission review the existing parking situation on Carolan Avenue between North Lane and Oak Grove, and concur with the staff’s recommendation to add this area to the City’s Residential Parking Permit Program. BACKGROUND Presently, Carolan Avenue between North Lane and Oak Grove has 2 hour parking limit on the west side of the street. The east side of the street that fronts Burlingame High School has no restricted parking. Historically Burlingame High School students have parked on the east side of Carolan free from restrictions. This works out well for students and affords them worry free parking for their entire school day. The west side of the street has a 2 hour parking restriction. The purpose of this 2 hour restriction is to discourage Caltrain riders, downtown employees and people going to the airport from parking for long periods of time on this public street. Students also use this 2 hour zone to park during the school day. There are approximately 60 parking spaces on the west side of the street, and 40 on the east. It is very evident that most are used by students. The police department has managed the student’s parking needs, but it has recently come to the department’s attention that the current practice of enforcement is not completely consistent with the signage posted for the area. When the police parking enforcement officers do enforce the 2 hour limit, this enforcement has a major impact on the student’s, due to their inability to move their cars during school. DISCUSSION The enforcement of the 2 hours zones on the west side of Carolan is causing students to receive citations and is taking away parking spaces for the school students. To assist the school community in their parking needs, I am recommending that this area be considered for addition to the City’s Residential Parking Permit Program. To accomplish this request, 2 hour parking signs would be added to the east side of the street, and approximately 100 residential parking permits would be made available to the students of Burlingame High School. The students would be able to park on either side of Carolan for the entire school day, and the police department would Carolan Avenue Parking October 13, 2016 2 continue to enforce the 2 hour zones consistently throughout the day for other citizens needing to park and visit local businesses. The majority of this parking is needed for students. If the police continue to enforce the 2 hour zone in this area it will force students to find parking in the neighborhoods surrounding the school, which will bring over 100 additional vehicles into the neighborhoods. Since, the only property affected by the proposal is the Burlingame High School, hence it meets the requirements of two third majority support from property owners on the affected street. Staff has had initial discussions with the High School officials who have indicated strong support for the proposed approach. FISCAL IMPACT There will be staff time involved in selling the permits, and the cost of adding additional 2 hour parking signs to the east side of Carolan, which can be absorbed in the both Police and Public Works Department’s operations budgets. The cost of an annual parking permit is $53.00. Exhibits:  Residential Parking Permit Program Pamphlet  Residential Parking Permit Program Policy  Map of Residential Parking Permit Program Area CAROLAN AVENUE PARKING RESTRICTION UPDATE Traffic Safety and Parking Commission November 10, 2016 BACKGROUND At the October 13,TSPC meeting,Chief Wollman reported on a parking issue along the west side of Carolan Avenue. Staff proposed an option for the students to purchase a permit which would allow them to park along Carolan beyond the 2-hour restriction. The Commission discussed the benefits and drawbacks of such a restriction, while also taking in public comment. Charging students for the permits Number of permits to be issued Who would administer permits? Abuse of permits Students on campus for extended amount of time Preference for students who live further away Staff reviewed the Commissioner’s concerns and public comments to refine and revise the proposal. In addition to the proposal,staff will share observations and data collection efforts with the TSPC. DISCUSSION EXISTING CONDITIONS Carolan Avenue (west side):2-hour parking restriction,from Oak Grove to North Lane. Carolan Avenue (east side):No parking restrictions along Burlingame High School Frontage. Burlingame High School’s on-site parking capacity:177 parking spaces BHS’s 2016 enrollment:1,421 students,696 Seniors and Juniors. BHS students utilize the school’s on-site parking,as well as on-street parking (Carolan and Oak Grove),and the Aquatic Center’s parking lot. DISCUSSION CAROLAN ON-STREET PARKING (MORNING SURVEY) DISCUSSION CAROLAN ON-STREET PARKING (AFTERNOON SURVEY) DISCUSSION CAROLAN ON-STREET PARKING (EVENING SURVEY) DISCUSSION CAROLAN ON-STREET PARKING (SURVEY OBSERVATIONS) Based on measured length,there is space for about 50 on-street parking spaces on the east side of Carolan.In the morning there were about 45 vehicles parked. On the west side,there is space for about 70 parking spaces.In the morning there were about 56 vehicles parked During the afternoon,about 75%of the vehicles remained from the morning period on both sides of the street. During the evening on east side of Carolan,it was determined that about 10%(5 vehicles) of vehicles parked were long-term,with 5%(3 vehicles)along the west side. Staff recommends including and revising the two-hour parking restriction on both the east and west sides of Carolan respectively.The restricted hours would be from 2 P.M.to 6 P.M.,Monday through Friday.This proposal would eliminate the Commission’s concerns regarding a new permit program,discourage long-term parking by employees and commuters,and allow BPD to enforce without bias.Staff would review the possibility of striping parking spaces to increase/maintain capacity. QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS 1 STAFF REPORT AGENDA NO: MEETING DATE: January 17, 2017 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: January 17, 2017 From: William Meeker, Community Development Director – (650) 558-7255 Subject: Adoption of an Ordinance Rezoning Property from R-4 (High Density Multi- family Residential) to CAR (California Drive Auto Row) and Adoption of Resolutions Amending the Burlingame General Plan to Designate Property from R-4 Incentive District to California Drive Mixed Use District; Making Findings Relative to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Related to a General Plan Amendment, Rezoning, and all Land Use Applications Related to a Proposed Automobile Service Facility Development; and Approval of Design Review and a Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map for a New Automobile Service Facility at an Existing Automobile Dealership on Property Located at 85 California Drive RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council take the following actions: 1. Adopt the following Resolution: “Resolution of the City Council of the City of Burlingame Finding That Approval of a Request for a General Plan Amendment, Rezoning, Design Review, and Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map for a New Automobile Service Facility at an Existing Automobile Dealership on Property Located at 85 California Drive Will Not Have a Significant Effect on the Environment as Defined in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Pursuant to the Findings Stated and Mitigation Measures Outlined in Mitigated Negative Declaration ND-595-P”. 2. Adopt the following Resolution: “Resolution of the City Council of the City of Burlingame Amending the City’s General Plan Land Use Map to Designate the Easterly 50-Feet of Lot 6, Block 13, Supplementary Map No. 1 of the Town Of Burlingame and the Easterly Ten-Feet of Assessor’s Parcel 029-242-230 (the Easterly 60-Feet, Excepting Therefrom The Easterly 50-Feet, of Lot 6, Block 13, Supplementary Map No. 1 of the Town of Burlingame) from R-4 Incentive District to California Drive Mixed Use District”. 3. Adopt the following Ordinance: “Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Burlingame Amending the City’s Zoning Map by Rezoning the Easterly 50-Feet of Lot 6, Block 13, Supplementary Map No. 1 of the Town Of Burlingame and the Easterly Ten-Feet of Assessor’s Parcel 029-242-230 (the Easterly 60-Feet, Excepting Therefrom The Easterly 85 California Drive – New Automobile Service Facility January 17, 2017 2 50-Feet, of Lot 6, Block 13, Supplementary Map No. 1 of the Town of Burlingame), from High Density Multi-Family Residential (R-4) to California Drive Auto Row (CAR)”. 4. Adopt the following Resolution: “Resolution of the City Council of the City of Burlingame Approving Applications for Design Review and Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map for a New Automobile Service Facility at an Existing Automobile Dealership on Property Located at 85 California Drive”. BACKGROUND The proposed ordinance to rezone a portion of the property at 85 California Drive was introduced by the City Council at its regular meeting of January 3, 2017. Further, the City Council conducted a public hearing to consider the proposed ordinance as well as all applications related to a proposed automobile service facility to be constructed at 85 California Drive (applications listed below). There were no changes to the proposed ordinance at introduction; therefore, the Council directed staff to bring the ordinance back for adoption on January 17, 2017. At the same time, resolutions memorializing all other aspects of the application package for the project at 85 California Drive are presented to the Council for adoption. Application Elements:  General Plan Amendment: Required to change the land use designation of a portion of the site from R-4 Incentive District to Calif ornia Drive Mixed Use District.  Mitigated Negative Declaration: A determination that with mitigation measures there will be no significant environmental effects as a result of this project.  Design Review: Required f or the new automobile service facility at an existing automobile dealership.  Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map: Required to combine four existing parcels and portions of a fifth and sixth parcel into one parcel. FISCAL IMPACT None Exhibits:  Resolution - CEQA  Resolution - General Plan Amendment  Ordinance - Rezoning  Resolution - Project Entitlements RESOLUTION NO. __________ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME FINDING THAT APPROVAL OF A REQUEST FOR A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, REZONING, DESIGN REVIEW, AND VESTING TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR A NEW AUTOMOBILE SERVICE FACILITY AT AN EXISTING AUTOMOBILE DEALERSHIP ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 85 CALIFORNIA DRIVE WILL NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT AS DEFINED IN THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA), PURSUANT TO THE FINDINGS STATED AND MITIGATION MEASURES OUTLINED IN MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION ND-595-P THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME hereby finds as follows: Section 1. On the basis of the Initial Study and the documents submitted and reviewed, and comments received and addressed by the City Council, pursuant to Mitigated Negative Declaration ND-595-P it is hereby found that that the project set forth above will have a less than significant impact upon the environment following application of all mitigation measures outlined in said environmental review document, therefore, Mitigated Negative Declaration ND-595-P, is hereby approved. Section 2. It is further directed that a certified copy of this resolution be recorded in the official records of the County of San Mateo. Ricardo Ortiz, Mayor I, Meaghan Hassel-Shearer, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 17th day of January, 2017 by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: _____________________________________ Meaghan Hassel-Shearer, City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. __________ 1 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AMENDING THE CITY’S GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP TO DESIGNATE THE EASTERLY 50-FEET OF LOT 6, BLOCK 13, SUPPLEMENTARY MAP NO. 1 OF THE TOWN OF BURLINGAME AND THE EASTERLY TEN-FEET OF ASSESSOR’S PARCEL 029-242-230 (THE EASTERLY 60-FEET, EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE EASTERLY 50-FEET, OF LOT 6, BLOCK 13, SUPPLEMENTARY MAP NO. 1 OF THE TOWN OF BURLINGAME) FROM R-4 INCENTIVE DISTRICT TO CALIFORNIA DRIVE MIXED USE DISTRICT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME hereby finds as follows: Section 1. The change is consistent with the policies of the General Plan and in particular the Land Use Element of the General Plan in that the proposal includes changing the land use designation of a portion of the property that currently contains no structures and is currently being used to store vehicles associated with the automobile dealership (Assessor’s Parcel 029-242-020 and a portion of 029-242-230) from the R-4 Incentive District to the California Drive Mixed Use District within the Downtown Specific Plan, which will bring the entire combined site into one designation and would be consistent with the adjacent California Drive Mixed Use District general plan designation; Section 2. The change in land use designation will not alter the land use patterns in the area since the area is currently being used to store vehicles and is an extension of the existing California Drive Mixed Use District; Section 3. The City of Burlingame General Plan indicates that this designation consists of the Auto Row area along California Drive between Burlingame and Peninsula Avenues dominated by automobile-related uses, and that auto showrooms, hotel, or retail uses are permitted on the ground floor, that automobile dealerships and services facilities are an important part of the City’s economy, and that the proposed service facility will continue to provide a needed service for the community, and therefore the proposed automobile service facility would be consistent with the California Drive Mixed Use District general plan designation; and Section 4. Following a duly noticed public hearing on January 3, 2017, the City Council considered the Planning Commission’s December 12, 2016 recommendation in support of amending the City’s General Plan Land Use Map to designate the Easterly 50-Feet of Lot 6, Block 13, Supplementary Map No. 1 of the Town Of Burlingame and the Easterly Ten-Feet of Assessor’s Parcel 029-242-230 (the Easterly 60-Feet, Excepting Therefrom The Easterly 50- Feet, of Lot 6, Block 13, Supplementary Map No. 1 of the Town of Burlingame) from R-4 Incentive District to California Drive Mixed Use District. RESOLUTION NO. __________ 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME THAT the City’s General Plan Land Use Map shall be amended as stated in Section 4 of this resolution. _________________________________________ Ricardo Ortiz, Mayor I, Meaghan Hassel-Shearer, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 17th day of January, 2017 by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: _____________________________________ Meaghan Hassel-Shearer, City Clerk ORDINANCE NO. __________ 1 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AMENDING THE CITY’S ZONING MAP BY REZONING THE EASTERLY 50- FEET OF LOT 6, BLOCK 13, SUPPLEMENTARY MAP NO. 1 OF THE TOWN OF BURLINGAME AND THE EASTERLY TEN-FEET OF ASSESSOR’S PARCEL 029-242-230 (THE EASTERLY 60-FEET, EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE EASTERLY 50-FEET, OF LOT 6, BLOCK 13, SUPPLEMENTARY MAP NO. 1 OF THE TOWN OF BURLINGAME), FROM HIGH DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-4) TO CALIFORNIA DRIVE AUTO ROW (CAR) The City Council of the City of Burlingame hereby ordains as follows: Division 1. Factual Background WHEREAS, on April 9, 2015, Kent Putnam, representing 1063 Bayswater LLC, filed an application with the City of Burlingame Community Development Department – Planning Division requesting approval of a new automobile service facility at an existing automobile dealership, which included rezoning a portion of the project site from High Density Multi-Family Residential (R-4) to California Drive Auto Row (CAR); and WHEREAS, the rezoning is appropriate and consistent with the intent of the Zoning Ordinance in that the project includes rezoning of a portion of the property which currently contains no structures (Assessor’s Parcel 029-242-020 and a portion of 029-242-230) from the R-4 (high density multifamily residential) to the CAR (California Drive Auto Row) zone, which will bring the entire combined site into one zoning designation and would be consistent with the proposed California Drive Mixed Use District general plan designation; and WHEREAS, the City of Burlingame Zoning code indicates that retail sales and service of automobiles is a permitted use within the CAR Zoning District and that the proposed project conforms to all development regulations for the CAR Zoning District; and WHEREAS, after considering all written and oral testimony presented at the December 12, 2016 public hearing regarding the proposed amendment, the Planning Commission voted 7-0-0-0 to recommend to the City Council, adoption of an ordinance amending the City’s zoning map as described herein; and WHEREAS, at its regular meeting of January 3, 2017, the Burlingame City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the Planning Commission’s recommendation to amend the City’s zoning map and following conclusion of the public hearing and consideration of all written and oral testimony provided during the hearing, introduced an ordinance, by title only, waiving further reading, amending the City’s zoning map as described herein. ORDINANCE NO. __________ 2 NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Division 2. The Burlingame zoning map is hereby amended as follows: Change the zoning of the Easterly 50-Feet of Lot 6, Block 13, Supplementary Map No. 1 of the Town Of Burlingame and the Easterly Ten-Feet of Assessor’s Parcel 029-242-230 (the Easterly 60-Feet, Excepting Therefrom The Easterly 50- Feet, of Lot 6, Block 13, Supplementary Map No. 1 of the Town of Burlingame), from High Density Multi-Family Residential (R-4) to California Drive Auto Row (CAR). Division 3. This ordinance, or a summary as applicable, shall be published as required by law and shall become effective 30-days thereafter. ____________________________________ Ricardo Ortiz, Mayor I, Meaghan Hassel-Shearer, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 3rd day of January, 2017, and adopted thereafter at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 17th day of January, 2017, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ___________________________________ Meaghan Hassel-Shearer, City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. __________ 1 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME APPROVING APPLICATIONS FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND VESTING TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR A NEW AUTOMOBILE SERVICE FACILITY AT AN EXISTING AUTOMOBILE DEALERSHIP ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 85 CALIFORNIA DRIVE RESOLVED, BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME THAT: WHEREAS, on April 9, 2015, Kent Putnam, representing 1063 Bayswater LLC, filed an application with the City of Burlingame Community Development Department – Planning Division requesting approval of the following requests:  General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation of a portion of the site from R-4 Incentive District to California Drive Mixed Use District;  Rezoning of a portion of a site from R-4 (high density multifamily residential) to CAR (California Drive Auto Row);  Commercial Design Review for a new automobile service facility at an existing automobile dealership;  Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map to combine four existing parcels and portions of a fifth and sixth parcel into one parcel; and WHEREAS, on February 22, 2016 the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing (environmental scoping session and design review study meeting) to review development of a new automobile service facility at an existing automobile dealership and to identify subjects to be analyzed in the project Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study (MND/IS). At that time direction was provided to the applicant regarding issues to be addressed in the project MND/IS; and WHEREAS, an MND/IS was prepared to analyze project impacts; said MND/IS was circulated for public review and comment commencing on November 23, 2016 and concluding on December 12, 2016; and WHEREAS, on December 12, 2016 the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing and voted 7-0-0-0 to recommend approval of the applicant’s requests for Design Review and Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map; and WHEREAS, on January 3, 2017, the City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider all project entitlements, at which time it reviewed and considered the staff report and all other written materials and oral testimony presented at said hearing; and WHEREAS, as a result of the oral and written testimony presented at the January 3, 2017 public hearing, as well as the analysis in the staff report, the City Council hereby makes the following findings relative to each aspect of the project application: RESOLUTION NO. 2 Commercial Design Review Findings:  The proposed project is compatible with the City’s commercial design review criteria in that the proposal consisting of prefinished horizontal metal and aluminum composite panel siding, painted steel and aluminum trim, and an aluminum anodized storefront system is consistent with the pattern of diverse architectural styles that characterize the city’s auto-row commercial area, and is consistent with the architectural style, mass, and bulk of the existing showroom building; that the proposal is consistent with the design guidelines established in Chapter 5 of the Downtown Specific Plan (Design & Character); and that 879 SF of new landscaping in the ground and six new street trees along California Drive and Bayswater Avenue will be planted to enrich the existing commercial neighborhood. Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map Findings:  The proposed vesting tentative subdivision map, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the Burlingame General Plan and consistent with the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act; that the site is physically suited for the proposed type and density of development in that the proposed Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the Burlingame General Plan and consistent with the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act; that the site is physically suited for the proposed type of development in that it provides an automobile service facility use in an area identified as suitable for such use in the Burlingame General Plan; that the project provides ample vehicular and pedestrian circulation to serve the project, and is consistent with required development standards including setbacks, lot coverage and building height. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Burlingame, that the applications for Design Review and Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map are hereby granted, subject to the following conditions: 1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Division date stamped December 5, 2016, sheets A.001 through A.611 and C1.0 through C3.0; 2. 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 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; 3. that any changes to the size or envelope of building, which would include changing or adding exterior walls or parapet walls, shall require an amendment to this permit; RESOLUTION NO. 3 4. that any changes to building materials, exterior finishes, windows, architectural features, roof height or pitch, and amount or type of hardscape materials shall be subject to Planning Division or Planning Commission review (FYI or amendment to be determined by Planning staff); 5. that the maximum elevation at the top of the roof parapet shall not exceed elevation 55.70’ for a maximum height of 25’-1½”, and that the top of each floor and final roof ridge shall be surveyed and approved by the City Engineer as the framing proceeds and prior to final framing and roofing inspections. Should any framing exceed the stated elevation at any point it shall be removed or adjusted so that the final height of the str ucture with roof shall not exceed the maximum height shown on the approved plans; 6. that the conditions of the Building Division’s December 29, 2015 and April 14, 2015 memos, the Park's Division's January 5, 2016 and April 17, 2015 memos, the Engineering Division’s January 8, 2016 and April 14, 2015 memos, the Fire Division’s April 13, 2015 memo, and the Stormwater Division’s February 15, 2016 and April 22, 2015 memos shall be met; 7. that the on-site parking spaces shall be used only by the visitors and employees of the automobile showroom and service facility on this site and shall not be leased or rented for storage of automobiles or goods either by individuals or businesses not on this site or by other businesses for off-site parking; 8. that prior to issuance of a building permit for the project, the applicant shall pay the first half of the public facilities impact fee in the amount of $8,749.29, made payable to the City of Burlingame and submitted to the Planning Division; 9. that prior to scheduling the final framing inspection, the applicant shall pay the second half of the public facilities impact fee in the amount of $8,749.29, made payable to the City of Burlingame and submitted to the Planning Division; 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 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; 12. that during construction, the applicant shall provide fencing (with a fabric screen or mesh) around the project site to ensure that all construction equipment, materials and debris is kept on site; 13. that storage of construction materials and equipment on the street or in the public right - of-way shall be prohibited; 14. that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance; RESOLUTION NO. 4 15. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes, in effect at the time of submittal, as amended by the City of Burlingame; The following four (4) conditions shall be met during the Building Inspection process prior to the inspections noted in each condition: 16. that prior to scheduling the foundation inspection, a licensed surveyor shall locate the property corners, set the building footprint and certify the first floor elevation of the new structure(s) based on the elevation at the top of the form boards per the approved plans; this survey shall be accepted by the City Engineer; 17. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection, the project architect, engineer or other licensed professional shall provide architectural certification that the architectural details such as window locations and bays are built as shown on the approved plans; if there is no licensed professional involved in the project, the property owner or contractor shall provide the certification under penalty of perjury. Certifications shall be submitted to the Building Division; 18. that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall shoot the height of the roof parapet and provide certification of that height to the Building Division; 19. that prior to final inspection, Planning Division 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; Mitigation Measures from Initial Study Aesthetics 20. The project developer shall install low-profile, low-intensity lighting directed downward to minimize light and glare. Exterior lighting shall be low mounted, downward casting, and shielded. In general, the light footprint shall not extend beyond the periphery of each property. Implementation of exterior lighting fixtures on all buildings shall also comply with the standard California Building Code (Title 24, Building Energy Efficiency Standards) to reduce the lateral spreading of light to surrounding uses, consistent with Burlingame Municipal Code Section 18.16.030 that requires that all new exterior lighting for commercial developments be designed and located so that the cone of light and/or glare from the light element is kept entirely on the property or below the top of any fence, edge or wall. Air Quality 21. The contractor shall implement the following BMPs: 1) All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day. 2) All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered. RESOLUTION NO. 5 3) All visible mud or dirt tracked onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited. 4) All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 miles per hour (mph). 5) All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used. 6) Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations (CCR)). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points. 7) All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified mechanic and determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation. 8) Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the Lead Agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District’s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. 22. All diesel-powered off-road equipment larger than 25 horsepower and operating on the site for more than two continuous days shall, at a minimum, meet U.S. EPA particulate matter emissions standards for Tier 4 engines or equivalent. 