HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - CC - 2020.09.08CITY
v
0
ticow � �
rPORATED
Tuesday, September 8, 2020
City of Burlingame
Meeting Agenda - Final
City Council
7:00 PM
BURLINGAME CITY HALL
501 PRIMROSE ROAD
BURLINGAME, CA 94010
On March 17, 2020, the Governor issued Executive Order N-29-20 suspending certain
provisions of the Ralph M. Brown Act in order to allow for local legislative bodies to conduct
their meetings telephonically or by other electronic means. Pursuant to the Governor's
Executive Order N-33-20 issued on March 19, 2020, and the CDC's social distancing guidelines
which discourage large public gatherings, the Council Chambers will not be open to the public
for the September 8, 2020 City Council Meeting.
Members of the public may view the meeting by logging into the Zoom meeting listed below.
Additionally, the meeting will be streamed live on YouTube and uploaded to the City's website
after the meeting.
Members of the public may provide written comments by email to
publiccomment@burlingame.org.
Emailed comments should include the specific agenda item on which you are commenting, or
note that your comment concerns an item that is not on the agenda or is on the Consent
Calendar. The length of the emailed comment should be commensurate with the three
minutes customarily allowed for verbal comments, which is approximately 250-300 words. To
ensure that your comment is receive and read to the City Council for the appropriate agenda
item, please submit your email no later than 5:00 p.m. on September 8, 2020. The City will
make every effort to read emails received after that time, but cannot guarantee such emails will
be read into the record. Any emails received after the 5:00 p.m. deadline which are not read
into the record, will be provided to the City Council after the meeting.
All votes are unanimous unless separately noted for the record.
Online
Online
City of Burlingame Page 1 Printed on 91312020
City Council Meeting Agenda - Final September 8, 2020
1. CALL TO ORDER - 7:00 p.m. - Online
To Join the Zoom Meeting (note that the link below doesn't look like a hyperlink, but
it is)
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/89554309533?
pwd=OW50YWppeUpuTHcrekxtcStNbVRhdz09
Meeting ID: 895 5430 9533
Passcode:534508
One tap mobile
+16699006833„89554309533# US (San Jose)
+13462487799„89554309533# US (Houston)
Dial by your location
+1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose)
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
+1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
+1 301 715 8592 US (Germantown)
+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
+1 929 436 2866 US (New York)
Meeting ID: 895 5430 9533
Find your local number: https://us02web.zoom.us/u/kds46hEX2U
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
3. ROLL CALL
4. REPORT OUT FROM CLOSED SESSION
5. UPCOMING EVENTS
6. PRESENTATIONS
7. PUBLIC COMMENTS, NON -AGENDA
Members of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. Members of the public wishing to
suggest an item for a future Council agenda may do so during this public comment period. The Ralph M.
Brown Act (the State local agency open meeting law) prohibits the City Council from acting on any matter
that is not on the agenda.
City of Burlingame Page 2 Printed on 9/3/2020
City Council Meeting Agenda - Final September 8, 2020
8. APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR
Consent calendar items are usually approved in a single motion, unless pulled for separate discussion.
Any member of the public wishing to comment on an item listed here may do so by submitting a speaker
slip for that item in advance of the Council's consideration of the consent calendar.
a. Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes for August 17, 2020
Attachments: Meeting Minutes
b. Adoption of a Resolution Authorizina the Citv Manaaer to Execute an Amendment to the
Professional Services Agreement with MIG for Preparation of an Update of the City's
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance
Attachments: Staff Report
Resolution
Executed Agreement for Professional Services with MIG
Amendment
Exhibit A - 2019 Amended Work Program
C. Adoption of a Resolution Awarding a $792,524 Construction Contract to Golden Bay
Construction, Inc. for the 2020 Sidewalk Repair Program, City Project No. 85960, and
Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Contract
Attachments: Staff Report
Resolution
Bid Summary
Construction Contract
Protect Location Map
d. Adoption of a Resolution Awarding a $478,740 Contract to Duke's Root Control, Inc., for
the Sanitary Sewer Root Control Program, City Protect No. 86110
Attachments: Staff Report
Resolution
Contract
Project Location Map
e. Adoption of a Resolution Accepting the FY 2019-20 Citywide Sewer Improvements
Project by Ranger Pipelines, Inc., City Project No. 85570
Attachments: Staff Report
Resolution
Final Progress Payment
Project Location Map
City of Burlingame Page 3 Printed on 9/3/2020
City Council Meeting Agenda - Final September 8, 2020
f. Adoption of a Resolution Authorizina a Professional Services Aareement with Wilsev Ham
in the Amount of $157,223 for the Engineering Design Services for the 1740 Rollins Road
Sewage Pump Station Effluent Force Main Upgrades Project, and Authorizing the City
Manager to Execute the Agreement
Attachments: Staff Report
Resolution
Professional Services Agreement
Project Location Map
g. Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a One -Year Service
Order for Information Technology Services from the City of Redwood City
Attachments: Staff Report
Resolution
Service Order
h. Open Nomination Period to Fill Two Vacancies on the Traffic, Safety and
Commission
Attachments: Staff Report
9. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Public Comment)
a. Introduction of an Ordinance to Establish a Local Minimum Wage in Burlingame
Attachments: Staff Report
Proposed Ordinance
February 3, 2020 Staff Report
February 3, 2020 Study Session Minutes
City of San Mateo Minimum Wage Ordinance
Mayor Beach Outreach Information
Total Minimum Wage Survey Responses
Resident Minimum Wage Survey Responses
Business Owner Minimum Wage Survey Responses
Building Our Future Flyer
10. STAFF REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS (Public Comment)
11. COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND ACTIVITIES REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
Councilmembers report on committees and activities and make announcements.
12. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
City of Burlingame Page 4 Printed on 9/3/2020
City Council Meeting Agenda - Final September 8, 2020
13. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The agendas, packets, and meeting minutes for the Planning Commission, Traffic, Safety & Parking
Commission, Beautification Commission, Parks & Recreation Commission, and Library Board of Trustees
are available online at www.burlingame.org.
14. ADJOURNMENT
Notice: Any attendees who require special assistance or a disability -related modification or
accommodation to participate in this meeting, or who have a disability and wish to request an
alternative format for the agenda, meeting notice, agenda packet, or other writings that may be
distributed at the meeting, should contact Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk, by 10:00 a.m. on
Tuesday, September 8, 2020 at (650) 558-7203 or at mhasselshearer@burlingame.org. Notification in
advance of the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility
to this meeting, the materials related to it, and your ability to comment.
NEXT CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, September 21, 2020
VIEW REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING ONLINE AT www.burlingame.org/video
Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the City Council regarding any item on this agenda
will be made available for public inspection at the Water Office counter at City Hall at 501 Primrose
Road during normal business hours.
City of Burlingame Page 5 Printed on 9/3/2020
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 09/08/2020
CITY C
BURLINGAME
q
$Anreo� u[b,e
BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL
Unapproved Minutes
Regular Meeting on August 17, 2020
1. CALL TO ORDER
A duly noticed meeting of the Burlingame City Council was held on the above date online at 7:00 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
There were no public comments.
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. Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran pulled 8c and 8k. Councilmember Brownrigg pulled 8f.
1
Burlingame City Council August 17, 2020
Unapproved Minutes
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 09/08/2020
Councilmember Ortiz made a motion to adopt 8a, 8b, 8d, 8e, 8g, 8h, 8i, 8j, 81, 8m, 8n, and 8o; seconded by
Councilmember Brownrigg. The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote, 5-0.
a. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 6, 2020
City Clerk Hassel -Shearer requested Council approve the City Council Meeting Minutes for July 6, 2020.
b. ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
BURLINGAME AMENDING CHAPTER 25.59 (ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS),
CHAPTER 25.60 (ACCESSORY STRUCTURES IN R-1 AND R-2 DISTRICTS), CHAPTER
25.26 (R-1 DISTRICT REGULATIONS) AND CHAPTER 25.70 (OFF-STREET PARKING)
OF THE BURLINGAME MUNICIPAL CODE RELATED TO ACCESSORY DWELLING
UNITS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH RECENTLY ADOPTED AMENDMENTS TO
CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SELECTIONS 65852.2 AND 65852.22 AND
ADDITIONAL CHANGES TO REMOVE CONSTRAINTS TO CREATING ACCESSORY
DWELLING UNITS
CDD Gardiner requested Council adopt Ordinance 1978 and Resolution Number 100-2020.
c. ADOPTION OF ORDINANCES AMENDING THE BURLINGAME MUNICIPAL CODE TO
ALLOW FOR A BUILDING ELECTRIFICATION REACH CODE
Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran explained that she is voting against adoption of these ordinances because she
questions whether the technology, energy, and equipment are in place to handle all -electric. She noted that
during the current heat wave, PG&E and other electrical companies are doing rolling blackouts because the
grid is overwhelmed. She stated that while it might be good policy, it is important to first have the necessary
infrastructure.
Councilmember Colson stated that she appreciated the Vice Mayor's comments. She noted that she asked
Peninsula Clean Energy staff about this issue. She stated that what it comes down to is generating enough
electricity during the high peaks of demand. PCE has committed to ensuring that the demand is met within
the next two years.
Mayor Beach opened this item up for public comment.
PCE Director of Energy Programs Rafael Reyes thanked Council and staff for their hard work on this item.
He explained that PCE has done an analysis in regards to the impact of reach codes on electrical load
demand. He stated that they found that all -electric buildings would add less than one percent load to what
PCE currently serves.
Mayor Beach closed public comment.
2
Burlingame City Council August 17, 2020
Unapproved Minutes
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 09/08/2020
Councilmember Brownrigg made a motion to adopt Ordinance 1979, Ordinance 1980, and Ordinance 1981;
seconded by Councilmember Ortiz.
Councilmember Brownrigg noted that he recognizes the Vice Mayor's concerns, especially during the
current heat wave. However, he felt comfortable with moving forward.
The motion passed by roll call vote, 4-1(Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran voted against).
d. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE CENTRAL COUNTY FIRE STATION
35 IMPROVEMENTS IN THE AMOUNT OF $926,98294
DPW Murtuza requested Council adopt Resolution Number 101-2020.
e. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION ACCPETING THE POLICE STATION UNDERGROUND
STORAGE TANK REMOVAL PROJECT IN THE AMOUNT OF $309,409 BY PMK
CONTRACTORS LLC, CITY PROJECT NO.84640
DPW Murtuza requested Council adopt Resolution Number 102-2020.
f. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AWARDING A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO
O'GRADY PAVING, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,493,116 FOR THE 2020 STREET
RESURFACING PROGRAM, CITY PROJECT NO.85640, AND AUTHORIZING THE
CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
Councilmember Brownrigg noted that a small piece of the paving contract will be for the pathway along
Easton. He explained that the sidewalk on Easton is overdue for some TLC and asked that staff review this
need.
