Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - CC - 2020.03.02CITY O BURLINGAME $AarEo � xE � BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL Approved Minutes Regular Meeting on March 2, 2020 1. CALL TO ORDER A duly noticed meeting of the Burlingame City Council was held on the above date in the City Hall Council Chambers at 7:00 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG The pledge of allegiance was led by League of Women Voters' representative Marta Bookbinder. 3. ROLL CALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Beach, Brownrigg, Colson, O'Brien Keighran, Ortiz MEMBERS ABSENT: None 4. REPORT OUT FROM CLOSED SESSION a. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — ANTICIPATED LITIGATION SIGNIFICANT EXPOSURE TO LITIGATION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(b), ONE CASE (LETTER REGARDING CALIFORNIA VOTING RIGHTS ACT/DISTRICT ELECTIONS) STAFF IN ATTENDANCE: CITY CLERK, CITY MANAGER, AND CITY ATTORNEY City Attorney Kane reported that direction was given but no reportable action was taken. 5. UPCOMING EVENTS Mayor Beach reviewed the upcoming events taking place in the city. Burlingame City Council March 2, 2020 Approved Minutes 6. PRESENTATIONS a. PRESENTATION BY CORA (COMMUNITY OVERCOMING RELATIONSHIP ABUSE) RECOGNIZING POLICE OFFICER RICHARD SCHENO Mayor Beach explained that CORA (Community Overcoming Relationship Abuse) is a nonprofit organization in the county that is dedicated to helping those affected by partner abuse by providing such services as counseling and emergency housing. CORA representative Jaskirat Chawla explained that every quarter, CORA recognizes a police officer who went above and beyond to assist a survivor. CORA representative Jessica Gray stated that this quarter, CORA selected Burlingame Police Officer Richard Scheno for his compassion, advocacy, and support of a survivor of domestic violence. She explained that on December 4, 2019, Officer Scheno responded to a report of a domestic disturbance, and during his investigation, he determined that the victim was assaulted. She stated that Officer Scheno built a rapport with the victim, which resulted in gaining her trust and being able to provide appropriate assistance. Officer Scheno thanked CORA and stated that any officer would have responded in the same fashion. Councilmember Brownrigg discussed Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran's work with CORA and thanked all involved for their hard work and dedication. b. PROCLAMATION CELEBRATING THE 100TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE 19TH AMENDMENT AND THE FOUNDING OF THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS Mayor Beach explained that 2020 was the 100th anniversary of the passage of the 19th Amendment, which gave women the right to vote, and the founding of the League of Women Voters. She commended the League of Women Voters for their dedication to ensuring that voters have access to voting centers and information on candidates and measures. League of Women Voters representative Marta Bookbinder stated that the League was founded on Valentines Day in 1920. She noted that it was founded six months before the 19th Amendment was ratified in order to assist women with their new right. She explained that the League's mission is to facilitate the democratic process and ensure its success. She discussed the League's candidate forums and their reports on the pros and cons of ballot measures. Councilmember Brownrigg commended the League for their work. He noted that there have been several elections in Burlingame where the League provided the only candidate forum. He added that he was a member of the League and encouraged other men to join. Councilmember Colson stated that not only was she a member of the League, but she also signed her two daughters up. 2 Burlingame City Council March 2, 2020 Approved Minutes Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran stated that the League has done a phenomenal job over the years. Mayor Beach presented Ms. Bookbinder with a proclamation honoring the work of the League and celebrating the 1001h anniversary of the League of Women Voters and the 191h Amendment. 7. PUBLIC COMMENT Dr. Trudy Opitz voiced concern about a curb stop in a downtown parking lot and asked that the City paint it red to ensure that the public doesn't trip over it. A Burlingame resident discussed his traffic concerns related to the southbound lane on California Drive just north of the Broadway intersection. 8. CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Beach asked the Councilmembers and the public if they wished to remove any item from the Consent Calendar. Councilmember Brownrigg pulled 8a. Councilmember Colson pulled item 8b. As a result of both Consent Calendar items being pulled, there was no motion. a. