Loading...
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