Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - CC - 2020.07.06CITY O BURLINGAME coo � 90 $AarEo � xE � BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL Approved Minutes Regular Meeting on July 6, 2020 1. CALL TO ORDER A duly noticed meeting of the Burlingame City Council was held on the above date online at 7:01 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG The pledge of allegiance was led by Mayor Beach. 3. ROLL CALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Beach, Brownrigg, Colson, O'Brien Keighran, Ortiz MEMBERS ABSENT: None 4. REPORT OUT FROM CLOSED SESSION There was no closed session. 5. UPCOMING EVENTS Mayor Beach reviewed the upcoming events taking place in the city. 6. PRESENTATIONS There were no presentations. 7. PUBLIC COMMENT Sphere representative Greg Boro spoke about the State Lands parcel along the Bay Trail. He noted that Sphere is working to keep the land clean and accessible to the public. Arne Hurty voiced his concern about having Police Officers in schools. Madeline Frechette asked that City staff look into additional measures to ensure that public hearing notices reach apartment units. (comment submitted via publiccomment&burlin_a�g). 1 Burlingame City Council July 6, 2020 Approved Minutes 8. CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Beach asked her colleagues and members of the public if they would like to pull any item off the Consent Calendar. Councilmember Brownrigg pulled 8h and 8i. Councilmember Colson pulled 8k. Councilmember Ortiz made a motion to adopt 8a, 8b, 8c, 8d, 8e, 8f, 8g, and 8j; seconded by Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran. The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote, 5-0. a. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR JUNE 1, 2020 City Clerk Hassel -Shearer requested Council approve the City Council Meeting Minutes for June 1, 2020. b. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINTUES FOR JUNE 9, 2020 City Clerk Hassel -Shearer requested Council approve the City Council Meeting Minutes for June 9, 2020. Prior to the meeting Mayor Beach requested the following changes on Page 7, Paragraph 1: Mayor Beach dice sse whether- the City should allow appreciated staffs "wait and see" recommendation that allows bicycling on Burlingame Avenue during its closure to motorists. She explained that see times when it ..otil 7 be allowed. mixed used pathways are used throughout the world, and they work when people use courtesy, common sense, and give pedestrians the right of way. She gave the example of early in the morning when people are heading to the Avenue for their coffee. She noted that because this was a pilot program, , if . we can monitor to see if additional restrictions are needed. c. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR JUNE 15, 2020 City Clerk Hassel -Shearer requested Council approve the City Council Meeting Minutes for June 15, 2020. Prior to the meeting Mayor Beach requested the following changes on Page 14, Paragraph 8: Mayor Beach stated that if there were to be an exception to allow gas fireplaces and fire pits in people's backyards during new construction or substantial remodels, then new gas lines would need to be installed for these items when everything else in the house is electric. If our goal is to reduce gas line infrastructure, then we should be cautious about allowing this. She w ffiea tha4 later- the owners wool tise tha4 u„o for- their- vkehef d. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A $312,150 AGREEMENT WITH TIMBERLINE TREE SERVICE, INC. FOR THE TREE PRUNING & STUMP REMOVAL FOR FY 2020-2021, CITY PROJECT NUMBER 51000 Parks and Recreation Director Glomstad requested Council adopt Resolution Number 088-2020. 2 Burlingame City Council July 6, 2020 Approved Minutes e. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTIONS AWARDING A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO ANVIL BUILDERS INC., FOR THE 1740 ROLLINS ROAD AND 842 COWAN ROAD PUMP STATION UPGRADES IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,189,000, APPROVING A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH TANNER PACIFIC FOR CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES IN THE AMOUNT OF $626,920, AND APPROVING A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH MOTT MACDONALD FOR CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING IN THE AMOUNT OF $125,384 DPW Murtuza requested Council adopt Resolution Number 089-2020, Resolution Number 090-2020, and Resolution Number 091-2020. C ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AWARDING A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO R&M PAVING CONTRACTORS, INC. FOR THE 2020 PARKING LOT RESURFACING PROJECT, IN THE AMOUNT OF $286,301, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE CONTRACT DPW Murtuza requested Council adopt Resolution Number 092-2020. g. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AWARDING A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO KINGDOM PIPELINES, INC. FOR THE HILLSIDE AND SKYVIEW RESERVOIR SITE IMPROVEMENTS, IN THE AMOUNT OF $233,170, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE CONTRACT DPW Murtuza requested Council adopt Resolution Number 093-2020. h. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION TO AMEND THE ON -CALL TRAFFIC SIGNAL MAINTENANCE SERVICES CONTRACT WITH BEAR ELECTRICAL SOLUTIONS IN THE AMOUNT OF $84,700 AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE CONTRACT AMENDMENT Councilmember Brownrigg asked if he was correct that the traffic light on Hillside is now a timed light instead of only turning red when somebody is waiting on the side street. DPW Murtuza replied in the affirmative. He noted that this was done in order to allow pedestrians to not have to push the walk button during the COVID-19 pandemic. Mayor Beach opened the item up for public comment. Manito Velasco voiced concern about bicyclist safety at the Broadway and Airport Boulevard intersection and at the Cadillac and Rollins Road intersection. He also discussed the pedestrian signal crossing at Broadway that doesn't have a countdown. (comment submitted via publiccomment&burlin a�g). Mayor Beach closed public comment. Burlingame City Council July 6, 2020 Approved Minutes DPW Murtuza stated that some of the bicycle traffic signals are included in a previous contract but have been delayed as a result of COVID. Councilmember Brownrigg made a motion to adopt Resolution Number 094-2020; seconded by Councilmember Ortiz. The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote, 5-0. i. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTIONS AWARDING A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO REDGWICK CONSTRUCTION CO. FOR THE BROADWAY, CALIFORNIA DRIVE, CADILLAC WAY, AND TROUSDALE DRIVE FEDERAL GRANT RESURFACING PROJECT, IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,589,914, AND APPROVING A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH THE HANNA GROUP, INC. FOR CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES IN THE AMOUNT OF $199,730 Councilmember Brownrigg asked if the City should delay the repaving of Trousdale and Cadillac until after the Bicycle -Pedestrian Master Plan and the construction work off of Cadillac is completed. DPW Murtuza stated that repaving is being done with the assistance of a Federal grant that the City received four years ago. Accordingly, the City has to either undertake the repaving now or return the funds. He noted that the striping would be done with paint so that if the Bicycle -Pedestrian Master Plan changes the lines, it would be a less expensive fix. Mayor Beach asked if she was correct that the City would be putting sharrows on those roadways. DPW Murtuza replied in the affirmative. Mayor Beach opened the item up for public comment. No one spoke. Councilmember Brownrigg made a motion to adopt Resolution Number 095-2020 and Resolution Number 096-2020; seconded by Councilmember Colson. The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote, 5-0. j. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE RNEWED AND REVISED AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AND THE BURLINGAME AQUATICS CLUB, INC. FOR THE MANAGEMENT AND OPERAITON OF, AND FOR THE PROVISIONS OF AQUATIC PROGRAMS AT, THE BURLINGAME AQUATIC CENTER Parks and Recreation Director Glomstad requested Council adopt Resolution Number 097-2020. k. APPROVAL OF THE RESTARTING BUSINESS ASSISTANCE PROGRAM AND THE DISTRIBUTION OF FUNDS Councilmember Colson thanked the Economic Development (` ED") Subcommittee for their hard work on this program. She stated that she appreciated their solution of re -directing $60,000 into $3,000 PPE grants. She asked if the grants would be awarded on a first come, first -served basis or in a lottery. City Manager Goldman stated that it would be first come, first served. 4 Burlingame City Council July 6, 2020 Approved Minutes Councilmember Colson asked how the City would be notifying businesses about these grants. City Manager Goldman stated that staff would work with the BID and the Chamber, and staff would be calling all the applicable businesses. Councilmember Colson stated that some of the restaurants expressed interest in public restrooms being set up. She explained that a lot of non -customer users are utilizing restaurant bathrooms, which is creating extra work for their staff. She discussed the $70,000 that would be returned to the General Fund. She noted that the closure of Burlingame Avenue and potential closure of Broadway is expensive, and therefore these funds would be needed for those programs. Councilmember Brownrigg voiced his support for the ED Subcommittee's plan. He noted that he would like to see additional mask signage in the business districts. He asked how grant applications would be submitted. City Manager Goldman stated that businesses would be emailing their applications to the Economic Development and Housing Specialist ("ED&HS") Joe Sanfilippo. Councilmember Colson discussed the issues that had arisen with the County's grant program. She noted that many people weren't able to log in. Therefore, she suggested that the City conduct a lottery for all completed applications filed within a certain time period. City Manager Goldman stated that she would defer to the ED Subcommittee on how best to approach selection. Councilmember Ortiz stated that he liked the first come, first -served approach as it puts the onus on the businesses to get their applications in. Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran stated that she could go either way. Councilmember Ortiz made a motion to approve the Restarting Business Assistance Program and the distribution of funds; seconded by Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran. Councilmember Colson stated that she has a strong preference for the lottery system. She stated that she thought that it would quell a lot of the anxieties around applying. Councilmember Brownrigg concurred with Councilmember Colson. Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran stated that the difference with this program is there is no portal, and that is what caused a lot of the issues with the County's program. Councilmember Ortiz suggested that all applications successfully submitted in the first 24 hours would be put in a lottery, and then if additional funds existed, the City would utilize the first come, first -served approach. City Manager noted that public comment is needed. 5 Burlingame City Council July 6, 2020 Approved Minutes Mayor Beach opened public comment. No one spoke. Councilmember Ortiz amended his motion to state that the first phase of the grant program would be done by lottery and then it would become first come, first served; seconded by Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran. The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote, 5-0. 9. PUBLIC HEARING a. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE EXTENSION OF THE TEMPORARY STREET CLOSURE OF DOWNTOWN BURLINGAME AVENUE, THE CREATION OF PARKLETS NEAR DOWNTOWN BURLINGAME AVENUE, AND THE TEMPORARY STREET CLOSURE OF BROADWAY TO FACILITATE SAFE PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY AND OUTDOOR DINING PURSUANT TO THE LATEST SAN MATEO COUNTY HEALTH ORDER City Manager Goldman explained that staff is asking the Council to consider the following three things: 1. Extension of the temporary, Friday -Sunday street closure of Downtown Burlingame Avenue between El Camino Real and California Drive until the end of September; 2. Creation of parklets along restaurant frontages within the parking lanes on Primrose Road, Park Road, Lorton Avenue, Howard Avenue, and Chapin Avenue; and 3. Temporary, Saturday -Sunday closure of Broadway between Chula Vista Avenue and Capuchino Avenue. DPW Murtuza stated that on June 9, 2020, the Council held a special meeting to consider temporarily closing Burlingame Avenue. He noted that the closure has been generally well -received. He explained that at the June 9 meeting, the Council expressed an interest in creating parklets on side streets in the Downtown Burlingame Avenue area. DPW Murtuza stated that on June 24, the ED Subcommittee held a special meeting to discuss the parklets concept. He explained that the ED Subcommittee agreed to move forward with the concept in the Downtown Burlingame Avenue area. He described the parklets as surrounded by heavy duty industrial barriers that are filled with water. He stated that the barriers couldn't be relocated overnight and therefore would become a permanent fixture for the time being. He noted that the parklets would result in the loss of 60 to 70 parking spaces. He stated that this was based on maximum utilization of the parklets. Mayor Beach suggested considering the extension of the Burlingame Avenue closure and the creation of parklets prior to discussing Broadway. Council agreed. Councilmember Brownrigg stated that parklets would assist restaurants in weathering the storm. He suggested opening up this option citywide and not limiting it to the Downtown Burlingame Avenue area. Mayor Beach asked if staff had concerns about allowing parklets citywide. DPW Murtuza stated that staff is recommending parklets for the entire downtown. He explained that other areas such as California Drive were not included due to traffic volume and public safety. 6 Burlingame City Council July 6, 2020 Approved Minutes Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked if Council approves extending the temporary street closure on Burlingame Avenue, if Council could still tweak the program as needed. City Manager Goldman replied in the affirmative. Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked if staff had talked to the downtown businesses about the parklets to find out who was interested. City Manager Goldman stated that staff visited every restaurant in the downtown business district. DPW Murtuza added that most of the restaurants were interested, and staff gave them encroachment applications to start the process. Councilmember Colson asked if the parklets would be available seven days a week. City Manager Goldman replied in the affirmative. Councilmember Colson asked if restaurants were being charged a flat fee for these encroachment permits. DPW Murtuza stated that due to the City's interest in assisting businesses, there are no permit fees charged at this time for restaurants interested in obtaining parklets. Councilmember Ortiz stated that the issue he has with the parklets is that once they go down, they stay there for the season, and then the City loses parking. He noted that when he drives through San Mateo, there are many empty tables at the parklets. He asked that the City wait for the encroachment permit prior to putting down a parklet. City Manager Goldman replied in the affirmative. Councilmember Colson asked if restaurants must have certain hours or be open a certain amount of days to obtain a parklet. City Manager Goldman replied in the negative. Councilmember Brownrigg stated that he would be interested to hear what his colleagues thought about charging a fee for the parklets. He noted that by charging a fee, it ensures that restaurants are committed to utilizing the parklets. Mayor Beach opened the item up for public comment. Jason Cooper voiced his support for continuing the temporary closure of Burlingame Avenue. (comment submitted via publiccomment(&burlin ag me.org.) Karen Kelly voiced concern that the temporary closure of Burlingame Avenue is detrimental to some small businesses. (comment submitted via publiccomment&burlin_ag me.org). Mayor Beach closed public comment. Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran stated that she didn't think the City should charge a fee for the parklets. She explained that she thought this was a good way for the City to assist businesses. She suggested that the City could remove the parklet if it isn't utilized enough. Councilmember Ortiz concurred with Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran. 7 Burlingame City Council July 6, 2020 Approved Minutes Councilmember Colson stated that if the City is getting a lot of complaints from retail, another option would be to create parklets on Burlingame Avenue around the restaurants so that the street didn't need to be shut down. DPW Murtuza stated that in the staff report, staff is asking for the ability to make changes to the program, including termination of the temporary street closure, if the City receives 30 unique complaints. As a result of technical difficulties Mayor Beach needed to re log into the meeting. Councilmember Brownrigg stated that he supported the consensus. He stated that he wasn't happy with the notion of staff determining if a parklet was getting enough use. He explained that instead, the City could notify the restaurants that this is a pilot program and that the City reserves the right to charge an encroachment fee. Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran stated that the City needs to encourage people to wear masks and observe six feet social distancing in these areas. She noted that the State won't hesitate to close businesses that aren't following the rules. City Manager Goldman echoed the Vice Mayor's concern. She noted that the City has utilized the police to talk with the public about wearing masks. She discussed putting signs on the avenue. Mayor Beach rejoined the meeting. Councilmember Brownrigg made a motion to continue the temporary closure of Burlingame Avenue and to create the parklet program as described in the staff report; seconded by Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran. The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote, 5-0. DPW Murtuza stated that at the June 24 ED Subcommittee meeting, two options were discussed to facilitate outdoor dining on Broadway. 1. Parklet option He explained that under this option the City would create parklets in front of each restaurant on Broadway, and where restaurants were next to each other, the City would combine the parklet. He stated that under this option, Broadway would lose several parking spaces. 2. Temporary Closure of Broadway He stated that under this option, the City would close Broadway at Chula Vista Avenue and Capuchino Avenue. He noted that Paloma and Laguna would remain open to provide access to residents and parking lots. DPW Murtuza stated that the ED Subcommittee felt that a temporary closure of Broadway would be a better option. DPW Murtuza stated that staff discussed the temporary closure with the Broadway BID. He explained that the Broadway BID requested that the closure be done Friday, Saturday, and Sunday, from 4:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. However, the ED Subcommittee decided against this because of the difficulties of closing Broadway 8 Burlingame City Council July 6, 2020 Approved Minutes three days in a row and the traffic congestion on Friday nights. Instead, the ED Subcommittee proposed closing Broadway from Saturday at 8:00 a.m. to Sunday at 10:00 p.m. DPW Murtuza explained that the major concern with temporarily closing Broadway is that it is a major east - west arterial street for El Camino Real and US 101. He stated that the closure would be similar to Burlingame Avenue with nine -foot pedestrian walkways to assist with ADA requirements. He added that the City would lose approximately 50 to 60 parking spaces on the weekends. Mayor Beach thanked staff and the ED Subcommittee for their work on this matter. She asked if staff had recommendations for restaurants that are located outside of the closure area on Broadway. Additionally, she asked if these restaurants would be able to obtain a parklet. DPW Murtuza stated that considering the heavy volume of traffic on Broadway and the detour of traffic onto Capuchino or Chula Vista, installing parklets could create safety concerns. He stated that staff could review this as the pilot program gets underway. Mayor Beach opened the item up for public comment. Henry Schulman stated that he was 100% opposed to closing Broadway because of traffic and safety issues. (comment submitted via publiccoment(&burlin ame.org). Scheherezade Sharabianlou voiced her opposition to closing Broadway. (comment submitted via publiccommentgburlin a�g). Oscar Juarez voiced his support for closing Broadway on the weekends. (comment submitted via publiccomment(d),burlin ag me.org). Mark Zuckerman voiced concern about closing Broadway and how it would affect residential parking in the adjoining neighborhoods. (comment submitted via publiccommentgburlin_a�g). Dave Smaby stated that the temporary closure of Broadway would intensify parking issues for residents that live on or near Broadway. (comment submitted via publiccomment(&,burlin ag me.org). A resident asked what simulations the City performed to understand the traffic flows under the proposed temporary street closure. BPAC representative Leslie Beatty stated that BPAC supports closing streets to allow for more pedestrian access. She suggested closing side streets due to their high density. Mike Cammarata voiced support for the temporary closure of Broadway. Alison Powell voiced support for the temporary closure of Broadway but discussed safety concerns. Tom Feeney voiced concern that the temporary closure of Broadway could increase the spread of COVID- 19. (comment submitted via publiccomment(d),burlin ag me.org). 