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR FEBRUARY 18, 2020 Mayor Beach emailed City Clerk Hassel -Shearer the following amendments to the City Council Meeting Minutes for February 18, 2020 (indicated in italics): Page 1 "She reviewed some of the comments that staff heard from developers including:" Page 2 • "Sustainability Coordinator Michael stated that to enact a reach code, the City must prove cost- effectiveness to the California Energy Commission. She stated numerous cities have proved this already" • "She stated that Cupertino, Brisbane, Mountain View, Pacifica, Palo Alto, San Jose, and San Mateo County have all adopted the Menlo Park approach" • "She noted that Menlo Park as well as other cities don't allow natural gas for cooking in multi -family buildings." Page 3 • "She added that she would have further discussions with developers about transformers and their concerns. She noted that the developers she spoke with were comfortable with this exemption strategy. " Burlingame City Council March 2, 2020 Approved Minutes Page 7 • "Mayor Beach thanked staff, developers, and the community for engaging in this conversation. She stated it makes a difference to her that the reach codes being considered apply to new construction, not remodels. " Councilmember Brownrigg noted the importance of watching the Council meeting and not just reading the meeting minutes in order to understand the nuance of the Council's comments. Councilmember Ortiz made a motion to approve the City Council Meeting Minutes for February 18, 2020; seconded by Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. b. QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPORT, PERIOD ENDING DECEMBER 34, 2049 Councilmember Colson stated that the Quarterly Investment Report covered the period ending December 31, 2019. However, she explained that the past two weeks have been rocky in the investment market. She asked that when the City discusses the FY 2020-21 budget and pension liabilities in May, that staff provide an update on the investment numbers. She explained that she wanted to understand if the market's fluctuation impacted the Ca1PERS contribution rates. Councilmember Brownrigg stated that at the mid -year budget study session, he would like to hear about the potential impact of the coronavirus on the travel industry and therefore the City's TOT. Mayor Beach opened the item up for public comment. No one spoke. Councilmember Brownrigg made a motion to accept the City's Quarterly Investment Report for the period ending December 31, 2019; seconded by Councilmember Colson. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS a. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 25.59 (ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS), CHAPTER 25.60 (ACCESSORY STRUCTURES IN R-1 AND R-2 DISTRICTS), CHAPTER 25.26 (R-1 DISTRICT REGULATIONS) AND CHAPTER 25.70 (OFF-STREET PARKING) OF THE BURLINGAME MUNICIPAL CODE RELATED TO ACCESSORY DWELLI NG UNITS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH RECENTLY ADOPTED AMENDMENTS TO CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTIONS 65852.2 AND 65852.22 AND ADDITIONAL CHANGES TO REMOVE CONSTRAINTS TO CREATING ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS Planning Manager Ruben Hurin stated that in response to the statewide and Bay Area regional housing shortages, the Governor signed into law a number of bills to encourage the construction of accessory dwelling units ("ADU") and junior accessory dwelling units ("JADU") by reducing the regulatory barriers commonly found in local zoning ordinances. He explained that the recently adopted legislation defines the 4 Burlingame City Council March 2, 2020 Approved Minutes standards local jurisdictions can apply to ADUs and JADUs. He noted that the legislation took effect on January 1, 2020. Planning Manager Hurin stated that the State legislation supersedes the City's regulations for ADUs as currently outlined in Municipal Code Chapter 25.59 — Accessory Dwelling Units. He explained that the proposed changes are to bring the City's Accessory Dwelling Unit regulations into conformity with State law. Planning Manager Hurin stated that at the Planning Commission's February 24, 2020 meeting, the Commission reviewed the proposed amendments to the Zoning Regulations and recommended that the Council adopt the changes as proposed in the draft ordinance. Planning Manager Hurin stated that before explaining the key changes in the State law, he wanted to review the different types of ADUs and JADUs. • Attached ADU — when the structure is attached to the single-family home • Detached ADU — a new structure that is separate from the single-family home • Converted Garage • Conversion/interior — convert a portion of the single-family home into an ADU Planning Manager Hurin reviewed the key areas of change mandated by the State legislation: • No minimum lot size requirement for construction of an ADU, whether it is a conversion of existing space, an addition, or a new detached structure. • In addition to an ADU, a JADU (up to 500 square feet in size and located within an existing or proposed single-family dwelling) may be created on a single-family zoned property. • The maximum allowed size for an ADU is 850 square feet, or 1,000 square feet for two or more bedrooms. • ADUs up to 800 square feet in size are exempt from lot coverage and floor area regulations. For simplicity and to avoid confusion, staff is proposing that the lot coverage and floor area ratio exemption be applied to 850 square feet ADUs to be consistent with the maximum allowed size. • Required side and rear setbacks can be no greater than 4'-0". This does not affect detached ADUs since they are exempt from side and rear setbacks if located within 30% of the lot. However, this does reduce the rear setback requirement for an attached ADU from 15'-0" to 4'-0". • No replacement parking for the primary dwelling can be required if an existing detached or attached garage is converted to an ADU or JADU. • No parking is required for a JADU. • ADUs are now permitted in all districts zoned to allow multifamily dwelling residential uses (allowed on properties where a multifamily dwelling structure exists). Up to 25% of the existing dwelling units within a multifamily dwelling structure, but at least one ADU, may be created within existing non -livable space(s). In addition, up to two new detached ADUs may be allowed. • Approval for a compliant ADU or JADU must be issued within 60 days of receiving a complete application. 