Mayor Beach opened the item up for public comment. No one spoke.
Councilmember Brownrigg made a motion to adopt Resolution Number 103-2020; seconded by
Councilmember Ortiz. The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote, 5-0.
g. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION APPROVING A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
AGREEMENT WITH AARC CONSULTANTS, LLC TO PERFORMT HE RISK AND
RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT AND PREPARE THE EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN FOR
THE CITY'S PORTABLE WATER SYSTEM, CITY PROJECT NO.86050, IN THE
AMOUNT OF $108,985 AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE
AGREEMENT
DPW Murtuza requested Council adopt Resolution Number 104-2020.
Burlingame City Council August 17, 2020
Unapproved Minutes
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 09/08/2020
h. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTIONS AWARDING A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO
MITCHELL ENGINEERING IN THE AMOUNT OF $937,437 FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD
STORM DRAIN PROJECT #12 AND APPROVING A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
AGREEMENT WITH ANCHOR ENGINEERING, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $190,590
FOR CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES RELATED TO THE PROJECT
DPW Murtuza requested Council adopt Resolution Number 105-2020 and Resolution Number 106-2020.
i. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTIONS AWARDING A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT IN THE
AMOUNT OF $828,280 TO CRATUS, INC FOR THE BURLINGAME AVENUE STORM
DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AND APPROVING A PROFESSIONAL
SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH ANCHOR ENGINEERING, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF
$179,366 FOR CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES RELATED TO THE
PROJECT
DPW Murtuza requested Council adopt Resolution Number 107-2020 and Resolution Number 108-2020.
j. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AWARDING A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO PC
INC. FOR THE FIRE STATION GENERATORS REPLACEMENT PROJECT IN THE
AMOUNT OF $587,080 AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
DPW Murtuza requested Council adopt Resolution Number 109-2020.
k. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION CONFIRMING THE STORM DRAINAGE FEE FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2020-21 WITH NO INFLATIONARY INCREASE
Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran stated that after reviewing the April 6, 2020 City Council meeting minutes,
was she correct that this item was brought back because Councilmember Brownrigg asked that the item be
reviewed in the third or fourth quarter. Finance Director Augustine replied in the negative. She explained
that this was put on the agenda as a housekeeping matter. She noted that the County asked the City for a
resolution setting the fee, which staff realized wasn't adopted at the April 6 meeting. Therefore, staff is
asking the Council to adopt a resolution re-establishing the storm drainage fee.
Mayor Beach opened the item up for public comment. No one spoke.
Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran made a motion to adopt Resolution Number 110-2020; seconded by
Councilmember Ortiz. The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote, 5-0.
1. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING VOTING DELEGATES AND
ALTERNATES FOR THE 2020 LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES' ANNUAL
CONFERENCE
4
Burlingame City Council August 17, 2020
Unapproved Minutes
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 09/08/2020
City Clerk Hassel -Shearer requested Council adopt Resolution Number 111-2020.
m. ANNUAL RENEWAL OF THE BURLINGAME AVENUE AREA BUSINESS
IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (DBID): RESOLUTION APPROVING THE 2019-20 ANNUAL
REPORT: CONFIRMING THE CITY'S INTENTION TO WAIVE ASSESSMENTS FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2020-21; AND PROVIDING FOR PAYMENT OF THE AMOUNT OF
ASSESSMENTS WAIVED DIRECTLY TO THE DBID IN SUPPORT OF ITS FISCAL YEAR
2020-21 ACTIVITIES
Finance Director Augustine requested Council adopt Resolution Number 112-2020.
n. OPEN NOMINATION PERIOD TO FILL TWO VACANCIES ON THE PARKS AND
RECREATION COMMISSION
City Manager Goldman requested Council open the nomination period to fill two vacancies on the Parks and
Recreation Commission.
o. QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPORT, PERIOD ENDING JUNE 30, 2020
Finance Director Augustine requested Council accept the Quarterly Investment Report for the period ending
June 30, 2020.
9. PUBLIC HEARING
There were no public hearings.
10. STAFF REPORTS
a. UPDATE AND DISCUSSION OF THE TEMPORARY STREET CLOSURE PROGRAM
FOR BROADWAY, DOWNTOWN BURLINGAME AVENUE, AND PARKLETS ON THE
SIDE STREETS IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA TO FACILITATE SAFE OUTDOOR
DINING AND PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY, AND DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION
REGARDING ALLOWING PERSONAL SERVICES IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY
City Manager Goldman explained that on June 9, 2020, the City Council held a special meeting to discuss
temporarily closing downtown Burlingame Avenue to facilitate safe outdoor dining and directed staff to
implement the temporary street closures. On July 6, 2020, the City Council authorized an extension of the
pilot program until the end of September barring major issues such as public health and safety concerns and
complaints. She added that Council also approved allowing parklets for restaurants on the side streets in the
Downtown Burlingame Avenue District. She noted that at the July 6 meeting, the City Council authorized a
pilot program to temporarily close Broadway in the commercial area for two weekends, as a trial period,
before considering extending the program or taking other actions.
5
Burlingame City Council August 17, 2020
Unapproved Minutes
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 09/08/2020
City Manager Goldman stated that at the July 29, 2020 Economic Development ("ED") Subcommittee
meeting, the subcommittee discussed the temporary street closures of Broadway and Burlingame Avenue
and the parklets on the side streets. She noted that Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran, Councilmember Ortiz,
DBID President Jenny Keleher, BBID President John Kevranian, Chamber of Commerce President
Georgette Naylor, Terry Horn who represents landlords and tenants in the downtown area, Sam Abbassi, and
staff were all in attendance at the meeting.
City Manager Goldman stated that at the July 29 ED Subcommittee meeting and at subsequent meetings, the
subcommittee made recommendations for Council on: (1) Broadway Street Closure, (2) Burlingame Avenue
Street Closure and parklets, and (3) allowing personal services businesses to operate outside.
• Broadway Street Closure
City Manager Goldman explained that per Council direction, staff implemented the temporary street closure
of Broadway for a two -weekend trial period. She noted that it was successful in terms of mask wearing,
proper social distancing, etc. Therefore, at the recommendation of the ED Subcommittee, the street was
closed for the weekends of August 1-2, August 7-8, and August 15-16. Staff received no complaints
regarding the lack of face coverings or social distancing, and there have been no traffic circulation nor
parking issues.
City Manager Goldman stated that at the August 12, 2020 ED Subcommittee meeting, the group indicated
their support for the continuation of the closure barring any future major public health and safety concerns
and complaints.
• Burlingame Avenue Street Closure
City Manager Goldman stated that the Burlingame Avenue Street Closure program began in June, and
originally the street was closed from Friday at 8:00 a.m. to Sunday at 10:00 p.m. She explained that staff
received numerous complaints from the public regarding people not using face coverings and not adhering to
the social distancing requirements. Additionally, the City received complaints about the adverse impact to
retail businesses and about individuals riding bicycles and skateboards in the roadway.
City Manager Goldman stated that DBID surveyed their members to obtain feedback regarding the street
closures. She explained that DBID received 81 responses to the survey: 22 from restaurants, 36 from
retailers, and 23 from service providers (salons, attorneys, etc.) She noted that less than half of the
respondents (36) were located on the Avenue.
City Manager Goldman reviewed the findings of the survey:
• 24 businesses were helped by the street closure
• 29 businesses were hurt by the street closure (1 restaurant, retailers, service providers on and off the
Avenue)
• 26 businesses were unaffected by the street closure
6
Burlingame City Council August 17, 2020
Unapproved Minutes
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 09/08/2020
• 2 businesses were unsure how they were affected by the street closure (street closure or COVID
concerns affecting businesses)
City Manager Goldman stated that the survey also asked respondents what their major concerns were about
the street closure:
• 39 indicated parking as their main concern
• 32 complained about lack of face coverings and social distancing
• 10 indicated lack of curbside pick-up parking main concern
City Manager Goldman noted that overall, the public likes the street closure. However, she noted that the
street closure has turned into a festival atmosphere. Therefore, while it has been fun, the City has received a
lot of complaints about people not adhering to face covering and social distancing requirements. She added
that as of the previous week, staff logged 62 complaints related to the street closure.
City Manager Goldman explained that the ED Subcommittee discussed these concerns at their July 29
meeting. The subcommittee recommended that the street closure be reduced to Saturday starting at 5:00 a.m.
to Sunday at 10:00 p.m. She stated that staff implemented this change August 1.
City Manager Goldman stated that the ED Subcommittee held a meeting on August 12 and recommended
that Council consider terminating the pilot program and replacing it with parklets. She explained that the ED
Subcommittee recommended parklets because it would facilitate safe outdoor dining; address public health
and safety concerns of lack of social distancing/face coverings; and it would address adverse impacts to retail
businesses. She stated that installing parklets would allow restaurants on Burlingame Avenue to expand
their outdoor dining space to seven days a week.
City Manager Goldman stated that if Council decides to terminate the street closure program and replace it
with parklets, staff recommends outlining requirements for restaurants to acquire and keep their parklet. She
noted that one of the suggested requirements would be that the restaurants must utilize the parklets at least
three days a week.
City Manager Goldman stated that the parklets would result in the loss of approximately 60 to 65 parking
spaces for the duration of the program. She noted that as of the previous week, the City had installed 13
parklets on side streets and hadn't received any complaints or negative feedback. She added that CCFD is
looking into the ability of restaurant owners to put up tents or heaters in their parklets for colder weather.
City Manager Goldman stated that the City may remove street closures/parklets or make adjustments if they
are causing traffic congestion, circulation concerns, safety concerns, parking problems, and/or emergencies.
She added that the City can also remove any of the street closures/parklets or make adjustments if social
distancing/face covering requirements are ignored, or if other safety or traffic issues emerge.
7
Burlingame City Council August 17, 2020
Unapproved Minutes
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 09/08/2020
• Personal Services
City Manager Goldman stated that on August 1, San Mateo County was placed on the State Monitoring List,
which led to additional mandatory business closures countywide starting at 12:01 a.m. on August 2, 2020.
She explained that the list of businesses that had to close their indoor operations includes gyms; personal
care services such as hair salons, barber shops, and nail salons; and certain offices.
City Manager Goldman explained that the City had focused on providing opportunities for outdoor dining
via the street closures and parklets. However, as a result of being put on the State Monitoring List, the City
received requests from personal care services businesses to operate outside, in the public right-of-way. She
noted that the State determined that these services can operate outdoors provided that they follow State
guidelines and the municipality approves.