23. If construction activities would commence anytime during the nesting/breeding season of native bird species potentially nesting near the site (typically February through August in the project region), a pre-construction survey for nesting birds shall be conducted by a qualified biologist within two weeks of the commencement of construction activities. If active nests are found in areas that could be directly affected or are within 150 feet of construction and would be subject to prolonged construction-related noise, a no- disturbance buffer zone shall be created around active nests during the breeding season or until a qualified biologist determines that all young have fledged. The size of the buffer zones and types of construction activities restricted within them will be determined by taking into account factors such as the following:  Noise and human disturbance levels at the construction site at the time of the survey and the noise and disturbance expected during the construction activity;  Distance and amount of vegetation or other screening between the construction site and the nest; and  Sensitivity of individual nesting species and behaviors of the nesting birds. RESOLUTION NO. 6 Biological Resources 24. Prior to the removal of any trees, the project applicant shall evaluate if the on-site trees meet the requirement to be considered a “protected” tree. A permit shall be obtained from the Parks and Recreation Department prior to the removal of a protected tree. Cultural Resources 25. In the event archaeological resources are encountered during construction, work shall be halted within 100 feet of the discovered materials and workers shall avoid altering the materials and their context until a qualified professional archaeologist has evaluated the situation and provided appropriate recommendations. If an archaeological site is encountered in any stage of development, a qualified archeologist will be consulted to determine whether the resource qualifies as an historical resource or a unique archaeological resource. In the event that it does qualify, the archaeologist will prepare a research design and archaeological data recovery plan to be implemented prior to or during site construction. The archaeologist shall also prepare a written report of the finding, file it with the appropriate agency, and arrange for curation of recovered materials. 26. A discovery of a paleontological specimen during any phase of the project shall result in a work stoppage in the vicinity of the find until it can be evaluated by a professional paleontologist. Should loss or damage be detected, additional protective measures or further action (e.g., resource removal), as determined by a professional paleontologist, shall be implemented to mitigate the impact. 27. In the event that human remains are discovered during project construction, there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains. The county coroner shall be informed to evaluate the nature of the remains. If the remains are determined to be of Native American origin, the Lead Agency shall work with the Native American Heritage Commission and the applicant to develop an agreement for treating or disposing of the human remains. Geology and Soils 28. Project design and construction shall adhere to Title 18, Chapter 18.28 of the Burlingame Municipal Code, and demonstrate compliance with all design standards applicable to the California Building Code Zone 4 would ensure maximum practicable protection available to users of the buildings and associated infrastructure. 29. Project design and construction, including excavation activities, shall comply with Chapter 33 of the CBC, which specifies the safety requirement to be fulfilled for site work. This would include prevention of subsidence and pavement or foundations caused by dewatering. RESOLUTION NO. 7 30. The applicant shall prepare a monitoring program to determine the effects of construction on nearby improvements, including the monitoring of cracking and vertical movement of adjacent structures, and nearby streets, sidewalks, utilities, and other improvements. As necessary, inclinometers or other instrumentation shall be installed as part of the shoring system to closely monitor lateral movement. The program shall include a pre-condition survey including photographs and installation of monitoring points for existing site improvements. Hazards and Hazardous Materials 31. The contractor shall comply with Title 8, California Code of Regulations/Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) requirements that cover construction work where an employee may be exposed to lead. This includes the proper removal and disposal of peeling paint, and appropriate sampling of painted building surfaces for lead prior to disturbance of the paint and disposal of the paint or painted materials. 32. The applicant shall contract a Certified Asbestos Consultant to conduct an asbestos survey prior to disturbing potential asbestos containing building materials and following the Consultant’s recommendations for proper handling and disposal. 33. Workers handling demolition and renovation activities at the project site will be trained in the safe handling and disposal of any containments with which they are handling or disposing of on the project site. Noise 34. The following measures, in addition to the best practices specified in Impact 3, shall be implemented to reduce vibration impacts from construction activities to a less-than- significant level:  For all construction proposed to be located within 20 feet of adjacent structures, a construction vibration-monitoring plan would need to be implemented to document conditions prior to, during and after vibration generating construction activities. All plan tasks shall be undertaken under the direction of a licensed Professional Structural Engineer in the State of California and be in accordance with industry accepted standard methods. The construction vibration monitoring plan should be implemented to include the following tasks: - Perform a photo survey, elevation survey, and crack monitoring survey for each identified structure. Surveys shall be performed prior to any construction activity and after project completion and shall include internal and external crack monitoring in structures, settlement, and distress and shall document the condition of foundations, walls and other structural elements in the interior and exterior of said structures. - Designate a person responsible for registering and investigating claims of excessive vibration. The contact information of such person shall be clearly posted on the construction site. - Make appropriate repairs or compensation where damage has occurred as a result of construction activities. RESOLUTION NO. 8 - The results of all vibration monitoring shall be summarized and submitted in a report shortly after substantial completion of each phase identified in the project schedule. The report will include a description of measurement methods, equipment used, calibration certificates, and graphics as required to clearly identify vibration-monitoring locations. An explanation of all events that exceeded vibration limits will be included together with proper documentation supporting any such claims. Transportation and Traffic 35. Prior to issuance of grading and building permits, the project applicant shall submit a Traffic Control Plan. The Traffic Control Plan would indicate how par king for construction workers would be provided during construction and ensure a safe flow of traffic in the project area during construction. The requirements within the Traffic Control Plan include, but are not limited to, the following: truck drivers would be notified of and required to use the most direct route between the site and U.S. 101, as determined by the City Engineering Department; all site ingress and egress would occur only at the main driveways to the project site; specifically designated travel routes for large vehicles would be monitored and controlled by flaggers for large construction vehicle ingress and egress; warning signs indicating frequent truck entry and exit would be posted on adjacent roadways if requested; and any debris and mud on nearby streets caused by trucks would be monitored daily and may require instituting a street cleaning program. 36. On-street parking to the east and west of the outbound driveways on Bayswater Avenue shall be prohibited by painting red curb for a distance of approximately 20 feet on either side. __________________________________ Ricardo Ortiz, Mayor I, Meaghan Hassel-Shearer, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 17th day of January, 2017 by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: _____________________________________ Meaghan Hassel-Shearer, City Clerk 1 STAFF REPORT AGENDA NO: MEETING DATE: January 17, 2017 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: January 17, 2017 From: William Meeker, Community Development Director – (650) 558-7255 Subject: Adoption of a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Burlingame Making Findings Regarding an Amendment to Title 21 – Historic Resource Preservation of the Burlingame Municipal Code and Adoption of an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Burlingame, Amending Title 21 – Historic Resource Preservation of the Burlingame Municipal Code by Adding Provisions Defining “Adaptive Re-Use” and Outlining Procedures for Granting Approval of a Conditional Use Permit for Adaptive Reuse of Historic Resources within the City of Burlingame RECOMMENDATION The City Council should adopt the resolution: A. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME FINDING THAT ADOPTION OF AN AMENDMENT TO TITLE 21 – HISTORIC RESOURCE PRESERVATION, ADDING PROCEDURES FOR GRANTING APPROVAL OF THE ADAPTIVE RE-USE OF DESIGNATED HISTORIC RESOURCES, IS ADEQUATELY EVALUATED IN MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. ND-555-P ADOPTED FOR THE BURLINGAME DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN AND DETERMINING THAT NO FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS IS REQUIRED PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) The City Council should adopt the following ordinance: B. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME, AMENDING TITLE 21 – HISTORIC RESOURCE PRESERVATION OF THE BURLINGAME MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING PROVISIONS DEFINING “ADAPTIVE RE-USE” AND OUTLINING PROCEDURES FOR GRANTING APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR ADAPTIVE REUSE OF HISTORIC RESOURCES WITHIN THE CITY OF BURLINGAME Amendment to Title 21 – Historic Resource Preservation – Adaptive Reuse January 17, 2017 2 DISCUSSION The City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing and discussed the proposed amendment at its regular meeting of January 3, 2017. No changes to the proposed ordinance were requested; therefore, the ordinance and a resolution making required findings pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) is presented to the City Council for adoption at its regular meeting of January 17, 2017. FISCAL IMPACT None. Exhibits:  CEQA Resolution  Ordinance RESOLUTION NO. __________ 1 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME FINDING THAT ADOPTION OF AN AMENDMENT TO TITLE 21 – HISTORIC RESOURCE PRESERVATION, ADDING PROCEDURES FOR GRANTING APPROVAL OF THE ADAPTIVE RE-USE OF DESIGNATED HISTORIC RESOURCES, IS ADEQUATELY EVALUATED IN MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. ND-555-P ADOPTED FOR THE BURLINGAME DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN AND DETERMINING THAT NO FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS IS REQUIRED PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME hereby finds as follows: Section 1. On October 4, 2010, the City Council adopted the Burlingame Downtown Specific Plan and Mitigated Negative Declaration ND-555-P certifying completion of the environmental analysis of the policy direction provided by the Plan. Section 2. On June 16, 2014 the City Council adopted Ordinance 1899 adding Title 21 – Historic Resource Preservation to the Burlingame Municipal Code. As adopted, the ordinance establishes an historic preservation program applicable to any property deemed historic (with consent of the property owner) within the geographic area of the City covered by the Burlingame Downtown Specific Plan Section 3. At a duly noticed public hearing held on January 3, 2017, The City Council introduced an ordinance amending Title 21 – Historic Resource Preservation pf the Burlingame Municipal Code by adding provisions defining “Adaptive Re-Use” and outlining procedures for granting approval of the adaptive re-use of designated historic structures within the City of Burlingame. Section 4. Mitigated Negative Declaration ND-555-P was prepared and approved on October 4, 2010 in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and it was determined that with the mitigation measures proposed and incorporated into the Standard Conditions of Approval for all projects included in the Burlingame Downtown Specific Plan, there are no potential significant environmental impacts from adoption of the Plan. Section 5. The modifications to the Code contained in the ordinance amending Title 21 – Historic Preservation to allow adaptive re-use of historic structures do not permit uses or entitlements outside of the scope of those already studied and addressed in Mitigated Negative Declaration ND-555-P. RESOLUTION NO. __________ 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME THAT adoption of an amendment to Title 21 – Historic Resource Preservation of the Burlingame Municipal Code adding provisions related to adaptive re-use of designated historic resources is adequately evaluated pursuant to CEQA in Mitigated Negative Declaration ND-555-P, and that no further environmental analysis is required pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). ___________________________________ Ricardo Ortiz, Mayor I, MEAGHAN HASSEL-SHEARER, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 17th day of January, 2017 by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ___________________________________ Meaghan Hassel-Shearer, City Clerk ORDINANCE NO. __________ 1 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME, AMENDING TITLE 21 – HISTORIC RESOURCE PRESERVATION OF THE BURLINGAME MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING PROVISIONS DEFINING “ADAPTIVE RE-USE” AND OUTLING PROCEDURES FOR GRANTING APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR ADAPTIVE REUSE OF HISTORIC RESOURCES WITHIN THE CITY OF BURLINGAME The City Council of the City of Burlingame hereby ordains as follows: Division 1. Factual Background WHEREAS, on June 16, 2014 the City Council adopted Ordinance 1899 adding Title 21 – Historic Resource Preservation to the Burlingame Municipal Code. As adopted, the ordinance establishes an historic preservation program applicable to any property deemed historic (with consent of the property owner) within the geographic area of the City covered by the Burlingame Downtown Specific Plan; and WHEREAS, once designated as historic resources, properties listed on the local, State or Federal register of historic properties are eligible for the following incentives: Mills Act Contract, Federal Historic Preservation Tax Incentives, Use of the California Historic Building Code, Historic Variances, and Fee Reduction; and WHEREAS, to date, no property owners have come forward to voluntarily request designation of their property as an historic resource, nor have any of the existing incentives for historic properties been utilized; and WHEREAS, it is frequently the case with historic resources that the purpose for which a structure was initially built may not be one that is appropriate or desirable in the present contemporary setting based upon current zoning regulations (e.g. a warehouse situated within what is now an pedestrian-oriented commercial area); and WHEREAS, “Adaptive Reuse” of historic resources is an accepted means of repurposing such a property for different uses or functions than those for which it was originally designed while retaining the original historic features of the resource; and WHEREAS, on November 14, 2016, the Burlingame Planning Commission considered an amendment to Title 21 – Historic Resource Preservation of the Burlingame Municipal Code that adds “Adaptive Reuse” as an incentive for preservation of historic resources, and outlines the procedure (Conditional Use Permit) for property owners to seek approval of adaptive reuse of their historic resource. Following a duly noticed public hearing on that date, and after considering all oral and written public testimony regarding the proposed amendment, the Commission moved to recommend that the City Council adopt the proposed amendment; and ORDINANCE NO. __________ 2 WHEREAS, on January 3, 2017, the Burlingame City Council introduced the proposed ordinance amending Title 21 – Historic Resource Preservation by title only, waiving further reading, and conducted a duly noticed public hearing; considered the Planning Commission’s recommendation, and all written and oral testimony from the public regarding the proposed amendment and, following conclusion of the public hearing, directed that the proposed ordinance be placed on the January 17, 2017 City Council agenda for adoption. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Division 2. The Burlingame Municipal Code, Title 21 – Historic Resource Preservation is amended as follows: Section 21.04.020 Definitions shall be amended to read as follows: (a) “Adaptive Reuse” means repurposing a designated historic resource for different uses or functions than those for which it was originally designed while retaining the original historic features of the resource. (b) “Alteration” means any change or modification, through public or private action, to the character-defining or significant exterior physical features of properties affected by this title. Such changes may be changes to or modification of structure, architectural details, or visual characteristics, grading, surface paving, the addition of new structures, and the placement or removal of any significant objects such as signs, plaques, light fixtures, street furniture, walls, fences, steps, plantings, and landscape accessories affecting the significant visual and/or historical qualities of the property. (c) “Demolition” means any act or process that destroys in part or in whole an historic resource. (d) “Designated Historic Resource” means a parcel or part thereof on which an historic resource is situated and any abutting parcel or part thereof constituting part of the premises on which the historic resource is situated, and which has been designated an historic resource in the Burlingame Historic Register, California Register of Historic Places and/or National Register of Historic Places. (e) “Historic Resource” means improvements, buildings, structures, signs, or other objects of scientific, aesthetic, educational, cultural, architectural, or historical significance to the owner, citizens of the City and the State of California, the Bay Area region, or the nation which may be eligible for local designation for historic preservation by the City pursuant to the provisions of this title. An historic resource is either included in the Register or may be added in accordance with Section 21.04.080. ORDINANCE NO. __________ 3 (f) “Improvement” means any building, structure, , fence, gate, landscaping, tree, wall, parking facility, work of art, or other object constituting a physical feature of real property, or any part of such feature. (g) “Inventory” refers to the October 6, 2008 Inventory of Historic Resources – Burlingame Downtown Specific Plan which identifies resources in the City which may be considered historical. Owners of property which were included in the Inventory are eligible to apply to be included on the Burlingame Historic Register. (h) “Ordinary Maintenance and Repair” means any work, for which a building permit is not required by law, where the purpose and effect of such work is to correct any deterioration of or damage to a structure or any part thereof and to restore the same to its condition prior to the occurrence of such deterioration or damage. (i) “Preservation” means the identification, study, protection, restoration, or acquisition of historic resources. (j) “Register” refers to the Burlingame Historic Register. Inclusion on the Register results from submittal of an application to the Community Development Department by the property owner, with exception of the two structures and one tree grove in the City which are listed on the California Register of Historic Places and/or National Register of Historic Places, as referenced in Section 21.40.040 of this Title. (k) “Secretary of the Interior Standards for Rehabilitation” means the standards promulgated by the National Park Service that provide guidance for the preservation, rehabilitation, restoration and reconstruction of historic properties. (l) “Significant Feature” means the natural or man-made elements embodying style or type of historic resource, design, or general arrangement and components of an improvement, including but not limited to, the kind, color, and texture of the building materials, and the type and style of all windows, doors, lights, signs, and other fixtures appurtenant to such improvement. 21.04.120 Preservation Incentives shall be amended to read as follows: (a) The Commission is authorized to develop and implement preservation incentive programs that are consistent with this Chapter. Incentives shall be made available for properties listed on the Register that undergo maintenance or alteration consistent with the Secretary of the Interior Standards for Rehabilitation. (1) State Historic Building Code. The Building Official is authorized to use and shall use the California State Historic Building Code (SHBC) for projects involving designated historic resources. The SHBC provides alternative building regulations for the rehabilitation, preservation, restoration, or relocation of ORDINANCE NO. __________ 4 structures designated as historic resources. The SHBC shall be used for any designated historic resource in the City’s building permit procedure. (2) Fee Reduction. Any permit fees for minor or major exterior modifications to historic resources done in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior Standards for Rehabilitation shall be reduced by 25% provided that the work is consistent with the historic criteria under which the property was designated an historic resource. (3) Development Standard Flexibility. (A) Parking Standards. i. Additional floor area may be added to existing single-family residences that are nonconforming due to substandard parking without providing parking according to current standards, provided that the aggregate of all additional floor area constructed following the date of designation of the structure as a historic resource does not exceed 50% of the floor area existing as of the date of designation as a resource. For multiple-family developed properties, adding units in accordance with existing zoning standards shall not require the property owner to bring existing nonconforming parking into compliance with current parking requirements, though code-required parking shall be provided for any new units created. ii. Designated historic commercial structures may add up to an aggregate of 15 percent of the existing floor area as of the date of designation of the property as a historic resource, not to exceed 500 square feet, without providing additional parking and without bringing any existing nonconformity into compliance with the current zoning regulations, subject to review and approval by the Commission. The addition must be removed or otherwise approved under governing procedures if the historic building is demolished. (B) Historic Variances. i. Owners of designated properties may apply for variances from development standards applicable to the property in instances where the deviation from the standard is warranted in order to preserve the historic character of the property. The property’s status as a designated historic resource may be used as a basis for determining whether the property owner is denied privileges ORDINANCE NO. __________ 5 enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and within the same zoning district. The procedure for requesting approval of an historic variance shall be the same as that required for other forms of variances, as specified in Title 25 of the Burlingame Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance). (4) Adaptive Reuse. Owners of designated properties may apply for a conditional use permit for any use that is not ordinarily permitted, or conditionally permitted, within the zoning district in which the designated resource is situated, pursuant to the purpose, findings and conditions expressed in Chapter 25.52 Conditional Use Permits of Title 25 of the Burlingame Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance), and the following additional findings: (A) Use of the property for a purpose other than that for which it was originally designed, and in a manner that would not normally be permitted within the zoning district in which the resource is situated, is necessary in order to enhance the economic viability of retaining the resource and its notable characteristics in a manner that ensures the continued maintenance of the resource; and (B) Any alterations to the resource that are necessary to accommodate the adaptive re-use of the resource shall be designed and completed in a manner consistent with the Secretary of Interior Standards for Rehabilitation, and shall be subject to any discretionary approvals required pursuant to Title 25 of the Burlingame Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance). (5) Mills Act Contracts. (A) Mills Act contracts granting property tax relief shall be made available by the City of Burlingame only to owners of properties listed in the Burlingame Historic Resources Register, as well as properties located within the City of Burlingame that are listed in the National Register of Historic Places and/or the California Register of Historical Places. Properties that have been previously listed on the above-mentioned register(s), but that have been removed from the register(s) and are no longer listed, shall not be eligible for a Mills Act contract with the City. (B) Mills Act contracts shall be made available pursuant to California law. The Community Development Department shall make available appropriate Mills Act application materials. The Mills Act application may be processed concurrently with the Historic Resource Application. ORDINANCE NO. __________ 6 (C) Mills Act contract applications shall be made to the Community Development Director or his/her designee, who shall within 30 days of receipt of a completed application, prepare and make recommendations on the contents of the contract for consideration by the City Council. A fee for the application will be required consistent the City’s adopted fee schedule, to cover all or portions of the costs of the preparation of the contract or an amount set by City Council Resolution may be charged. (D) The City Council shall, in public hearing, resolve to approve, approve with conditions, or deny the proposed contract. Failure to pass a motion approving the application shall be deemed a denial. Should the City Council fail to act on the proposed contract within one year of its receipt of the proposal, the proposal shall be deemed denied. (E) A Mills Act contract application that has failed to be approved by the City Council cannot be resubmitted for one year from the date of City Council action, or where the Council fails to take action, within one year from the date that the application is deemed denied pursuant to (4) above. (6) Preservation Easements. Preservation easements on the facades of buildings designated as an historic resource may be acquired by the City or nonprofit group through purchase, donation, or documentation pursuant to California Civil Code 815. (7) Official Recognition/Awards. The Commission, on an annual basis, may recognize those projects involving designated historic resources that have demonstrated a high level of commitment to maintaining or restoring the historic integrity of the resource. The Community Development Department may nominate all projects implemented within a calendar year for award consideration by the Commission. Division 3. This ordinance, or a summary as applicable, shall be published as required by law and shall become effective 30-days thereafter. ____________________________________ Ricardo Ortiz, Mayor ORDINANCE NO. __________ 7 I, Meaghan Hassel-Shearer, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 3rd day of January 2017, and adopted thereafter at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 17th day of January 2017, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ___________________________________ Meaghan Hassel-Shearer, City Clerk 1 STAFF REPORT AGENDA NO: MEETING DATE: January 17, 2017 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: January 17, 2017 From: Lisa K. Goldman, City Manager – (650) 558-7243 Subject: Adoption of a Resolution Committing the City to Continue Working with Other Jurisdictions in the County to Address the Housing Crisis on a Regional Basis, Including through Ongoing Support of the Home for All San Mateo County Initiative RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution committing the City to continue working with other jurisdictions in the County to address the housing crisis on a regional basis, including through ongoing support of the Home for All San Mateo County Initiative. BACKGROUND In September 2015, the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors convened a task force of community leaders to identify regional housing issues, bring community leaders together to share the challenges created by the current housing market, learn about possible solutions, and work together to develop an action plan to preserve and increase housing at all income levels. The Jobs/Housing Gap Task Force, of which the City of Burlingame is a member, includes representatives from cities and towns, business organizations, large employers, educators, housing developers, community-based organizations providing housing services, and labor and community advocates. The Task Force met eight times, starting in September of 2015 and concluding June 23, 2016. DISCUSSION The Task Force members generated many ideas for closing the jobs/housing gap. Those ideas were compiled and organized around four key recommendations:  Create a regional action plan;  Establish an on-line housing resource center;  Develop and conduct a housing gap education and public relations campaign;  Develop partnerships and engage the boarder community in both discussing housing options and developing solutions to the gap. The Task Force also approved expanding the jobs/housing gap work countywide under the brand “Home for All San Mateo County”. Home for All, San Mateo County Initiative January 17, 2017 2 One of the Task Force "strides" toward closing the Jobs/Housing Gap is to have the county and all 20 cities and towns adopt resolutions in support of the Home for All San Mateo County Initiative. The resolution identifies regional housing problems, recognizes the purpose and work of the Task Force, and commits each jurisdiction to continue working with other jurisdictions to address the housing crisis on a regional basis, including through ongoing support of the Home for All San Mateo County Initiative. The resolution does not specifically commit the City to support any particular policies or programs, nor does it commit any specific financial resources beyond staff and elected official participation in regional meetings, as appropriate. FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact associated with adoption of the resolution. Exhibit:  Resolution RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME COMMITTING TO CONTINUE WORKING WITH OTHER JURISDICTIONS IN THE COUNTY TO ADDRESS THE HOUSING CRISIS ON A REGIONAL BASIS, INCLUDING THROUGH ONGOING SUPPORT OF THE HOME FOR ALL SAN MATEO COUNTY INITIATIVE WHEREAS, San Mateo County is facing an historic housing crisis that has resulted in some of the highest housing costs in the Country; and WHEREAS, as of March 2016, the average price to purchase a single family home in San Mateo County is over one and a half million dollars, and the average monthly rent for a two- bedroom apartment is nearly two thousand nine hundred dollars; and WHEREAS, between 2010 and 2014, San Mateo County added over 54,000 new jobs, while only 2,148 new housing units were built in the County; and WHEREAS, local government jurisdictions within the County have long collaborated to address housing challenges on a regional basis through, for example, the 2003 creation of a housing endowment and regional trust, known as HEART of San Mateo County, and the 2006 development of a sub-regional process for regional housing needs allocations for all 20 cities and towns, and the unincorporated County; and WHEREAS, building upon this regional approach to addressing housing issues, in September 2015, the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors convened a task force of community leaders to identify housing issues, evaluate innovative tools and best practices, and create a menu of solutions to preserve and increase housing at all income levels; and WHEREAS, the Jobs/Housing Gap Task Force, of which the City of Burlingame is a member, includes representatives from cities and towns, business organizations, large employers, educators, housing developers, community-based organizations providing housing services, and labor and community advocates; and WHEREAS, the efforts of the Closing the Jobs-Housing Gap Task Force have resulted in the creation of the Home for All San Mateo County Initiative that was launched in September 2016 with a housing policy resource center, a community engagement campaign, and a regional action plan to implement a variety of strategies to produce and preserve housing at all income levels; and WHEREAS, the City of Burlingame is committed to continue working on housing issues by collaborating with jurisdictions and community members to promote the strategies put forth in the Home for All San Mateo County Initiative and support the initiative. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: The City of Burlingame commits to continue working with other jurisdictions in the County to address the housing crisis on a regional basis, including through ongoing support of the Home for All San Mateo County Initiative. ____________________________ Ricardo Ortiz, Mayor I, Meaghan Hassel-Shearer, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 17th day of January, 2017, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote: AYES: Councilmembers: NOES: Councilmembers: ABSENT: Councilmembers: ____________________________ Meaghan Hassel-Shearer, City Clerk 1 STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM NO: MEETING DATE: January 17, 2017 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: January 17, 2017 From: William Meeker, Community Development Director – (650) 558-7255 Subject: Housing Element Annual Progress Report (APR) on the Implementation of the Housing Element of the General Plan RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council, by motion, accept the 2015 and 2016 Housing Element Annual Progress Report and authorize its transmittal to the California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) and the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). BACKGROUND California requires each jurisdiction to prepare a Housing Element as part of its General Plan in order to ensure that all jurisdictions are planning for the projected housing demand throughout the state. Unlike other elements of a General Plan, the Housing Element must be updated by deadlines set by the State. The process begins with the State advising a region of its Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA), which is the estimated number of housing units that will be needed over the planning period (usually seven years). This allocation is further subdivided among four household income categories: very-low, low, moderate, and above moderate. Affordable housing income limits are determined by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and are adjusted for family size, as detailed in the table below. The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) is responsible for the public process by which this regional allocation is apportioned to each jurisdiction within its boundaries. In addition to demonstrating how the allocated number of units can be produced, policies in a Housing Element must also:  address the removal of governmental barriers to housing production;  ensure the jurisdiction’s housing stock is maintained, and  ensure that housing is available to all types of persons on an equitable basis. County Income Category Number of Persons in Household 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 San M ateo County 4-Person Area Median Incom e: $107,700 Extremely Low 25850 29550 33250 36900 39900 42850 45800 48750 Very Low Income 43050 49200 55350 61500 66450 71350 76300 81200 Low Incom e 68950 78800 88650 98500 106400 114300 122150 130050 M edian Income 75400 86150 96950 107700 116300 124950 133550 142150 Moderate Income 90500 103400 116350 129250 139600 149950 160250 170600 Housing Element Annual Progress Report January 17, 2017 2 DISCUSSION The City of Burlingame’s Housing Element update was adopted in January 2015. The City is currently starting the second year of the 2015-2023 planning period. Burlingame’s RHNA allocation for this cycle is 863 units. Annual Report California Government Code Section 65400 requires that an Annual Report (“Report”) be prepared on the status and progress of implementation of the Housing Element and submitted to the City Council, the State Office of Planning and Research (OPR), and the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) by April 1st of each year. There is no similar requirement for the other Elements of the General Plan. Additionally, the Report has to be prepared in accordance with the provisions set forth by HCD and on the forms provided by HCD (attached). Given that the updated Housing Element was adopted in January 2015, the annual report for 2015 was not prepared. Therefore, staff is catching up and providing for the City Council’s review both the 2015 and 2016 Annual Reports. The Housing Element Annual Report includes the following information about housing production since the start of the planning period in 2015:  Information on the types of housing units that were issued building permits (Table A & A3);  Information on the City’s progress in meeting its Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA)(Table B); and  Progress report on implementation of Housing Element programs (Table C). The reporting is for the number of building permits issued for construction of new dwelling units. The count only includes net new units, not permits issued for replacement units (demolition of a unit and reconstruction of a new unit). In summary, permits were issued for a total of five new units in (calendar year) 2015. One unit was a new single family dwelling, and the remaining four units were accessory dwelling units. There were permits issued for a total for 133 new units in 2016. This included five new units added as part of a condominium development, four new accessory dwelling units, and 124 new senior assisted living apartments units. Included in this total are ten below market rate units that are part of the senior assisted living housing project. However, this was not required by the zoning code, and the units are not deed restricted. Burlingame’s progress in meeting its RHNA number of units for this housing cycle (2015-2023) is summarized as follows: Income Level RHNA Units Constructed % of RHNA Goal Extremely Low 138 0 0 Very Low 138 0 0 Low 144 10 6.9% Moderate 155 0 0 Above Moderate 288 128 44.4% Total: 863 138 14.8% These reports are informational only, and do not change adopted policies or authorize any action or expenditure of funds. These reports are being prepared in compliance with California Government Code Section 65400. Once the Council has acknowledged that the Annual Reports have been provided for review, staff will forward the reports to HCD and OPR. FISCAL IMPACT None. Housing Element Annual Progress Report January 17, 2017 3 Exhibits:  Housing Element Annual Progress Report – calendar year 2015  Housing Element Annual Progress Report – calendar year 2016  City of Burlingame Goals, Policies and Action Programs—Program Implementation Status City of Burlingame- Goals, Polices and Action Programs Program Description (By Housing Element Program Names) Housing Programs Progress Report - Government Code Section 65583. Describe progress of all programs including local efforts to remove governmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing as identified in the housing element. Name of Program Objectives Timeframe in H.E. Status of Program Implementation Goal A: PRESERVE RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER BY ENCOURAGING MAINTENANCE, IMPROVEMENT AND REHABILITATION OF THE CITY'S NEIGHBORHOODS AND HOUSING STOCK. Program H(A-1) - Maintenance of Public Facilities. In residential neighborhoods continue the maintenance and enhancement of public facilities such as streets, water supply and drainage by allocations from the general fund, gas tax revenue and, where appropriate, conditions of development. Continue maintenance programs for public facilities. Ongoing Maintenance of public facilities projects include the following: sidewalk improvements in the Easton Addition neighborhood/ Ray Park sewer rehabilitation/ El Camino Real water main improvement / storm drain improvement project - citywide, annual project priority based on need/ street resurfacing - citywide, annual project- priority based on need. Program H(A-2) - Housing Rehabilitation. Through the City's Code Enforcement Program, continue the program of contacting owners of structures that appear to be overcrowded, declining or in need of repair. Refer property owners to the Rehabilitation Loan Program administered by San Mateo County to assist qualified homeowners in making necessary repairs to structures in need of rehabilitation. Rehabilitate 20 housing units. Ongoing Code enforcement staff is aware of this program and refers property owners as needed. To date we have not have any cases/properties that would require such a referral. Program H(A-3) - Allow fee waivers for affordable rehabilitation. Consider amendment to the Master Fee Schedule to allow for waiver of permit fees for rehabilitation of affordable housing achieved through San Mateo County programs, through non-profit agencies or through other means, including Federal Programs and to provide incentives for property owners to maintain their properties. Rehabilitate 75 affordable units. Within 1 year of adoption of Housing Element The City is still working on making this change, however, building permit fees are significantly reduced for non-profit rehabilitation programs such Christmas in April and Rebuilding Together. Program Description (By Housing Element Program Names) Housing Programs Progress Report - Government Code Section 65583. Describe progress of all programs including local efforts to remove governmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing as identified in the housing element. Name of Program Objectives Timeframe in H.E. Status of Program Implementation Program H(A-4) - Discourage condominium conversions. Maintain the existing zoning controls which prohibit conversion of residential rental projects with fewer than 21 units to condominiums, and which contain strict regulations prohibiting conversion of less than 21 units to condominiums. No conversion of existing rental stock to condominiums. Ongoing The City continues to preserve rental housing stock with the implementation of Chapter 26.32 of the subdivision ordinance. Program H(A-5) - Prevent conversion of residential units to non-residential use. Amend zoning code to require a conditional use permit for any project where residential units are proposed to be replaced by non-residential use. Retain existing housing stock. Within 1 year of adoption of Housing Element The City is currently working on a General Plan and zoning code update which will include a Conditional Use Permit for the conversion of residential units to non-residential units to help preserve housing stock. Program H(A-6) - Ensure affordability of existing units. Continue the relationship with the County of San Mateo Department of Housing for administration of Block Grant funds for housing programs; encourage use of available programs (such as HOME) to assist non-profit housing corporations in acquiring, rehabilitating and managing apartment units for long-term affordability. Utilize funds to assist 20 units to achieve long term affordability. Ongoing The City will encourage use of available programs administered by San Mateo County to ensure affordability of existing units. Program H(A-7) - Determine code compliance, structural deficiencies of existing residences upon sale. Continue program that assists in research of residential records upon the request of realtors or potential home buyers Continue assistance to potential home bu yers. Ongoing Planning and Building Division staff regularly assists potential buyers and relators in locating historical records to determine the history of a property prior to purchase. Program Description (By Housing Element Program Names) Housing Programs Progress Report - Government Code Section 65583. Describe progress of all programs including local efforts to remove governmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing as identified in the housing element. Name of Program Objectives Timeframe in H.E. Status of Program Implementation Program H(A-8) - Residential design review . Continue implementation of residential design review and zoning regulations including setbacks, floor area ratio, declining height; continue implementation of single family design review guidelines adopted in 1998. Process 250 applications for residential design review. Ongoing Proposals for new single family dwellings, duplexes and multifamily dwellings are required to go through our Design Review process before the Planning Commission for approval. Program Description (By Housing Element Program Names) Housing Programs Progress Report - Government Code Section 65583. Describe progress of all programs including local efforts to remove governmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing as identified in the housing element. Name of Program Objectives Timeframe in H.E. Status of Program Implementation GOAL B: PROVIDE VARIETY AND CHOICE OF HOUSING BY PROMOTING HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR ALL PERSONS REGARDLESS OF AGE, SEX, RACE, COLOR, MARITAL STATUS, DISABILITY, NATIONAL ORIGIN OR OTHER BARRIERS. Program H(B-1) - Public awareness of anti- discrimination laws and policies. Continue to fund the Code Enforcement Officer position and coordination with Community Development Department code enforcement activities; provide information handouts; inform the public and local realtors about equal housing laws and recourse available in case of violations; refer complaints to Calif ornia Department of Fair Employment and Housing; refer complaints regarding discrimination to La Raza Central Legal, a nonprofit community law center which works with local tenants to resolve landlord/tenant issues. Information will be posted and available at public locations, such as City Hall, the library and the recreation center. Continue referral activities through Code Enforcemen t Program. Ongoing Information is provided and referrals are made to assist the public with issues regarding fair housing laws. Program H(B-2) - Implement an outreach program for persons with disabilities. Work with agencies such as the Golden Gate Regional Center, a state-funded nonprofit organization serving individuals with developmental disabilities in Marin, San Francisco and San Mateo counties, InnVision Shelter Network, Cal Primrose, and Center for Independence of Individuals with Disabilities to implement an outreach program that informs families in Burlingame about housing and services available for persons with disabilities. The program could include the development of an informational brochure, providing information on services on the City's website, and providing housing- related training for individuals/families through workshops. Provide information regarding housing to families of persons with developmental disabilities. Develop outreach material within 2 years of HE adoptions Information regarding housing services available for person with disabilities is provided by the City during Building workshops and by staff on specific projects where this situation applies. In addition staff will work on a brochure to provide to the public regarding such services. Program Description (By Housing Element Program Names) Housing Programs Progress Report - Government Code Section 65583. Describe progress of all programs including local efforts to remove governmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing as identified in the housing element. Name of Program Objectives Timeframe in H.E. Status of Program Implementation Program H(B-3) - Community amenities for rentals. Encourage the inclusion of communal amenities in new rental developments (i.e. community rooms, play structures, laundry facilities) where feasible and provision of which does not impair achievement of maximum densities or the financial feasibility of developing housing affordable to lower-income households. Promote attractive rental opportunities. Ongoing When reviewing multif amily projects staff and the Planning Commission request that the developer provide additional amenities for the residents. For example, a 290-unit multifamily development approved in 2015 includes a range of communal amenities including a community room that will also be available for use by the general public. Goal 3: PROVIDE HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CITY EMPLOYEES, TEACHERS, HOSPITAL WORKERS AND OTHERS IN THE SERVICE INDUSTRY WHO WORK IN BURLINGAME. Program H(C-1) - Refer eligible employees to housing assistance programs. Train staff about current opportunities; make available brochures and contact information to eligible residents who inquire about availability of programs. Refer eligible residents to CDBG programs administered by the County Office of Housing and Community Development. Continue staff training and to refer eligible residents to programs. Continuous When there are phone or counter inquiries regarding housing assistance Planning Division staff provides referrals to San Mateo Office of Housing and also prints and provides the list of eligible affordable housing opportunities prepared by the County Housing Office. Program H(C-2) - Provide incentives for developers to include affordable units in new residential projects. 1. Amend the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance to co mply with local and state legislative requirements. 2. Amend the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance or adopt a Density Bonus Ordinance to accommodate a Low- Income component of required affordable housing. 3. Amend the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance or adopt a Density Bonus Ordinance to encourage smaller unit sizes (i.e. studio, SROs, one- and two-bedroom units). 4. Amend the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance or adopt a Density Bonus Ordinance to extend the affordability time restrictions on subsidized housing. 5. Amend the zoning code to provide incentives to developers who provide additional affordable units and/or serve a broader range of income levels than that required by the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance or state density bonus requirements, such as reduced parking requirements, increased height limits, reduced landscaping requirements, flexible setback requirements and reduced fees. Provide 75 new affordable units Provide 50 percent of affordable units at Low- income levels. Within 1 year of HE adoption The Density Bonus Ordinance was amended and adopted in January 2015 and includes items #1-4 . Action #5 will be addressed as part of our zoning code update following the General Plan update which is currently underway. Program Description (By Housing Element Program Names) Housing Programs Progress Report - Government Code Section 65583. Describe progress of all programs including local efforts to remove governmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing as identified in the housing element. Name of Program Objectives Timeframe in H.E. Status of Program Implementation Program H(C-3) - Consider adoption of a co mmercial impact in-lieu fee. Consider adopting a commercial in-lieu fee that would require developers of employment-generating commercial and industrial developments to contribute to the supply of low- and moderate-income housing through the provision of commercial in-lieu fees as prescribed in a nexus impact fee study. Generate in-lieu fees to contribute toward the creation of low and moderate income housing. Within 1 year of HE adoption Both commercial and residential impact fees were brought before the City Council for study in January 2017, with further analysis and proposals anticipated later in 2017. Program H(C-4) - Consider adoption of a residential in- lieu fee option. Consider adopting a residential in-lieu fee as an alternative to providing affordable units on-site. Generate in-lieu fees to contribute toward the creation of low and moderate income housing. Within 1 year of HE adoption Both commercial and residential impact fees were brought before the City Council for study in January 2017, with further analysis and proposals anticipated later in 2017. Program H(C-5) - Encourage public agency partnerships to provide housing, reduce commute time, and facilitate retention of groups like teachers, public employees, hospital and service sector workers. Contact public agencies to encourage them to include a provision for housing in any facility expansion plans; disseminate information about available CDBG funded programs. Provide 50 new housing units in the vicinity of public agency workplaces and commercial centers. Ongoing The City is working with a nonprofit developer on a proposal to develop workforce housing on two existing parking lots located downtown. Program Description (By Housing Element Program Names) Housing Programs Progress Report - Government Code Section 65583. Describe progress of all programs including local efforts to remove governmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing as identified in the housing element. Name of Program Objectives Timeframe in H.E. Status of Program Implementation GOAL D: ENCOURAGE SPECIAL PURPOSE HOUSING. Program H(D-1) - Increase affordability for elderly households. a. Continue to implement the second unit amnesty program to allow creation of accessible secondary units for the elderly; b. Continue to allow upon request curbside disabled accessible parking spaces in single family neighborhoods. c. Coordinate with San Mateo County Housing Authority to increase the number of Section 8 units for Burlingame's elderly population. d. Continue updating and distributing widely to local residents the Senior Resources Handbook: An Informational Guide for Burlingame Senior Citizens, Their Families and Caregivers. e. Continue to provide incentives for new senior housing by maintaining the code provision that allows reduced parking requirements for assisted living projects and other group residential facilities for the elderly. f. Continue City financial support to non-profit agencies which administer housing programs for seniors (home sharing, reverse mortgage). Planning staff to work with these agencies to facilitate implementation of their programs in Burlingame. g. Encourage non-profit housing groups to develop housing by having adequate Planning staff to facilitate project processing and environmental review, and by maintaining the existing incentives in the zoning regulations for residential facilities for the elderly. h. Refer seniors who are homeowners to the Human Investment Project (HIP) for Housing Home Sharing Program, to find eligible tenants to share their housing. Provide 30 affordable units for the elderly. Increase number of Section 8 units for elderly by 5 units. Continue public education efforts. Ongoing The City is currently working with the Peninsula Health Care District on preliminary stages of planning for the Peninsula Wellness Community Master Plan which will include a variety of senior housing options, including hospice care, assisted and independent living facilities. The City is in the process of updating its accessory dwelling unit (second unit) regulations to comply with State requirements which are intended to facilitate the construction of affordable accessory dwelling units including units suitable for the elderly. Program Description (By Housing Element Program Names) Housing Programs Progress Report - Government Code Section 65583. Describe progress of all programs including local efforts to remove governmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing as identified in the housing element. Name of Program Objectives Timeframe in H.E. Status of Program Implementation Program H(D-2) - Improve livability of housing units for disabled population. a. Implement the adopted Reasonable Accommodations Ordinance, which provides individuals with disabilities reasonable accommodation in rules, policies, practices and procedures that may be necessary to ensure equal access to housing by providing a process for individuals with disabilities to make requests for reasonable accommodation in regard to relief from the various land use, zoning, or building laws, rules, policies, practices and/or procedures of the City. This policy offers a process to modify certain development standards, such as lot coverage and setback requirements for ramps and landings added to residences and group homes in order to provide access for the disabled. b. Continue to allow supportive and transitional housing in residential districts subject to the same restrictions that apply to other residential districts in the same zone. c. Help facilitate the acquisition of single-family homes to be converted into assisted living facilities for the developmentally disabled. d. Continue to allow persons with disabilities to request disabled parking curb markings in the single family residential areas. Facilitate use of County assistance and staff work with residents to modify 10 existing housing units to accommodate disabled. Ongoing Planning and Building Division staff is versed in the reasonable accommodations ordinance and works with applicants to utilize this section of the code. In addition, when needed Public Works staff works with residents requesting disabled curb parking in residential areas. Program H(D-3) - Add affordable housing units for single-parent households. Continue to assign staff to carry out the follow ing actions: a. Work with the County Housing Authority to increase the number of Section 8 certificates for single-parent families. b. Work with the Human Investment Project for Housing (HIP), a non-profit housing corporation which administers a home-sharing program which is available for Burlingame residents. Develop literature regarding availability of housing programs; distribute to Burlingame residents. Continue City funding assistance. Increase by 5 the number of Section 8 units for single parent households. Train staff and refer single parent households to shared housing program, IHN or other local providers Ongoing Staff is aware of HIP housing programs and refers interested parties to HIP. In addition, the City's newsletter also information on HIP's home share program, and information is provided on a web page dedicated to affordable housing resources on the City’s website.. Program Description (By Housing Element Program