9 Burlingame City Council July 6, 2020 Approved Minutes Alene Meyer noted that unlike Burlingame Avenue, Broadway is surrounded by residential neighborhoods and asked that the City not close Broadway in order to stop the spread of COVID-19. (comment submitted via publiccomment&burlin ag me.org). Davina Drabkin voiced support for the temporary closure of Broadway. (comment submitted via publiccomment(&,,burlin ag me.org). Linda Field voiced concern about the enforcement of mask -wearing and the spread of COVID-19 if the street is closed. (comment submitted via publiccommentkburlin am�e.org). Madeline Frechette voiced support for the closure of Broadway. (comment submitted via publiccomment(d),burlin ag me.org). Christopher Beall voiced support for the closure of Broadway and added that it would be an opportunity to review the need for alternative transportation in Burlingame. (comment submitted via publiccomment(&,,burlin ag me.org). Dilyana Dimova asked that Broadway not be closed as it is a freeway gateway street. (comment submitted via publiccomment&burlin ag me.org). Manito Velasco asked if the City considered that traffic would be diverted to Sanchez, which already has safety issues. (comment submitted via publiccomment(&burlin ag me.org.) A resident voiced concern about the side streets off Broadway that are residential and how delivery trucks and residents would access their streets. (comment submitted via Zoom chat). John Kevranian stated that the Broadway BID talked with the ED Subcommittee about their proposal. He explained that they wanted to close Broadway Friday, Saturday, and Sunday from 4:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. He voiced concern about the notice that the City put out notifying nearby residents and businesses that the City was considering closing Broadway during the day on Saturday and Sunday, rather than describing the BID's proposal. A&A Gas Station voiced concern about the closure of Broadway and how it would affect their business. (comment submitted via publiccomment(d),burlin ag me.org). Mayor Beach closed public comment. Councilmember Brownrigg stated that he was confused about the Broadway BID's position. He asked if he was correct that they wanted Broadway to be closed from 4:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. on Friday, Saturday, and Sunday. Mr. Kevranian replied in the affirmative. Councilmember Brownrigg asked if the Broadway BID approved of the recommendation in the staff report, which was to close Broadway from Saturday at 8:00 a.m. to Sunday at 10:00 p.m. Mr. Kevranian replied in the negative. 10 Burlingame City Council July 6, 2020 Approved Minutes Mayor Beach asked Mr. Kevranian if the Broadway BID had a second -choice. Mr. Kevranian stated that the Broadway BID opposes closure during the day because it hurts service businesses such as hair salons. Councilmember Brownrigg asked what was stated in the notice. City Manager Goldman explained that the City sent out flyers to all of the residents and businesses in that area notifying them of the ED Subcommittee proposal to close Broadway from Saturday at 8:00 a.m. through Sunday at 10:00 p.m. Mayor Beach asked if Mr. Kevranian and the Broadway BID considered parklets. Mr. Kevranian replied that they were not in favor of parklets due to safety concerns. Councilmember Colson stated that the opening and closing of streets requires a significant amount of staff time. She asked if it was feasible to have staff do this three days a week. DPW Murtuza replied in the negative. He stated that the cost to carry out the Broadway BID's proposal would be 75% more a month than the cost of the Burlingame Avenue street closure. Councilmember Colson stated that because of the financial impact, she couldn't support the Broadway BID's proposal. Councilmember Ortiz stated that at the ED Subcommittee meeting they initially discussed parklets. However, due to safety concerns, the subcommittee determined that a temporary street closure was their best option. He added that Friday night traffic concerns resulted in the ED Subcommittee proposing that the closure not start until Saturday morning. Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran concurred with Councilmember Ortiz. She stated that after hearing from her colleagues and the public, she would be willing to amend the hours so that instead of closing Broadway at 8:00 a.m. on Saturday, it is closed at 4:00 p.m. on Saturday. She noted that this is a pilot program. She suggested trying out the street closure for a couple weeks and then coming back to discuss whether it worked or not. Councilmember Brownrigg stated that he concurred with Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran. He noted that he found this a difficult decision. He suggested following the Vice Mayor's proposal and regrouping in two weeks to see how the street closure works. He explained that he was concerned that the closure would create a heavy traffic burden on the neighboring streets. He asked staff to look into traffic calming measures. Mayor Beach stated that this was a difficult issue. She noted that she thought at first that parklets were a great option. She thought that the parklets would act as a traffic calming measure and increase pedestrian safety. She explained that she thought Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran's suggestion of closing Broadway from 4:00 p.m. on Saturday to 10:00 p.m. on Sunday might be the best option. Mayor Beach stated that she was curious to hear more from the ED Subcommittee about why they chose not to go with parklets. She noted that Mr. Kevranian had mentioned safety issues and that from other conversations, parking availability seemed to be a concern. 11 Burlingame City Council July 6, 2020 Approved Minutes Councilmember Ortiz stated that parklets take up a lot of parking spaces. He added that he liked the Vice Mayor's idea to go from 4:00 p.m. on Saturday through 10:00 p.m. on Sunday. Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran stated that parklets were a two -prong issue. The first was that the Broadway BID felt that they would be losing too many parking spaces, and the second issue was the cost of setting up the parklets and their permanence. She explained that she and Councilmember Ortiz were on the same page about not closing Broadway on Friday evenings due to Friday evening traffic. Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked if the City can decrease the speed limit on the side streets during the closure. DPW Murtuza stated that he didn't believe the City could do that. Councilmember Colson suggested doing two pilot programs where one weekend Broadway is closed from 4:00 p.m. on Friday to 10:00 p.m. on Saturday, and the next weekend Broadway is closed from 4:00 p.m. on Saturday to 10:00 p.m. on Sunday. She explained that the City could then determine which worked better. City Manager Goldman stated that it is a good idea but could cause public confusion. Councilmember Colson stated that if the Broadway BID really wants Friday nights, could the Broadway closure be Friday at 5:00 p.m. to Saturday at 10:00 p.m. She noted that a lot of the service industries are open on Sundays. She explained that the question she has is would they rather have Friday or Saturday night open. City Manager Goldman stated that another challenge is that whatever time you close the road down, staff will have to start getting the cars off the road a couple of hours before. Councilmember Colson and Mayor Beach suggested following Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran's proposal of closing Broadway from 4:00 p.m. on Saturday through 10:00 p.m. on Sunday. Councilmember Brownrigg voiced support for closing Broadway from Saturday at 4:00 p.m. until Sunday at 10:00 p.m. for two weekends. He stated that then he would like to review the pilot program to see how it is working from both a restaurant and traffic perspective. He noted that he is deeply concerned about the health of restaurants on Broadway. He added that a stop sign on Carmelita or Sanchez would assist with slowing down traffic. Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran made a motion to close Broadway from Saturday at 4:00 p.m. to Sunday at 10:00 p.m.; seconded by Councilmember Ortiz. Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran stated that she would like to incorporate traffic calming measures into the pilot program. Councilmember Ortiz stated that he believed the pilot program should run for a month prior to reviewing the program. City Manager Goldman recommended taking it to the ED Subcommittee prior to bringing it back to the Council as the Council is on break until August 17. 12 Burlingame City Council July 6, 2020 Approved Minutes Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran concurred with the City Manager. The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote, 5-0. b. 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 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 DWELLING 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 Hurin stated the City Council reviewed a draft ADU ordinance on March 2, 2020 and May 18, 2020. He explained that at the May 18 meeting, the Council continued action on the item and asked staff to research whether it would be possible to monitor the use of ADUs to ensure that they are used for housing and not just as an extension of the primary dwelling. Additionally, he stated that Council expressed concern regarding building ADUs that are less than 850 square feet as a way to circumvent the floor area ratio and lot coverage limits in order to gain additional space for use in the primary dwelling. Planning Manager Hurin explained that following the May 18 meeting, staff requested that the State Department of Housing and Community Development ("HCD") review and comment on the draft ordinance. HCD noted that overall, the draft ordinance does a good job at covering the more difficult portions of the ADU statute. He added that HCD offered several comments for the City to address in the draft ordinance. Planning Manager Hurin stated that HCD clarified that limiting ADUs to 50% of the living area of an existing single-family dwelling only applies to new attached ADUs, not interior ADUs created from converting space within an existing primary dwelling. He explained that new attached ADUs would be limited to 50% of the existing primary dwelling, with a maximum allowed size of 850 square feet, or 1,000 square feet for two or more bedrooms. Planning Manager Hurin stated that HCD stated that the City cannot limit the number of kitchen facilities within an ADU. Additionally, he explained that HCD noted that the City cannot apply front setback requirements to an ADU that meets the following criteria as provided in the statute: 800 square foot maximum size, 16 foot maximum height, and 4 foot side and rear setbacks. Lastly, HCD stated that in multifamily structures, the City cannot prohibit conversion of spaces required as part of a condition of approval or zoning requirement (bike storage room, gym, etc.) as these are considered to be non -livable spaces. Planning Manager Hurin stated that staff contacted HCD for guidance on the issue of monitoring the use of ADUs. HCD explained that the statute does not anticipate that cities would monitor the use of ADUs, and it doesn't provide any safeguards for this issue. He stated that there may be pauses in the use of the ADU, and the use may change over time, but the ADU would continue to provide the opportunity for housing in various forms over its lifetime. 13 Burlingame City Council July 6, 2020 Approved Minutes Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked if there is any other city on the Peninsula that monitors how the ADUs are utilized. She stated that her issue is that people might build ADUS for the benefit of extending the use of their primary residence rather than utilizing it for housing. Planning Manager Hurin stated that of the 30 applications that the City has received for ADUs, staff senses that they are all for housing. He also noted the issue with trying to track an ADU's use. City Attorney Kane stated that the City can certainly try to track it. She noted that the message they got from HCD is that they can't require it as part of the ordinance as something that would be enforceable. Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran stated that she liked the idea of collecting the data and then later re- evaluating. She noted that her concern is that the system could be abused. Mayor Beach asked the City Clerk to read the title of the ordinance. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer read the title of the ordinance. Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran made a motion to waive further reading and introduce the ordinance; seconded by Councilmember Ortiz. The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote, 5-0. Mayor Beach opened the public hearing. No one spoke. Councilmember Brownrigg stated that he has a lot of concerns about the ADU ordinance, but it is a State mandate. Mayor Beach asked the City Clerk to publish notice of the proposed ordinance prior to the next meeting. c. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE BURLINGAME MUNICIPAL CODE TO ALLOW FOR A BUILDING ELECTRIFICATION REACH CODE CDD Gardiner stated that the Council has reviewed the Reach Code extensively, and what is before the Council at the meeting is a response to what was discussed at the June 15 meeting. He noted that the Reach Code was broken into three ordinances: single-family residences, multi -family, and commercial. Sustainability Coordinator Michael first reviewed the proposed ordinance for single-family residences. Building Electrification Requirements Solar Requirements EV Infrastructure Requirements • All -electric for new homes • Existing building code • One Level 2 charging and and certain substantial requirements one Level 1 if a second remodels parking space exists • Non -electric indoor and • Exception: Accessory outdoor cooking Dwelling Units or Junior appliances and fireplaces Accessory Dwelling Units are allowed without parking facilities • Electric prewiring required for any non -electric 14 Burlingame City Council July 6, 2020 Approved Minutes appliances as ap licable Sustainability Coordinator Michael noted that substantial remodel is defined as when the remodel is over 50% of the valuation of the existing structure and includes a new HVAC system. She added that new roofs or kitchen remodels wouldn't trigger this requirement. Sustainability Coordinator Michael next reviewed the proposed ordinance for multi -family buildings. Building Electrification Requirements Solar Requirements EV Infrastructure Requirements • All -electric • Min 3kW system for • Level 2 Ready for 10% of • Exception: Must buildings less than 10,000 units; remaining units to be demonstrate all -electric is square feet Leave 1 Ready and have infeasible due to • Min 5kW system for conduit for future Level 2 outstanding circumstances buildings 10,000 square charging; Level 1 access or technical challenge to be feet and larger may be shared between considered for an • Exception: Solar infeasible two units. exception by the Chief due to roof size, slope, • Exceptions: EV Building Official shading, and other infrastructure costs exceed • Electric prewiring required limitations $4,500 per space; spaces for any non -electric accessible only by appliances as applicable automated mechanical parking systems; commercial power supply is unavailable. Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked if there is a State law going into effect in 2022 that mandates electrification. Sustainability Coordinator Michael stated that there is talk of that happening. She explained that PG&E recently endorsed all -electric. Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked what is included in the proposed legislation. Sustainability Coordinator Michael stated that it wasn't known yet. Sustainability Coordinator Michael reviewed the third proposed ordinance that dealt with commercial buildings. Building Electrification Requirements Solar Requirements EV Infrastructure Requirements • All -electric • Min 3kW system for • Offices: Level 2 Stations • Commercial kitchens and buildings less than 10,000 for 10% of spaces; and restaurants allowed to use square feet Level 1 for 10% of spaces non -electric cooking • Min 5kW system for • Other Commercial: Level appliances buildings 10,000 square 2 Stations for 6% of • Exception: must feet and larger spaces; and Level 1 for 5% demonstrate all -electric is • Exception: Solar infeasible of spaces 15 Burlingame City Council July 6, 2020 Approved Minutes infeasible due to due to roof size, slope, • Exceptions: EV outstanding circumstances shading, and other Infrastructure costs exceed or technical challenges to limitations $4,500 per space; spaces be considered for an accessible only by exception by the Chief automated mechanical car Building Official parking systems; parking • Electric prewiring required facilities without available for any non -electric commercial power supply appliances as applicable Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked if a restaurant wants a gas stove, will they need to go through the Building Official, or are they exempt. Sustainability Coordinator Michael stated that they are exempt and allowed to put in a gas stove. Councilmember Ortiz stated that he thought the Council agreed to only allow outdoor gas use for new single- family residences. City Manager Goldman noted that there are so few single-family residences that are built that staff felt this was the path of least resistance. She added that if the Council did want to amend the ordinance, it would be a major change, so it would have to be re -introduced at the next Council meeting. Mayor Beach asked the City Clerk to read the titles of the three proposed ordinances. City Clerk Hassel - Shearer read the titles. Councilmember Brownrigg made a motion to waive further reading and introduce the three proposed ordinances; seconded by Councilmember Ortiz. The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote, 5-0. Mayor Beach opened the public hearing. No one spoke. Councilmember Colson thanked staff for their hard work and the discussions that had been had on the Reach Codes. Mayor Beach concurred. She stated that Council and staff worked hard on the ordinances, and a lot of compromises were made along the way. Councilmember Ortiz agreed and stated that he would like the ordinances to be a tiny bit more stringent but can live with the proposed ordinances. Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran stated that she knew everyone had put a lot of work into this, but she had objections to some of the requirements in the proposed ordinances. She noted that knowing there might be a State mandate in 2022, she would rather use this time to educate the public rather than adopt a single-family residence ordinance. Mayor Beach asked the City Clerk to publish notice on the proposed ordinances prior to the next meeting. 16 Burlingame City Council July 6, 2020 Approved Minutes d. PUBLIC HEARING TO APPROVE VACATION OF A 10-FOOT WIDE EXISTING WATERLINE EASEMENT, AND ACCEPT A NEW EASEMENT DEED AND APPROVE AN AGREEMENT WITH SAN MATEO COUNTY FOR THE RELOCATED WATER PIPELINE AT 12 AIRPORT BOULEVARD DPW Murtuza stated that the public hearing for this matter is required as part of the Streets and Highways Code to vacate an existing easement. He explained that approximately two years ago, the City Council approved a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a cost -sharing agreement with San Mateo County to relocate a water main that was in conflict with the new animal shelter project. He stated that the work was completed, and the old easement is no longer needed. Mayor Beach opened the public hearing. No one spoke. Councilmember Brownrigg made a motion to adopt Resolution Number 098-2020; seconded by Councilmember Colson. The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote, 5-0. 10. STAFF REPORTS a. DISCUSSION OF SHORT-TERM RENTALS CDD Gardiner stated that staff first had a conversation with the City Council concerning short-term rentals at a study session in December 2019. He explained that since that time staff hired Good City Company to assist with the process and do further research. Good City Company Principal Aaron Aknin explained that tonight they would be discussing the different options available to the City for regulating short-term rentals in order to guide development of a future ordinance. Mr. Aknin reviewed the main takeaways from the December 2019 study session: • Create a policy framework • Property rights — reasonable regulations not prohibition • Protect housing stock and quality of life • Accessory Dwelling Units and affordable units should be addressed • Create limitations and maximums • Distinguish between "hosted" versus "un-hosted" rentals • Registration, tax -collection, and data collection should be addressed Mr. Aknin reviewed the proposed policy framework: 1. Allow limited short-term rental uses while preventing the loss of housing stock. 2. Preserve the residential character of neighborhoods and establish operating standards to reduce potential noise, parking, traffic, property maintenance, and safety impacts on adjacent neighbors. 