City Manager Goldman stated that a nail salon has been operating in the public right-of-way on Burlingame
Avenue in violation of the City's regulations. She reviewed safety concerns of having this business continue
to operate on the sidewalk while blocking access.
City Manager Goldman stated that included in the Council's agenda packet was the City of San Mateo's
program for personal care services. She highlighted the following requirements under San Mateo's program:
• Allows operations within private parking lots such as shopping centers and in recessed areas of
storefronts that don't encroach on sidewalks
• Businesses cannot utilize public sidewalks, parklets, or closed streets
• Personal care services may only be performed in outdoor areas of licensed establishments contiguous
with or adjacent to their business premise
• Businesses within 50 feet from any outdoor dining areas can only provide service before 11:00 a.m.
and only while outdoor dining is not occurring
City Manager Goldman stated that the State's Department of Consumer Affairs provided further guidance
through a memorandum to the Board of Barbering and Cosmetology. The memorandum outlines
requirements or guidelines for licensees that want to operate outdoors such as:
• Services are allowed on sidewalks and other public thoroughfares and parking lots if reasonably
proximate to the licensed establishment, and the area must be closed to public access during the
period of service.
• Chemical hair services including, but not limited to, permanent waving, relaxing, bleaching, tinting,
coloring, dyeing, straightening, shampooing, and electrolysis are not allowed outdoors.
City Manager Goldman stated that the ED Subcommittee discussed this matter on August 12. The ED
Subcommittee recommended that the matter be discussed by the Council. She noted that the Council may
want to consider whether the City should have additional parklets that would be available to these personal
services businesses. She added that if the Council is amenable to this or to utilizing a public parking lot,
staff devised some parameters:
• Prohibit the use of generators and extension cords that connect to the adjacent building
8
Burlingame City Council August 17, 2020
Unapproved Minutes
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 09/08/2020
• Require businesses to have a plan for disposing of water inside the business and capturing hair and
other products so that nothing enters the storm drains
City Manager Goldman reviewed the costs associated with setting up parklets. She stated that if the Council
decides to allow restaurants to have parklets on Burlingame Avenue, it will cost approximately $80,000. She
explained that this is in addition to the previously approved costs related to street closures and parklets. She
noted that the City has $40,000 left from its original allotment for the San Mateo County Strong Fund that
could be utilized. She stated that there would be an estimated $15,000 to $20,000 loss per month in parking
meter revenue. She added that the City doesn't have an estimate of the cost of obtaining barriers for personal
services businesses or how much parking meter revenue will be lost.
Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran discussed the health concern of operating personal services businesses outside
that are in close proximity to outside dining. She asked what staff s recommendation was for distancing.
City Manager Goldman stated that the City of San Mateo was requiring 50 feet. She explained that if the
City requires 50 feet, it will eliminate a lot of opportunities for salons as restaurants are spread out on
Burlingame Avenue. She explained that one idea to help personal services businesses was to utilize a City
parking lot.
Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran stated that if the Council allows personal services businesses to operate
outside, the businesses should be required to submit a detailed plan about COVID and storm drain -related
concerns and disposal of chemicals. She explained that if the business doesn't follow its plan, then the City
has documentation.
Mayor Beach stated that staff is asking Council to make decisions on: (1) the extension of the Broadway
pilot program; (2) ending the temporary street closure of Burlingame Avenue and replacing it with parklets;
and (3) allowing personal services businesses to operate outside.
City Attorney Kane stated if the Council is considering allowing personal services businesses to operate
outside, the Council should keep in mind that the City has limited enforcement mechanisms. She asked that
the Council consider that the rule be one violation and you are done. She stated that the restrictions should
be published in advance, with staff having the ability to enforce them.
Councilmember Colson asked if the DBID survey addressed the point that if they vote against extending the
street closure, the alternative is a parklet. City Manager Goldman stated that they would have DBID
President Keleher address this.
Councilmember Colson stated that she thought the Council should first address the Burlingame Avenue
closure versus parklets and then personal services businesses.
Mayor Beach agreed.
Councilmember Colson asked if the City allows the parklets, will restaurants be confined to just the
immediate space in front of their business, or could they utilize parking spaces adjacent to their storefront.
9
Burlingame City Council August 17, 2020
Unapproved Minutes
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 09/08/2020
City Manager Goldman stated that sidewalk dining is still allowed. She explained that the City is allowing
the parklets to spread further then their frontage if they get permission from their neighbors. DPW Murtuza
stated that the City is allowing one to two parking spaces more than their frontage.
Councilmember Colson asked if she was correct that one to two parking spaces allows four tables. DPW
Murtuza replied in the affirmative.
Councilmember Colson stated that one of the questions she is struggling with is what is the City trying to
solve by terminating the Burlingame Avenue street closure program. She asked if the issue was lack of face
coverings and social distancing or parking issues. City Manager Goldman stated that what staff is seeing is
that when the street is closed, people are walking down the middle of the street and then stopping at tables to
have conversations. She explained that the street closure is providing a lot of opportunity for socializing and
the spread of COVID.
Councilmember Colson asked if staff felt comfortable that by ending the pilot program on Burlingame
Avenue that this problem won't just relocate to Broadway. City Manager Goldman replied in the
affirmative. She stated that a lot of people that have been enjoying the closure of Burlingame Avenue are
coming from outside of the City and are coming just to hang out.
Councilmember Colson asked that if people do migrate to Broadway and Broadway ended up like
Burlingame Avenue, would it also be closed. City Manager Goldman stated that it would be brought back to
Council for a decision.
Councilmember Brownrigg thanked the ED Subcommittee for their hard work. He asked if everyone on
Burlingame Avenue was wearing masks, would the City be proposing to change the street closure protocols.
City Manager Goldman stated that if everyone was wearing masks and social distancing, then the challenge
would be the complaints about the bikers and skateboarders, and the adverse impact on retail businesses.
Councilmember Brownrigg stated that he believed it was important to get at what the City is trying to solve.
He explained that if staff is trying to solve the issue of people not wearing masks and social distancing, then
the City should try enforcement first. He noted that it the City is trying to solve the issue that closing the
Avenue is hurting retailers, then that is a different conversation. City Manager Goldman stated that this is a
multi -pronged problem: (1) enforcement of face masks and social distancing; (2) issues with bicyclists and
skateboarders; and (3) retailer complaints.
Councilmember Brownrigg stated that part of the reason that the Council approved of the street closure was
to help businesses survive. He discussed how the street closure has brought a lot of people to the area and
assisted businesses.
Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked if the Council adopted the City Attorney's suggestion of a one-time
violation and you're out, what happens if the business still doesn't adhere to the rules. She added that her
follow-up question is whether the City can take their business license away. City Attorney Kane replied that
the City's code contains an existing business license revocation procedure, which involves a hearing in front
10
Burlingame City Council August 17, 2020
Unapproved Minutes
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 09/08/2020
of the Council. She stated that it would be helpful to alert businesses of the zero -tolerance policy when the
City issues the encroachment permit for a parklet. She noted that if this warning doesn't work and the
business persists, it becomes an enforcement policy question of whether the City confiscates materials that
are encroaching on the right-of-way.
Councilmember Ortiz asked if the City had received complaints about people congregating without face
masks and without proper social distancing prior to the closure of Burlingame Avenue. City Manager
Goldman replied that the City received complaints throughout the City but most were around the parks.
Mayor Beach discussed the ED Subcommittee's recommendation that restaurants must utilize their parklets
at least three days a week. She voiced concern that restaurants would choose to only use their parklets on
Friday, Saturday, and Sunday, thereby leaving the Avenue looking vacant on weekdays.
Councilmember Ortiz stated that he was initially opposed to parklets. He explained that when he goes to San
Mateo, he sees a number of their parklets empty. Therefore, his concern was that the City would remove
parking spaces in favor of parklets that wouldn't be used. He explained that to solve this issue, the ED
Subcommittee discussed different options and settled on the three-day requirement.
City Manager Goldman added that the ED Subcommittee hadn't specified what days the parklets had to be
used.
Councilmember Colson asked if she was correct that if the Council approved of the parklets, the parklets
would remain until indoor dining is allowed again. City Manager Goldman replied that it would be up to
Council to determine when to end the program. She noted that even when restaurants are allowed to have
indoor dining, there might be a 25% capacity requirement. Therefore, the parklets might still be needed.
Councilmember Colson stated that the parklets might be needed for more than a year. City Manager
Goldman replied in the affirmative.
Mayor Beach opened the item up for public comment.
DBID President Keleher stated that Councilmember Colson's question about street closure versus parklets
was not on the survey. She explained that DBID used Mayor Beach's survey and sent out an additional
survey which had no reference to parklets. She stated that the survey addressed extending the temporary
street closure and asked how they felt about it. She noted that the majority of respondents stated that they
wanted to extend the closure through September. She added that there were approximately 35 businesses that
stated that the street closure was hurting their business.
Councilmember Colson stated that the parklet alternative should have been mentioned in the survey so that
the respondents were fully informed. DBID President Keleher stated that parklets weren't being discussed at
the time that the survey was sent out.
11
Burlingame City Council August 17, 2020
Unapproved Minutes
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 09/08/2020
Mayor Beach stated that she does a constituent newsletter. She explained that around July 20, she asked in
her newsletter what people thought about the temporary street closure of Burlingame Avenue. She noted that
her survey was not City -sponsored and that only 30 people responded.
DBID President Keleher stated that she took what Mayor Beach asked in her constituent newsletter and
modified it for DBID's survey. She noted that DBID received almost 100 responses but that the survey was
only about the temporary street closure program.
Councilmember Brownrigg asked if he was correct that the questions on Mayor Beach's survey and DBID's
survey were the same but that the surveys were issued to two different groups of people.
Mayor Beach stated that she didn't believe that her survey had the same questions as DBID because her
informal survey didn't ask if the street closure was hurting retail businesses. She asked if DBID's survey
included a link to the Mayor's survey. DBID President Keleher stated that DBID had a separate survey.
Mayor Beach asked if DBID sent their members a link to the Mayor's survey. DBID President Keleher
stated that she would have to get back to Council on this question.
DBID President Keleher and City Manager Goldman discussed the information that DBID submitted to the
City. It was determined that DBID submitted the results of their survey, but not the questions.
Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked how many of the questions on DBID's survey were the same as on
Mayor Beach's survey. DBID President Keleher stated that she would send the Council the questions. She
read out loud the questions she had placed in the survey. The questions focused on who are you, where is
your business located, and has the street closure helped or hurt.
Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked if she was correct that DBID's questions were different than Mayor
Beach's questions. DBID President Keleher replied in the affirmative.
A citizen asked if a restaurant is not utilizing their parklet everyday, can neighboring restaurants use the
parklet. (comment submitted via Zoom chat).
A citizen voiced their approval of the street closure and stated that the City should enforce face masks and
social distancing requirements. (comment submitted via Zoom chat).