5 Burlingame City Council March 2, 2020 Approved Minutes Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran stated that the staff report notes that the maximum square footage for an ADU is 850 square feet. She asked if she was correct that an individual could have both an 850 square foot ADU and a 500 square foot JADU. Planning Manager Hurin replied in the affirmative. Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked about converting a basement into an ADU where the basement is more than 850 square feet. Planning Manager Hurin stated that under the law, an individual can build a two - bedroom ADU with a maximum square footage of 1000. Councilmember Brownrigg asked why the State put a limit on the square footage of an ADU. Planning Manager Hurin replied that the State law allows ADUs to be as large as 1200 square feet. But under the State law, cities can limit the square footage to 850 for a one -bedroom ADU and 1000 for a two -bedroom ADU. Councilmember Brownrigg asked why the State cares about the size of ADUs. City Attorney Kane explained that the legislative purpose was to create smaller, more naturally affordable ADUs. Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran stated that if a garage is converted into an ADU, under State law the owner isn't required to provide parking. She asked what would happen if a property owner converted the garage but didn't utilize the space as an ADU. Planning Manager Hurin stated staff would utilize code enforcement in these situations. He added that the proposed ordinance states that when an ADU is no longer being used as an ADU, the structure would need to revert to its previous use. Mayor Beach asked if the ordinance contains any protection against the ADU being used as a short-term rental. Planning Manager Hurin stated that State law provides that ADUs and JADUs cannot be rented for fewer than 30 consecutive calendar days. Planning Manager Hurin discussed the additional changes to the City's ADU ordinance that staff is proposing: • No longer require a Conditional Use Permit for windows located within 10'-0" of property line or for skylights • No longer require a Special Permit for a direct exit from a basement to the exterior of the structure Councilmember Colson stated that under the current code, basements have to have a lightwell for an emergency exit. She asked if staff's proposal would allow them to change the lightwell into a door. Planning Manager Hurin replied in the affirmative. Councilmember Colson asked if it is possible that you could have an ingress through the single-family home. Planning Manager Hurin stated that State law requires a separate entrance for an ADU or JADU. Councilmember Brownrigg discussed the ridge line of the roof and that the proposed ordinance requires a pitch on two sides of the roof. He asked if this was a shed roof. Planning Manager Hurin stated that the ridge can be 16 feet tall with a plate height of 9 feet. 6 Burlingame City Council March 2, 2020 Approved Minutes Councilmember Brownrigg stated that he would have thought that the City wouldn't want to be this prescriptive concerning the roof's ridge. He explained that he believed shed roofs and flat roofs can be more sensitive to their neighbors. City Attorney Kane stated that one of the ambiguities of the State law is that the cities can establish a maximum height of 16 feet. However, the State law does not address whether the roof needs to have a pitch. Therefore, she stated that staff s thought process was that a 16-foot ridge height as opposed to a flat roof would be less impactful on neighbors as a result of removing side and rear setbacks. Councilmember Brownrigg suggested allowing a 10-foot plate height for a flat roof with a very low pitch. Councilmember Colson stated that she believes there are more flat roof garages in the community. She discussed her experience with converting the top of a flat roofed garage into garden space. Planning Manager Hurin explained that the proposed ordinance is requiring the ADU to be in line with the single- family home. Therefore, if the single-family home has a pitched roof, the converted garage would also have to have a pitched roof. Councilmember Colson stated that she was against requiring the same roof design on the ADU and single- family home. She explained that she's had a pitched roof with a flat roof garage. She noted that she believed there were so many benefits to having a flat -roofed garage. Councilmember Ortiz asked if he was correct that the staff s