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