Burlingame resident Madeline Frechette asked that the City roll out the slow street program to additional
areas in Burlingame. (comment submitted via publiccommentkburlin_ag me.org.)
Sam Abbassi stated that the temporary street closure worked to bring people to the Avenue and support local
businesses. He noted that he was concerned that the parklets would act as a deterrent to people visiting the
Avenue and thereby hurt businesses.
12
Burlingame City Council August 17, 2020
Unapproved Minutes
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 09/08/2020
Broadway BID President John Kevranian stated that the outdoor dining on Broadway is working well. He
recommended that Burlingame Avenue be closed on the same days as Broadway.
Mayor Beach closed public comment.
Councilmember Ortiz stated that at the beginning, he was against parklets and in favor of the street closure.
However, after the County went on the watchlist, he became convinced that the City had to do its part to
prevent situations where COVID could easily spread. He explained that he believed that the environment
created on Burlingame Avenue due to the temporary closure promoted a party like atmosphere that can't be
controlled. He explained that the parklets will assist restaurants while deterring large groups from gathering.
Councilmember Brownrigg asked Councilmember Ortiz and Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran what the
discussion was about face mask enforcement at the ED Subcommittee. He explained that he had just come
back from a city out of state where mask wearing was about 99.5%. He stated that this city gave tickets to
those who didn't wear masks.
Councilmember Ortiz stated that his opinion is that the police shouldn't be used to issue tickets for face
masks in order to increase compliance in the Downtown Burlingame Avenue District. He added that the
City created a situation that encourages bad behavior, and therefore the City should end the situation.
Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran stated that the City tried the closure. She noted that there has been an
improvement in wearing masks but there has been an increase in socializing. She stated that according to the
guidelines, the tables are supposed to be six feet apart and only households sit together. However, this isn't
what is happening. She explained that she is seeing a large problem lately with younger constituents not
wearing masks in big groups.
Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked if she was correct that the side streets that are utilizing parklets have
been doing well. She noted that she is disappointed in the DBID survey. She stated that she thought that the
businesses were informed about the parklet alternative.
Councilmember Colson stated that she is warming up to the idea of parklets. She noted that she was on the
Avenue on Sunday and noticed that most people were wearing masks and social distancing.
Councilmember Colson stated that since reducing the closure to Saturday at 5:00 a.m. to Sunday at 10:00
p.m., she has heard from the retail businesses that they are doing better. She expressed support for parklets
as it would allow restaurants to be open for dining seven days a week.
Councilmember Colson voiced concern that by ending the Burlingame Avenue temporary closure program,
the bikers and skateboarders would go to Broadway. She asked that the City issue tickets to those that
violate the rules.
City Manager Goldman stated that while she shares Councilmember Colson's concern about bikers and
skateboarders on Broadway, she didn't think it would be the same as Burlingame Avenue. She explained
13
Burlingame City Council August 17, 2020
Unapproved Minutes
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 09/08/2020
that the cross streets are open on Broadway, and therefore bikers and skateboarders would have to be more
cautious.
Councilmember Brownrigg stated that he believes it's great that people are coming to Burlingame Avenue;
he just wishes they were doing it safely. He explained that it is to the City's benefit that the Avenue is a
place for people to stroll, eat, and shop. He noted that a majority of people like the closure, and he would
like to see the City enforce mask wearing and social distancing. He added that he wasn't convinced that this
problem wouldn't also occur with parklets.
Councilmember Brownrigg stated that he would be a vote of dissent on moving to parklets because he
believed the City should try enforcement first.
Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran stated that she doesn't necessarily disagree with Councilmember Brownrigg's
statements on enforcement. She explained that whatever direction the City goes with, she believes that the
City needs to increase enforcement. She discussed citing people for not wearing masks. She added that the
City should also put up signs addressing bicycling and skateboarding, and that if people continued to not
follow the rules, they should also be cited.
Councilmember Colson asked if the temporary street closure would continue until the barriers for the
parklets were installed. City Manager Goldman replied in the affirmative.
Mayor Beach discussed the feedback she received about the temporary street closure. She noted that it was a
toss up with some people liking it and others not. She stated that she believed the parklets were more
equitable as all restaurants in the downtown area could be open seven days a week for dining. She added
that it also seemed like a longer -term investment.
Mayor Beach noted that she liked the street closure and suggested revisiting it in the summers when social
distancing and face masks aren't required.
Councilmember Ortiz made a motion to adopt the recommendation of the ED Subcommittee and end the
temporary street closure of Burlingame Avenue when barriers are purchased to create parklets; seconded by
Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran. The motion passed by roll call vote, 4-1 (Councilmember Brownrigg voted
against).
Mayor Beach asked her colleagues to discuss whether personal services businesses should be allowed to
operate outside.
Mayor Beach stated that in reviewing the ED Subcommittee meeting minutes, she was intrigued by the idea
of offering parklets in a City parking lot for personal services businesses versus parklets in front of
storefronts. She asked what parking lots were considered and if staff thought this was a feasible opportunity.
City Manager Goldman stated that she had heard from the County Manager that the County was thinking of
doing this for businesses in unincorporated areas. She explained that staff explored using Lot J, which is the
lot behind the Apple store. DPW Murtuza stated that staff also discussed Lot O.
14
Burlingame City Council August 17, 2020
Unapproved Minutes
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 09/08/2020
Councilmember Brownrigg asked if the City conducted any surveys with personal services businesses about
operating outside. City Manager Goldman replied in the negative. She noted that there are a lot of
restrictions in terms of what you can do outside as a personal services business. She gave the example of
hair salons and stated that they aren't allowed to wash hair or chemically treat hair.
Councilmember Colson stated that she called around to some of the salons and received feedback that even
with a parklet, it would be hard for them to operate. She discussed different concerns she had heard from the
salons including access to equipment and supplies, and their staff needing to be home to take care of their
children.
Councilmember Colson discussed how hard the closures are impacting female -owned businesses and female
workers. She stated that she wished the Governor would allow salons to reopen as this wasn't where COVID
was spreading, and these businesses were doing a good job of keeping their staff and customers safe.
Mayor Beach noted that San Mateo County Public Health Officer Dr. Morrow agreed with Councilmember
Colson and thought that salons should be allowed to reopen.
Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran stated that allowing personal services businesses to operate outside is new
territory. Therefore, the ED Subcommittee didn't have time to conduct a survey. She stated that the ED
Subcommittee was trying to think outside the box and provide options for businesses.
Mayor Beach opened up public comment.
Salon consultant Jaki Berry discussed the regulations that have been put in place by the State, county, and
local governments for personal services businesses. She explained that it is very difficult for a salon to know
what they can and can't do. She stated that a lot of the salons are feeling like they are being pushed aside.
She noted that she didn't believe a parking lot would work because of the amount of equipment that salons
have and the need to go back and forth to their shop.
Buyantod Rinchin discussed her nail salon (La Vie) on Burlingame Avenue and explained how hard hit her
business was by COVID. She asked that the City work with salons to help them open up much in the same
way the City assisted restaurants. She noted all the processes she has in place to protect her clients.
Jeff Silverman discussed the challenges hair salons would face if they operate outside in a parklet. He stated
that the parklets would take away parking from retail and personal services businesses.
Mayor Beach closed public comment.
Councilmember Colson asked if people had filed complaints about Ms. Rinchin's salon operating on the
sidewalk. City Manager Goldman replied in the affirmative. She explained that the nail salon has an
extension cord stretched across the sidewalk, and that it is a tripping hazard.
15
Burlingame City Council August 17, 2020
Unapproved Minutes
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 09/08/2020
City Attorney Kane discussed the complaints that the City had received. She explained that staff s approach
has been to guide the business in other options that they could pursue so that there isn't an encroachment on
the path of travel.
Councilmember Colson stated that if the City was to offer the salons the opportunity to have a parklet, the
issue would just be in making sure that all water and other products were collected and brought back into the
store for proper disposal. City Attorney Kane replied in the affirmative. She added that the City would have
to review the encroachment permit to make sure the parklet is safe and in compliance. She discussed the
possibility that it might be better for salons if they have rear access to operate in a back parking lot. She
noted that it would be a case -by -case basis.
Councilmember Colson noted that her guess was that a majority of the personal services businesses would
not avail themselves of the opportunity to have a parklet.
Mayor Beach stated that what she was hearing from Councilmember Colson and Vice Mayor O'Brien
Keighran is what can the City do to lean in and assist personal services businesses. She discussed the City of
San Mateo's policy and its restrictions. She thought the Council should consider the following things:
1. Is the City comfortable with anything in the public right-of-way
2. If comfortable, does the City have concerns with personal services such as nail or hair salons being
close to restaurants
Councilmember Ortiz stated that the one thing he keeps coming back to is the requirement to have three
sides open if there is a tent enclosure. He explained that if the City gave the personal services businesses
parklets, then three sides of the tent enclosure would have to be open. He stated that he felt for all the
businesses but didn't think that they should be allowed to set up on the sidewalks. He suggested allowing
personal services businesses to utilize parklets. He added that he didn't believe a parking lot would work,
and he wouldn't want them close to outdoor restaurant tables.
Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran stated that she has concerns about allowing personal services business
parklets near restaurants. She asked if there is a minimum distance from restaurant requirement. Ms. Berry
stated that she hasn't read anything about distance requirements from restaurants. She noted that there
wouldn't be a lot of salons that could take advantage of a parklet, but that this should be allowed to help
some.
Mayor Beach concurred with Ms. Berry and explained that this is why she thought utilizing a parking lot
might be something the City should explore.
Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran stated that if there is a way to allow some of the businesses to function, even
though it is extremely limited, she would like the City to offer this option. She noted that in regard to the
restaurants, she was not keen on a salon being adjacent or in close proximity to a restaurant. She thought the
City should explore the parklet idea as long as all safety criteria are adhered to. She added that she didn't
know how reasonable it would be to open up a parking lot for salons. She explained that they have heavy
equipment, and they wouldn't be able to reset up every day unless it is right at their backdoor.
16
Burlingame City Council August 17, 2020
Unapproved Minutes
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 09/08/2020
Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked how the City was defining chemical. City Manager Goldman stated
that the State Board of Barbering and Cosmetology memorandum discusses permissible outdoor services and
states that no chemical hair services are allowed. She noted that it doesn't address nail salons. Ms. Berry
stated that she wasn't aware of requirements about chemicals for nail salons.
DPW Murtuza stated that to prevent water pollution, whatever the nail salons are using would need to be
specially handled to ensure that the chemicals don't end up in the storm drain system.