suggestion of requiring pitch on two sides of the roof is to prevent an individual from building a 16-foot tall flat -roofed ADU. Planning Manager Hurin replied in the affirmative. Councilmember Brownrigg stated that staff could require a pitch if the building height reaches 16 feet. Or if the individual wants to have a flat roof, the City could lower the plate height to prevent a 16-foot tall building with a flat roof. He explained that if the City limits the plate height to 9 feet, the individual wouldn't be able to build to 16 feet. Councilmember Brownrigg explained that in communities where ADUs are common, the backyards shrink to almost nothing. He stated that the City would need to figure out a way to balance the community's housing needs with Burlingame's "City of Trees" designation. Councilmember Colson asked if the City could require property owners that are building ADUs to put in trees. City Attorney Kane stated that the point of the legislation is to force an administrative process for the construction of ADUs. Therefore, she stated that the City had to be careful with what it required. Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran voiced concern about skylights on pitched roof ADUs that face the neighbor's property. Mayor Beach discussed sea level rise and the City's water table during storms. She voiced concern about building ADUs in basements and how sea level rise could cause those basements to flood. City Attorney 7 Burlingame City Council March 2, 2020 Approved Minutes Kane stated that property owners would be informed of the City's water table and flooding concerns during plan review. Mayor Beach opened the public hearing. Jennifer Pfaff voiced concerns about the proposed ordinance including staff s suggestion to remove the Conditional Use Permit requirement for skylights. Mona, a local licensed architect, stated that San Mateo is interpreting the 16-foot height limit as a plate height limit. She added that the dual pitch would not aesthetically agree with the historical Eichlers. Mayor Beach closed the public hearing. Mayor Beach asked about setback requirements for basements. Planning Manager Hurin stated that if the basement is below the top of existing grade, then it is not subject to setback requirements except on El Camino Real. Councilmember Colson asked if she was correct that the basement could be in the rear corner of the house and that it can extend to the fence line. Planning Manager Hurin replied in the affirmative. Planning Manager Hurin stated that currently, up to 700 square feet of a basement is exempt from the floor area coverage of the house. Under the proposed ADU ordinance, it would be 850 square feet. Mayor Beach asked if the City should be considering limiting the allowable footprint of basements. Planning Manager Hurin stated that this is another discussion that the Planning Commission and City Council could address in the future. City Attorney Kane stated that based on Council discussion, staff would need to further refine the proposed ordinance. Therefore, the Council didn't have to ask the City Clerk to read the title of the ordinance and make a motion to introduce the ordinance. She explained that as of January 1, 2020, the State law was in effect, and staff was obligated to review plans pursuant to the State's mandates, until the City adopts its own ordinance. Councilmember Colson asked if ADUs are counted towards the City's RHNA allocation. Planning Manager Hurin stated that his understanding is that they can count, but staff is unable to track the affordability rate. Councilmember Colson stated that she believed Hillsborough was able to count their ADUs towards their low income RHNA allocation. Planning Manager Hurin stated that he would talk with his colleagues in Hillsborough. Mayor Beach stated that it seemed that there were three issues that the Council had to discuss regarding the proposed ordinance: 1. Roof line 2. Permeable space 8 Burlingame City Council March 2, 2020 Approved Minutes 3. Windows and skylights on ADUs Mayor Beach voiced concern about being too prescriptive and noted that she believed the Planning Commission would thoroughly review each application to ensure it fit within the neighborhood. City Attorney Kane noted that the three issues that the Mayor brought up are nondiscretionary and would be handled by staff at the counter. Councilmember Ortiz stated that he liked Councilmember Brownrigg's suggestion that if an individual decides to build up to 16 feet, that the roof would be double pitched. Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran stated that she agreed with Councilmember Ortiz. She stated that because the City can't conduct design review on ADUs, her preference would be that the ADU match the existing architecture. Councilmember Colson asked if the City could require a pitched roof with exceptions based on the circumstances of an individual's property. City Attorney Kane replied in the affirmative but stated that the criteria must be objective. She noted that where possible, the City should craft a standard as the purpose of the State's mandate is to streamline the ADU process. Councilmember Colson asked if ADUs would be required to have solar panels. Planning Manager Hurin stated that he would review the requirement with the Chief Building Official. Mayor Beach stated that she agreed with Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran that you wouldn't want a skylight pointing towards a neighbor's second floor. However, she noted that if the ADU was designed to have a flat roof, she thought a skylight would be a reasonable request. Councilmember Colson asked if an individual builds a 16-foot tall ADU and adds a loft, would the loft count towards the 850 square feet. Planning Manager Hurin stated that current Code section for measurement of the floor area states that if you have an open space that is more than 12 feet in height, the area counts twice. Therefore, he noted that this might exceed the maximum square footage allowed. Councilmember Brownrigg stated that the proposed ordinance states that the roof shall be pitched from ridge to plate on at least two sides. He suggested that if the maximum plate height is 9 feet, the developer could determine the appropriate style of roof, with the exception that if the ridge is over 12 feet, then the ridge should be at least 5 feet off the center. Councilmember Brownrigg discussed lot coverage as a result of the State's mandates. He stated that the Planning Commission should consider whether the City should reduce lot coverage for the main house when a house gets rebuilt. He noted that it would be a tradeoff, as it would allow for the City to maintain backyards but might require the City to allow for more height in single-family houses. Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran explained that the proposed ordinance states that the maximum allowed plate height is 9 feet. She noted that she wouldn't want that changed. She stated that this would help avoid the creation of large box shaped ADUs. 9 Burlingame City Council March 2, 2020 Approved Minutes Planning Manager Hurin stated that regarding windows and skylights, staff could require a conditional use permit for any skylights that are not facing the interior or windows along the rear or side property lines. Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran voiced support for the Planning Manager's suggestion. Councilmember Colson agreed with Planning Manager Hurin's suggestion. City Attorney Kane stated that if there's a window requirement for egress under the City's fire or building code and imposing a CUP would defeat the ability to build an ADU, then staff would need to allow the construction of the ADU. Councilmember Colson asked if the City could require opaque windows within a certain distance of the lot line. City Attorney Kane stated that windows aren't allowed on lot lines. Councilmember Brownrigg asked that the proposed ordinance include a line under Section K referring to balconies and decks that states that a green roof does not count as a rooftop terrace or balcony to cover Councilmember Colson's concerns. 10. STAFF REPORTS a. CONSIDERATION OF APPOINTMENT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION City Manager Goldman stated that there was an opening on the Planning Commission and one candidate, John Schmid, had applied. She noted that Council interviewed Mr. Schmid. Mayor Beach opened the item for public comment. No one spoke. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer read the Council's ballots. John Schmid was unanimously selected by the Council to serve on the Planning Commission. Congratulations to John Schmid. b. CONSIDERATION OF TWO APPOINTMENTS TO THE MEASURE I CITIZENS' OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE City Manager Goldman stated that three candidates applied for the two openings on the Measure I Citizens' Oversight Committee. She noted that Council interviewed the three candidates. Mayor Beach opened the item up for public comment. No one spoke. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer read the Council's ballots. Stephanie Lee and Sandeep Shroff were unanimously selected by the Council to be reappointed to the Measure I Citizens' Oversight Committee. 10 Burlingame City Council March 2, 2020 Approved Minutes Mayor Beach noted that she was unable to attend the interviews but that she read through their applications and listened to the recordings of the interviews. Congratulations to Ms. Lee and Mr. Shroff on their reappointment. Thank you to all applicants. c. 220 PARK ROAD (FORMERLY POST OFFICE) — APPLICATION UPDATE CDD Gardiner stated that during the January 21, 2020 Council study session, Sares Regis and their team presented the Council with some preliminary concepts for the adaptive reuse of the Post Office. He explained that Sares Regis has not submitted a formal planning application. CDD Gardiner explained that staff and Sares Regis are looking for direction on the following matters prior to an application being submitted: 1. An easement exchange between the culvert and Parking Lot E CDD Gardiner explained that an underground culvert runs through this area of downtown Burlingame, connecting stormwater drainage for Burlingame Creek between the hills and the Bay. He stated that the culvert runs across a portion of the Post Office property and continues along Lot E. He explained that Sares Regis is proposing an exchange of easements, whereby the City would receive a subsurface easement for the portion of the culvert under the Post Office