Names) Housing Programs Progress Report - Government Code Section 65583. Describe progress of all programs including local efforts to remove governmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing as identified in the housing element. Name of Program Objectives Timeframe in H.E. Status of Program Implementation Program H(D-4) - Provide affordable studio or one- bedroom units for single occupants. a. Amend the zoning code to create zoning incentives that encourage the development of smaller, more affordable housing units for seniors and other single occupants, such as reduced parking requirements for units less than 900 square feet and other flexible development standards. b. Continue to allow secondary units per the Government Code. Continue to implement the Secondary Dw elling Unit Ordinance (adopted in 2011), which allows new secondary dwelling units subject to certain standards, including minimum lot size, maximum unit size and one of the units to be owner occupied. Continue to allow waiver of on-site parking for accessory dwelling units that are rented out to those with moderate incomes or below. Provide affordable efficiency housing units on appropriate opportunity sites. Rezone properties with residential overlay Amend code to provide incentives for smaller units. Within 1 year of HE adoption Staff has drafted revisions to the secondary dwelling unit regulations to bring it into conformance with new State regulations for accessory dwelling units. These changes will be reviewed by the City Council in January 2017. Program H(D-5) - Provide local share of support for county-wide homeless programs a. Continue financial contributions to agencies which provide service to the homeless population in San Mateo County; continue to allow group facilities for the homeless in conjunction with church facilities as a conditional use; continue to support financially and work with local and non-profit providers in San Mateo b. Maintain the zoning code provisions that allow emergency shelters by right in the northern part of the RR (Rollins Road) zoning district. c. Implement the zoning code provisions that allow transitional and supportive housing by right in all zone districts which allow residential uses only subject to those restrictions that apply to other residential uses of the same type in the same zone. Program H(D-5) - Provide local share of support for county-wide homeless programs a. Continue financial contributions to agencies which provide service to the homeless population in San Mateo County; continue to allow group facilities for the homeless in conjunction with church facilities as a Continue financial support of County-wide programs. Staff to continue to facilitate process necessary to provide such services in the city. Ongoing Staff continues to provide financial support to County-wide programs Program Description (By Housing Element Program Names) Housing Programs Progress Report - Government Code Section 65583. Describe progress of all programs including local efforts to remove governmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing as identified in the housing element. Name of Program Objectives Timeframe in H.E. Status of Program Implementation conditional use; continue to support financially and work with local and non-profit providers in San Mateo b. Maintain the zoning code provisions that allow emergency shelters by right in the northern part of the RR (Rollins Road) zoning district. c. Implement the zoning code provisions that allow transitional and supportive housing by right in all zone districts which allow residential uses only subject to those restrictions that apply to other residential uses of the same type in the same zone. GOAL E: REDUCE RESIDENTIAL ENERGY USE TO CONSERVE ENERGY AND HELP REDUCE HOUSING COSTS. Program H(E-1) - Energy conservation for major residential construction In all plan checking for new residential construction and major additions, apply Title 24 energy conservation requirements; where possible in planning developments, require structural and landscaping design to make use of natural heating and cooling. Add energy conservation features to 250 residences. Ongoing Title 24 energy conservation requirements are applied to all plan checks for new residential construction. Program H(E-2) - Community awareness of conservation benefits Distribute brochure on available energy conservation programs and measures at the Planning counter to all residents planning to expand or build new residences. Provide energy conservation information to public. Ongoing There are brochures available at City Hall and on-line information provided regarding energy conservation for both residents and businesses. Program H(E-3) - Sustainable Development Stringent California Green Building Standards (CalGreen) have been adopted. At the minimum, new construction will follow the requirements set by the mandatory portion of the CalGreen Code. Utilize CalGreen standards. Continuous The City currently complies with the CalGreen standards. Program Description (By Housing Element Program Names) Housing Programs Progress Report - Government Code Section 65583. Describe progress of all programs including local efforts to remove governmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing as identified in the housing element. Name of Program Objectives Timeframe in H.E. Status of Program Implementation GOAL F: ACHIEVE INCREASED AFFORDABILITY OF HOUSING. Program H(F-1) - Encourage development of housing on selected sites to serve all income levels Amend the zoning code to create zoning incentives that encourage the consolidation of smaller lots identified as Housing Inventory Sites, such as development review streamlining, reduction in required parking for smaller units, setback modifications, or increases in building height. Promote development on smaller opportunity sites by promoting lot consolidation for creation of affordable housing Within 1 year of HE adoption When City staff meets with applicants regarding new development they are encouraged to consider consolidation of parcels for development project, particularly near transit. Further zoning incentives will be considered as part of a comprehensive zoning ordinance update over the next year. Program H(F-2) - Promote development of potential housing sites Maintain and update the area-by-area land use surveys, note changes in vacant and underutilized sites; share information with potential residential developers. Provide assistance and incentives to encourage development of the opportunity sites identified in the Housing Element Ongoing The City's opportunity sites are provided to developers that express interest in developing in Burlingame, this list of opportunity sites is also provided on the City's website (and in the Housing Element). Program H(F-3) - Create Priority Development Area (PDA) Housing Overlay Zone. Amend the zoning code to create a "Priority Development Area Housing Overlay Zone" to establish standards and incentives for housing in the portions of the community zoned for high density residential and/or mixed use development that are adjacent to transit corridors and transit centers. Specific standards to be considered are densities, development standard incentives, reduced parking requirements, building heights and compatibility with adjacent low er-scale neighborhoods. The Priority Development Area covers the North Burlingame area, the El Camino Real and California Drive corridors and the Downtown Specific Plan area. Provide flexibility and incentives in the application of development standards within the Priority Development Area. Provide flexibility and incentives in the application of development standards within the Priority Development Area. Within 1 year of HE adoption The General Plan Update has identified potential areas that would be suitable for high density residential and/or mixed use development that are adjacent to transit corridors and transit centers. This program will be examined for inclusion in the zoning code update that will follow the General Plan adoption, which is currently underway. Program Description (By Housing Element Program Names) Housing Programs Progress Report - Government Code Section 65583. Describe progress of all programs including local efforts to remove governmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing as identified in the housing element. Name of Program Objectives Timeframe in H.E. Status of Program Implementation Program H(F-4) - Identify sites for affordable, mixed use residential, live-work and small one-bedroom or studio apartments. a. Encourage development of sites in C-R zone and where there is commercial zoning with a residential overlay or residential mixed use zoning; b. Promote development within the new mixed use zoning districts within the Downtown Specific Plan area, which allow for mixed uses and high density residential uses, and includes incentives to keep units affordable such as reduced parking requirements, increased heights and modified setbacks. Encourage development of 150 units on selected Housing Opportunity Sites within the Downtown Specific Plan area. Ongoing Planning staff has encouraged these mixed use developments and as a result we have a recent application for a live-work project and have also had recent developments in the Downtown Area that been approved and constructed with reduced parking requirements and the use of parking lifts to meet the parking requirements. Program H(F-5) - Second-unit Amnesty Continue the second unit amnesty program and provide second unit applicants with information on participation in the San Mateo County Rental Rehabilitation program which provides rehabilitation loans for units which are available to tenants with low or very low incomes; consider expansion of the program by changing the eligibility date to qualify for second-unit amnesty. There have been 10 units approved through the second unit amnesty program since its adoption in 2001. In addition, there have been 3 new units approved under the ordinance allowing new second units which was adopted in 2011. Process 125 applications for second unit amnesty; Provide opportunities for rehabilitation of these units Ongoing The City is currently in the process of adopting new accessory dwelling unit regulations in conformity with State law. The processing of such applications has been streamlined. Planning staff educates the public about the accessory dwelling unit regulations and encourages new accessory dwelling units when possible. Program Description (By Housing Element Program Names) Housing Programs Progress Report - Government Code Section 65583. Describe progress of all programs including local efforts to remove governmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing as identified in the housing element. Name of Program Objectives Timeframe in H.E. Status of Program Implementation Program H(F-6) - To expand the stock of affordable housing Contact known non-profit housing corporations and religious institutions to make them aware of City interest, familiarize them with the opportunities available in Burlingame, and assist in processing where applications are required; encourage use of private foundation grants to fund affordable units. The City will issue an RFP for redevelopment of City-owned parking lots with affordable housing within one year of Housing Element adoption. Encourage development of affordable units on opportunity sites. Issue RFP for redevelopment of parking lots. Ongoing The City put out an RFP for the redevelopment of lots F& N for affordable housing in 2015. A development team was selected by the City Council and the development team is currently developing design concepts and securing financing. Program H(F-7) - Section 8 Program Work with San Mateo County Community Services and Housing Authority to provide Burlingame a proportionate share of Section 8 funds; distribute information about program to potential property ow ner and renter participants. Current number of Section 8 units is 100. Attempt to increase by additional 20 units (total of 120 units). Ongoing The City will work with San Mateo County Community Services and Housing Authority to provide a proportionate number of Section 8 units located Burlingame. Program H(F-8) - First-time Homebuyer Program Continue to participate in cooperative CDBG agreement with San Mateo County to provide Burlingame residents with the opportunity to participate in the first-ti me homebuyer program (Mortgage Credit Certificate) funded by CDBG. Make first time home buyer information available on City’s website and hold public workshops to identify opportunities for those in need. Obtain assistance for 15 Burlingame residents. Ongoing The City will educate the public about the opportunity to participate in the first-tine homebuyer program. Program Description (By Housing Element Program Names) Housing Programs Progress Report - Government Code Section 65583. Describe progress of all programs including local efforts to remove governmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing as identified in the housing element. Name of Program Objectives Timeframe in H.E. Status of Program Implementation Program H(F-9) - Zero-Net-Loss of Housing Units Amend the zoning code to require that when there is a loss of multifamily rental housing due to subdivision or condominium approvals, the project shall be required to provide 20 percent affordable housing units and/or provide displaced tenants with the first right to return to replacement housing units and to affordable housing units, subject to compliance with Measure T, the Burlingame Fair Property Rights Ordinance. No loss of housing stock. Within 1 year of HE adoption This program has been implemented through project review but the zoning code has not yet been amended to include this required. The City is currently doing a General Plan update that will be followed by a zoning code update. This issue will be studied for inclusion in the upcoming zoning code update. Program H(F-10) – Housing for Very Low Income Households Explore opportunities to encourage development of housing for very low and extremely low income households through a variety of activities that may include: • Examining the appropriateness of new housing types that can provide affordable options, such as junior second units and micro-apartments; • Identifying grant and funding opportunities; • Monitoring the availability of state cap-and-trade funding for affordable housing; • Considering joint development opportunities with non- profit developers for projects that accommodate a wide range of income categories including very low inco me; • Reaching out to housing developers and assisting them, where applicable, in preparing applications for affordable housing funding sources, which may involve feedback on their financial analyses, provision of demographic and land use data, and review of their funding applications; • Offering additional incentives beyond the density bonus and inclusionary housing provisions; and/or • Prioritizing a portion of fees, including potential residential and commercial impact fees, tow ards affordable housing. Explore the effectiveness and appropriateness of new strategies and incentives to promote housing for very low and extremely low income households on an annual basis. Annual Review As part of the zoning code amendments to the secondary dwelling unit regulations, the City will also explore the option of amending the code to add opportunities for junior accessory units (which provide a housing unit within the footprint of an existing family dwelling). In addition, the development of lots F & N will include the City teaming with a housing developer to construct new affordable units. In addition, in January 2017 the City Council reviewed the option of adopting commercial and residential impact fees to provide funding to be set aside for affordable housing development and directed staff to provide further analysis and proposals. This is a result of the countywide nexus study prepared by 21 Elements. Program Description (By Housing Element Program Names) Housing Programs Progress Report - Government Code Section 65583. Describe progress of all programs including local efforts to remove governmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing as identified in the housing element. Name of Program Objectives Timeframe in H.E. Status of Program Implementation Program H(F-11) – Anti-Displacement Strategies Acknowledge the problem of tenant displacement and convene a process to investigate mitigations and the obstacles to deploying them, including legislative barriers such as the Burlingame Fair Property Rights Ordinance (“Measure T”) and establish or modify strategies as appropriate. Conduct an annual review of the availability and effectiveness of anti-displacement strategies and programs. First reviewed January 2015. then annually Anti-displacement strategies were discussed and examined by the City Council during the last housing element cycle. In addition, this topic was revisited by the City Council in 2016 when Measure R (rent control) was placed on the ballot. 1 STAFF REPORT AGENDA NO: MEETING DATE: January 17, 2017 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: January 17, 2017 From: William Meeker, Community Development Director – (650) 558-7255 Subject: Public Hearing to Consider Proposed Amendments to Title 25, Chapters 25.08, 25.26, 25.50, 25.59, 25.60, and 25.70 to Update existing Secondary Dwelling Unit Regulations to be Consistent with Recently Adopted Amendments to California Government Code Section 65852 Related to Accessory Dwelling Units RECOMMENDATION The City Council should: 1. Request the City Clerk to read the title of the following ordinance: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AMENDING TITLE 25 OF THE BURLINGAME MUNICIPAL CODE, THE ZONING ORDINANCE, CHAPTERS 25.08, 25.26, 25.50, 25.59, 25.60, AND 25.70 TO UPDATE EXISTING SECONDARY DWELLING UNIT REGULATIONS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH RECENTLY ADOPTED AMENDMENTS TO CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65852 RELATED TO ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS 2. By motion, waive further reading and introduce the proposed ordinance. 3. Conduct a public hearing on the proposed ordinance. 4. Following closure of the public hearing, discuss the proposed ordinance and provide any direction to staff. If no changes are requested, then direct that the ordinance be placed on the February 6, 2017, City Council agenda for adoption. 5. Direct the City Clerk to publish a summary of the ordinance at least five days before proposed adoption. If introduced, the ordinance along with a resolution verifying that the actions of the City Council are in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) will be presented for adoption at the February 6, 2017, regular meeting of the City Council. Title 25 - Zoning Amendments for Accessory Dwelling Units January 17, 2017 2 BACKGROUND On September 27, 2016, Governor Jerry Brown signed AB 2299 and SB 1069 into law. This legislation amends Government Code Section 65852.2, the regulations for accessory dwelling units (ADUs, currently referred to as secondary dwelling units in the Burlingame Municipal Code). The amendments are intended to streamline housing production in the face of the State’s ongoing housing crisis by making it easier for property owners to construct an ADU associated with a single family dwelling. In addition, the legislation requires that such units now be referred to as accessory dwelling units. The revisions to State Law became effective on January 1, 2017. Local jurisdictions are required to comply with the new requirements, which supersede local ordinances. In addition, jurisdictions are required to provide a copy of the Accessory Dwelling Unit ordinance to the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) within 60 days of adoption. At its meeting of December 12, 2016, the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed amendments to the Burlingame Zoning Regulations and recommended that the City Council adopt the changes as proposed. DISCUSSION The attached draft ordinance sets forth text amendments to the City’s existing secondary dwelling unit regulations (now to be referred to as accessory dwelling units) to ensure that the Burlingame Municipal Code is consistent with the new State regulations. A summary of the most significant changes includes:  Parking – Parking requirements are waived for ADUs that are:  within 1/2 mile of a major transit stop, as defined in California Public Resources Code § 21064.31 or included in the regional transportation plan;  located within a designated historic district;  part of the existing main residence or an existing residential accessory structure intended for human habitation;  located within one block of a car share vehicle; or  when on-street parking permits are required but not offered to the occupant of the accessory dwelling unit.  Occupancy - No occupancy restriction on number of residents (previously no more than two people were allowed in an ADU)  Ministerial approval/denial within 120 days 1 CA Government Code Section 21064.3. "Major transit stop" means a site containing an existing rail transit station, a ferry terminal served by either a bus or rail transit service, or the intersection of two or more major bus routes with a frequency of service interval of 15 minutes or less during the morning and afternoon peak commute periods. Title 25 - Zoning Amendments for Accessory Dwelling Units January 17, 2017 3  Revise terminology to refer to “Accessory Dwelling Units” (previously identified as “secondary dwelling units”) Pursuant to the Burlingame Zoning Regulations, the square footage for an ADU is still counted toward the lot coverage and floor area allowed for the subject property by the underlying zoning district. For example, the 40% lot coverage allowed on an R-1 lot would include both the main single family dwelling and an ADU. The parking exemption for ADUs created as part of the existing main residence or an existing residential accessory structure is based on the principle that the square footage has already been counted as living space (in terms of parking), and the conversion of this space to an ADU is not significantly increasing (or increasing at all) the parking requirement for the use of the property as a whole. An example would be the conversion of a master bedroom or family room of a dwelling into an ADU, or the conversion of an accessory structure previously approved for accessory living space, such as a detached recreation room or guest house. To prevent the possibility of an application for an accessory living space being approved and in succession becoming an application for an ADU, the ordinance includes a provision that accessory dwelling units must be constructed within the existing building envelope or existing and authorized accessory structures as they existed three years prior to application. State ADU regulations are located in Section 65852.2 of the California Government Code. Burlingame’s regulations for secondary dwelling units are currently located in Chapter 25.59. There are several other sections that address secondary units that require updating for consistency including:  Chapter 25.08 - Definitions  Chapter 25.26 - R-1 District regulations  Chapter 25.50 - Non-conforming uses  Chapter 25.59 - Secondary dwelling unit regulations  Chapter 25.60 - Accessory structure regulations  Chapter 25.70 - Off-street parking regulations Other changes other than those affecting the local Zoning Regulations include: Fire Sprinklers: In addition to the changes detailed above, other changes in State law have implications for building, fire and utilities standards. The State regulations now state that fire sprinklers cannot be required for an ADU if they are not also required for the primary residence. After consultation with the Fire Marshal, it was determined that Title 18 (Building Construction – Residential Code) will need to be amended to bring it into conformity with State law requirements for accessory dwelling units. For attached units, fire sprinklers are only required if the total area of disturbance within the single family dwelling (including the unit) totals more than 750 square feet. This applies to additions of 750 square feet or more over a two-year period. Detached ADUs are not required to have fire sprinklers unless the furthest point of the structure is more than 400 feet from the nearest hydrant. In such cases, fire sprinklers would be required in the detached accessory dwelling unit or a private hydrant could be installed on the property. Amendments to Title 18 will be presented to the City Council at the February 6, 2017 meeting. Title 25 - Zoning Amendments for Accessory Dwelling Units January 17, 2017 4 Utilities: With regard to utilities, the State regulations state that ADUs shall not be considered new residential uses for the purposes of calculating local agency connection fees or capacity charges for utilities, including water and sewer service. However, for ADUs that are not located within an existing structure (new detached accessory structures or square footage added to a single family dwelling), jurisdictions may require a new or separate utility connection for the accessory dwelling unit. The City’s current regulations with regard to utilities for ADUs comply with the State standards. Junior Accessory Dwelling Units: In addition to the adoption of AB 2299 and SB 1069, part of the changes to Government Code Section 6582.2 include new language resulting from the adoption of AB 2406, which enables jurisdictions to adopt standards related to junior accessory dwelling units. A junior second unit involves converting a portion of an existing single family residence into an ADU as a way of providing smaller housing units. An example would be converting an existing bedroom and making it a separate unit by incorporating a small wet -bar kitchen and an exterior entrance. Junior second units are generally smaller in size than an accessory dwelling unit, up to 500 square feet. Such units maintain an internal connection to the remainder of the single family dwelling so that the space can be flexible over time, including the possibility of reverting back to a larger single family dwelling. HCD does recognize junior accessory dwelling units as housing units in terms of jurisdictions meeting their RHNA (Regional Housing Need Allocation) numbers. While jurisdictions are not required to allow junior accessory dwelling units, AB 2406 sets standards for the creation of such units. Given that jurisdictions are not required to make provisions for junior accessory dwelling units, the proposed code amendments for consideration in this amendment do not include standards for junior accessory dwelling units at this time. However, if the City Council would like to consider provisions for junior accessory dwelling units in the future, staff can return with a separate item at a later date. The draft ordinance is provided as an attachment to this report. Staff has also attached a “strikeout” version of the current regulations to assist the City Council in identifying the specific changes made to the local regulations. FISCAL IMPACT None. Exhibits:  Ordinance  Current Regulations - Strikeout  PC Minutes – December 12, 2016  Government Code Section 65852.2 ORDINANCE NO. __________ 1 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AMENDING TITLE 25 OF THE BURLINGAME MUNICIPAL CODE, THE ZONING ORDINANCE, CHAPTERS 25.08, 25.26, 25.50, 25.59, 25.60, AND 25.70 TO UPDATE EXISTING SECONDARY DWELLING UNIT REGULATIONS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH RECENTLY ADOPTED AMENDMENTS TO CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65852 RELATED TO ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS The City Council of the City of Burlingame ordains as follows: Division 1. WHEREAS, on September 27, 2016 Governor Jerry Brown signed AB 2299 and SB 1069 into law. This legislation amends Government Code Section 65852.2, the regulations for accessory dwelling units (ADUs, currently referred to as “Secondary Dwelling Units” in the Burlingame Municipal Code). The amendments are intended to streamline housing production in the face of the State’s ongoing housing crisis by making it easier for property owners to construct an accessory dwelling unit associated with a single family dwelling. Under the legislation such units are now to be referred to as “Accessory Dwelling Units”; and WHEREAS, the revisions to State Law became effective on January 1, 2017. Local jurisdictions are required to comply with the new requirements, which supersede local ordinances. In addition, jurisdictions are required to provide a copy of the Accessory Dwelling Unit ordinance to the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) within 60-days of adoption, and; WHEREAS, at its regular meeting of December 12, 2016, the Burlingame Planning Commission reviewed proposed amendments to the Burlingame Zoning Regulations to bring them into conformance with Government Code Section 65852.2 and recommended that the City Council adopt the changes as proposed. WHEREAS, at its regular meeting of January 17, 2017 the Burlingame City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing, and following conclusion of the hearing, introduced an ordinance revising the Burlingame Zoning Regulations to bring them into conformance with Government Code Section 65852.2. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Division 2. Burlingame Municipal Code Title 25 - Zoning is hereby amended as follows: ORDINANCE NO. __________ 2 Chapter 25.59 Secondary Dwelling Units is replaced in total with the following text: Chapter 25.59 ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS 25.59.010 Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to regulate both existing and new accessory dwelling units in residential zoning districts and on residential property consistent with state law (California Government Code Sections 65852.1 through 65852.2). This chapter is intended to implement the Housing Element of the Burlingame General Plan by providing for additional housing opportunities. This will be accomplished by increasing the number of units available within existing neighborhoods while maintaining the primarily single-family residential character of the area, and establishing standards for the development and occupancy of accessory units to ensure that they are compatible with neighboring uses and structures, adequately equipped with public utility services, safe for human occupancy, and do not create unreasonable traffic and safety impacts. An accessory residential unit which conforms to the requirements of this chapter shall not be considered to exceed the allowable density for the lot upon which it is located and shall be deemed to be a residential use which is consistent with the existing General Plan and zoning designations for the lot. 25.59.020 Accessory dwelling unit permit procedure. (a) Applications for such an accessory dwelling unit permit shall be in writing and filed with the Community Development Director on a form approved by the Community Development Director. (b) As established by council resolution, a fee will be charged for an application for an accessory dwelling unit permit under this chapter. (c) Within 120 days of receipt of a complete application, the Community Development Director shall ministerially process for approval any application for an accessory dwelling unit permit pursuant to this chapter. Upon finding that the performance standards set forth in Section 25.59.060 are met the proposal shall be approved ministerially without discretionary review or public hearing and the applicant may proceed to acquire a building permit. All accessory units are categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to Sections15301 and 15303 of the CEQA guidelines. If the application does not meet all of the requirements of this chapter, the Community Development Director shall deny the application. ORDINANCE NO. __________ 3 (d) Deed Restrictions. Prior to issuance of a building permit for an accessory dwelling unit, or for improvements to bring an existing accessory dwelling unit into compliance with the accessory dwelling unit permit requirements, an agreement of restriction shall be filed with the county recorder. The agreement of restriction shall state the following: (1) The accessory dwelling unit shall not be sold separately from any part of the property on which it is located; (2) The accessory dwelling unit is restricted to the standards specified in Burlingame Municipal Code Chapter 25.59; (3) Either the primary single-family dwelling or the accessory dwelling unit shall be occupied as the principal place of residence of the record owner of the lot. In the case of ownership by a corporation, partnership, trust or association, either the primary single-family dwelling or the accessory dwelling unit shall be the place of residence of an officer, director or shareholder of the corporation, a partner in the partnership, a trustor, trustee or beneficiary of the trust, a member of the association, or an employee of any such organization; and (4) The restrictions shall be binding upon any successor in ownership of the property and lack of compliance shall result in legal action against the property owner. 25.59.030 Appeal. The applicant that requested the accessory dwelling unit permit may appeal the community development director’s denial of the request. The appeal shall be submitted to the community development director in writing within ten (10) days after the date of the community development director’s decision. The appeal shall be heard by the planning commission in a public hearing pursuant to the procedures established for discretionary actions in Chapter 25.16. 25.59.040 Revocation of accessory dwelling unit permit. (a) Grounds. An accessory dwelling unit permit granted pursuant to this chapter may be revoked on any one or more of the following grounds: (1) The performance standards outlined in Sections 25.59.060 and 25.59.070 are not being met; or (2) No owner of the subject property resides on the property; or ORDINANCE NO. __________ 4 (3) The accessory dwelling unit is no longer used for residential purposes; or (4) The parking required by Section 25.59.060 is no longer provided; or (5) The primary single-family dwelling on the site is purposely demolished; or (b) Notice. Written notice to revoke an accessory dwelling unit permit shall be served on the property owner, as shown on the last equalized assessment roll, either personally or by certified mail, and shall state: (1) The reasons for the proposed revocation; (2) That the proposed action will be taken by the director of community development unless a hearing before the planning commission is requested within fifteen (15) days after the date of said notice. If no response is received, the director of community development shall forthwith revoke the accessory dwelling unit permit as set forth in said notice. (c) Hearing. If a hearing is requested, at least ten (10) days’ notice thereof shall be given to the requested party. At any such hearing the property owner shall call witnesses and present evidence in his or her behalf. Upon conclusion of such hearing, the planning commission shall determine whether or not the permit shall be revoked. Such determination may be appealed to the city council in the same manner as for appeals taken on applications for the granting of conditional use permits or variances. 25.59.050 Variances prohibited. No variance under Chapter 25.54 shall be granted from any requirement of this chapter. 25.59.060 Performance standards for accessory dwelling units. General Provisions. This section allows an accessory dwelling unit, either attached to the main dwelling or detached in a separate structure to be created on lots which now contain one single-family dwelling and meet the following criteria, upon approval of an administrative accessory dwelling unit permit. (a) Minimum Lot Size. The minimum lot size to accommodate an accessory dwelling unit shall be no less than six thousand (6,000) square feet; except for accessory dwelling units constructed prior to January 1, 1954; ORDINANCE NO. __________ 5 (b) There shall be no more than one accessory dwelling unit permitted on a lot which contains no more than one primary single-family dwelling. (c) Occupancy Restrictions. Either the primary single-family dwelling or the accessory dwelling unit shall be occupied as the principal place of residence of the record owner of the lot. In the case of ownership by a corporation, partnership, trust or association, either the primary single-family dwelling or the accessory dwelling unit shall be the place of residence of an officer, director or shareholder of the corporation, a partner in the partnership, a trustor, trustee or beneficiary of the trust, a member of the association, or an employee of any such organization. (d) Unit Size. The floor area of the accessory dwelling unit shall not exceed six hundred forty (640) square feet. (e) Floor Area Ratio. The accessory dwelling unit shall fall within the total floor area ratio and lot coverage allowed by the underlying zoning district. (f) Other Measurable Standards. (1) For attached units, the accessory dwelling unit shall comply with the setback, height and declining height envelope regulations which apply to the main dwelling unit. (2) For detached units, the accessory dwelling unit shall comply with the setback, height and window placement criteria for accessory structures contained in Chapter 25.60, and shall meet the setback requirements, including exceptions for accessory structures, contained in Sections 25.28.072 and 25.28.073. Detached units shall be limited to one story in height. (g) Parking. On-site parking spaces based on the number of bedrooms in the primary dwelling as required by Chapter 25.70 and parking requirements for an accessory dwelling unit shall be as follows: (1) Unless otherwise provided in this section, a minimum of one off-street uncovered parking space within shall be provided for the accessory dwelling unit in addition to the off-street covered and uncovered parking spaces required for the main dwelling. (i) Parking for the accessory dwelling unit may be in tandem with a required parking space for the primary dwelling, meaning one car located directly behind another car; and (ii) No required parking may be provided in the front setback or yard, except in the driveway; and ORDINANCE NO. __________ 6 (iii) All parking shall be provided on a hard, all-weather surface and properly drained to the public street. (2) No parking space shall be required for an accessory dwelling unit in any of the following instances: (i) No on-site parking for the second unit shall be required if the accessory dwelling unit is only used for “affordable housing” as defined in Chapter 25.63. As a condition of approval under this subsection, the owner of the property will be required to enter into and record an agreement generally in conformance with Section 25.63.040 to ensure continued affordability of the accessory dwelling unit. A draft agreement shall be required at the time of application submittal. (ii) The accessory dwelling unit is located within one-half mile of a major transit stop, as defined in California Public Resources Code § 21064.3 or included in the regional transportation plan; (iii) The accessory dwelling unit is located within a designated historic district; (iv) The accessory dwelling unit is part of the existing main residence or an existing, authorized and finalized residential accessory structure intended for human habitation as having existed three years prior to application; (v) When on-street parking permits are required but not offered to the occupant of the accessory dwelling unit; (vi) When there is a car share vehicle, in a location determined by the Community Development Director to have at least three dedicated parking spaces, located within one block of the accessory dwelling unit; (h) Construction of the accessory dwelling unit shall comply with the all applicable provisions of this title and all applicable building, health and fire codes; except for accessory dwelling units constructed prior to January 1, 1954; (i) The accessory dwelling unit shall incorporate the same or similar architectural features, building materials and colors as the primary dwelling located on the property. Compatibility with the primary structure includes coordination of colors, materials, roofing and other architectural features, and landscaping designed so that the appearance of the site remains that of a single-family residence. ORDINANCE NO. __________ 7 (j) Upon approval of an accessory dwelling unit there shall be an application submitted for a new, separate address from the Public Works, Engineering Division. Address numbers shall be placed on all new and existing buildings with accessory dwelling units, in accordance with the street identification standards provided in Title 17, Chapter 17.04. and shall be placed in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street to provide clear identification of the unit for emergency responders. (k) A restrictive covenant which mandates owner occupancy of at least one of the units shall be recorded to establish the existing accessory dwelling unit. The restrictive covenant shall be binding upon any successor in ownership of the property and lack of compliance shall void the approval of the unit and may result in legal action against the property owner. The restrictive covenant shall be subject to approval by the city attorney as to its form and content. (l) If the accessory dwelling unit is demolished, the accessory dwelling unit permit shall lapse and be of no further force and effect, and all on-site parking requirements of Chapter 25.70 shall be met for the primary dwelling on the site. (m) For existing accessory dwelling units constructed prior to January 1, 1954 the following additional criteria shall be met, in addition to subsections a-j above: (1) The accessory dwelling unit shall conform to the requirements of the California Health and Safety Code Section 17920.3, and the Uniform Housing Code as adopted by Section 17922. (2) An applicant for an accessory dwelling unit permit pursuant to this section that has been granted on conditions that it conform to the requirements of this chapter may perform work to bring the accessory dwelling unit into conformance, such as reducing the size of the living unit, improving or constructing parking, and correcting violation of Health and Safety Code Section 17920.3 and the Uniform Housing Code. (3) Any remodeling affecting the exterior of the accessory dwelling unit shall be matched to generally conform to the exterior treatment of the primary dwelling unit on the parcel. (4) If the accessory dwelling unit is destroyed or damaged by a natural catastrophe, the accessory dwelling unit may be reconstructed in exactly the same envelope and floor area as it existed immediately before the catastrophe or in conformance with the standards for new accessory dwelling units contained in Section 25.59.060. ORDINANCE NO. __________ 8 Chapter 25.08 Definitions, Section 25.08.573 is replaced in total with the following text: 25.08.573 Accessory dwelling unit. “Accessory dwelling unit” means either a detached or an attached additional residential dwelling unit on a single-family residential lot or parcel that provides complete independent living facilities. It shall include permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cook ing, and sanitation purposes on the same parcel as the primary single-family dwelling is situated. Chapter 25.50 Nonconforming Uses and Structures, Section 15.50.025 Expansion of nonconforming uses – R-1 zone is replaced in total with the following text: 25.50.025 Expansion of nonconforming uses - R-1 zone. (a) This section shall only be applicable to R-1 zoned parcels which contain two (2) detached nonconforming residential units. Only the primary residence, as determined by the director of community development, may be increased in footprint or in any exterior dimension if the accessory detached unit is to be retained as a residential unit. A conditional use permit pursuant to Chapter 25.16 shall be required for any such increase to a primary unit. Only maintenance and repairs as defined by the Uniform Building Code may be made to any accessory dwelling unit. The floor area or footprint of such an accessory unit shall not be expanded. (b) Factors for determining the primary residence shall include, but not be limited to, relative age, size and conformity with zoning requirements of the two (2) residences. The property owner may request that the planning commission review any such determination by the director of community development. Chapter 25.60 Accessory Structures in R-1 and R-2 Districts is replaced in total with the following text: CHAPTER 25.60 ACCESSORY STRUCTURES IN R-1 AND R-2 DISTRICTS 25.60.010 Conditional use permit requirements. Accessory structures in the R-1 or R-2 Districts shall be a conditional use requiring a conditional use permit if any of the following will exist: (a) Two (2) or more accessory structures, each having over one hundred (100) square feet gross floor area, will exist on a single lot, except that there may be two (2) ORDINANCE NO. __________ 9 accessory structures if one is an accessory dwelling unit which complies with the provisions of Chapter 25.59 and obtains an accessory dwelling unit permit; (b) Any single accessory structure will exceed six hundred (600) square feet of gross floor area; except that an accessory structure containing an accessory dwelling unit which complies with the provisions of Chapter 25.59 and obtains an accessory dwelling unit permit may be up to six hundred forty (640) square feet; (c) All accessory structures on a single lot will exceed a total of eight hundred (800) square feet gross floor area; (d) An accessory structure will occupy any portion of the lot in front of the main building; provided, where a dwelling has been erected on the rear sixty (60) percent of the lot prior to January 15, 1954, a garage may be erected in front of the main building, but not in any portion of the front setback; (e) An accessory structure will be erected closer than four (4) feet to any other structure on the same lot; (f) Accessory structures will cover more than fifty (50) percent of the rear thirty (30) percent of a lot; (g) The plate line of the accessory structure will be more than nine (9) feet above grade at the closest point between the plate line and adjacent grade; (h) The roof height of the accessory structure will exceed ten (10) feet above grade, except the height may be increased one foot for each foot of separation from an adjacent property line, up to a maximum height of fourteen (14) feet, provided: (1) Where the lot slopes more than ten (10) percent at the location of the accessory structure, the maximum height shall be four (4) feet above the plate line; (2) The portion of the structure at the rear property line may have a maximum height of fourteen (14) feet if the structure has a pitched roof on both sides and the rear plate line does not exceed nine (9) feet above the natural grade; (3) The roof height of an accessory structure may have a maximum height of fifteen (15) feet above grade when the roof is pitched from ridge to plate on at least two (2) sides, and the ridge is no closer than five (5) feet to a side property line, and the rear plate line does not exceed nine (9) feet above the natural grade; and ORDINANCE NO. __________ 10 (4) No portion of the space within any accessory structure between the top of plate and the lowest portion of the roof structure including any dormer shall exceed seven (7) feet in height. (i) Glazed openings of the accessory structure will be within ten (10) feet of the property line or any portion of a glazed opening will be higher than ten (10) feet above grade; (j) Water or sewer connections to the accessory structure will exceed building code minimums or the accessory structure will contain any shower, bath or toilet, except that an accessory structure containing an accessory dwelling unit which complies with the provisions of Chapter 25.59 and obtains an accessory dwelling unit permit; (k) The accessory structure will enclose mechanical equipment, excluding air conditioning equipment, which is designed to operate on a regular or continuous basis, which may be objectionable because of loudness, hours of operation, odor or other reason, and which is to be located less than twenty (20) feet from any structure for habitation, or less than ten (10) feet from any property line; provided such shall be allowed without a special permit if the building official approves the structure as adequately sound insulated; (l) Storage of household goods, tools or equipment in the accessory structure will exceed ten (10) percent of the gross floor area of the main dwelling structure; (m) Any portion of the accessory structure will be used for accessory living quarters, recreation purposes or for use in a home occupation; except for an accessory structure containing an accessory dwelling unit which complies with the provisions of Chapter 25.59 and obtains an accessory dwelling unit permit does not require a conditional use permit; (n) The accessory structure will be a greenhouse, lathhouse, lanai, patio shelter or similar structure exceeding one hundred twenty (120) square feet of gross floor area. Chapter 25.26 R-1 District Regulations, Section 25.26.035 is replaced in total with the following text: 25.26.035 Uses allowed with a special permit. The following are uses allowed in the district with a special permit: (a) Attached garages for single-family dwelling units; (b) Reduction in the number of parking spaces existing on site; ORDINANCE NO. __________ 11 (c) Construction exceeding the limits of the declining height envelope; (d) A detached garage exempt from setback restrictions located within the rear forty (40) percent of the lot; (e) An accessory structure that is in the rear of the lot and that is more than twenty- eight (28) feet in width or depth, except that an accessory structure containing an accessory dwelling unit which complies with the provisions of Chapter 25.59 and obtains an accessory dwelling unit permit; (f) A basement with any interior ceiling height of six and one-half (6 1/2) feet or greater; (g) A direct exit from a basement to the exterior of the structure that is anything other than a light or window well; (h) A bathroom (toilet and sink) exceeding twenty-five (25) square feet located in a basement. Chapter 25.70 Off-Street Parking, Section 25.70.010 is replaced in total with the following text: 25.70.010 Vehicle parking spaces to be provided. (a) Parking Required. At the time of erection of any building or structure, or at the time any building or structure is enlarged or increased in capacity, there shall be provided off- street parking spaces with adequate and proper provision for ingress and egress by standard size automobiles. (b) Parking with Remodel or Reconstruction. When any building is remodeled, reconstructed or changed in use by the addition of dwelling units, gross floor area, seating capacity, change in type of use or intensified use, such additional garage or parking facilit ies as may be required must be provided. (c) Minimum Requirements. The regulations which follow are the minimum requirements unless specific requirements are made for a particular use in a district. Additional spaces may be provided. Unless otherwise expressly permitted by a section of this chapter, parking required by this chapter is to be provided on the same lot as the use for which the parking is required. ORDINANCE NO. __________ 12 25.70.030 Requirements for single-family dwellings. The following are parking requirements for single-family dwellings. (a) Parking Space Requirements. Each single-family dwelling shall provide off-street parking spaces for at least two (2) vehicles, one of which must be covered by a garage or carport. The following further requirements apply to certain additions and to new single-family dwellings: (1) An existing single-family dwelling increased in size to three (3) or four (4) bedrooms and a new single-family dwelling with up to four (4) bedrooms shall provide off-street parking spaces to current code dimensions for at least two (2) vehicles, one of which must be covered by a garage or carport; (2) A single-family dwelling hereafter increased in size to five (5) or more bedrooms and a new single-family dwelling with five (5) or more bedrooms shall provide off-street parking to current code dimensions for at least three (3) vehicles, two (2) of which must be covered by a garage or carport; (3) For the purposes of subsections (a)(1) and (2) of this section, an existing garage not less than eighteen (18) feet wide and twenty (20) feet deep interior dimension shall be considered to provide two (2) covered off-street parking places; (4) For additions to existing single-family dwellings, an existing garage with an eighteen (18) foot depth interior dimension shall be considered to meet the dimensional requirements for a parking space. (5) Bedrooms that are within accessory dwelling units shall not be counted toward the overall number of bedrooms for the primary single family dwelling on the lot on which it is located; parking for accessory dwelling units shall comply with Section 25.59.060(g). (b) Parking Aisles and Driveways. Covered parking spaces shall have a twenty-four (24) foot back-up area or be designed to be entered or exited in no more than three (3) maneuvers. All spaces must allow entry in three (3) maneuvers in the forward direction. (c) Parking Limitations. (1) A vehicle shall not be parked between a structure and the front or side property line except in a garage, driveway or other approved parking; ORDINANCE NO. __________ 13 (2) Inoperative vehicles, vehicle parts, boats and campers (as defined by Section 243 of the Vehicle Code) shall not be stored or parked in driveways or between a structure and front or side property line; (3) Required covered parking shall not be provided in tandem configuration; (4) For an addition to an existing single-family dwelling, required uncovered spaces may be provided in tandem configuration and may extend: (A) In areas with sidewalks, to the inner edge of the sidewalk, (B) In areas without sidewalks to five (5) feet from the inner edge of the curb, (C) In areas without either sidewalks or curbs, to five (5) feet from the edge of pavement. Division 3. This ordinance, or a summary as applicable, shall be published as required by law and shall become effective 30-days thereafter. ____________________________________ Ricardo Ortiz, Mayor I, Meaghan Hassel-Shearer, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 17th day of January, 2017, and adopted thereafter at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 6th day of February, 2017, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ___________________________________ Meaghan Hassel-Shearer, City Clerk Draft Ordinance – Accessory Dwelling Units REDLINED-STRIKETHROUGH VERSION 1 Title 25 ZONING Chapter 25.59 ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS 25.59.010 Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to regulate both existing and new accessory dwelling units in residential zoning districts and on residential property consistent with state law (California Government Code Sections 65852.1 through 65852.2). This chapter is intended to implement the Housing Element of the Burlingame General Plan by providing for additional housing opportunities. This will be accomplished by increasing the number of units available within existing neighborhoods while maintaining the primarily single-family residential character of the area, and establishing standards for the development and occupancy of accessory units to ensure that they are compatible with neighboring uses and structures, adequately equipped with public utility services, safe for human occupancy, and do not create unreasonable traffic and safety impacts. An accessory residential unit which conforms to the requirements of this chapter shall not be considered to exceed the allowable density for the lot upon which it is located and shall be deemed to be a residential use which is consistent with the existing General Plan and zoning designations for the lot. (Ord. 1865 § 8, (2011)) 25.59.020 Accessory dwelling unit permit procedure. (a) Applications for such an accessory dwelling unit permit shall be in writing and filed with the Community Development Director on a form approved by the Community Development Director. (b) As established by council resolution, a fee will be charged for an application for an accessory dwelling unit permit under this chapter. (c) Within 120 days of receipt of a complete application, the Community Development Director shall ministerially process for approval any application for an accessory dwelling unit permit pursuant to this chapter. Upon finding that the performance standards set forth in Section 25.59.060 are met the proposal shall be approved ministerially without discretionary review or public hearing and the applicant may proceed to acquire a building permit. All accessory units are categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to Sections15301 and 15303 of the CEQA guidelines. If the application does not meet all of the requirements of this chapter, the Community Development Director shall deny the application. (d) Deed Restrictions. Prior to issuance of a building permit for an accessory dwelling unit, or for improvements to bring an existing accessory dwelling unit into compliance with the accessory dwelling unit permit requirements, an agreement of restriction shall be filed with the county recorder. The agreement of restriction shall state the following: Draft Ordinance – Accessory Dwelling Units REDLINED-STRIKETHROUGH VERSION 2 (1) The accessory dwelling unit shall not be sold separately from any part of the property on which it is located; (2) The accessory dwelling unit is restricted to the standards specified in Burlingame Municipal Code Chapter 25.59; (3) Either the primary single-family dwelling or the accessory dwelling unit shall be occupied as the principal place of residence of the record owner of the lot. In the case of ownership by a corporation, partnership, trust or association, either the primary single-family dwelling or the accessory dwelling unit shall be the place of residence of an officer, director or shareholder of the corporation, a partner in the partnership, a trustor, trustee or beneficiary of the trust, a member of the association, or an employee of any such organization; and (4) The restrictions shall be binding upon any successor in ownership of the property and lack of compliance shall result in legal action against the property owner. (Ord. 1865 § 8, (2011)) 25.59.030 Appeal. The applicant that requested the accessory dwelling unit permit may appeal the community development director’s denial of the request. The appeal shall be submitted to the community development director in writing within ten (10) days after the date of the community development director’s decision. The appeal shall be heard by the planning commission in a public hearing pursuant to the procedures established for discretionary actions in Chapter 25.16. (Ord. 1865 § 8, (2011)) 25.59.040 Revocation of accessory dwelling unit permit. (a) Grounds. An accessory dwelling unit permit granted pursuant to this chapter may be revoked on any one or more of the following grounds: (1) The performance standards outlined in Sections 25.59.060 and 25.59.070 are not being met; or (2) No owner of the subject property resides on the property; or (3) The accessory dwelling unit is no longer used for residential purposes; or (4) The parking required by Section 25.59.060 is no longer provided; or (5) The primary single-family dwelling on the site is purposely demolished; or Draft Ordinance – Accessory Dwelling Units REDLINED-STRIKETHROUGH