Councilmember Brownrigg suggested allowing the ED Subcommittee to work with staff on a plan for
personal services businesses. He noted that he was skeptical that the Council could come up with the best
answer at the meeting because the matter was complicated. He added that he didn't think it fair to tell some
salons they can't operate because they are next to a restaurant and others that they can because they aren't
next to a restaurant.
Councilmember Brownrigg stated that it might make more sense to take an obscure parking lot for salons.
He suggested the Library Parking Lot's upper tier. He noted that if there is a sufficient demand, the City
could put a tent over the top and let people rent space from the City.
Councilmember Colson stated that Ms. Rinchin's business has shown that clients aren't concerned about
getting manicures and pedicures in a parklet. She agreed that kicking this issue back to the ED
Subcommittee might be the best way to handle this matter. She added that her concern about setting them up
in a parking lot is that they would have to carry all of their supplies and water from their stores. She stated
that it wasn't practical.
Mayor Beach stated that her concern is that kicking it back to the ED Subcommittee wouldn't give staff
enough guidance to deal with the matter. She explained that it sounded like the majority of Council is
leaning into doing something. She stated that Council agrees that salons shouldn't operate on sidewalks.
She asked if her colleagues were open to allowing salons to operate in a parklet in front of their stores that
could be near or adjacent to restaurants.
Councilmember Ortiz voiced support for the City of San Mateo's regulations that required 50 feet between a
salon and restaurant.
Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran stated that she agreed with Councilmember Ortiz. She noted that her biggest
concern is distance from restaurants. She added that for consistency reasons, she felt that the 50 feet
requirement was reasonable. She stated that she would also be open to giving them one or two spaces in a
parking lot. She also suggested utilizing private alleys with permission from the landowner.
Councilmember Colson asked why a restaurant gets priority over a nail salon. She asked what would happen
if a salon isn't within 50 feet of a restaurant so the City gives them a parklet, but then the storefront next to
them is leased to a restaurant. She asked if the restaurant has to stay closed. She stated that she has a real
17
Burlingame City Council August 17, 2020
Unapproved Minutes
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 09/08/2020
issue with picking one industry to survive over the other. She explained that she isn't as concerned with the
50 feet requirement. She stated that she just wanted it to be fair to everyone.
City Attorney Kane stated that Council should determine what issue they are trying to regulate and then how
it can be addressed. She stated that if it is strictly a matter of airspace or visual space, then that is a distance
requirement. She noted that if it is an issue of making sure that there is no detritus that goes from one use
into another, there may be other ways to address that that aren't based on a 50 foot distance.
Mayor Beach asked the City Attorney if she had any thoughts on Councilmember Colson's suggestion that
parklet priority be given to the business that gets there first. City Attorney Kane stated that any action that
the Council takes has to be fair and equitable. Therefore, whatever the Council's decision is, there must be a
record that supports the basis for that decision.
Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran stated that she isn't picking one business over the other. She explained that
the reason she discussed separation is because she is looking at it from a health perspective. She noted that if
there are ways to cover these concerns so that restaurants and salons can both operate outside within a
smaller distance, that would be great.
Mayor Beach stated that she could support the first -in priority for salons and restaurants. She explained that
she liked Councilmember Ortiz's suggestion of going with the City of San Mateo's regulations for 50 feet
between a salon parklet and restaurants. However, she noted that she also agreed with Councilmember Ortiz
that the City should go further than the City of San Mateo and offer public parking lots.
Councilmember Colson stated that she understands the health concerns of having salons close to outdoor
dining. She explained that she believes that the State has created a much bigger problem by not allowing
salons to operate indoors.
Mayor Beach asked Councilmember Ortiz if he wanted to formulate a motion.
Councilmember Ortiz stated that he was struggling because the Council was stating that they wanted to adopt
similar regulations to the City of San Mateo with a few exceptions, including allowing salons to utilize
public parking lots.
City Attorney Kane stated that she thought the Council wanted to consider allowing salons to operate in
parklets but only if it is setback from existing adjacent restaurants.
Councilmember Ortiz agreed. He stated that he would say no sidewalks but is okay with the use of parklets
in the public right-of-way and outside the 50-foot setback from existing restaurant uses.
Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran added the caveat that if a restaurant moved in after, that the salon would have
priority in utilizing a parklet.
Mayor Beach asked the City Attorney to articulate the motion.
18
Burlingame City Council August 17, 2020
Unapproved Minutes
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 09/08/2020
City Attorney Kane stated that she believed the motion was:
• To allow personal services businesses in the public right-of-way, in parklets, but not on sidewalks,
• To allow personal services businesses in City parking lots, subject to review by the Public Works
Department, and in private outdoor spaces,
• The personal services business must comply with State regulations and reasonable regulations from
the City regarding health and safety, and
• The outdoor operations of personal services businesses must be 50 feet or more from an existing
restaurant use.
Councilmember Ortiz made a motion utilizing City Attorney Kane's outline of the motion.
Councilmember Colson asked if there was a restaurant next door to a salon that is choosing not to serve food,
could the salon get the parklet. She asked what would happen if the restaurant decided that it did want
outdoor dining. City Attorney Kane stated that the motion could be clarified to say existing restaurant use in
the public right-of-way.
Councilmember Ortiz stated that he would like salons to have the same requirement as restaurants --that the
parklet has to be used at least three days a week.
DPW Murtuza asked about Councilmember Colson's hypothetical. He asked if she was stating that if a
restaurant initially doesn't take the City's offer to have outdoor dining but later asks for an encroachment
permit when a salon is already in place, the City should deny the restaurant's request.
Councilmember Colson replied in the affirmative.
Councilmember Brownrigg stated that he believed that DPW Murtuza's question was whether the restaurant
would be allowed to obtain the encroachment permit but that the salon could stay open.
Councilmember Colson stated that she was fine with that.
City Attorney Kane stated that this creates a slight logical problem because if the 50 feet is necessary for
health and safety, than those reasons are still there no matter who came first.
Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran stated that the way she was understanding it is that the restaurants had the
opportunity to utilize a parklet. Therefore, if the restaurant declined that opportunity and the nail salon took
it, then the salon shouldn't be punished if the restaurant changes its mind.
Councilmember Ortiz stated that even if the restaurant is closed, the City should not allow a salon to open a
parklet if it is within 50 feet of the restaurant.
19
Burlingame City Council August 17, 2020
Unapproved Minutes
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 09/08/2020
City Attorney Kane discussed the issue of health and safety. She noted that the Council should consider if
the restaurant is only operating as takeout and doesn't have outside dining, is there still an issue of health and
safety.
Mayor Beach stated that the issue she believes the Council was trying to address was the incompatibility for
health, safety, and privacy of two parklets operating next door to each other, where one is a restaurant and
one is a salon. She noted that she didn't believe she heard concern about a salon operating outside in a
parklet with a restaurant only doing takeout.
Councilmember Ortiz stated that in his mind, the 50-foot distance was required whether or not the restaurant
was operating outside.
Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran agreed with Mayor Beach and stated for her it is the outdoor activity.
Mayor Beach stated that she was comfortable with the premise of allowing either to have a parklet depending
on who got their first.
Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran concurred with the Mayor.
City Attorney Kane stated that for clarity, she is assuming that who got there first means submitted a
complete application for an encroachment permit rather than physical presence, if physical presence hadn't
been established yet.
Mayor Beach concurred with the City Attorney.
City Attorney Kane asked if she was correct that the 50 feet was in all directions. Therefore, if a restaurant
was utilizing a sidewalk but not a parklet, the salon's parklet would need to be 50 feet from the sidewalk
tables.
Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran stated that it seemed like the City was arbitrarily picking 50 feet based off of
the City of San Mateo's requirements. She asked if the City could do less distance and still maintain health
and safety. She noted that she didn't know what the distance should or shouldn't be. City Attorney Kane
stated staff doesn't know what the basis for the 50 feet was. She noted that this might be something that staff
needs to look into a little bit more.
Mayor Beach asked if typical store fronts for restaurants in the downtown area are 50 feet. CDD Gardiner
stated that they are usually 25 to 35 feet.
Mayor Beach stated that it is imperfect information that the City has; however, she thought Councilmember
Ortiz's motion (articulated by City Attorney Kane) was correct.
Councilmember Colson stated that the City should first reach out to the salons and see who is interested. She
explained that then the City could draft a policy.
20
Burlingame City Council August 17, 2020
Unapproved Minutes
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 09/08/2020
Councilmember Ortiz stated that he believed the motion needed to be clarified that it is outdoor restaurant
operations as opposed to just a restaurant.
Councilmember Brownrigg suggested having Mayor Beach write to Governor Newsom, supporting San
Mateo County Health Officer Dr. Morrow's assertion that salons should be allowed to remain open.
City Attorney Kane stated that Councilmember Brownrigg's suggestion doesn't require a motion just
majority support.
Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran questioned the 50-foot distance.
Councilmember Colson noted that 50 feet would prevent a salon from operating outside if there was a
restaurant across the street. DPW Murtuza replied in the affirmative.
Councilmember Ortiz recommended decreasing it to 25 feet.
DPW Murtuza stated that the space between parklets across the street from each other is approximately 21
feet.
Councilmember Colson suggested decreasing the required distance to 20 feet.
Mayor Beach suggested limiting the distance requirement to same side of the street.
Councilmember Colson noted that the distance requirement needed to be consistent if the issue was health
and safety.
Councilmember Ortiz stated that 20 feet made sense.
Councilmember Ortiz made a motion:
• To allow personal services businesses in the public right-of-way, in parklets, but not on sidewalks,
• To allow personal services businesses in City parking lots, subject to review by the Public Works
Department, and in private outdoor spaces
• The personal services businesses must comply with State regulations and reasonable regulations from
the City regarding health and safety,
• The personal services business must be operating 20 feet or more from any existing outdoor
restaurant use in the public right-of-way,
• The personal services business must utilize the parklet at least three days a week, and
• If a restaurant decides later to have outdoor dining and the outdoor tables fall within 20 feet of an
existing outdoor salon, the restaurant is not allowed to have outdoor dining because the salon already
established itself outside.
21
Burlingame City Council August 17, 2020
Unapproved Minutes
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 09/08/2020
The motion was seconded by Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran.
The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote, 5-0.
City Attorney Kane stated that she wanted Council direction on if there are violations of the reasonable life
safety and health restrictions that the permits can be pulled on one violation.
Councilmember Colson stated that there are a lot of different violations. She asked what would happen if a
customer is not wearing their mask, would it count as a violation.
City Attorney Kane suggested that staff draft a short list of the very serious things that would qualify as a
violation for terminating a permit. She explained that this could be given to the ED Subcommittee for their
review and approval.
Council agreed.
Mayor Beach asked if Council agreed to her sending a letter on behalf of the City to the Governor outlining
their objections over State regulations of personal services businesses. Council agreed.
City Manager Goldman asked for Council direction on the Broadway street closure.