property, and the project would receive a subsurface easement under Lot E to benefit its parking. He stated that the subsurface easement under Lot E would provide the project with an additional 36 parking spaces. He noted that the developer proposed a total of 280 spaces (he stated 180 but to avoid confusion, the developer's total of 280 is included here) that could be utilized by the public on nights and weekends. City Attorney Kane stated that mechanism to exchange use of the area underneath the parking lot for the culvert has not yet been identified. Therefore, she explained that staff is looking for whether Council is amenable to this idea. 2. Building height of 90 feet CDD Gardiner explained that the staff report discusses the ability of the developer to request a historic variance under the Historic Resource Preservation ordinance. He stated that the developer has indicated its intent to apply for a historic variance regarding the height of the building. He noted that the proposed building height is 90 feet, with an average height of 53.5 feet. City Attorney Kane noted that it is not before Council whether the project qualifies for the historical variance. Instead, that is a question for the Planning Commission. 3. Utilization of all remaining office space capacity under the Downtown Specific Plan. CDD Gardiner explained that the City Council adopted the Downtown Specific Plan in 2010. The environmental review, as required by CEQA, evaluated a build -out involving up to 248,702 square feet of new office space. He noted that the 2019 General Plan Update adopted these figures into the environmental impact report. He explained that since the adoption of the Downtown Specific Plan, 108,000 square feet of office space has been added to the downtown. He stated that the developer proposes to create 140,000 11 Burlingame City Council March 2, 2020 Approved Minutes square feet of office space at the Post Office site. He noted that future projects would be able to create office space in the downtown, but they would need to conduct their own environmental reviews. City Attorney Kane noted that the project is allowed to apply for the office space square footage but that staff and Sares Regis are looking for Council's input. 4. Suggestions for community engagement to solicit feedback on the proposed project and its design. He noted that this project dovetails with the City's own initiative to create a public plaza. He explained that the City contracted with Urban Field to engage with the community on designing the public plaza. Councilmember Ortiz asked how tall the Burlingame Hotel is. CDD Gardiner stated that the hotel is three stories and 43 feet 8 inches. He added that the tallest building in Burlingame is at 330 Primrose, which is six stories and 82 feet 10 inches. Sares Regis Chief Operating Officer David Hopkins outlined the development group's presentation. Bionic Design Director Marcel Wilson stated that one of the development team's charges was to build a legacy project. He reviewed the location of the project and its access to public transportation. Mr. Wilson discussed options for the open space. He showed examples of other town squares including the square in Noe Valley. He noted that a goal of the project is to ensure that if an individual stands on Park, they get an immediate sense of what the building looked like in the 1940s. He discussed the technical complexities of the project including the four foot elevation above average grade of the building, the culvert, and that the plaza backs up to the backs of buildings. Mr. Hopkins stated the proposed development would include 280 parking stalls. He noted that they are all below grade. He stated that the public would be able to utilize all 280 parking stalls on nights and weekends. He added that their proposal is also to improve and maintain the culvert at the surface level. Mr. Wilson discussed creating retail on the ground floor and noted the importance of visibility of the retail. He also reviewed how the building's structure will ensure that the open plaza provides both sun and shade. He reviewed options for how to design the open plaza including where to place vendors and kids' activities. Councilmember Brownrigg noted that the City retained the services of Urban Field to design the City plaza. Councilmember Colson stated that she agreed with Councilmember Brownrigg but noted that the two projects would have to work together. Mr. Hopkins stated that the team reviewed the General Plan and the Downtown Specific Plan to see how much office space would be allowed. He noted that in order to conform with the capacity under the environmental review, they are proposing 140,000 square feet. 12 Burlingame City Council March 2, 2020 Approved Minutes Mr. Hopkins stated that the team engaged Page & Turnbull to help steer the development's design. He noted that the historic preservation ordinance exists for sites like the Post Office. He discussed the uniqueness of the site. Mr. Hopkins stated that the team strived to establish criteria on height. He explained that to make the project financially feasible and preserve the historical facade, it became necessary to add height to the building. He stated that the proposal was to scale the height of the building down on the street