VERSION 3 (b) Notice. Written notice to revoke an accessory dwelling unit permit shall be served on the property owner, as shown on the last equalized assessment roll, either personally or by certified mail, and shall state: (1) The reasons for the proposed revocation; (2) That the proposed action will be taken by the director of community development unless a hearing before the planning commission is requested within fifteen (15) days after the date of said notice. If no response is received, the director of community development shall forthwith revoke the accessory dwelling unit permit as set forth in said notice. (c) Hearing. If a hearing is requested, at least ten (10) days notice thereof shall be given to the requested party. At any such hearing the property owner shall call witnesses and present evidence in his or her behalf. Upon conclusion of such hearing, the planning commission shall determine whether or not the permit shall be revoked. Such determination may be appealed to the city council in the same manner as for appeals taken on applications for the granting of conditional use permits or variances. (Ord. 1865 § 8, (2011)) 25.59.050 Variances prohibited. No variance under Chapter 25.54 shall be granted from any requirement of this chapter. (Ord. 1865 § 8, (2011)) ( 25.59.060 Performance standards for accessory dwelling units. General Provisions. This section allows an accessory dwelling unit, either attached to the main dwelling or detached in a separate structure to be created on lots which now contain one single-family dwelling and meet the following criteria, upon approval of an administrative accessory dwelling unit permit. (a) Minimum Lot Size. The minimum lot size to accommodate an accessory dwelling unit shall be no less than six thousand (6,000) square feet; except for accessory dwelling units constructed prior to January 1, 1954; (b) There shall be no more than one accessory dwelling unit permitted on a lot which contains no more than one primary single-family dwelling. (c) Occupancy Restrictions. Either the primary single-family dwelling or the accessory dwelling unit shall be occupied as the principal place of residence of the record owner of the lot. In the case of ownership by a corporation, partnership, trust or association, either the primary single-family dwelling or the accessory dwelling unit shall be the place of residence of an officer, director or Draft Ordinance – Accessory Dwelling Units REDLINED-STRIKETHROUGH VERSION 4 shareholder of the corporation, a partner in the partnership, a trustor, trustee or beneficiary of the trust, a member of the association, or an employee of any such organization. (d) Unit Size. The floor area of the accessory dwelling unit shall not exceed six hundred forty (640) square feet. (e) Floor Area Ratio. The accessory dwelling unit shall fall within the total floor area ratio and lot coverage allowed by the underlying zoning district. (f) Other Measurable Standards. (1) For attached units, the accessory dwelling unit shall comply with the setback, height and declining height envelope regulations which apply to the main dwelling unit. (2) For detached units, the accessory dwelling unit shall comply with the setback, height and window placement criteria for accessory structures contained in Chapter 25.60, and shall meet the setback requirements, including exceptions for accessory structures, contained in Sections 25.28.072 and 25.28.073. Detached units shall be limited to one story in height. g) Parking. On-site parking spaces based on the number of bedrooms in the primary dwelling as required by Chapter 25.70 and parking requirements for an accessory dwelling unit shall be as follows: (1) Unless otherwise provided in this section, a minimum of one off-street covered parking space within shall be provided for the accessory dwelling unit in addition to the off-street covered parking spaces required for the main dwelling. (i) Parking for the accessory dwelling unit may be in tandem with a required parking space for the primary dwelling, meaning one car located directly behind another car; and (ii) No required parking may be provided in the front setback or yard, except in the driveway; and (iii) All parking shall be provided on a hard, all-weather surface and properly drained to the public street. (2) No parking space shall be required for an accessory dwelling unit in any of the following instances: (i) No on-site parking for the second unit shall be required if the accessory dwelling unit is only used for “affordable housing” as defined in Chapter 25.63. As a condition of approval under this subsection, the owner of the property will be required to enter into and record an agreement generally in conformance with Section 25.63.040 to ensure continued affordability of the accessory dwelling unit. A draft agreement shall be required at the time of application submittal. Draft Ordinance – Accessory Dwelling Units REDLINED-STRIKETHROUGH VERSION 5 (ii) The accessory dwelling unit is located within one-half mile of a major transit stop, as defined in California Public Resources Code § 21064.3 or included in the regional transportation plan; (iii) The accessory dwelling unit is located within a designated historic district; (iv) The accessory dwelling unit is part of the existing main residence or an existing, authorized and finalized residential accessory structure intended for human habitation as having existed three years prior to application; (v) When on-street parking permits are required but not offered to the occupant of the accessory dwelling unit; (vi) When there is a car share vehicle, in a location determined by the Community Development Director to have at least three dedicated parking spaces, located within one block of the accessory dwelling unit; (h) Construction of the accessory dwelling unit shall comply with the all applicable provisions of this title and all applicable building, health and fire codes; except for accessory dwelling units constructed prior to January 1, 1954; (i) The accessory dwelling unit shall incorporate the same or similar architectural features, building materials and colors as the primary dwelling located on the property. Compatibility with the primary structure includes coordination of colors, materials, roofing and other architectural features, and landscaping designed so that the appearance of the site remains that of a single-family residence. (Ord. 1865 § 8, (2011)) (j) Upon approval of an accessory dwelling unit there shall be an application submitted for a new, separate address from the Public Works, Engineering Division. Address numbers shall be placed on all new and existing buildings with accessory dwelling units, in accordance with the street identification standards provided in Title 17, Chapter 17.04. and shall be placed in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street to provide clear identification of the unit for emergency responders. (k) A restrictive covenant which mandates owner occupancy of at least one of the units shall be recorded to establish the existing accessory dwelling unit. The restrictive covenant shall be binding upon any successor in ownership of the property and lack of compliance shall void the approval of the unit and may result in legal action against the property owner. The restrictive covenant shall be subject to approval by the city attorney as to its form and content. (l) If the accessory dwelling unit is demolished, the accessory dwelling unit permit shall lapse and be of no further force and effect, and all on-site parking requirements of Chapter 25.70 shall be met for the primary dwelling on the site. (m) For existing accessory dwelling units constructed prior to January 1, 1954 the following additional criteria shall be met, in addition to subsections a-j above: Draft Ordinance – Accessory Dwelling Units REDLINED-STRIKETHROUGH VERSION 6 (1) The accessory dwelling unit shall conform to the requirements of the California Health and Safety Code Section 17920.3, and the Uniform Housing Code as adopted by Section 17922. (2) An applicant for an accessory dwelling unit permit pursuant to this section that has been granted on conditions that it conform to the requirements of this chapter may perform work to bring the accessory dwelling unit into conformance, such as reducing the size of the living unit, improving or constructing parking, and correcting violation of Health and Safety Code Section 17920.3 and the Uniform Housing Code. (3) Any remodeling affecting the exterior of the accessory dwelling unit shall be matched to generally conform to the exterior treatment of the primary dwelling unit on the parcel. (4) If the accessory dwelling unit is destroyed or damaged by a natural catastrophe, the accessory dwelling unit may be reconstructed in exactly the same envelope and floor area as it existed immediately before the catastrophe or in conformance with the standards for new accessory dwelling units contained in Section 25.59.060. Title 25 ZONING Chapter 25.08 DEFINITIONS 25.08.573 Accessory dwelling unit. “Accessory dwelling unit” means either a detached or an attached additional residential dwelling unit on a single-family residential lot or parcel that provides complete independent living facilities. It shall include permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and sanitation purposes on the same parcel as the primary single-family dwelling is situated. (Ord. 1865 § 4, (2011)) Title 25 ZONING Chapter 25.50 NONCONFORMING USES AND STRUCTURES 25.50.025 Expansion of nonconforming uses—R-1 zone. (a) This section shall only be applicable to R-1 zoned parcels which contain two (2) detached nonconforming residential units. Only the primary residence, as determined by the director of community development, may be increased in footprint or in any exterior dimension if the accessory detached unit is to be retained as a residential unit. A conditional use permit pursuant to Chapter 25.16 shall be required for any such increase to a primary unit. Only maintenance and repairs as defined by the Uniform Building Code may be made to any accessory dwelling unit. The floor area or footprint of such an accessory unit shall not be expanded. Draft Ordinance – Accessory Dwelling Units REDLINED-STRIKETHROUGH VERSION 7 (b) Factors for determining the primary residence shall include, but not be limited to, relative age, size and conformity with zoning requirements of the two (2) residences. The property owner may request that the planning commission review any such determination by the director of community development. (Ord. 1471 § 1, (1992); Ord. 1806 § 19, (2007)) Title 25 ZONING Chapter 25.60 ACCESSORY STRUCTURES IN R-1 AND R-2 DISTRICTS 25.60.010 Conditional use permit requirements. Accessory structures in the R-1 or R-2 Districts shall be a conditional use requiring a conditional use permit if any of the following will exist: (a) Two (2) or more accessory structures, each having over one hundred (100) square feet gross floor area, will exist on a single lot, except that there may be two (2) accessory structures if one is an accessory dwelling unit which complies with the provisions of Chapter 25.59 and obtains an accessory dwelling unit permit; (b) Any single accessory structure will exceed six hundred (600) square feet of gross floor area; except that an accessory structure containing an accessory dwelling unit which complies with the provisions of Chapter 25.59 and obtains an accessory dwelling unit permit may be up to six hundred forty (640) square feet. (c) All accessory structures on a single lot will exceed a total of eight hundred (800) square feet gross floor area; (d) An accessory structure will occupy any portion of the lot in front of the main building; provided, where a dwelling has been erected on the rear sixty (60) percent of the lot prior to January 15, 1954, a garage may be erected in front of the main building, but not in any portion of the front setback; (e) An accessory structure will be erected closer than four (4) feet to any other structure on the same lot; (f) Accessory structures will cover more than fifty (50) percent of the rear thirty (30) percent of a lot; (g) The plate line of the accessory structure will be more than nine (9) feet above grade at the closest point between the plate line and adjacent grade; (h) The roof height of the accessory structure will exceed ten (10) feet above grade, except the height may be increased one foot for each foot of separation from an adjacent property line, up to a maximum height of fourteen (14) feet, provided: (1) Where the lot slopes more than ten (10) percent at the location of the accessory structure, the maximum height shall be four (4) feet above the plate line; Draft Ordinance – Accessory Dwelling Units REDLINED-STRIKETHROUGH VERSION 8 (2) The portion of the structure at the rear property line may have a maximum height of fourteen (14) feet if the structure has a pitched roof on both sides and the rear plate line does not exceed nine (9) feet above the natural grade; (3) The roof height of an accessory structure may have a maximum height of fifteen (15) feet above grade when the roof is pitched from ridge to plate on at least two (2) sides, and the ridge is no closer than five (5) feet to a side property line, and the rear plate line does not exceed nine (9) feet above the natural grade; and (4) No portion of the space within any accessory structure between the top of plate and the lowest portion of the roof structure including any dormer shall exceed seven (7) feet in height. (i) Glazed openings of the accessory structure will be within ten (10) feet of the property line or any portion of a glazed opening will be higher than ten (10) feet above grade; (j) Water or sewer connections to the accessory structure will exceed building code minimums or the accessory structure will contain any shower, bath or toilet, except that an accessory structure containing an accessory dwelling unit which complies with the provisions of Chapter 25.59 and obtains an accessory dwelling unit permit; (k) The accessory structure will enclose mechanical equipment, excluding air conditioning equipment, which is designed to operate on a regular or continuous basis, which may be objectionable because of loudness, hours of operation, odor or other reason, and which is to be located less than twenty (20) feet from any structure for habitation, or less than ten (10) feet from any property line; provided such shall be allowed without a special permit if the building official approves the structure as ade quately sound insulated; (l) Storage of household goods, tools or equipment in the accessory structure will exceed ten (10) percent of the gross floor area of the main dwelling structure; (m) Any portion of the accessory structure will be used for accessory living quarters, recreation purposes or for use in a home occupation; except for an accessory structure containing an accessory dwelling unit which complies with the provisions of Chapter 25.59 and obtains an accessory dwelling unit permit does not require a conditional use permit; (n) The accessory structure will be a greenhouse, lathhouse, lanai, patio shelter or similar structure exceeding one hundred twenty (120) square feet of gross floor area. (Ord. 1179 § 6, (1980); Ord. 1521 § 27, (1995); Ord. 1528 § 6, (1995); Ord. 1552 § 9, (1996); Ord. 1586 §§ 45, 46, (1998); Ord. 1603 § 39, (1998); Ord. 1793 § 34, (2006); Ord. 1865 § 9, (2011)) Title 25 ZONING Chapter 25.26 R-1 DISTRICT REGULATIONS 25.26.035 Uses allowed with a special permit. The following are uses allowed in the district with a special permit: Draft Ordinance – Accessory Dwelling Units REDLINED-STRIKETHROUGH VERSION 9 (a) Attached garages for single-family dwelling units; (b) Reduction in the number of parking spaces existing on site; (c) Construction exceeding the limits of the declining height envelope; (d) A detached garage exempt from setback restrictions located within the rear forty (40) percent of the lot; (e) An accessory structure that is in the rear of the lot and that is more than twenty-eight (28) feet in width or depth; (f) A basement with any interior ceiling height of six and one-half (6 1/2) feet or greater; (g) A direct exit from a basement to the exterior of the structure that is anything other than a light or window well; (h) A bathroom (toilet and sink) exceeding twenty-five (25) square feet located in a basement. (Ord. 1863 § 10, (2011)) 25.26.035 Uses allowed with a special permit. The following are uses allowed in the district with a special permit: (a) Attached garages for single-family dwelling units; (b) Reduction in the number of parking spaces existing on site; (c) Construction exceeding the limits of the declining height envelope; (d) A detached garage exempt from setback restrictions located within the rear forty (40) percent of the lot; (e) An accessory structure that is in the rear of the lot and that is more than twenty-eight (28) feet in width or depth, except that an accessory structure containing an accessory dwelling unit which complies with the provisions of Chapter 25.59 and obtains an accessory dwelling unit permit; (f) A basement with any interior ceiling height of six and one-half (6 1/2) feet or greater; (g) A direct exit from a basement to the exterior of the structure that is anything other than a light or window well; (h) A bathroom (toilet and sink) exceeding twenty-five (25) square feet located in a basement. (Ord. 1863 § 10, (2011)) Draft Ordinance – Accessory Dwelling Units REDLINED-STRIKETHROUGH VERSION 10 Title 25 ZONING Chapter 25.70 OFF-STREET PARKING 25.70.010 Vehicle parking spaces to be provided. (a) Parking Required. At the time of erection of any building or structure, or at the time any building or structure is enlarged or increased in capacity, there shall be provided off-street parking spaces with adequate and proper provision for ingress and egress by standard size automobiles. (b) Parking with Remodel or Reconstruction. When any building is remodeled, reconstructed or changed in use by the addition of dwelling units, gross floor area, seating capacity, change in type of use or intensified use, such additional garage or parking facilities as may be required must be provided. (c) Minimum Requirements. The regulations which follow are the minimum requirements unless specific requirements are made for a particular use in a district. Additional spaces may be provided. Unless otherwise expressly permitted by a section of this chapter, parking required by this chapter is to be provided on the same lot as the use for which the parking is required. (1941 Code § 1971, Ord. 539, (1954); Ord. 763 (1962); Ord. 911 § 1, (1970); Ord. 1586 § 49, (1998); Ord. 1728 § 7, (2004); Ord. 1863 § 12, (2011)) 25.70.030 Requirements for single-family dwellings. The following are parking requirements for single-family dwellings. (a) Parking Space Requirements. Each single-family dwelling shall provide off-street parking spaces for at least two (2) vehicles, one of which must be covered by a garage or carport. The following further requirements apply to certain additions and to new single-family dwellings: (1) An existing single-family dwelling increased in size to three (3) or four (4) bedrooms and a new single-family dwelling with up to four (4) bedrooms shall provide off-street parking spaces to current code dimensions for at least two (2) vehicles, one of which must be covered by a garage or carport; (2) A single-family dwelling hereafter increased in size to five (5) or more bedrooms and a new single-family dwelling with five (5) or more bedrooms shall provide off-street parking to current code dimensions for at least three (3) vehicles, two (2) of which must be covered by a garage or carport; (3) For the purposes of subsections (a)(1) and (2) of this section, an existing garage not less than eighteen (18) feet wide and twenty (20) feet deep interior dimension shall be considered to provide two (2) covered off-street parking places; Draft Ordinance – Accessory Dwelling Units REDLINED-STRIKETHROUGH VERSION 11 (4) For additions to existing single-family dwellings, an existing garage with an eighteen (18) foot depth interior dimension shall be considered to meet the dimensional requirements for a parking space. (5) Bedrooms that are within accessory dwelling units shall not be counted toward the overall number of bedrooms for the primary single family dwelling on the lot on which it is located; parking for accessory dwelling units shall comply with Section 25.59.060(g). (b) Parking Aisles and Driveways. Covered parking spaces shall have a twenty-four (24) foot back-up area or be designed to be entered or exited in no more than three (3) maneuvers. All spaces must allow entry in three (3) maneuvers in the forward direction. (c) Parking Limitations. (1) A vehicle shall not be parked between a structure and the front or side property line except in a garage, driveway or other approved parking; (2) Inoperative vehicles, vehicle parts, boats and campers (as defined by Section 243 of the Vehicle Code) shall not be stored or parked in driveways or between a structure and front or side property line; (3) Required covered parking shall not be provided in tandem configuration; (4) For an addition to an existing single-family dwelling, required uncovered spaces may be provided in tandem configuration and may extend: (A) In areas with sidewalks, to the inner edge of the sidewalk, (B) In areas without sidewalks to five (5) feet from the inner edge of the curb, (C) In areas without either sidewalks or curbs, to five (5) feet from the edge of pavement. (1941 Code § 1971.2, Ord. 539 § 1971, (1954); Ord. 608, (1955); Ord. 763, (1963); Ord. 911 § 3, (1970); Ord. 990 § 1, (1973); Ord. 1163 § 1, (1980); Ord. 1167 § 1, (1980); Ord. 1177 § 1, (1980); Ord. 1183 § 2, (1980); Ord. 1355 § 1, (1987); Ord. 1390 § 2, (1989); Ord. 1403 § 25, (1990); Ord. 1466 §§ 3, 4, 5, (1992); Ord. 1495 § 12, (1994); Ord. 1521 § 30, (1995); Ord. 1528 § 7, (1995); Ord. 1543 § 5, (1996); Ord. 1586 § 49, (1998); Ord. 1793 §§ 36, 37, (2006); Ord. 1839 § 5, (2009); Ord. 1863 § 12, 2011)) BURLINGAME CITY HALL 501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME, CA 94010 City of Burlingame Meeting Minutes - Draft Planning Commission 7:00 PM Council ChambersMonday, December 12, 2016 e.Proposed Amendments to Title 25, Chapters 25.08, 25.26, 25.50, 25.59, 25.60, and 25.70 to update existing Secondary (Accessory) Dwelling Unit regulations to be consistent with recently adopted amendments to California Government Code Section 65852.2. The proposed amendments are Statutory Exempt from CEQA pursuant to section 15282(h) which exempts the adoption of an ordinance regarding second units in a single family or multifamily residential zone by a city to implement the provisions of Section 65852.1 and 6582.2 of the Government Code as set forth in Section 21080.17 of the Public Resources. Accessory Dwelling Unit Amendments - Staff Report and Resolution Accessory Dwelling Unit Amendments - Redlined strikethrough version Accessory Dwelling Unit Amendments - Clean version Accessory Dwelling Unit Amendments - Attachments Attachments: There were no ex-parte communications to support. Community Development Director Meeker provided an overview of the staff report. Questions of Staff: >Requested clarification regarding the ability to place a kitchen within an accessory building and restrictions upon the number of occupants. (Meeker - yes, kitchens may be installed within accessory buildings to convert the structure to an accessory dwelling unit. The City cannot restrict the number of occupants. The City is required to comply with the recently adopted State law; failure to do so, will require the City to comply with the letter of the State law as adopted. Kane - this is a first effort to comply with State law and may be subject to future iterations depending upon changes in State law in the future.) >Questioned the meaning of the reference to structures intended for human habitation and the waiver of parking. (Meeker - clarified that in instances where the Commission has approved the construction/conversion of an accessory structure to a game room, rumpus room or other room designed for human habitation, the City cannot require additional parking if this space is converted to an accessory dwelling unit as it was originally designed to be part of the use of the primary residential structure for which parking has been provided. This passage would also cover instances where a room within the house is converted to an accessory dwelling unit. Kane - as distinguished from a structure designed only for storage use.) >If there is a car-share facility within a block of an accessory dwelling unit, no parking is required? (Meeker - yes, that is the requirement of State law. Kane - clarified that the City would interpret this to only apply when the vehicles are accessible by the general public.) >Could car-share spaces be created within a single -family area? (Meeker - clarified that the City could choose to convert spaces within a public parking lot to car -share spaces which would be available . However, in instances where these spaces are not available for use by the general public, i .e. 225 California Drive, then this exemption would not be available.) >Were cities consulted regarding the provisions of the new State law? (Meeker/Kane - no.) >Requested clarification regarding the parking waivers - all must apply? (Meeker - yes.) Page 1City of Burlingame Printed on 1/6/2017 December 12, 2016Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - Draft >When do the new standards apply? (Meeker - effective January 1, 2017. If the City receives an application in advance of the City's local standards become effective, then strict application of the State law is required. It is anticipated that the new local regulations would become effective in 45 to 60 days.) >Clarified that the Commission's action will be a recommendation. Can modifications be made? (Meeker - can only make changes that do not conflict with State law. Kane - could always be more liberal.) >Noted that non-substantive edits will be forwarded to staff prior to submittal to the City Council. >Hurin - asked if parking can be required for a unit created from non -habitable space; no variances can be considered? (Meeker - conversions of non -habitable space would require parking; a variance from the standard cannot be requested.) >Can tandem spaces provided be "double" tandem (more than two spaces )? (Hurin - no, only one space behind another. Meeker - only one space behind another is permitted.) >Is there a limit to the number of units that can be provided on a property? (Meeker - the City's interpretation is that you can only provide one accessory dwelling unit per property. The local regulation is specific in this regard. Kane - believes that the City's "boarding" regulations, which do not limit occupancy, may need to be reviewed at some point as well.) Chair Loftis opened the public hearing. Public Comments: Jerry Deal, J Deal and Associates - if new space is created he understands that the parking must be provided. If something has been permitted, but not yet built, then can it be built per the approval? (Meeker - if the approval has been granted, then it could be built as approved. Kane - will need to review this more closely as usually "vesting" is as of issuance of a building permit.) Are buslines also included in the radius from a transit stop for purposes of parking waivers? (Commissioner - noted that the State law references intersecting buslines. Meeker - the City has no intersecting SAMTRANS buslines, so the waiver does not apply.) Chair Loftis closed the public hearing. Commission Discussion: >Should the Millbrae Multi -Modal Station be considered a "transit location" for purposes of the parking waiver? (Meeker - yes, this is appropriate.) >Feels that there should be some reference to the length of stay in accessory dwelling units. (Kane - the entire VRBO/Airbnb discussion is a separate discussion that needs to occur with the City Council . The Council will be taking this issue up in the future. Waiting for current legal challenges in other communities to be decided.) >Noted that a ten unit condominium approved on Floribunda (but not yet built) is being marketed as an Airbnb project; hopes that this issue is addressed sooner rather than later. Commissioner Terrones made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bandrapalli, to recommend adoption of the proposed ordinance revisions by the City Council and passing along additional comments from the Commission's discussion. Chair Loftis asked for a voice vote, and the motion carried by the following vote: Aye:DeMartini, Loftis, Gum, Terrones, Bandrapalli, Sargent, and Gaul7 - Page 2City of Burlingame Printed on 1/6/2017 1 STAFF REPORT AGENDA NO: MEETING DATE: January 17, 2017 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: January 17, 2017 From: Lisa Goldman, City Manager – (650) 558-7243 Margaret Glomstad, Parks and Recreation Director – (650) 558-7307 Subject: Management of the Golf Center Site RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council begin negotiations with Topgolf for the management of the Golf Center site. BACKGROUND On June 20, 2016, the City Council requested that City staff issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the lease management of the Golf Center site for the operation of golf or other recreational or entertainment activities that would be open to the public (Exhibit A). The RFP indicated that the City would not provide any financial commitment. In addition, the RFP noted developers/operators of the site are required to provide a minimum annual guaranteed rent, and, depending on the business model, a percentage from gross revenues. The RFP was issued on October 12, 2016, and responses were due by November 23, 2016, at 2 pm. The City received proposals from Mid-Peninsula Ice Rink Foundation (MIRF), US Badminton Center Group (USBC), and Topgolf International. A committee comprised of Councilmember Donna Colson, Parks and Recreation Commissioner Joe Dito, City Manager Lisa Goldman, Finance Director Carol Augustine, Public Works Director Syed Murtuza, and Parks and Recreation Director Margaret Glomstad reviewed the proposals and recommended that all groups be invited to present their proposals in person. On December 4, 2016, Councilmember Colson, Parks and Recreation Commissioner Dito, Finance Director Augustine, and Parks and Recreation Director Glomstad met with each group to learn more about their proposals and ask clarifying questions. DISCUSSION Mid-Peninsula Ice Rink Foundation: The MIRF proposal includes building two new indoor ice rinks with supporting services (locker/restrooms, restaurant, pro shop and a meeting space) on the existing parking lot, short range game area, and golf bays at the Golf Center site (Exhibit B). The proposed design leaves a significant portion of the driving range untouched and under the Management of the Golf Center Site January 17, 2017 2 maintenance of the City. The facility would offer a variety of programming for all ages including figure skating, hockey, broomball, curling, adaptive ice sports, leagues, and tournaments. MIRF, which is a 501c(3) nonprofit public benefit corporation, proposes to operate the rinks in conjunction with Sharks Ice LLC, an affiliate of the San Jose Sharks that operates ice rinks in San Jose, Oakland, and Fremont. (No contract had been signed between MIRF and Sharks Ice LLC as of the November 23 proposal due date.) The funds needed for the project have not been secured yet, but MIRF anticipates financing construction through a combination of donations from local government entities (the City of San Mateo and the County of San Mateo) and the general public, plus a bank loan from a commercial bank. In lieu of paying fixed rent to the City of Burlingame, as required in the RFP, MIRF proposes negotiating a profit-sharing agreement with the various public stakeholders in which the stakeholders would receive a share of net profit after all other expenses are paid. MIRF notes that they are open to negotiating some type of rent payment. US Badminton Center Group: The USBC proposal includes building a facility that would contain 20-50 badminton courts, a 10,000-20,000 sq. ft. Wellness Center, an outdoor training facility, a food court, a pro shop, and supporting spaces. Under this proposal, 20 – 25 of the Golf Center bays would remain for use by golfers. The facility would be built on the existing parking lot and the short game and driving range area (Exhibit C). The facility would offer memberships and drop-in options for a variety of badminton and health/fitness programs for all ages including yoga, senior fitness, personal training, massage therapy, sports leagues, tournaments, and youth camps. The funds needed for the project will be capitalized by USBC. USBC would directly operate the facility and proposes an annual lease payment of $80,000, plus 5% on annual revenue in excess of $2.5 million. Topgolf International: The Topgolf proposal includes building a 65,000 sq. ft. LEED Silver- certified facility with 102 hitting bays, 3,000 sq. ft. of event space, a full-service restaurant and bar, a rooftop terrace, pool tables, shuffle board, and supporting areas. The facility, which would be built on the existing Golf Center site (Exhibit D), would offer general entertainment, food and music, golf lessons for all ages, summer camps, tournaments, and leagues. Topgolf would draw on its partners, line of credit, and corporate financial resources to finance the project. Topgolf would directly operate the facility, and it proposes an annual lease payment of at least $500,000 per year. The option to combine more than one proposal on the site was explored. However, due to the unique requirements of each proposal and the corresponding parking requirements, the site does not have sufficient space to accommodate more than one of the uses described above. In addition, all proposals may have an impact on the landfill clay cap. Any excavation on the site and/or structural foundations will very likely impact the clay cap and the subsurface systems, requiring mitigations and future maintenance costs for the operator. Management of the Golf Center Site January 17, 2017 3 The committee comprised of Councilmember Colson, Park and Rec. Commissioner Dito, and City staff evaluated the proposals and presentations on the following criteria: 1. Proven and sustainable business model. 2. Community benefit and the broadest public market served. 3. Use of the Golf Center land for development with minimal impact on the remaining site. 4. Economic impact - capital investment, quality jobs, payroll, sales taxes, and transit occupancy taxes. 5. Financial contribution to the City - lease terms, financial model viability. 6. Developer/operator financial presentation - capital structure and debt. 7. Experience developing and operating similar projects. 8. Green construction and business practices. 9. Ability to begin timely negotiations and start the planning/entitlement process. The comparison chart (Exhibit E) contains the City’s analysis of the three proposals. Based on the information provided, the committee recommends that Topgolf be invited to begin negotiations with the City to operate the Golf Center site for the following reasons: 1. Topgolf is a proven, successful, and profitable brand name business with operations around the country, and they have prior experience working with municipalities. 2. Topgolf’s programming appeals to all ages. 3. The City’s hotels are supportive of the Topgolf proposal. As they noted to the City Council in a December 21 letter, Topgolf is their preferred choice because it, more than the other two proposals, is what meeting planners, convention attendees, and business and leisure travelers are seeking. They believe that Topgolf will be a “closer” in terms of business opportunities for their hotels. 4. Topgolf has the highest capital investment for the property, and their financing model is already in place. 5. Topgolf will maintain the landfill clay cap during the term of the lease. 6. Topgolf will provide significant recurring income to the City for the term of the lease. 7. The facility will be built to LEED Silver standards. 8. Topgolf’s proposal would involve the least amount of staff time/oversite (as opposed to MIRF’s public/private venture). 9. The Topgolf proposal represents the least financial and development risk for the City. FISCAL IMPACT Whether it be through an agreement with a for-profit or not-for-profit entity, the preferred solution for the Golf Center site would maximize use of the property and availability of recreational activities for the broadest spectrum of the City’s residents and visitors. The committee feels the Topgolf proposal best fulfills these attributes, while also presenting the maximum amount of return to the City in the form of a relatively secure lease agreement. The other two proposals provide significantly less in guaranteed income. Financial details will need to be determined as part of the negotiation process with the chosen operator. Management of the Golf Center Site January 17, 2017 4 Exhibits:  Request for Proposals  MIRF Site Plan  USBC Site Plan  Topgolf Site Plan  Comparison Summary REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS OF THE BURLINGAME GOLF CENTER SITE CITY OF BURLINGAME DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR THE MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS OF THE BURLINGAME GOLF CENTER SITE Margaret Glomstad, Parks and Recreation Director 650-558-7307 REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS ISSUED: October 12, 2016 PROPOSALS DUE: November 23, 2016 at 2:00pm, Pacific Time 850 Burlingame Avenue, Burlingame, CA 94010 REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS OF THE BURLINGAME GOLF CENTER SITE Page 2 of 13 I. OVERVIEW The City of Burlingame (the City) is seeking competitive proposals for the lease of the Burlingame Golf Center site (BGC) located in Burlingame, California, for the operation of golf or other recreational or entertainment activities that would be open to the public. T he BGC complex is within Bayside Park, located on the westerly side of Airport Boulevard near San Francisco Bay and south of San Francisco International Airport (SFO). This RFP provides specif ic instructions to the prospective Developers/Operators regarding the minimum information that must be included in any RFP response, including formatting of responses, as well as pertinent data about the BGC facility. The park facility was developed in 1999 on a former waste disposal site owned by the City of Burlingame. In addition to the BGC, the park includes a lighted soccer field, parking shared by the adjacent DoubleTree Hotel, and a City Parks Division Corporation Yard. The City will continue to operate the soccer field and Corporation Yard; accommodations for the DoubleTree Hotel’s shared parking will also be required. The current lease began in 1999 and will terminate on December 30, 2016. Current operations include management of the driving range, pitch and put, club house (including an independent restaurant) and parking lot. In addition to the City facilities, hardscape, fixed appliances and infrastructure, attachment A provides a list of property onsite that is owned by the current operator and is not available as part of the RFP. If modifications to the site are necessary for the proposed operation of the site, the selected Developer/Operator for the property will be responsible for seeking and obtaining any and all required approvals from the City of Burlingame, County of San Mateo, and any other agency with regulatory authority over the use of the property prior to initiating any construction activities on the site necessary for implementation of the selected use. Additionally, the Developer/Operator shall be responsible for all design and capital improvements (including securing any necessary financing), for both the site and adjacent property, that are required to initiate the proposed site use modifications. This includes, and is not limited to, REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS OF THE BURLINGAME GOLF CENTER SITE Page 3 of 13 responsibility for all costs associated with construction of new facilities and modifications to existing facilities, including the landfill and protective cap, and modifications to the existing landfill monitoring systems and their ongoing maintenance. Additionally, the project developer shall carry appropriate liability insurance for the ongoing operation and maintenance, and reporting responsibilities associated with the landfill in compliance with state and federal regulations . A bond sufficient to cover the construction costs of any improvements and in a form acceptable to the City Attorney shall be required to be submitted and approved prior to issuance of any City construction permits. Based on the quality and compatibility with City Council objectives and competitiveness of the proposals received in response to this Request for Proposal (RFP), the City will select a successful Developer/Operator and enter into a lease agreement with the selected entity. The term of the lease will be determined by the City based on the proposals received, including the proposed use of the premises, and the proposed capital investment in the premises. The term of the lease may be proposed by the Developer/Operator but must be a minimum of 15 years and will be subject to the approval of the City Council. Leases may commence as soon as 30 days after approval by the City, expected on or about February/March, 2017, depending on City staff workload. Following a comprehensive evaluation of submitted proposals, staff will contact the applicants best suited to partner with the City. The City will then conduct interviews with the top qualified Developers/Operators and will identify the most suitable and qualified company for the project. The City may elect to negotiate with the Developers/Operators found by the interview panel to offer the best proposals according to the RFP’s criteria. The City Council, at its sole discretion, will choose the Developers/Operator(s) that it determines will provide the best service to the City and the community, balanced with financial return to the City, and will then begin negotiations to enter into a lease. The submission of a proposal by any Developer/Operator does not in any way commit the City to enter into a lease with that Developer/Operator, or any other REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS OF THE BURLINGAME GOLF CENTER SITE Page 4 of 13 Developer/Operator. The City will enter into negotiations with the Developer/Operator that it deems the best able to provide and fund a golf range, facility operations, and improvements, or other recreational or entertainment activities, within the first two (2) years of the lease. The City reserves the right to reject any or all proposals and to advertise for new proposals. Interested parties may obtain a copy of the RFP from the City website at www.burlingame.org, request a copy by email by contacting Margaret Glomstad at mglomstad@burlingame.org, or request the RFP by mail at: Burlingame Recreation Center, 850 Burlingame Ave, CA 94010, Attention: Margaret Glomstad. II. COMMUNITY BACKGROUND The City of Burlingame is situated within central San Mateo County and is bounded by Millbrae to the north, Hillsborough to the west, San Mateo to the south, and San Francisco Bay to the east. Occupying roughly 5.5 square miles of land area, Burlingame’s population is approximately 28,000. Regional access to the community is provided via U.S. Highway 101, which runs north-south through the eastern portion of the city; State Highway 82/El Camino Real, which runs north -south through the central portion of the city; and Interstate Highway 280, which runs along the western border of the city. The community boasts a healthy, balanced economy; over 22,000 jobs are present within the city and across multiple sectors. The city’s residential property values are high, with a median sale price of over $1 million for residential units. The residential population is split fairly equally between owners and renters, with a slight predominance of renters at 52%. The residential community of Hillsborough lies to the west of Burlingame; Downtown Burlingame serves as the primary commercial district serving this community as well. Three primary commercial areas exist within the city: Burlingame Plaza shopping center, located adjacent to El Camino Real near the boundary with Millbrae; the Broadway commercial district, which provides a balance of local-serving businesses in the central part of the city; and REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS OF THE BURLINGAME GOLF CENTER SITE Page 5 of 13 Downtown Burlingame, situated within the southerly portion of the city. Light-industrial uses are centered around Rollins Road, north of Broadway and west of Highway 101, just a short distance south of the Millbrae BART intermodal facility on Millbrae Avenue, adjacent to the northern portion of Burlingame. Office and additional light-industrial uses lie east of Highway 101 and west of Bayshore Highway, north of Broadway in the city’s Bayfront area. The city’s proximity to San Francisco International Airport (SFO) has led to the development of 12 major hotels along the city’s waterfront, with a total of over 3,700 hotel rooms. Transit facilities within Burlingame include Caltrain, which provides service at the historic Burlingame Train Station located adjacent to Downtown Burlingame, near the intersection of Burlingame Avenue and California Drive; bus service provided by the San Mateo County Transit District (SAMTRANS), and proximity to the Millbrae BART intermodal facility located near Millbrae Avenue and Rollins Road. The city is also home to a newly built, modern medical facility. Mills-Peninsula Medical Center is situated near the intersection of Trousdale Drive and El Camino Real in the northern portion of the community. III. FACILITY LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION T he land area, building square footage, and range characteristics listed below and elsewhere in this RFP are approximate and should be used as a general guide only. T he true dimensions of the site must be field check ed by potential Developers/Operators. Location BGC is located at 250 Anza Blvd, Burlingame, California 94010, in San Mateo County, in the southeastern portion of Burlingame. REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS OF THE BURLINGAME GOLF CENTER SITE Page 6 of 13 Golf Center Facilities BGC is an approximately 12.3-acre site in the southeastern portion of the now closed Burlingame landfill, a greater land reclamation/redevelopment project of 30+ acres. Because of certain site management issues (i.e. ground stability and settling, gas emission, groundwater monitoring, safety and security) BGC will be a controlled access facility. Design features such as perimeter fencing netting, and hitting stall layout, and operational procedures such as gate security and customer traffic control, seek to keep golf balls in and unwanted visitors off the premises. Certain portions of the premises and all of the surrounding grounds are and will continue to be maintained by the City. BGC facilities include the following:  A driving range with two oversized concrete-padded stalls for instruction; 45 stalls (32 covered) with lights for night use  A 10 acre, 265 x 175 yard artificial surface landing area lighted for night use  A 1.5 acre short game practice area covered with natural grass, which includes chipping area, sand bunker and green, and two (2) putting greens lighted for night use  Clubhouse building (approximately 4,200 square feet) with short order food/beverage facilities, pro shop, administrative offices and other support space  12,000 square feet of concrete patio (2,000 feet covered) adjacent to the Clubhouse for outdoor food and beverage service and special event support (current lessees: Gabriel and Daniel’s Restaurant)  A secure ½ acre maintenance yard for outdoor material storage, a wash down area, and an 800 square foot maintenance/storage building with covered parking for two (2) operator vehicles  Non-exclusive access to 100+ paved, landscaped and lighted parking spaces REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS OF THE BURLINGAME GOLF CENTER SITE Page 7 of 13 IV. HISTORICAL OPERATIONS T he recent operating history for BGC is estimated below. It should be noted that limited information is available regarding historical operations. I nformation discussed below is based on annual year-end reports. The current fee structure is as follows: Current Fees Gross Revenue 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Pro Shop $9,444 $10,697 $11,192 $12,154 54 $13,940 Driving Range $228,560 $275,698 $264,817 $230,172 $213,580 Short Game $6,785 $8,153 $13,105 $11,668 $12,115 Rent $11,600 $11,600 $12,000 $12,000 $13,000 Other Income $53,593 $57,100 $62,763 $65,541 $87,367 V. THE CITY’S VISION STATEMENT The City is dedicated to providing residents and visitors an exceptional and affordable golfing or other recreational or entertainment experience in a friendly, inclusive environment for socializing and enjoying the outdoors. Currently, BGC is a “driving range in a park.” It is a community resource that emphasizes the outdoor, recreational aspects of golf for citizens of all age groups while providing an ongoing source of Range Card Cash Small Basket $7 $8 Medium Basket $11 $12 Large Basket $13 $14 Range Balls per Basket – M-F 7:30am – 11am Small 70 54 Medium 115 95 Large 175 148 Range Balls per Basket – M-F 11am – 9pm Small 60 54 Medium 105 95 Large 165 148 Range Balls per Basket – Weekends 7am – 9pm Small 60 54 Medium 105 95 Large 165 148 Range Card Prices $20 Card $20 $55 Card (10% bonus) $50 $115 Card (15% bonus) $100 $260 Card (30% bonus) $200 $700 Card (40% bonus) $500 Chipping, Pitching, Bunker Area 30 minutes $6 45 minutes $7 1 hour $8 REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS OF THE BURLINGAME GOLF CENTER SITE Page 8 of 13 revenue to support landfill site maintenance and Burlingame Parks and Recreation Department activities. The City’s vision for the BGC is for an operation that:  Provides excellent customer service.  Establishes pricing that is affordable to City residents, represents excellent value for visitors and Peninsula area residents, and allows the operation to be self - sustaining.  Sets high standards for maintenance, grounds care and quality of service, providing a facility of which all involved are justifiably proud.  Maintains an economically viable operation with revenues sufficient to cover operating expenses, rental payment, capital improvement reserves, and provide the Lessee an adequate return on its investment.  Offers provisions for engaging and educational programs. VI. REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS The City is seeking proposals from qualified Developers/Operators that are interested in partnering with the City to modify/redevelop, operate, and maintain the BGC site. As noted elsewhere in this document, any proposal submitted must address a feasible means to provide recreational or entertainment activities on-site. A. Submittals The City will accept submittals through Wednesday, November 23, 2016 at 2:00 p.m. The City will then review all submittals and schedule interviews with the most qualified Developers/Operators beginning in December 2016 (exact dates to be determined). Submittals will be reviewed and evaluated based upon the criteria identified below: 1. Cover Letter Each Developer/Operator must submit a cover letter identifying the Developer/Operator and the scope of the proposed project. Developers/Operators may include other important general information that is deemed significant enough to be highlighted. An authorized representative of the proposing entity must sign the cover letter. 2. Description of Business a. Describe the business and marketing plan for the facility. At a minimum, this must include a detailed description of the services to be provided (with types of products to be sold, if applicable), operating hours, and an analysis of the REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS OF THE BURLINGAME GOLF CENTER SITE Page 9 of 13 demand for this service, ongoing marketing and business development practices, and the target market. b. Provide a rationale showing why the Developer/Operator should be selected. c. Provide a description of the proposed revenue and expense internal controls and reporting systems. d. Provide a financial pro forma covering a 10-year period including financial projections, cash flow, and potential gross revenue participation projections for the City. 3. Statement of Qualifications and Experience Provide information regarding the company’s professional experience, identifying similar operations that it manages. Describe how the company is organized and how its resources will be utilized for the project, including identifying the individuals that would be involved in the operation of the BGC site, any partners or sub-consultants providing a significant portion of the work and/or with an ongoing presence in the operation, and their experience with this kind of operation. In addition, identify any other projects the company is working on at the current time and its level of completion and anticipated timeline. Include the qualifications of the Design Team, particularly their experience and expertise developing a closed landfill site. 4. Staffing Plan a. Describe how the proposed operations will be managed. Include an organization chart for the proposed operations, including which positions will be involved in the operation and the reporting structure for such personnel. b. Describe the organization’s customer service philosophy/programs and the Developer/Operator’s goals with regard to customer service. Include training programs to be employed to achieve customer service goals. 5. Access to Capital Identify what sources of financing the company will use to complete any needed construction, its current access to this financing, and what steps it expects to go through, as well as the anticipated timing needed to secure project financing. REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS OF THE BURLINGAME GOLF CENTER SITE Page 10 of 13 6. Proposed Project, if applicable If the proposal includes an operation different from the current operation, i dentify the type of operation the Developer/Operator would propose for the site, including: needed construction including understanding of the existing closed landfill monitoring systems and regulatory permitting required for alterations to the site; type of entertainment or programming and other details that demonstrate compliance with the vision set forth within this proposal. The proposal shall include a preliminary description of the proposed project, taking into account the landfill constraints and how the project would be implemented from inception to completion with all of its phases. The proposal should include the list of qualified consultants and engineers and the project manager who have successfully completed similar projects on a landfill site. Additionally, the City prefers that the project team has an understanding and familiarity with California laws and regulatio ns pertaining to landfill operation and maintenance. 7. Anticipated Timeline Identify a rough timeline to begin the operations of the BGC site or proposed facility, including how soon the company would expect to complete the planning process, secure financing, begin and complete project construction, if needed, and open the operations to the public. Also indicate if the company would pursue a phased project. If the project is proposed to be phased, identify the breakdown of each phase and how long the overall project would take to complete. The timeline should include the required permitting and approval requirements that apply to the landfill. 8. Franchises/Sub-lessees Developers/Operators who are proposing to operate with franchises or sub- lessees from other companies must submit letters of intent that confirm the franchising/sub-lessee arrangements between the Developer/Operator and the franchising/sub-lessee company. 9. Rent Developers/Operators are required to provide a minimum annual guaranteed rent, and, depending on the business model, a percentage from gross revenues. The proposed annual rent should be based upon the Developer/Operator’s best estimate of the economic potential of the business. REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS OF THE BURLINGAME GOLF CENTER SITE Page 11 of 13 10. References Provide three (3) references from other cities or counties within which the company has operated similar facilities. Developer/Operator may also provide any additional references it believes would be helpful in providing the City with a more complete understanding of its professional experience in this type of operation. VII. SUBMITTAL INFORMATION A. Format of Submittal Please respond with five (5) copies of Developer/Operator’s submittal, addressing the requirements identified above, formatted to standard letter-size paper. Additional promotional materials providing an overview of the company or prior operations may also be submitted. All responses must be received by Wednesday, November 23, 2016 at 2:00 p.m. B. Delivery All submittals must be mailed or otherwise delivered to: Margaret Glomstad, Parks and Recreation Director City of Burlingame 850 Burlingame Ave Burlingame, California 94010 All questions regarding this Request for Proposals shall be directed to Margaret Glomstad, Parks and Recreation Director, via e-mail at: mglomstad@burlingame.org; or by telephone at (650) 558-7307. VIII. INTERPRETATION OF PROPOSAL DOCUMENT 1. If discrepancies or omissions are found by any prospective Developer/Operator or there is doubt as to the true meaning of any part of the RFP, written request for a clarif ication or interpretation shall be submitted to City no later than 2:00 p.m., Wednesday, November 9, 2016. 2. Any clarification or interpretation of the RFP will be posted to the City ’s website in an addendum. Any change to the RFP shall be made by addendum and posted to REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS OF THE BURLINGAME GOLF CENTER SITE Page 12 of 13 the City’s website. 