Mayor Beach opened the item up for public comment. No one spoke.
Councilmember Brownrigg made a motion to extend the Broadway street closure; seconded by
Councilmember Ortiz.
Councilmember Ortiz commented on the motion; stating that the City has to keep an eye on the violations on
Broadway to make sure it remains under control.
The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote, 5-0.
11. COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND ACTIVITIES REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
a. MAYOR BEACH COMMITTEE REPORT
12. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
Councilmember Brownrigg asked that the Council agendize allowing cannabis delivery service businesses to
establish themselves in the city. Council agreed.
13. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
22
Burlingame City Council August 17, 2020
Unapproved Minutes
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 09/08/2020
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 10:56 p.m. in memory of Doug Freeman and Gwen Kingsmill.
Respectfully submitted,
Meaghan Hassel -Shearer
City Clerk
23
Burlingame City Council August 17, 2020
Unapproved Minutes
�v ci�v o
`� STAFF REPORT
APORA<
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Date: September 8, 2020
AGENDA ITEM NO: 8b
MEETING DATE: September 8, 2020
From: Kevin Gardiner, Community Development Director — (650) 558-7253
Subject Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an
Amendment to the Professional Services Agreement with MIG for
Preparation of an Update of the City's General Plan and Zoning Ordinance
RECOMMENDATION
The City Council is asked to adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute an
amendment to the Professional Services Agreement with MIG to extend the term of the
Agreement for preparation of an update of the City's General Plan and Zoning Ordinance.
BACKGROUND
The City of Burlingame adopted a new General Plan in January 2019 and a new Climate Action
Plan (CAP) in September 2019. The combined effort, which also includes an update to the Zoning
Ordinance, is known as "Envision Burlingame." MIG was selected through a competitive process
to provide consulting services for the project, and the City Council approved a Professional
Services Agreement with MIG on January 5, 2015. The term of the agreement was extended on
September 19, 2016, and again on November 18, 2019.
The last two items in the work plan are the comprehensive update of the Zoning Ordinance, and
the release of the "ePlan" online version of the General Plan. The Zoning Ordinance has been
largely completed as an administrative draft, and the ePlan is in the beta review phase.
Subcommittee review and public hearings on the Zoning Ordinance will commence in the coming
months, in addition to release of the General Plan ePlan.
DISCUSSION
The City entered into an Agreement for Professional Services with MIG to perform the consulting
services required for the General Plan Update, Zoning Ordinance Update, Climate Action Plan,
and preparation of the required environmental review document in an amount not to exceed
$1,320,281.00. Of the total budget, $491,770 was funded from a Strategic Growth Council
Sustainable Communities Grant, and the remainder was from the General Fund. The November
2019 amendment included a budget increase of $75,075 for additional services, bringing the total
budget to $1,395,356.
1
Amendment to Professional Services Agreement - MIG
September 8, 2020
While work on the Zoning Ordinance Update and General Plan ePlan is progressing, the term of
the Agreement for Professional Services needs to be extended to cover the anticipated duration
of the public hearings for the Zoning Ordinance Update. Staff recommends a nine -month
extension.
Attached is the draft Amendment to Agreement for Professional Services with MIG to extend the
term to perform the planning services required for the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update
to June 8, 2021. Because the cost of the original agreement exceeds $100,000, Council approval
of the amendment is required.
No other changes to the agreement or budget are proposed. The proposed resolution allows work
on the project to continue in the interim until the amendment is fully executed.
FISCAL IMPACT
The General Plan update is being funded through the Strategic Growth Council Sustainable
Communities Grant approved on June 3, 2014, and through the General Fund. There is no fiscal
impact associated with this amendment.
Exhibits:
• Resolution
• Executed Agreement for Professional Services with MIG
• Draft Amendment to Agreement for Professional Services with MIG #3
• City of Burlingame General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update Work Program As Amended
October 29, 2019 (Exhibit A)
2
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO THE
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH MIG TO PREPARE THE UPDATE
TO THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING ORDINANCE
WHEREAS, the City of Burlingame has embarked on an update to the City's General
Plan and Zoning Ordinance to provide a comprehensive plan for the community; and
WHEREAS, the City selected MIG to prepare the update of the General Plan and
Zoning Ordinance based on its experience preparing similar documents in the Bay Area
region, its experience with zoning ordinance updates, its comprehensive community
participation and outreach plan, and the expertise of the team assembled for preparation of
the update; and
WHEREAS, an agreement incorporating the Work Program, Cost Estimate, and
Project Schedule prepared by MIG in the amount of $1,320,281.00 was executed by the City
Manager per direction of the City Council on February 18, 2015; and
WHEREAS, on September 19, 2016, the term of the Agreement was extended to June
30, 2018 (Amendment No. 1); and
WHEREAS, on November 18, 2019, the total budget (Compensation) was increased from
$1,320,281 to $1,395,356 to account for unanticipated costs associated with the adoption of the
General Plan and Climate Action Plan, and the term of the Agreement was extended to June 30,
2020; and
WHEREAS, the term of the agreement shall be extended to terminate on June 8, 2021
in order to accommodate the duration of time needed to complete the Zoning Ordinance
update and General Plan "ePlan"; and
WHEREAS, because the agreement authorized work in excess of $100,000, City
Council approval is required.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED AND ORDERED:
The City Manager is authorized and directed to enter into Amendment No. 3 to the
Professional Services Agreement with MIG to prepare the update to the City's General
Plan and Zoning Ordinance, with a term to be extended to June 8, 2021, as stated in
Contract Amendment No. 3.
2. Payment for services provided by MIG and invoiced after June 30, 2020, and before the
date of adoption of this resolution is authorized.
RESOLUTION NO.
3. The City Clerk is directed to attest to the signature of the City Manager upon execution
of the Professional Services Agreement.
Emily Beach, Mayor
I, Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, certify that the
foregoing resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council, held on the 8t" day
of September, 2020, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NAYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
2
Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
BETWEEN THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AND MIG
TO PREPARE THE UPDATE OF THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN
AND ZONING ORDINANCE
THIS AGREEMENT is by and between MIG ("Consultant") and the City of
Burlingame, a public body of the State of California ("City"). Consultant and City agree:
1. Services. Consultant shall provide the Services set forth in Exhibit A, attached
hereto and incorporated herein.
2. Compensation. Notwithstanding the expenditure by Consultant of time and
materials in excess of said Maximum compensation amount, Consultant agrees to perform all of
the Scope of Services herein required of Consultant for $1,320,281, including all materials and
other reimbursable amounts ("Maximum Compensation"). Consultant shall submit invoices on a
monthly basis. All bills submitted by Consultant shall contain sufficient information to
determine whether the amount deemed due and payable is accurate. Bills shall include a brief
description of services performed, the date services were performed, the number of hours spent
and by whom, a brief description of any costs incurred and the Consultant's signature.
3. Term. This Agreement commences on full execution hereof and terminates on
June 30, 2016 unless otherwise extended or terminated pursuant to the provisions hereof.
Consultant agrees to diligently prosecute the services to be provided under this Agreement to
completion and in accordance with any schedules specified herein. In the performance of this
Agreement, time is of the essence. Time extensions for delays beyond the Consultant's control,
other than delays caused by the City, shall be requested in writing to the City's Contract
Administrator prior to the expiration of the specified completion date.
4. Assignment and Subcontracting. A substantial inducement to City for entering
into this Agreement is the professional reputation and competence of Consultant. Neither this
Agreement nor any interest herein may be assigned or subcontracted by Consultant without the
prior written approval of City. It is expressly understood and agreed by both parties that
Consultant is an independent contractor and not an employee of the City.
5. Insurance. Consultant, at its own cost and expense, shall carry, maintain for the
duration of the Agreement, and provide proof thereof, acceptable to the City, the insurance
coverages specified in Exhibit B, "City Insurance Requirements," attached hereto and
incorporated herein by reference. Consultant shall demonstrate proof of required insurance
coverage prior to the commencement of services required under this Agreement, by delivery of
endorsements and certificates of insurance to City.
6. Indemnification. Consultant shall indemnify, defend, and hold City, its directors,
officers, employees, agents, and volunteers harmless from and against any and all liability,
claims, suits, actions, damages, and causes of action arising out of, pertaining or relating to the
negligence, recklessness or willful misconduct of Consultant, its employees, subcontractors, or
agents, or on account of the performance or character of the Services, except for any such claim
arising out of the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the City, its officers, employees,
agents, or volunteers. It is understood that the duty of Consultant to indemnify and hold
harmless includes the duty to defend as set forth in section 2778 of the California Civil Code.
Agreement for Professional Services Between the City of Burlingame and MIG
for preparation of an Update to the General Plan and Zoning Code Update
Notwithstanding the foregoing, for any design professional services, the duty to defend and
indemnify City shall be limited to that allowed pursuant to California Civil Code section 2782.8.
Acceptance of insurance certificates and endorsements required under this Agreement does not
relieve Consultant from liability under this indemnification and hold harmless clause. This
indemnification and hold harmless clause shall apply whether or not such insurance policies shall
have been determined to be applicable to any of such damages or claims for damages.
7. Termination and Abandonment. This Agreement may be cancelled at any time
by City for its convenience upon written notice to Consultant. In the event of such termination,
Consultant shall be entitled to pro -rated compensation for authorized Services performed prior to
the effective date of termination provided however that City may condition payment of such
compensation upon Consultant's delivery to City of any or all materials described herein. In the
event the Consultant ceases performing services under this Agreement or otherwise abandons the
project prior to completing all of the Services described in this Agreement, Consultant shall,
without delay, deliver to City all materials and records prepared or obtained in the performance
of this Agreement. Consultant shall be paid for the reasonable value of the authorized Services
performed up to the time of Consultant's cessation or abandonment, less a deduction for any
damages or additional expenses which City incurs as a result of such cessation or abandonment.
8. Ownership of Materials. All documents, materials, and records of a finished
_ nature, including but not limited to final plans, specifications, video or audio tapes, photographs,
computer data, software, reports, maps, electronic files and films, and any final revisions,
prepared or obtained in the performance of this Agreement, shall be delivered to and become the
property of City. All documents and materials of a preliminary nature, including but not limited
to notes, sketches, preliminary plans, computations and other data, and any other material
referenced in this Section, prepared or obtained in the performance of this Agreement, shall be
made available, upon request, to City at no additional charge and without restriction or limitation
on their use. Upon City's request, Consultant shall execute appropriate documents to assign to
the City the copyright or trademark to work created pursuant to this Agreement. Consultant shall
return all City property in Consultant's control or possession immediately upon termination.