frontages. He explained that on Lorton, the direct height would be two stories. He added that the maximum height of the building would be focused in the center of the building at six stories. Mr. Hopkins reviewed different sketches of the proposed design. He used the sketches to show how the building scales down near the plaza, protects the fagades of the Post Office, and ensures light in the open space. He added that his team studied post offices throughout the country to get the feel of the buildings. He explained that the windows and scale of the lower levels remained consistent with what they saw in other post offices. Mr. Hopkins stated that the projected would provide $3 to $4 million in commercial linkage fees, which could assist the City in building affordable housing. Mayor Beach opened the item up for public comment. Jennifer Pfaff stated that she appreciated the direction of the project and the respect that the developers have shown for the historical facade of the building. She noted that the Lorton Avenue side of the building would be tricky, but she was sure that the Planning Commission could help break up the mass size of the building. Mayor Beach closed public comment. Councilmember Brownrigg asked if the 90 feet height was to the top of the parapet or to the top of the screening of the elevator shaft. Mr. Hopkins stated that it is the parapet as measured by the City's code. CDD Gardiner asked if the parapet is at 90 feet, will there still be overruns from elevators beyond 90 feet. Molly Ricker, a member of the development team, stated that 90 feet is the roof slab separate from mechanical screening. She noted that the mechanical screening isn't part of the height measurement. Councilmember Ortiz stated that the project proposal was for six stories and 90 feet. He noted that the building on Primrose is six stories and 82 feet. He asked why the proposal was higher. Ms. Ricker replied that it is a modern office building. Councilmember Brownrigg stated that the proposal is also trying to incorporate the Post Office, which starts four feet above ground. Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked how much height the mechanical screening adds to the building. Mr. Hopkins replied that it would be an additional five feet. 13 Burlingame City Council March 2, 2020 Approved Minutes Mayor Beach asked if she was correct that the building could have more square footage for office space but that the project instead scaled it back to fit under what was studied for the Downtown Specific Plan. Mr. Hopkins replied in the affirmative. Mayor Beach asked if the average height was 55 feet. Mr. Hopkins replied in the affirmative. Dostart President Steve Dostart noted that the team pushed the height to ensure that they didn't crowd the plaza or the Post Office facade. He noted that the maximum height is at the smallest part of the building. Councilmember Colson asked how far back the height goes on the Lorton Avenue side of the building. Mr. Dostart stated that there is a ten -foot terrace before the height starts. Councilmember Colson asked Mr. Dostart to show the different terraces that created step -backs for the height of the building. Mr. Dostart reviewed the sketches to show the Council the step -backs. Mayor Beach asked how many parking spaces Lot E currently holds. CDD Gardiner replied that it has 70 parking spaces. Mayor Beach discussed giving up parking spaces to create the open space. She noted that hopefully the community would utilize public transportation. She added that a new parking garage would be opening a few blocks from this project with 162 net new stalls. She stated that on nights and weekends, the project would create 280 new parking spaces for the public. She asked if the development team had thoughts on how to address the public's concern about losing daytime parking. Mr. Hopkin discussed smarter parking systems when it comes to structured parking. He stated that there are systems that can talk between parking lots to alert the public of where to park. Mayor Beach stated that it sounds like the applicant would be willing to work with the City on wayfinding. Mr. Hopkins replied in the affirmative. Mayor Beach stated that the place to build in -fill office was in a downtown lot that is a five-minute walk to Caltrain. Councilmember Colson stated that she spoke with DPW Murtuza about the valet parking that was implemented to assist with Parking Lot N being off-line. She noted that he stated that it is only being utilized at a 50% rate. She stated that she believes people are changing their modes of transportation. Therefore, she explained she wasn't concerned about removing 70 parking spaces because they would be more than covered by the parking garage. Councilmember Ortiz stated that he agreed with Councilmember Colson on parking. He explained that the project is creating a unique area for Burlingame and to get there, the City will have to give up a few spaces. He noted that people will learn to use the other lots. He asked that the City Attorney get it in writing that the public is able to utilize the development's 280 parking spaces on nights and weekends. 14 Burlingame City Council March 2, 2020 Approved Minutes Councilmember Ortiz stated that he has some concerns about the height of the building. He noted that he would need to see the detail to understand what issues it might cause on Lorton Avenue. He added that he was fine with the office space capacity. Councilmember Ortiz discussed community engagement on the project. He stated that it is important that the developers listen and act on what the community states. Councilmember Brownrigg stated that previously Mr. Hopkins had discussed the development team's decision to build office space versus housing. He asked Mr. Hopkins to explain this decision. Mr. Hopkins explained that the question is what development will support the cost of the land and the cost of the construction. He stated that in order to support the costs of the site, if the team built housing, it would have to be in the upper echelon of housing. He added that the housing wouldn't support the missing middle. Councilmember Brownrigg stated that when Facebook bought the development on the Bayside, they decided to get rid of the retail and instead build a corporate campus. He explained that he didn't want to see this happen at the Post Office site. Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran echoed Councilmember Brownrigg's point that she didn't want the site to be a corporate campus. Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran stated that she liked that the public would have access to the parking spaces on nights and weekends. She voiced concern for the height of the building but did like the articulation of the different stories. She added that she believed community engagement would be important for the project and noted that there needed to be synergy with the City's town square. Councilmember Brownrigg stated that he thought that the community engagement could come from the Planning Commission process. Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran stated that she thought it needed more than just the Planning Commission process. She noted that many members of the public don't come to Planning Commission meetings, and therefore at least one public meeting would be necessary. Councilmember Ortiz stated that he agreed with Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran. He noted that the project will have a large impact on the community, and therefore at least one meeting outside of the Planning Commission process is necessary. Councilmember Colson discussed the portion of Parking Lot E that would be exchanged for the culvert. She asked that after the developer builds the underground parking, that the at -grade level is built by the developers pursuant to the City's selected design for the plaza. Councilmember Colson noted that she was amenable to the height of the project because it maintains the integrity of the historical elements of the Post Office. She stated that Council and Sares Regis would need to figure how best to message the height of the building to the community. She noted that this would be part of the community engagement. 15 Burlingame City Council March 2, 2020 Approved Minutes Mayor Beach voiced her appreciation to the Burlingame Historical Society for working closely with Sares Regis. She stated that it was important to remember that the development was an average of 55 feet in height. She explained that it allows for the historical facade to have some breathing room. Mayor Beach stated that community engagement would be important for implementing the programing in the City plaza. Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran made a motion to authorize the project to submit plans on the City's property on Parking Lot E contingent on ultimate development and approval of an appropriate agreement to support that; seconded by Councilmember Ortiz. Councilmember Brownrigg stated that he believed the motion should also include the fact that Council believes it is an appropriate trade off to ask that in exchange for granting access to subterranean Lot E, Sares Regis would allow the public to utilize the development's parking spaces on nights and weekends, and Councilmember Colson's suggestion that when Sares Regis finishes the below grade parking on Lot E, they rebuild the top of the lot to conform with the City's selected design for the plaza. Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran amended her motion; seconded by Councilmember Ortiz. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. 11. COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND ACTIVITIES REPORTS AND ANNOUNCMENTS a. MAYOR BEACH'S COMMITTEE REPORT b. COUNCILMEMBER COLSON'S COMMITTEE REPORT 12. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Councilmember Brownrigg asked for a discussion on homelessness and what State mandates might be arising. The Council agreed to agendize the topic. 13. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The agendas, packets, and meeting minutes for the Planning Commission, Traffic, Safety & Parking Commission, Beautification Commission, Parks and Recreation Commission, and Library Board of Trustees are available online at www.burlin_a�g. 16 Burlingame City Council March 2, 2020 Approved Minutes 14. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Beach adjourned the meeting at 10:13 p.m. Respectfully submitted, /s/ Meaghan Hassel -Shearer City Clerk 17 Burlingame City Council March 2, 2020 Approved Minutes