3. The City is not responsible for any explanation, clarif ication, interpretation or approval made or given in any manner except by addendum. A copy of each addendum will be posted to City’s website. Any addenda so posted are to be considered a part of this RFP document. IX. RIGHT TO REJECT The City of Burlingame reserves the right, at its sole discretion, to select or reject any or all submittals received pursuant to this Request for Proposals. X. PROPOSED SCHEDULE Submittals Due: Wednesday, November 23, 2016 – 2:00 p.m. Interviews with Qualified Developers/Operators: December, 2016 Selection of Preferred Developer/Operator: January, 2017 Agreement between Developer/Operator and City: February/March, 2017 REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS OF THE BURLINGAME GOLF CENTER SITE Page 13 of 13 Attachment A Burlingame Golf Center Inventory, September, 2016 VB Golf Property Safe Hallway slatwall Restaurant tables and chairs Two desktop computers Two printers All outdoor maintenance equipment Ball machine Range balls and mats Ball trays Ball washers, shoe cleaner and other range accessories Range distance markers Green garbage cans Canvas screening near range machines Small front office contents White supply cabinet near restrooms Small white cabinet in equipment/electrical room Hall artwork Electricity meters (2) Bathroom hand dryers (2) Sublessee Matt Coe Property Retail desk outside rented office space Artwork above his desk Cubbies All office contents Sublessee Dave Atchison Property All office contents of lesson studio room Café Property Flat screen TVs Kitchen shelving Two small freezers All kitchen small appliances and cooking items Note: Pepsi machines belong to Pepsi NEW TWO-SHEETICE ARENAICE ARENA PARKING 550 SPACESEXISTING SOCCERFIELDS TO REMAINEXISTING DRIVINGRANGE TO REMAIN15 TEE BOXESEXISTINGRESTAURANTTO REMAINNEW GOLF BALL NETTING 1" = 60'-0"A1MIRF Community Skating CenterMIRF COMMUNITY SKATING CENTER ANZ A B O UL E V A R DAIR POR T BOU L EVARD AIRPORT BOULEVARD U.S. ROUTE 101 SAN FRANCISCO BAY DATE:SCALE:DRAWN BY: TOPGOLF - BURLINGAME BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA TEST FIT PLAN #1 NORTH TM SITE AREA =698,214 SF (16.03 ACRES) BUILDING/OUTFIELD AREA = 5.01 ACRES PARKING AREA = 4.77 ACRES OPEN SPACE = 6.25 ACRES STANDARD PARKING = 476 SPACES ACCESSIBLE PARKING =10 SPACES TOTAL PARKING PROVIDED =486 SPACES MODIFIED OUTFIELD CONFIGURATION RED TARGETS = 25 YARDS (STD=25 YDS) YELLOW TARGETS =50 YARDS (STD=50 YDS) GREEN TARGET =90 YARDS (STD=90 YDS) BROWN TARGET = 125 YARDS (STD=125 YDS) BLUE TARGET = 150 YARDS (STD=150 YDS) WHITE TARGET = 175 YARDS (STD=185 YDS) BLACK TARGET = 200 YARDS (STD=215 YDS) Request For Proposal Summary Burlingame Golf Center Site Criteria Mid-Peninsula Ice Rink Foundation US Badminton Center BUSINESS PROPOSAL Facility Summary Two NHL sized rinks, a restaurant, locker rooms, community rooms, fitness center, homework lounge and 300 spectator seating area. Maintain 15 bays of existing golf center. A Badminton World Federation qualified venue with 30K - 50K sq. ft. of badminton courts with specialized flooring, lighting and high ceilings, a 40K sq. ft. wellness center, outdoor fitness facilities (short running tracks), pro shop, and supplemental food services. Maintain 20-25 bays of existing golf center. Operator This is proposed as a public/private partnership. MIRF is the non-profit development partner. There will be a for profit master sublease with an operator. They anticipate partnering with the Sharks Ice organization who will be paid a fixed fee or % profits. MIRF would subcontract for other management as needed. Burlingame, San Mateo and possibly San Mateo County would be the governmental entities involved in the partnership. No franchising or sub-leasing. Turnkey operation with the proposed team operating and managing this entity. Proposing Entities Audience / Target Market Local ice sport enthusiasts of all ages. Local and international badminton players, current golf range players. # Anticipated Visitors Anticipate 500,000 visitors per year. Badminton Center 1,500 members and Wellness Center 800 members. Hours of Operation Open 7 days a week 18 hours day (5:30 AM to 1 AM) - 365 days a year. Indoor: M-F 6 AM to 10 PM and S/S 7 AM to 8 PM, Outdoor: M-F 9 AM to 9 PM and S/S 7 AM to 8 PM. Programming Figure skating, co-ed youth hockey, adult hockey, public skating, broomball, curling, adaptive ice sports, lessons (3 days a week), birthday parties (daily), public sessions (daily). Golf Center continues with 15 bays. Badminton - Membership based programming with drop in classes, community workshops, tournaments and training camps. Wellness Center (indoor and out) - yoga, senior fitness, personal trainers, massage therapy and other fitness classes. Community Support Programs - PLAYSPACE , sports leagues, youth activity summer camps. Golf Center - continues its on 20-25 bays. Food and Retail Services Concessions open M-F 11 AM - 9 and SS 7 AM - 9 PM, Restaurant M- F 3:30 PM to 1 AM and SS 7 AM to 1 AM, Retail M-F 11 AM - 9 PM and SS 7 AM - 9 PM. Healthy options in a sports food hall and pro shop open during operating hours. ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY IMPACT # Jobs Created Anticipate approximately 60 local hires including 6-7 FT management staff and up to 100 PT employees. Based on the organization chart, about 10-20 FT professionals and then various contract staff such as trainers and coaches as needed. Rent to City of Burlingame Preferred option: $0 rent ground lease with profit sharing in lieu of rent. Open to negotiating rent with COB. Development and construction phase $50,000 per annum and once occupied an annual base rent of $80,000 plus performance 5% above annual revenue of $2.5 million. Financial Benefit Investment of $16-20 MM in capital improvements. Hotel and sales tax revenues. Lease revenue to the city, $8 -$10 MM in capital improvements, local tournaments and international events for hotels. Hotel and sales tax revenues. Community Benefit Would provide Mid-Peninsula with ice rink option to replace closed one in SM and Belmont. Would provide scholarships to local youth. BHS and other local high school teams (golf and badminton) could use the facility for free. Would create a Burlingame Cup Badminton Tournament and offer fitness and health supporting services, PE and youth programs. Available to Community When not programmed for their needs, would be open for public skate, lessons, and parties. Daily public skate on one rink from M-F 11:00 AM - 5:00 PM and then on weekends 11:15 AM to 3:15 PM as well as 7:30-9:30 PM. Fifteen bays for the golf range to remain open to the public. Membership based. About 20 - 25 bays for the golf range remain open to the public. FINANCIAL PROPOSAL Financial Structure Total project cost $16 - 20 MM. MIRF will use a portion of the BGC land to build a Community Skating Center, COB maintains rest of facility. Construction paid for by combination of contributions from City of San Mateo, County of San Mateo, donations from the general public, and traditional debt financing from a commercial bank. Anticipate $8 MM in equity from City of San Mateo and San Mateo County, $3 million of donor capital, $1 MM naming rights and $8 MM bank loan secured by the facility. Initial loan would be for construction and then converted to permanent financing. Anticipate several large donors and about 1 year to fundraise the $3 million. Estimates for construction cost alone are $8-$12 MM and based on pro forma need minimum 20 years recoup of these costs. The proposal is for the two partners to finance all construction costs with cash. City Financial Requirements Unknown at this time, but the proposal suggests a public/private partnership that envisions city financial participation from City of SM and County of SM. COB may be asked to forego base rental income. No capital required to build center. Possible costs to reconfigure the remaining golf center bays or convert to other uses. USBC would pay % of the lease during construction phase. Ground Lease Term 40 year ground lease.45 year lease with 3-ten year options and first right of refusal should land ever be for sale. The group anticipates no recap of investment for at least 20 years. Sustainable Practices Bloom Energy Fuel Cell Technology Proposal to use concrete tilt up with more of a canopy (like Burlingame Tennis Center) and sustainable low water landscaping. PROPOSING ENTITY Headquartered Proposed pro bono team is Bay Area. Franchise operator is San Jose. Proposed team is Bay Area. Organization Team The MIRF is set up as a 501(3) charitable organization with Mike Strambi, financial executive, Ray Miolla real estate and land use attorney, Tim Hennessey, real estate investor. Sharks Ice (Proposed sub-lease agreement) - Jim Goodard EVP Business and Operations, Jon Gustafson - VP Sharks Ice LLC, Robert Savoie, Hockey Director, Candy Goodson, Skating Director Internal: Solomon Tsai - Local hotel and restaurant developer (financial partner), Bill Yeh (financial partner) problem solver and strategist (badminton player), Wesley Hsieh player and private club operator, Ishmael Jackson, fitness instructor. External: Paisan Rangsikitpho - Deputy President of BWF. Experience MIRF is new non-profit entity, but founders have general real estate development experience and Sharks Ice (if awarded the contract), has extensive operations experience. New group, but partners are experienced in badminton and have extensive hotel and restaurant experience. Ownership Structure MIRF is the non-profit entity that would oversee development, hire and retain the Sharks Ice (or similar) franchise for operations. Sharks Sports and Entertainment is a Limited Liability Corporation LLC. None suggested in proposal, but likely private citizens in some form of partnership. Organization proposal includes Board of Directors and staff. Operational Reach Sharks Ice manages 3 local facilities - San Jose, Oakland and Fremont. Local operational reach. There plan proposes involving the US Olympic and Badminton World Federation, but no formal agreement as of now. DEVELOPMENT Experience Landfill/Cap New organization, but the proposer indicates that the team has experience with landfill and caps. Suggest they will not disturb the cap, but will build mainly on the parking lot and will leave a portion of the BGC facility. Plan includes two rinks on the parking lot, parking on a portion of the driving range and all of the putting green. Comments on the landfill - initial proposal is a hybrid construction of 35' to 40' height, 50K to 80K sq. ft. - would need to do more work with engineers to understand landfill impact, suggest construction on putting green and existing parking lot - move those to other locations. Parking Lot Estimated 550 slots would be needed for the for the new facility, remaining driving range and Murray Field. Use half of the current lot, the short range and parking over the current driving range. Estimate 250 - 350 additional parking spots. Past Successful Developments No past ice rink development experience by the current volunteer MIRF team, but extensive business experience and will provide work pro bono. Past successful developments include hotel and restaurant facilities. Experience with Gov Agencies MIRF is a new non-profit and has no direct governmental experience. Not directly with badminton, but with hotels and restaurants. % of the Property Used Propose using the current parking lot area for the two ice rinks, adding parking by removing some of the golf center bays (15 to remain) and the putting green. City could retain responsibility for the unused driving range area for continued use. Current golf house, bathrooms and restaurant stays. Using half of the parking lot, the golf putting green, and half of the range. Parking moved to the current golf center range space and leave 20-25 hitting bays. Current golf house, bathrooms and restaurant stays. Timeline City of SM to meet in 1Q to consider allocation of negotiated proceeds from current rink owner. Would have to secure traditional financing, raise the $3 mm and get the County to allocate funds for the project. Anticipate 9-12 months to secure funding. After all development studies, permits and plans are completed, would anticipate 12-18 month construction timeline. Total project estimate 3 - 4 years after they secure project funding. After all development studies, permits, plans and Master Lease would estimate 18-24 months of construction. Total project estimate is 3 - 4 years. Topgolf A 65,000 SF facility with 3 levels, 102 climate controlled hitting bays with group seating, 3K sq ft. event space, 2.5K sq. ft. kitchen, full-service restaurant, 200+ HDTV units for patrons, 3K sq. ft. rooftop terrace with firepits and live music, lower lounge with free pool tables, shuffle board and Xbox Kinect. No franchising or sub-leasing. Turnkey operation - Topgolf is the developer and operator. Use several 3rd party partners and experts during development. Proposing Entities 70% of guests are "non-golfers" - the morning market is traditional golfers, the evening is focused on families, millennials, and general entertainment. Anticipate 500,000 visitors per year. 9:00 AM to 2:00 AM daily, but may open early for special events or to access driving range. Open 365 days yr. General entertainment, food and music. Golf lessons for all ages and levels, Kidzone - free to 12U, Summer Academy Camps for kids, Topgolf Championships - tournaments for avid and beginning golfers, leagues, and T/F/SAT TG nights with live bands and DJs all summer. Restaurant open during all hours of operations. Would also have a retail section. 485 local hires including 40 FT and 400 FT Equivalents. Annual payroll and benefits at $8MM. 150 to 170 associates on a typical evening. Proposes minimum annual base rent of $500,000 for leased premises starting 30 days from opening. Lease revenue to the city, $30 MM in capital improvements, local tournaments and events for hotels. Hotel and sales tax revenues. Will allow BHS and other local HS golf teams to continue their practice sessions. Would partner with Park and Rec Foundation for fundraising opportunities to provide scholarships. Space for community and hotel events. Open at all times to the broad community. Community oriented events, open to local hotel and other guests. Expected $30 MM capital investment. Project financing is in place. Topgolf uses syndicated debt and private equity to finance and has significant access to capital. Access to $175 MM term loan, just added $100 MM to revolving line of credit, and can access REIT financing. No capital required. City will hold long-term land lease and receive rent. During construction COB would lose access to rent paid by current golf center operator. Rent to start 30 days after occupancy. 20 year lease with another 20-30 year option. Objective to obtain LEED silver rating, low water plumbing, LED lights, use recyclable content, composting plan, driving range is pervious, native plants, etc. Dallas, TX Internal: Eric Anderson - Co- Chairman & CEO, Ken May CEO - Operations, Devin Charhon - Dir RE and Authorized Rep, Kevin Miner, VP Construction. External Team: ARCO Murray General Contractor, Manhard Consultants Civil Engineering, The ARIA Group national architect, JLL retail and restaurant. 16 Years development and operational experience with Topgolf facilities. Privately Owned and Operated, backed by Callaway Golf Company (NYSE:ELY) and other institutional and private investors. 27 US operations, 3 London, 6 in development and plans to expand globally. Partners have experience. Proposal is to work on existing golf center location. Plan has three options with the best one utilizing the entire existing golf center for both the facility and parking. Leaves the current lot in tact, adds 450 - 500 new slots. There are 27 locations and 6 under construction. Closest is in Sacramento, CA. Experience with long-term ground leases, CEQA and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Have completed long-term ground leases in IL and AZ with municipal agencies. Uses the entire golf center driving range and putting green, leaves the parking lot, restaurant and bathrooms intact. 2 years of entitlements and environmental review and 18 months construction - 3.5 years to completion. Provided complete timeline in proposal. 1 STAFF REPORT AGENDA NO: MEETING DATE: January 17, 2017 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: January 17, 2017 From: Meaghan Hassel-Shearer, City Clerk – (650) 558-7203 Subject: Informational Report on SB 415, the “California Voter Participation Rights Act” RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council receive this informational report on SB 415, the “California Voter Participation Rights Act,” and provide direction to staff on the next steps to be taken. BACKGROUND On September 1, 2015, Governor Brown signed into law SB 415, the “California Voter Participation Rights Act.” The legislation proposes to address declining voter turnout and voter fatigue by coordinating local elections with even-year state elections. SB 415 amended the California Elections Code (sections 14050-14057) to: “prohibit a political subdivision [municipality, school or special district], as defined, from holding an election other than on a statewide election date if holding an election on a nonconcurrent date has previously resulted in a significant decrease in voter turnout.” A significant decrease in voter turnout is defined as: “if the voter turnout for a regularly scheduled election in a political subdivision is at least 25 percent less than the average voter turnout within that political subdivision for the previous four statewide general elections.” Pursuant to SB 415, Burlingame must move its Council elections to an even-year cycle if voter turnout during the City’s Council elections (municipal elections) is more than 25% below the City’s voter turnout during the past four statewide general elections. The table below shows the voter turnout percentages in the past four statewide general elections. Informational Report on SB 415 January 17, 2017 2 Statewide General Election Year Registration Voter Turnout Turnout Percentage 2016 17,612 15,002 85.2% 2014 15,695 5,232 33.3% 2012 16,045 13,344 83.2% 2010 15,372 5,472 35.6% The average voter turnout in the past four statewide general elections for Burlingame is 59.3%. If voter turnout during Burlingame’s municipal elections is less than 44.5%, which is 25% less than the average turnout rate, then the City must move its elections to an even-year cycle. The table below shows the voter turnout percentages in the past four municipal elections. Burlingame General Election Year Registration Voter Turnout Turnout Percentage 2015 15,702 5,948 37.9% 2013 15,857 5,114 32.3% 2011 14,756 6,099 41.3% 2009 15,295 5,188 33.9% None of the past four municipal elections had a voter turnout rate that was above the required 44.5%. Therefore, Burlingame must comply with SB 415 and implement changes to coordinate its election cycle with the statewide even-year cycle. SB 415 gives jurisdictions until January 1, 2018, to adopt a plan to consolidate future elections with statewide elections. At the December 5, 2016 City Council meeting, staff discussed the above findings. At that time, the City Council requested more time to review the legislation and options. In addition, the City Council asked staff to track the progress of other San Mateo County municipalities in consolidating their elections with statewide elections and the potential cost of holding an election in 2017. DISCUSSION Staff has identified the following options for the City Council to review in determining how it wishes to comply with SB 415. Option 1: Extend all Council terms by a year. By doing this, the three seats that would be elected in November 2017 would be elected in November 2018, while the two seats that would be elected in November 2019 would be elected in November 2020. Informational Report on SB 415 January 17, 2017 3 Option 2: Decrease all Council terms by a year. By doing this, the three seats that would be elected in November 2017 would be elected for three years (ending November 2020), while the two seats that would be elected in November 2019 would be elected in November 2018. Option 3: Extend all Council terms by a year but wait until an election year. By doing this, the three seats that would be elected in November 2017 would be for five years (placing their next election in November 2022), and the two seats that would be elected in November 2019 would be for five years (placing their next election in November 2024). Option 4: Decrease all Council terms by a year but wait until an election year. By doing this, the three seats that would be elected in November 2017 would be for three years (placing their next election in November 2020) and the two seats that would be elected in November 2019 would be for three years (placing their next election in November 2022). Option 5: Extend all Council terms by seven months. By doing this, the three seats that would be elected in November 2017 would be elected in June 2018, and the two seats that would be elected in November 2019 would be elected in June 2020. Option 6: Combinations of the above. The three seats that would be elected in November 2017 could be for five years, and the two seats that would be elected in November 2019 could have extended or decreased terms. Staff reviewed the actions that the municipalities and districts in San Mateo County affected by SB 415 took to consolidate their elections with the even-year cycle. Of the 12 municipalities affected, Belmont, Foster City, Millbrae, Portola Valley, South San Francisco and Woodside have chosen Option 1 (extending members’ terms by 12 months). Nine school districts, including the San Mateo Union High School District, and two special districts also chose Option 1. The Burlingame School District has not yet scheduled an SB 415 discussion for their board. San Carlos and Redwood City will be discussing the item on January 23, and San Bruno will discuss it on January 24. Although the City of Brisbane has not adopted an ordinance, they did discuss the matter at their January 5, 2017 meeting and voted in favor of Option 5. Statewide elections in June are traditionally used for primary contests in Federal, State and County offices. But the June statewide election date is also used for school district measures and Central Committee contests. Burlingame’s average voter turnout for the past four June statewide elections is 40.38%. A few jurisdictions will be having November 2017 elections. The City of San Mateo is placing a charter amendment on the November 2017 ballot which would extend the terms of sitting officeholders by a year. The Portola Valley School District and the San Mateo Foster City School Informational Report on SB 415 January 17, 2017 4 District chose Option 4, and therefore will be holding elections in November 2017 and November 2019 for three-year terms. The San Carlos School District chose Option 3 and therefore will be holding elections in November 2017 and November 2019 for five-year terms. If Burlingame chooses to hold elections in November 2017 and/or November 2019, the City will be able to share some of the election expenses with at least three other jurisdictions. Once Council determines which option to utilize, staff will introduce an ordinance to amend Ordinance 1219, which consolidated City municipal elections with the Burlingame School District’s odd-year election cycle. After adoption, SB 415 requires the City to obtain approval from the County Board of Supervisors. Within 30 days of receiving the Board’s approval, the City Clerk will send out a notice to all Burlingame registered voters informing them of the change in the general municipal election date and elected officials’ terms affected by the ordinance. Staff asks Council to determine how it wishes to proceed so that an ordinance can be brought for its consideration as appropriate. FISCAL IMPACT A review of the past municipal elections shows that the 2013 election cost the City $28,124, and the 2015 All-Mailed Ballot Election cost the City $22,189. It is not yet known what the fiscal impact will be when the Council consolidates its elections to an even-year cycle. However, it can be predicted that the more jurisdictions sharing the costs of an election, the more savings the City will see. Likewise, if the Council holds an election in November, 2017, it will be more expensive than in years past because fewer jurisdictions will be sharing in the cost. This cost will increase if the Council has not implemented a change by the November 2019 election as, again, there will be fewer jurisdictions sharing the cost. In determining an estimate for holding an election in November, 2017, staff requested information from the Elections Office on what the Coastside Fire Protection District Recall Election in 2013 cost the District. The Coastside Fire Protection District has 14,323 registered voters, and the District’s measure/candidate contests were the only issues on the ballot. The cost was $167,869. The City should expect a similar cost to hold an election in November, 2017. In addition, AB 2028, which allowed San Mateo County to conduct all-mailed ballot elections, could be utilized. If the Elections Office and all jurisdictions that are planning to hold elections in November, 2017 agree, then the election could be held as an all-mailed ballot election. This would decrease election costs, while still providing a polling place to voters in Burlingame. Exhibits:  SB 415  List of SMC Municipalities and Their Respective Actions on SB 415 11/14/2016 Bill Text ­ SB­415 Voter participation. https://leginfo.legislatur e.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160SB415 1/2 SB­415 Voter participation.(2015­2016) Senate Bill No. 415 CHAPTER 235 An act to add Chapter 1.7 (commencing with Section 14050) to Division 14 of the Elections Code, relating to elections. [ Approved by Governor  September 01, 2015. Filed with Secretary of State  September 01, 2015. ] LEGISLATIVE COUNSELʹS DIGEST SB 415, Hueso. Voter participation. Existing law generally requires all state, county, municipal, district, and school district elections be held on an established election date. Existing law also establishes certain dates for statewide elections. Existing law requires any state, county, municipal, district, and school district election held on a statewide election date to be consolidated with a statewide election, except as provided. This bill, commencing January 1, 2018, would prohibit a political subdivision, as defined, from holding an election other than on a statewide election date if holding an election on a nonconcurrent date has previously resulted in voter turnout for a regularly scheduled election in that political subdivision being at least 25% less than the average voter turnout within the political subdivision for the previous 4 statewide general elections, except as specified. This bill would require a court to implement appropriate remedies upon a violation of this prohibition. The bill would authorize a voter who resides in a political subdivision where a violation is alleged to file an action in superior court to enforce this prohibition, and it would allow a prevailing plaintiff other than the state or political subdivision to collect a reasonable attorney’s fee and litigation expenses, as provided. Vote: majority   Appropriation: no   Fiscal Committee: no   Local Program: no   THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Chapter 1.7 (commencing with Section 14050) is added to Division 14 of the Elections Code, to read: CHAPTER  1.7. Voter Participation 14050. This chapter shall be known and may be cited as the California Voter Participation Rights Act. 14051. As used in this chapter: (a) “Political subdivision” means a geographic area of representation created for the provision of government services, including, but not limited to, a city, a school district, a community college district, or other district organized pursuant to state law. 11/14/2016 Bill Text ­ SB­415 Voter participation. https://leginfo.legislatur e.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160SB415 2/2 (b) “Significant decrease in voter turnout” means the voter turnout for a regularly scheduled election in a political subdivision is at least 25 percent less than the average voter turnout within that political subdivision for the previous four statewide general elections. (c) “Voter turnout” means the percentage of voters who are eligible to cast ballots within a given political subdivision who voted. 14052. (a) Except as provided in subdivision (b), a political subdivision shall not hold an election other than on a statewide election date if holding an election on a nonconcurrent date has previously resulted in a significant decrease in voter turnout. (b) A political subdivision may hold an election other than on a statewide election date if, by January 1, 2018, the political subdivision has adopted a plan to consolidate a future election with a statewide election not later than the November 8, 2022, statewide general election. 14053. Upon a finding of a violation of subdivision (a) of Section 14052, the court shall implement appropriate remedies, including the imposition of concurrent election dates for future elections and the upgrade of voting equipment or systems to do so. In imposing remedies pursuant to this section, a court may also require a county board of supervisors to approve consolidation pursuant to Section 10402.5. 14054. In an action to enforce subdivision (a) of Section 14052, the court shall allow the prevailing plaintiff other than the state or political subdivision of the state, a reasonable attorney’s fee consistent with the standards established in Serrano v. Priest (1977) 20 Cal.3d 25, 48­49, and litigation expenses including, but not limited to, expert witness fees and expenses as part of the costs. A prevailing defendant shall not recover any costs, unless the court finds the action to be frivolous, unreasonable, or without foundation. 14055. A voter who resides in a political subdivision where a violation of subdivision (a) of Section 14052 is alleged may file an action pursuant to that section in the superior court of the county in which the political subdivision is located. 14056. This chapter does not apply to special elections. 14057. This chapter shall become operative on January 1, 2018. List of San Mateo County Municipalities and Their Respective Actions on SB 415 City Election Year Date Presented or Will be Presented to Council Action Taken Atherton Even n/a Belmont Odd Informational Report submitted on January 10, 2017 Introduced ordinance to extend all members’ terms by 12 months Brisbane Odd Informational Report submitted on January 5, 2017 Introduced ordinance to extend all members’ terms by seven months Burlingame Odd Informational Report submitted on December 5, 2016 Colma Even n/a Daly City Even n/a East Palo Alto Even n/a Foster City Odd October 17, 2016 Extended all members’ terms by 12 months Half Moon Bay Even n/a Hillsborough Even n/a Menlo Park Even n/a Millbrae Odd June 14, 2016 Extended all members’ terms by 12 months Pacifica Even n/a Portola Valley Odd October 26, 2016 Extended all members’ terms by 12 months Redwood City Odd October, 2016 – Ad hoc committee recommended extending Council terms by 12 months Meeting scheduled for January 23, 2017 San Bruno Odd Informational Report scheduled for January 24, 2017 San Carlos Odd Informational Report scheduled for January 23, 2017 San Mateo Odd September 19, 2016 Charter amendment for 11/7/2017 South San Francisco Odd July 27, 2016 study session Extended all members’ terms by 12 months Woodside Odd December 13, 2016 Extended all members’ terms by 12 months