9. Compliance with Laws. In the performance of this Agreement, Consultant shall
abide by and conform to any and all applicable laws of the United States and the State of
California, and all ordinances, regulations, and policies of the City. Consultant warrants that all
work done under this Agreement will be in compliance with all applicable safety rules, laws,
statutes, and practices, including but not limited to Cal/OSHA regulations. If a license or
registration of any kind is required of Consultant, its employees, agents, or subcontractors by
law, Consultant warrants that such license has been obtained, is valid and in good standing, and
Consultant shall keep it in effect at all times during the term of this Agreement, and that any
applicable bond shall be posted in accordance with all applicable laws and regulations.
10. Conflict of Interest. Consultant warrants and covenants that Consultant presently
has no interest in, nor shall any interest be hereinafter acquired in, any matter which will render
the services required under the provisions of this Agreement a violation of any applicable state,
local, or federal law. In the event that any conflict of interest should nevertheless hereinafter
Agreement for Professional Services Between the City of Burlingame and MIG
for preparation of an Update to the General Plan and Zoning Code Update
arise, Consultant shall promptly notify City of the existence of such conflict of interest so that
the City may determine whether to terminate this Agreement. Consultant further warrants its
compliance with the Political Reform Act (Government Code § 81000 et seq.) respecting this
Agreement.
11. Whole Agreement and Amendments. This Agreement constitutes the entire
understanding and Agreement of the parties and integrates all of the terms and conditions
mentioned herein or incidental hereto and supersedes all negotiations or any previous written or
oral Agreements between the parties with respect to all or any part of the subject matter hereof.
The parties intend not to create rights in, or to grant remedies to, any third party as a beneficiary
of this Agreement or of any duty, covenant, obligation, or undertaking established herein. This
Agreement may be amended only by a written document, executed by both Consultant and the
City Manager, and approved as to form by the City Attorney. Such document shall expressly
state that it is intended by the parties to amend certain terms and conditions of this Agreement.
The waiver by either party of a breach by the other of any provision of this Agreement shall not
constitute a continuing waiver or a waiver of any subsequent breach of either the same or a
different provision of this Agreement. Multiple copies of this Agreement may be executed but
the parties agree that the Agreement on file in the office of the City Clerk is the version of the
Agreement that shall take precedence should any differences exist among counterparts of the
document. This Agreement and all matters relating to it shall be governed by the laws of the
State of California.
12. Capacity of Parties. Each signatory and party hereto warrants and represents to
the other party that it has all legal authority and capacity and direction from its principal to enter
into this Agreement and that all necessary actions have been taken so as to enable it to enter into
this Agreement.
13. Severability. Should any part of this Agreement be declared by a final decision
by a court or tribunal of competent jurisdiction to be unconstitutional, invalid, or beyond the
authority of either party to enter into or carry out, such decision shall not affect the validity of the
remainder of this Agreement, which shall continue in full force and effect, provided that the
remainder of this Agreement, absent the unexcised portion, can be reasonably interpreted to give
effect to the intentions of the parties.
14. Notice. Any notice required or desired to be given under this Agreement shall be
in writing and shall be personally served or, in lieu of personal service, may be given by (i)
depositing such notice in the United States mail, registered or certified, return receipt requested,
postage prepaid, addressed to a party at its address set forth in Exhibit A; (ii) transmitting such
notice by means of Federal Express or similar overnight commercial courier ("Courier"), postage
paid and addressed to the other at its street address set forth below; (iii) transmitting the same by
facsimile, in which case notice shall be deemed delivered upon confirmation of receipt by the
sending facsimile machine's acknowledgment of such with date and time printout; or (iv) by
personal delivery. Any notice given by Courier shall be deemed given on the date shown on the
receipt for acceptance or rejection of the notice. Either party may, by written notice, change the
address to which notices addressed to it shall thereafter be sent.
Agreement for Professional Services Between the City of Burlingame and MIG
for preparation of an Update to the General Plan and Zoning Code Update
15. Miscellaneous. Except to the extent that it provides a part of the definition of the
term used herein, the captions used in this Agreement are for convenience only and shall not be
considered in the construction of interpretation of any provision hereof, nor taken as a correct or
complete segregation of the several units of materials and labor.
Capitalized terms refer to the definition provide with its first usage in the Agreement.
When the context of this Agreement requires, the neuter gender includes the masculine,
the feminine, a partnership or corporation, trust or joint venture, and the singular includes the
plural.
The terms "shall", "will", "must" and "agree" are mandatory. The term "may" is
permissive.
The waiver by either party of a breach by the other of any provision. of this Agreement
shall not constitute a continuing waiver or a waiver of any subsequent breach of either the same
or a different provision of this Agreement.
When a party is required to do something by this Agreement, it shall do so at its sole cost
and expense without right to reimbursement from the other party unless specific provision is
made otherwise.
Where any party is obligated not to perform any act, such party is also obligated to
restrain any others within its control from performing such act, including its agents, invitees,
contractors, subcontractors and employees.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Consultant and City execute this Agreement.
CITY OF BURLINGAME
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
By: sr✓ti� N,�rN""
Lisa Goldman
City Manager
Date:
CONSULTANT
MIG
800 Hearst Avenue
Berkeley, CA 9471
By:
Nam _ L
Title r
Date: t biv/1
Attest: V `'"'' LG I `" Federal Employer ID Number: i 901
Mary Ellen Kearney
City Clerk
4
Agreement for Professional Services Between the City of Burlingame and MIG
for preparation of an Update to the General Plan and Zoning Code Update
Approved as to form:
Kathleen Kane
City Attorney
Attachments:
Exhibit A Scope of Services
Exhibit B City Insurance Provisions
AMENDMENT NO. 3
TO AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
BETWEEN THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AND MIG
TO PREPARE THE UPDATE TO THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN
AND ZONING ORDINANCE
THIS AMENDMENT NO. 3 is by and between MIG ("Consultant"), engaged in providing
planning and environmental review services for the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Update,
and the City of Burlingame, a public body of the State of California ("City"), amends the Agreement
between the parties executed by the City Manager per direction of the City Council February 18,
2015, hereinafter called the "Agreement".
RECITALS
WHEREAS, the City has determined that additional budget and time is required to complete
the General Plan "ePlan" and Zoning Ordinance Update; and
WHEREAS, on September 19, 2016, the term of the Agreement was extended to June 30,
2018 (Amendment No. 1); and
WHEREAS, on November 18, 2019, the work program was amended, the budget was
increased from $1,320,281 to $1,395,356, and the term of the Agreement was extended to June
30, 2020 (Amendment No. 1); and
WHEREAS, the Consultant may continue work and expenditure on the General Plan and
Zoning Ordinance Update under the terms of the Agreement between the expiration of the
Agreement and the execution of the Amendment.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
The City Manager is authorized and directed to enter into Amendment No. 3 to
Professional Services Agreement with MIG to prepare the update to the City's
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance, consistent with the Scope of Work attached to
this resolution, for a term to be extended to June 8, 2021.
2. Payment for services provided by MIG and invoiced after June 30, 2020 and before
the date of adoption of this resolution is hereby authorized.
3. The City Clerk is directed to attest to the signature of the City Manager upon
execution of the Professional Services Agreement.
3. Except as expressly amended in this Amendment No. 3, all other terms and
conditions contained in the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.
Amendment No. 3 to Agreement for Professional Services between MIG and the City of
Burlingame
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Consultant and City execute this Amendment No. 3 to the Agreement.
CITY OF BURLINGAME
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
Lisa Goldman
City Manager
Date:
Attest:
Meaghan Hassel -Shearer
City Clerk
2
CONSULTANT
MIG
800 Hearst Avenue
Berkeley, CA 94710
By:
Name
Title
Date:
Federal Employer ID Number:
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
BETWEEN THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AND MIG
TO PREPARE THE UPDATE OF THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN
AND ZONING ORDINANCE
THIS AGREEMENT is by and between MIG ("Consultant") and the City of
Burlingame, a public body of the State of California ("City"). Consultant and City agree:
1. Services. Consultant shall provide the Services set forth in Exhibit A, attached
hereto and incorporated herein.
2. Compensation. Notwithstanding the expenditure by Consultant of time and
materials in excess of said Maximum compensation amount, Consultant agrees to perform all of
the Scope of Services herein required of Consultant for $1,320,281, including all materials and
other reimbursable amounts ("Maximum Compensation"). Consultant shall submit invoices on a
monthly basis. All bills submitted by Consultant shall contain sufficient information to
determine whether the amount deemed due and payable is accurate. Bills shall include a brief
description of services performed, the date services were performed, the number of hours spent
and by whom, a brief description of any costs incurred and the Consultant's signature.
3. Term. This Agreement commences on full execution hereof and terminates on
June 30, 2016 unless otherwise extended or terminated pursuant to the provisions hereof.
Consultant agrees to diligently prosecute the services to be provided under this Agreement to
completion and in accordance with any schedules specified herein. In the performance of this
Agreement, time is of the essence. Time extensions for delays beyond the Consultant's control,
other than delays caused by the City, shall be requested in writing to the City's Contract
Administrator prior to the expiration of the specified completion date.
4. Assignment and Subcontracting. A substantial inducement to City for entering
into this Agreement is the professional reputation and competence of Consultant. Neither this
Agreement nor any interest herein may be assigned or subcontracted by Consultant without the
prior written approval of City. It is expressly understood and agreed by both parties that
Consultant is an independent contractor and not an employee of the City.
5. Insurance. Consultant, at its own cost and expense, shall carry, maintain for the
duration of the Agreement, and provide proof thereof, acceptable to the City, the insurance
coverages specified in Exhibit B, "City Insurance Requirements," attached hereto and
incorporated herein by reference. Consultant shall demonstrate proof of required insurance
coverage prior to the commencement of services required under this Agreement, by delivery of
endorsements and certificates of insurance to City.
6. Indemnification. Consultant shall indemnify, defend, and hold City, its directors,
officers, employees, agents, and volunteers harmless from and against any and all liability,
claims, suits, actions, damages, and causes of action arising out of, pertaining or relating to the
negligence, recklessness or willful misconduct of Consultant, its employees, subcontractors, or
agents, or on account of the performance or character of the Services, except for any such claim
arising out of the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the City, its officers, employees,
agents, or volunteers. It is understood that the duty of Consultant to indemnify and hold
harmless includes the duty to defend as set forth in section 2778 of the California Civil Code.
Agreement for Professional Services Between the City of Burlingame and MIG
for preparation of an Update to the General Plan and Zoning Code Update
Notwithstanding the foregoing, for any design professional services, the duty to defend and
indemnify City shall be limited to that allowed pursuant to California Civil Code section 2782.8.
Acceptance of insurance certificates and endorsements required under this Agreement does not
relieve Consultant from liability under this indemnification and hold harmless clause. This
indemnification and hold harmless clause shall apply whether or not such insurance policies shall
have been determined to be applicable to any of such damages or claims for damages.