3. Require a business license so the City can track and enforce these requirements as needed and ensure an appropriate collection of TOT. 17 Burlingame City Council July 6, 2020 Approved Minutes Mr. Aknin reviewed key definitions for short-term rentals: • Short Term Rentals — dwelling units that are rented for periods lasting fewer than 30 days. • Host — The owner or long-term lease holder of a residence, who offers a dwelling unit, or portion thereof, for short-term rental. • Hosted Rental — Any short-term rental where the host is present on the premises, particularly during the nighttime hours. • Un-hosted Rental — Any short-term rental where a host is not present. • Primary Resident— Homeowner or long-term renter lives in the homes a majority of the year and can provide evidence. Mr. Aknin reviewed potential housing regulations for the Council to discuss. He explained that the first option is the primary residence requirement. He stated that this goes to the housing stock issue. He noted that in general, on the Peninsula, we don't want people buying homes to rent as Airbnb units. This requirement states that the only way you can rent out a short-term rental is if it is your primary home. Mr. Aknin stated that another option is that the City could limit the number of un-hosted rental days per year. He noted that in San Francisco, the maximum un-hosted days per year is 90. However, he explained that most cities state that the rental can be un-hosted 180 days per year. Mr. Aknin noted that there is also a general prohibition on affordable housing units as short-term rentals. Mr. Aknin discussed potential neighborhood character regulations including: • Prohibition/limitation on special events • Limit concurrent listings or occupants • Requiring onsite parking for renters • Require local contact person and process Mr. Aknin compared two short-term rental ordinances: Redwood City Millbrae Primary Residence Required Required Un-hosted Rental Maximum 120 days per year 100 days/permit duration Special Events Prohibited Prohibited Occupancy Maximum None • Nighttime — 2 persons/bedroom, plus 2 additional persons • Daytime — twice nighttime occupancy Concurrent Listing Maximum 2 maximum concurrent listings for None same primary residence Parking Existing on -site parking spaces Existing on -site parking spaces must be made available must be made available Local Contact Person • Local contact person must • Minimum of 2 authorized 18 Burlingame City Council July 6, 2020 Approved Minutes be identified to guests and agents identified on permit adjacent properties for un- application for un-hosted hosted rentals rentals 60-minute response time • 30-minute response time and remedial action required 24 hours/day required 24 hours/day • Contact information distributed to 500-foot radius after permit issuance He noted that most cities don't regulate the number of hosted rental days. Mr. Aknin reviewed implementation and enforcement. He stated that the City can choose to require hosts to register their units via a modified business license process. He explained that the City may wish to clarify its TOT ordinance to require collection agreements with hosting platform(s) to collect TOT from all hosts and remit it to the City. Lastly, he discussed the City's enforcement options. He stated that the City can pursue enforcement through the hosting platform or through a third -party platform that tracks the location of short- term rentals to ensure that they are consistent with the registered unit. Mr. Aknin stated that he found out from Airbnb that there are 190 short-term rentals within Burlingame, with approximately 9,000 rental nights per year. Councilmember Brownrigg explained that in Burlingame, there are a number of individuals that list their property on Airbnb, and no one complains. However, there is one site that generates several complaints. He asked what the difference was between that site and the other sites. CDD Gardiner stated that the discussion about concurrent listing requirements is partially to address this type of issue. He stated that it would limit how many bookings on one property could be made in a single night. Councilmember Brownrigg asked if the other short-term rentals in the city that don't elicit a high level of complaints are undertaking concurrent rentals. CDD Gardiner stated that it is unclear. Mayor Beach asked about having minimum night stay requirements that could deter the feeling of a revolving door or potential party situation. Mr. Aknin stated that it could be a tool that is used, but it is not in a lot of ordinances. He noted that it could be something that Airbnb and other platforms push back against and something that is hard to regulate. Mayor Beach asked if Mr. Aknin had recommendations for revoking a short-term rental license based on complaints and violations. Mr. Aknin stated that he had discussed a three -strikes rule with Airbnb that could be put in local ordinances. City Attorney Kane noted that the key issues are due process and that there is an opportunity for a fact-finding process before the City removes a right that has been conferred. She discussed the City's revocation proceeding for business licenses and stated that this is the kind of thing that staff will be reviewing. 19 Burlingame City Council July 6, 2020 Approved Minutes Councilmember Colson asked if the short-term rental market has declined as a result of COVID. She added that as a result of that, has that changed the negotiating power of cities relative to the large corporate entities. Mr. Aknin stated that there has been a big decline particularly in the areas that rely on business short-term rentals. He noted that around 2015-2016, Airbnb and the other platforms didn't play well with the cities. He stated that after Airbnb's negotiations with San Francisco, they seemed more willing to work with cities. Councilmember Ortiz asked Mr. Aknin to comment on the issues of enforcing City ordinances on short-term rentals. Mr. Aknin replied that the ordinance is generally enforced in the same way that other code enforcement issues are handled. He added that the City will have Airbnb and the other platforms to assist with enforcement. City Attorney Kane added that the cooperation of Airbnb and other platforms hinges on the City's proposed ordinance and if it is palatable to them. Therefore, if the City takes a stronger stance and severely limits things, Airbnb is less likely to assist the City. Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked in which areas of the legislation cities experience the most pushback from Airbnb. Mr. Aknin stated that it would be the number of days allowed for un-hosted rentals and when the City makes registration difficult. He added that if there are a bunch of requirements that overall make things difficult, the platforms will be upset. Councilmember Brownrigg stated that the TOT revenue is not a factor that he is considering when it comes to regulating short-term rentals. He explained that if Burlingame has 9,000 nights of short-term rentals per year, it comes out to approximately $100,000 to $150,000 in TOT revenue. He noted that there is an equity element that short-term rentals should have to pay TOT. He stated that what he is trying to figure out is the balance between the private landowner's rights to use their property versus the neighborhood's rights to not have a busy business next to them. He asked how the City should consider how many nights to allow un- hosted rentals. Mr. Aknin stated that in a previous ordinance he worked on, it was decided that the City wanted the residence to be used as a normal single-family home for a super majority of the time. Therefore, that City decided that a unit or home could not be used as an un-hosted rental for more than one-third of the days in a year. He stated that the key from a neighborhood standpoint is the primary residency requirement. He explained that his recommendation would be to allow 120 days as un-hosted so that for two-thirds of the year, it is still a single-family home. Mayor Beach opened the item up for public comment. Pete Wanger stated that he would like Burlingame to only allow hosted accommodations. (comment submitted via publiccomment(d),burlin ag me.org). Mayor Beach closed public comment. Councilmember Ortiz stated that it scares him that the City may be legislating on this issue based on the one rogue operator. Therefore, he explained that the Council needed to move carefully and remember that a majority of the short-term rentals in Burlingame operate without complaint. He stated that the biggest issue to him is the concurrent listing, and he thought this would help to reign in the complaints. 20 Burlingame City Council July 6, 2020 Approved Minutes Mayor Beach stated that concurrent listings are an Achilles heel. She explained that while the City hasn't received complaints about several properties, she didn't think that people move into a single-family neighborhood in Burlingame with the expectation that they are going to be living next to a revolving door of a short-term rental. She stated that she respects private property rights, but she leans into having a more restrictive approach to protect the neighborhood and housing stock. She discussed minimum night rentals and thought the requirement of a minimum stay of two to three nights might help to prevent the revolving door aspect of short-term rentals. She stated that she agreed that a primary residence requirement could be a way to protect neighborhoods, and this could also be done by limiting multiple listings on any property. She added that for un-hosted nights, she would keep it at a 100 to 120-day limit. Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran stated that it would be nice to have more data. She noted that the criteria she would want to focus on is primary residence, 120-day limit for un-hosted, TOT for short-term rentals, and that the properties must register with the City. She added that she agreed with Mayor Beach that a two -night minimum would be good. Councilmember Colson stated that short-term rentals can be an important way to augment people's income if needed. Councilmember Brownrigg concurred with the Vice Mayor. He asked if ADUs could be short-term rentals. City Attorney Kane replied in the negative and explained the proposed ADU ordinance outlined that they are only for long-term rentals. Councilmember Ortiz stated that he supported the 120-day limit for un-hosted rentals. He added that he believed that short-term rentals should be charged TOT. Mayor Beach stated that she was hearing consensus for a 120-day limit for un-hosted rentals, having a local contact, TOT, and limit concurrent listings. She asked Mr. Aknin for advice on how to frame the concurrent listings. Mr. Aknin stated that he believed the Council wanted to distinguish between when it's a hosted rental with two bedrooms being rented out versus an un-hosted rental with three or four bedrooms being rented to different people. He noted that he would further research this approach but believed that San Jose limited the total number of people by the number of bedrooms. Mayor Beach stated that when the City doesn't limit the number of concurrent listings, it brings more automobile traffic and parking congestion. She added that she leans towards having restrictions on that matter. Councilmember Brownrigg stated that he believed the significant burden is how many nights the City will allow un-hosted. Mayor Beach asked if her colleagues supported considering a minimum night rental. Councilmember Ortiz stated that he would keep it to two. 21 Burlingame City Council July 6, 2020 Approved Minutes Councilmember Colson stated that a short-term rental of one night could be for a business traveler versus a minimum stay of two or three nights could be a vacationer that is coming and going more often. Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran stated that she was leaning towards requiring a two -night stay but thought Councilmember Colson brought up a good point. Mayor Beach asked staff if they had direction. CDD Gardiner replied in the affirmative. b. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AMENDED REAL ESTATE AGREEMENT WITH CALTRAIN AND RELATED DOCUMENTS TO ALLOW RELOCATION OF CALTRAIN PARALLELING STATION 3 (PS-3) TO CITY PROPERTY ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE RAILWAY TRACKS IN THE INDUSTRIAL ZONE DPW Murtuza stated that in August 2018, the City Council approved a Real Estate Agreement with Caltrain to facilitate the relocation of PS-3 to the east side of the tracks in order to avoid future conflicts with the footprint of the Broadway Grade Separation Project and to address residents' concerns about the original location. He added that Caltrain estimated that relocating the PS-3 in the future would cost approximately $10 to $12 million. Therefore, Council approved the Real Estate Agreement, which granted Caltrain approximately 4,000 square feet in the rear of the Public Works Corporation Yard and a lease for the permanent placement of the station. Additionally, as part of that agreement, Caltrain would pay the City $150,000 to mitigate the parking impacts associated with the loss of parking. DPW Murtuza explained that in April 2020, staff heard from Caltrain that their design build contractor had been unable to complete the PS-3 design within the space agreed to by the Council. He stated that Caltrain staff noted that as the PS-3 design was developed further, electrical clearance requirements increased the footprint needed, and an update in the FEMA floodplain made it so that the transformer would need to be elevated. DPW Murtuza stated that staff worked closely with Caltrain on a revised design. The proposed revision requires an additional 10-foot strip of land, plus approximately 500 square feet of land. He noted that it is estimated that this will increase the impact to the Public Works Corporation Yard from 10 to 12 lost spaces to 14 to 16 lost spaces. He added that due to the changes, it is estimated that the redesign costs of PS-3 will increase by $250,000. DPW Murtuza stated that Caltrain is pursuing funding from the San Mateo County Transportation Authority to cover the additional $250,000 cost and to pay Burlingame an additional $75,000 for the land acquisition. Councilmember Brownrigg stated that it seemed like a sensible amendment that was made necessary by required changes. Mayor Beach opened the item up for public comment. No one spoke. 22 Burlingame City Council July 6, 2020 Approved Minutes Councilmember Brownrigg made a motion to adopt Resolution Number 099-2020; seconded by Councilmember Ortiz. The motion was adopted unanimously by roll call vote, 5-0. 11. COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND ACTIVITIES REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS a. MAYOR BEACH'S COMMITTEE REPORT 12. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS There were no future agenda items. 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 ag me.org. 14. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Beach adjourned the meeting at 11:21 p.m. Respectfully submitted, /s/ Meaghan Hassel -Shearer City Clerk 23 Burlingame City Council July 6, 2020 Approved Minutes