7. Termination and Abandonment. This Agreement may be cancelled at any time
by City for its convenience upon written notice to Consultant. In the event of such termination,
Consultant shall be entitled to pro -rated compensation for authorized Services performed prior to
the effective date of termination provided however that City may condition payment of such
compensation upon Consultant's delivery to City of any or all materials described herein. In the
event the Consultant ceases performing services under this Agreement or otherwise abandons the
project prior to completing all of the Services described in this Agreement, Consultant shall,
without delay, deliver to City all materials and records prepared or obtained in the performance
of this Agreement. Consultant shall be paid for the reasonable value of the authorized Services
performed up to the time of Consultant's cessation or abandonment, less a deduction for any
damages or additional expenses which City incurs as a result of such cessation or abandonment.
8. Ownership of Materials. All documents, materials, and records of a finished
_ nature, including but not limited to final plans, specifications, video or audio tapes, photographs,
computer data, software, reports, maps, electronic files and films, and any final revisions,
prepared or obtained in the performance of this Agreement, shall be delivered to and become the
property of City. All documents and materials of a preliminary nature, including but not limited
to notes, sketches, preliminary plans, computations and other data, and any other material
referenced in this Section, prepared or obtained in the performance of this Agreement, shall be
made available, upon request, to City at no additional charge and without restriction or limitation
on their use. Upon City's request, Consultant shall execute appropriate documents to assign to
the City the copyright or trademark to work created pursuant to this Agreement. Consultant shall
return all City property in Consultant's control or possession immediately upon termination.
9. Compliance with Laws. In the performance of this Agreement, Consultant shall
abide by and conform to any and all applicable laws of the United States and the State of
California, and all ordinances, regulations, and policies of the City. Consultant warrants that all
work done under this Agreement will be in compliance with all applicable safety rules, laws,
statutes, and practices, including but not limited to Cal/OSHA regulations. If a license or
registration of any kind is required of Consultant, its employees, agents, or subcontractors by
law, Consultant warrants that such license has been obtained, is valid and in good standing, and
Consultant shall keep it in effect at all times during the term of this Agreement, and that any
applicable bond shall be posted in accordance with all applicable laws and regulations.
10. Conflict of Interest. Consultant warrants and covenants that Consultant presently
has no interest in, nor shall any interest be hereinafter acquired in, any matter which will render
the services required under the provisions of this Agreement a violation of any applicable state,
local, or federal law. In the event that any conflict of interest should nevertheless hereinafter
Agreement for Professional Services Between the City of Burlingame and MIG
for preparation of an Update to the General Plan and Zoning Code Update
arise, Consultant shall promptly notify City of the existence of such conflict of interest so that
the City may determine whether to terminate this Agreement. Consultant further warrants its
compliance with the Political Reform Act (Government Code § 81000 et seq.) respecting this
Agreement.
11. Whole Agreement and Amendments. This Agreement constitutes the entire
understanding and Agreement of the parties and integrates all of the terms and conditions
mentioned herein or incidental hereto and supersedes all negotiations or any previous written or
oral Agreements between the parties with respect to all or any part of the subject matter hereof.
The parties intend not to create rights in, or to grant remedies to, any third party as a beneficiary
of this Agreement or of any duty, covenant, obligation, or undertaking established herein. This
Agreement may be amended only by a written document, executed by both Consultant and the
City Manager, and approved as to form by the City Attorney. Such document shall expressly
state that it is intended by the parties to amend certain terms and conditions of this Agreement.
The waiver by either party of a breach by the other of any provision of this Agreement shall not
constitute a continuing waiver or a waiver of any subsequent breach of either the same or a
different provision of this Agreement. Multiple copies of this Agreement may be executed but
the parties agree that the Agreement on file in the office of the City Clerk is the version of the
Agreement that shall take precedence should any differences exist among counterparts of the
document. This Agreement and all matters relating to it shall be governed by the laws of the
State of California.
12. Capacity of Parties. Each signatory and party hereto warrants and represents to
the other party that it has all legal authority and capacity and direction from its principal to enter
into this Agreement and that all necessary actions have been taken so as to enable it to enter into
this Agreement.
13. Severability. Should any part of this Agreement be declared by a final decision
by a court or tribunal of competent jurisdiction to be unconstitutional, invalid, or beyond the
authority of either party to enter into or carry out, such decision shall not affect the validity of the
remainder of this Agreement, which shall continue in full force and effect, provided that the
remainder of this Agreement, absent the unexcised portion, can be reasonably interpreted to give
effect to the intentions of the parties.
14. Notice. Any notice required or desired to be given under this Agreement shall be
in writing and shall be personally served or, in lieu of personal service, may be given by (i)
depositing such notice in the United States mail, registered or certified, return receipt requested,
postage prepaid, addressed to a party at its address set forth in Exhibit A; (ii) transmitting such
notice by means of Federal Express or similar overnight commercial courier ("Courier"), postage
paid and addressed to the other at its street address set forth below; (iii) transmitting the same by
facsimile, in which case notice shall be deemed delivered upon confirmation of receipt by the
sending facsimile machine's acknowledgment of such with date and time printout; or (iv) by
personal delivery. Any notice given by Courier shall be deemed given on the date shown on the
receipt for acceptance or rejection of the notice. Either party may, by written notice, change the
address to which notices addressed to it shall thereafter be sent.
Agreement for Professional Services Between the City of Burlingame and MIG
for preparation of an Update to the General Plan and Zoning Code Update
15. Miscellaneous. Except to the extent that it provides a part of the definition of the
term used herein, the captions used in this Agreement are for convenience only and shall not be
considered in the construction of interpretation of any provision hereof, nor taken as a correct or
complete segregation of the several units of materials and labor.
Capitalized terms refer to the definition provide with its first usage in the Agreement.
When the context of this Agreement requires, the neuter gender includes the masculine,
the feminine, a partnership or corporation, trust or joint venture, and the singular includes the
plural.
The terms "shall", "will", "must" and "agree" are mandatory. The term "may" is
permissive.
The waiver by either party of a breach by the other of any provision. of this Agreement
shall not constitute a continuing waiver or a waiver of any subsequent breach of either the same
or a different provision of this Agreement.
When a party is required to do something by this Agreement, it shall do so at its sole cost
and expense without right to reimbursement from the other party unless specific provision is
made otherwise.
Where any party is obligated not to perform any act, such party is also obligated to
restrain any others within its control from performing such act, including its agents, invitees,
contractors, subcontractors and employees.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Consultant and City execute this Agreement.
CITY OF BURLINGAME
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
By: sr✓ti� N,�rN""
Lisa Goldman
City Manager
Date:
CONSULTANT
MIG
800 Hearst Avenue
Berkeley, CA 9471
By:
Nam _ L
Title r
Date: t biv/1
Attest: V `'"'' LG I `" Federal Employer ID Number: i 901
Mary Ellen Kearney
City Clerk
4
Agreement for Professional Services Between the City of Burlingame and MIG
for preparation of an Update to the General Plan and Zoning Code Update
Approved as to form:
Kathleen Kane
City Attorney
Attachments:
Exhibit A Scope of Services
Exhibit B City Insurance Provisions
To:
Date:
From:
STAFF REPORT
Honorable Mayor and City Council
September 8, 2020
AGENDA NO: 8c
MEETING DATE: September 8, 2020
Syed Murtuza, Director of Public Works — (650) 558-7230
Subject: Adoption of a Resolution Awarding a $792,524 Construction Contract to
Golden Bay Construction, Inc. for the 2020 Sidewalk Repair Program, City
Project No. 85960, and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Contract
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution awarding a construction
contract to Golden Bay Construction, Inc. for the 2020 Sidewalk Repair Program, City Project No.
85960, in the amount of $792,524, and authorizing the City Manager to execute the contract.
BACKGROUND
The 2020 Sidewalk Repair Program will concentrate in the area bound by Alvarado Avenue, Hillside
Drive, El Camino Real, and Adeline Drive. The sidewalks on the north side of Easton Drive between
Balboa Avenue and Vancouver Avenue will be widened to meet ADA requirements. Additionally,
the project scope of work includes improvements in the intersection of Bayview Place and Airport
Boulevard for better pedestrian access. Please see the attached Project Location Map for more
details.
DISCUSSION
The project was advertised for bids on July 27, 2020, and the bids were opened on August 18,
2020. The City received nine bids ranging from $792,524 to $1,520,750. Golden Bay Construction,
Inc. submitted the lowest responsible bid in the amount of $792,524, which is 20.7% lower than the
engineer's estimate of $1,000,000. Golden Bay Construction, Inc. has met the project requirements
and has successfully completed similar projects for the City and other agencies. As a result, staff
recommends that the City Council award the contract to Golden Bay Construction, Inc.
Due to favorable pricing, staff requests authorization to issue contract change orders up to 25% of
the contract amount to perform additional sidewalk repairs, install curb and gutters, and install
Americans with Disability Act curb ramps.
FISCAL IMPACT
Estimated Project Expenditures:
The following are the estimated project construction expenditures:
1
Award of Construction Contract for 2020 Sidewalk Repair Program
September 8, 2020
Construction $ 792,524
Construction Contingency (25%) $ 198,131
Engineering Administration $ 79,345
Total $1,070,000
Funding Availability:
The project is funded by a combination of revenues from Measure I and the General Fund. There
are adequate funds available in the Capital Improvement Program for sidewalk, curb ramps, and
curb and gutter to complete the project.
Exhibits:
Resolution
• Bid Summary
• Project Location Map
• Construction Contract
2
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME
AWARDING A $792,524 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR THE 2020 SIDEWALK
REPAIR PROGRAM TO GOLDEN BAY CONSTRUCTION, INC. AND AUTHORIZING
THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A CONTRACT
CITY PROJECT NO. 85960
WHEREAS, on July 27, 2020, the City issued notice inviting bid proposals for the 2020
Sidewalk Repair Program, City Project No. 85960; and
WHEREAS, on August 18, 2020, all proposals were received and opened before the City
Clerk and representatives of the Public Works Department; and
WHEREAS, Golden Bay Construction, Inc. submitted the lowest responsible bid for the
job in the amount of $792,524.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED and ORDERED, that
1. The Plans and Specifications, including all addenda, are approved and adopted; and
2. The bid of Golden Bay Construction, Inc. for the project in the amount of $792,524, is
accepted; and
3. A contract be entered into between the successful bidder and the City of Burlingame
for the performance of the work, and that the City Manager is authorized on behalf of the City of
Burlingame to execute the contract and to approve the faithful performance bond and the labor
materials bond required to be furnished by the contractor.
Emily Beach, Mayor
I, Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, certify that the foregoing
Resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 8t" day of
September, 2020, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk