The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAgenda Packet - CC - 2020.10.05CITY v 0 ticow � � rPORATED Monday, October 5, 2020 City of Burlingame Meeting Agenda - Final City Council 7:00 PM BURLINGAME CITY HALL 501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME, CA 94010 Please note that there are TWO Zoom Sessions for this meeting: (1) Closed Session and (2) Regular Meeting. CLOSED SESSION - 5:30 p.m. - Online To Join the CLOSED SESSION: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/81536725902?pwd=ZzIQYWVHMmlBdVlOd25MNFEyWklidzO9 Meeting ID: 815 3672 5902 Passcode:598690 One tap mobile +16699006833„81536725902# US (San Jose) +12532158782„81536725902# US (Tacoma) Dial by your location +1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose) +1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma) +1 346 248 7799 US (Houston) +1 301 715 8592 US (Germantown) +1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago) +1 929 436 2866 US (New York) Meeting ID: 815 3672 5902 Find your local number: https://us02web.zoom.us/u/kbnx9mrw4N a. Approval of the Closed Session Agenda Online b. Closed Session Community Forum: Members of the Public May Address the Council on anv Item on the Closed Session Aaenda at this Time C. Adjournment into Closed Session d. Public Employment (Government Code Section 5495 Title: Interim City Attorney/City Attorney City of Burlingame Page 1 Printed on 101112020 City Council Meeting Agenda - Final October 5, 2020 e. Conference with Real Property Neaotiators (Government Code Section 54956.8 Property: City Parking Lot E, APN 029-204-230 Agency Negotiators: City Manager Lisa K. Goldman, City Attorney Kathleen Kane, Community Development Director Kevin Gardiner, Assistant city Attorney Scott Spansail Negotiating Party: Sares Regis Group of Northern California, LLC Under Negotiation: Price and Terms 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 October 5, 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 received and read to the City Council for the appropriate agenda item, please submit your email no later than 5:00 p.m. on October 5, 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 on the record. City of Burlingame Page 2 Printed on 101112020 City Council Meeting Agenda - Final October 5, 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/84277725133? pwd=dTFMZ3czZXhrRVBGaTJFOG p4UXFmUT09 Meeting ID: 842 7772 5133 Passcode:223145 One tap mobile +16699006833„84277725133# US (San Jose) +13462487799„84277725133# 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) +1 929 436 2866 US (New York) +1 301 715 8592 US (Germantown) +1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago) Meeting ID: 842 7772 5133 Find your local number: https://us02web.zoom.us/u/kdsGgLNmB2 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG 3. ROLL CALL 4. REPORT OUT FROM CLOSED SESSION 5. UPCOMING EVENTS 6. PRESENTATIONS a. Update from the Youth Advisory Committee (YAC) 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 3 Printed on 101112020 City Council Meeting Agenda - Final October 5, 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 September 21, 2020 Attachments: Meeting Minutes b. Adoption of an Ordinance Amending the Zoning Code (Donnelly Avenue Commercial District) to Allow Multifamily Residential Uses Above the First Floor on Properties Located North of Donnelly Avenue that Have Sole Frontage on Donnelly Avenue and Adoption of Resolutions Amending the Downtown Specific Plan (Donnelly Avenue Area), Making Findings Relative to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and Approving Design Review, Conditional Use Permit for Building Height, Condominium Permit, and Lot Combination for a Proposed Fourteen (14) Unit Mixed Use Commercial/Residential Development to be Located at 1214-1220 Donnelly Avenue Attachments: Staff Report Proposed Ordinance Resolution - General Plan/Downtown Specific Plan Amendment Exhibit A - Chapter 3 - Planning Areas Exhibit B - Table 3-1 Planning Area Land Uses Resolution - CEQA Resolution - Proiect Entitlements C. Adoption of a Resolution Acceotina the Neiahborhood Storm Drain Proiect No. 11 b Stoloski & Gonzalez, Inc., City Proiect No. 85130 Attachments: Staff Report Resolution Final Progress Payment Proiect Location Map 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Public Comment) a. Introduction of an Ordinance Amending Burlingame Municipal Code Section 18.07.110 to Modify Construction Hours and the Exception Process for Work Conducted Outside of Legal Hours Attachments: Staff Report Ordinance June 1, 2020 Meeting Minutes City of San Mateo Municipal Code Section 23.06.060 City of Burlingame Page 4 Printed on 101112020 City Council Meeting Agenda - Final October 5, 2020 b. Introduction of an Ordinance to Remove an Exemption for Collective Baraainin Agreements from the Burlingame Minimum Wage Ordinance Attachments: Staff Report Proposed Ordinance 10. STAFF REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS (Public Comment) a. Discussion of Amending Chapter 25.58 of the Burlingame Municipal Code to Allow Cannabis Distribution Businesses Attachments: Staff Report California Regulations for Delivery of Cannabis Products — Summary 11. COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND ACTIVITIES REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS Councilmembers report on committees and activities and make announcements. a. Councilmember Brownrigg's Committee Report Attachments: Committee Report 12. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS 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 to participate in this meeting, or who have a disability and wish to request alternative format for the agenda, meeting notice, or other writings that may be distributed at the meeting, should contact Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk, by 10:00 a.m. on Monday, October 5, 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, October 19, 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 via www.burlingame.org or by emailing the City Clerk at mhasselshearer@burlingame.org. If you are unable to obtain information via the City's website or through email, contact the City Clerk at (650) 558-7203. City of Burlingame Page 5 Printed on 101112020 Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 10/05/2020 CITY C BURLINGAME q $Anreo� u[b,e BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL Unapproved Minutes Regular Meeting on September 21, 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 Manito Velasco asked the City to consider installing signals or a flashing beacon at Beach Road and Airport Boulevard. (comment submitted via publiccomment(aburlin ag me.org). 1 Burlingame City Council September 21, 2020 Unapproved Minutes Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 10/05/2020 8. CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Beach asked her colleagues and members of the public if they would like to pull any item off the Consent Calendar. Councilmember Colson pulled 8c. Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran pulled 8d. Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran made a motion to adopt 8a and 8b; seconded by Councilmember Ortiz. The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote, 5-0. a. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR SEPTEMBER 8, 2020 City Clerk Hassel -Shearer requested Council approve of the City Council Meeting Minutes for September 8, 2020. b. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH WILSEY HAM IN THE AMOUNT OF $351,545 FOR DESIGN SERVICES FOR THE BURLINGAME PARK SUBDIVISION WATER MAIN REPLACEMENT PROJECT, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT DPW Murtuza requested Council adopt Resolution Number 119-2020. c. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION PROVIDING A TOLLING OF EXISTING DEVELOPMENT ENTITLEMENTS Councilmember Colson thanked staff for this item. She discussed the difficulties of renovations and construction during the pandemic. She explained that this item was to extend existing development entitlements for one year (ending September 21, 2021). She asked CDD Gardiner if it would make more sense to toll existing development entitlements through the end of 2021. She noted that if Council was asked to further extend development entitlements, the request would likely come in early August 2020. However, the Council would not be in session. CDD Gardiner stated that the tolling is based on the date of the specific application. He explained that for a year, the clock would stop on each application's timeframe, and then it would start back up. Mayor Beach opened the item up for public comment. No one spoke. Councilmember Colson made a motion to adopt Resolution Number 120-2020; seconded by Councilmember Brownrigg. The motion was approved unanimously by roll call vote, 5-0. 2 Burlingame City Council September 21, 2020 Unapproved Minutes Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 10/05/2020 d. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SEND A LETTER TO THE GOVERNOR REQUESTING CONSIDERATION OF ORGANIZED HOTEL MEETINGS OF UP TO 50 PERSONS Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran explained that the third paragraph of the letter states: "We believe this would be in keeping with the standards for places of worship, which are currently permitted to host gatherings for 25% of their maximum capacity, or 100 people (whichever is less)." She noted that San Mateo County is currently in the purple tier, and therefore these types of gatherings would not be allowed until the County enters the red tier. She suggested adding a sentence to cover the County's current position. City Manager Goldman replied in the affirmative. Mayor Beach opened the item up for public comment. San Mateo County/Silicon Valley Convention and Visitors Bureau President John Hutar thanked the Council for their support. He reviewed the safety measures that the hotels have been implementing. SFO Waterfront Marriott Hotel General Manager Lisa Kershner further reviewed the safety measures that have been implemented and the collaborations with different cleaning companies. Hyatt Regency SFO General Manager Kevin Kretsch thanked the Council for their support. San Mateo Labor Council representative Julie Lind thanked the Council for their help on this item. Mayor Beach closed public comment. Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran suggested attaching the safety and sanitation protocols to the letter. She explained that this way, the Governor would have a better understanding of the strict protocols in place. City Manager Goldman replied in the affirmative. Mayor Beach asked that the third paragraph of the letter be tweaked to include hotel workforce in the sentence that begins: "On behalf of the City's hoteliers." City Manager Goldman replied in the affirmative. Councilmember Ortiz made a motion to adopt Resolution Number 121-2020 with the amendments from Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran and Mayor Beach added to the letter; seconded by Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran. The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote, 5-0. 9. PUBLIC HEARING a. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER INTRODUCTION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING CODE (DONNELLY AVENUE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT) AND CONSIDERATION OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN (DONNELLY AVENUE AREA) TO ALLOW MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES ABOVE THE FIRST FLOOR ON PROPERTIES LOCATED NORTH OF DONNELLY Burlingame City Council September 21, 2020 Unapproved Minutes Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 10/05/2020 AVENUE THAT HAVE SOLE FRONTAGE ON DONELLY AVENUE; MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA); DESIGN REVIEW, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR BUILDING HEIGHT; CONDOMINIUM PERMIT; AND LOT COMBINATION FOR A PROPOSED FOURTEEN (14) UNIT MIXED USE COMMERCIAL/RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT TO BE LOCATED AT 1214-1220 DONNELLY AVENUE Planning Manager Hurin stated that currently, the Donnelly Avenue Commercial Zone ("DAC") does not permit residential uses of any type. He explained that the application before the Council is requesting that the Council consider amending the DAC District zoning regulations and the Downtown Specific Plan (Donnelly Avenue Area) to allow multifamily residential uses above the first floor only on properties within the DAC zone that lie north of Donnelly Avenue that have sole frontage on Donnelly Avenue. He stated that this would include the project site, two public parking lots, and one lot east of the project site. He noted that the rationale for the amendment is that the Donnelly Avenue -facing properties are adjacent to multi -family residential land uses to the rear on the north side of that block (facing Bellevue Avenue), and as such would be compatible with the adjacent residential uses. Planning Manager Hurin stated that multi -family residential uses are permitted by right in the Bayswater Mixed Use, Howard Mixed Use, and California Drive Auto Row Districts, and with a Conditional Use Permit in the Myrtle Mixed Use District. He explained that the proposed amendment is consistent with these other downtown districts with the exception that it allows multi -family residential use above the first floor of commercial. Planning Manager Hurin stated that related to the request for these amendments is an application for construction of a new three-story mixed -use commercial residential development at 1214-1220 Donnelly Avenue. He noted that the project consists of 4,700 square feet of commercial use on the ground floor and 14 residential condominium units on the second and third floors. He added that parking for 23 vehicles would be provided in an enclosed garage behind the commercial space. Planning Manager Hurin stated that applications required for the project include a Mitigated Negative Declaration, Design Review, Conditional Use Permit for height, Condominium Permit, and a Lot Combination. Planning Manager Hurin stated that on August 10, the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed project including the amendment to the Donnelly Avenue Commercial District and Downtown Specific Plan. He explained that the Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of the applicant's requests for a Mitigated Negative Declaration, Amendment to the Donnelly Avenue Commercial District and Downtown Specific Plan, Design Review, Conditional Use Permit, Condominium Permit, and Lot Combination. He stated that since the Council is the final decision -making body regarding the request to amend the Donnelly Avenue Commercial District and Downtown Specific Plan, the Planning Commission's action was in the form of a recommendation to the Council. 4 Burlingame City Council September 21, 2020 Unapproved Minutes Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 10/05/2020 Councilmember Brownrigg stated that he had no ex parte communications on this matter. He explained that he has kept track of this application and felt that it improved as a result of Commission and staff input. He asked about the rezoning and why the City didn't use this opportunity to expand the number of properties eligible for housing above the first floor. He stated that in particular, he was thinking of Lot C. Planning Manager Hurin stated that staff could review Councilmember Brownrigg's proposal for a future rezoning. City Attorney Kane added that the CEQA didn't anticipate a broader rezone. Therefore, the rezoning couldn't be expanded at this point. Councilmember Ortiz and Councilmember Colson stated that they had talked with the applicant. Mayor Beach asked the City Clerk to read the title of the ordinance. City Clerk Hassel -Shearer read the title of the ordinance. Councilmember Brownrigg made a motion to waive further reading and introduce the ordinance; seconded by Councilmember Ortiz. The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote, 5-0. Mayor Beach opened the public hearing. Mark Hudak stated that he was appearing on behalf of John Britton, the applicant. He explained that the project went to the Planning Commission three times in order to refine the design detail and obtain approval. He stated that the applicant needed an amendment to the zoning ordinance to allow residential use above the first floor. He explained that the amendment made sense because there is a residential use behind the project site. He stated that the project will provide a buffer between residential and commercial. He added that he believed this project would activate a dead zone in the Downtown Area. Gary Gee, the architect for the project, reviewed the overall design. He showed an image of the front of the proposed project and explained the location of the residential units versus the commercial frontage. Additionally, he reviewed the plans for each floor of the building. Mayor Beach closed the public hearing. Councilmember Colson stated that she was enthusiastic about the project. She stated that it was an opportunity to add housing to the city. She thanked Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran and Councilmember Brownrigg for working on the Downtown Specific Plan, which led to housing in the downtown area. Councilmember Ortiz echoed Councilmember Colson's comment. He noted that he has been following this project since the former structure burned down. He stated that the rezoning made sense and fits with the Downtown Specific Plan and the City's stated goal to increase housing. Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran agreed with Councilmember Colson and Councilmember Ortiz. She stated that zoning this location for housing is a smart decision. She noted that its location is close to public transportation, shopping, and restaurants. 5 Burlingame City Council September 21, 2020 Unapproved Minutes Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 10/05/2020 Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran stated that on the back elevation, the application has a metal guardrail with several power lines above it. She asked if there was any concern in regards to safety around those power lines. Additionally, she asked if the applicant considered putting the planter boxes closer to the railing. Planning Manager Hurin stated that the Planning Commission discussed in detail the location of the planter boxes. He explained that originally the applicant had the planter boxes along the rear edge. However, in the third iteration of the design, the designer moved the boxes closer to the building. He noted that the Planning Commission recommended that the planter boxes be switched back to the edge for the same reason that the Vice Mayor brought up. Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked if the applicant agreed to move the planter boxes. Planning Manager Hurin replied in the affirmative. Mr. Hudak stated that he believed the lines in the back of the property were telephone lines and that the power lines were grounded. Councilmember Brownrigg made a motion to approve the project and bring back the ordinance for adoption. Councilmember Brownrigg stated that if there is an ability to look at additional ornamentation on the tower that faces Donnelly, it should be done. The motion was seconded by Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran. Mayor Beach stated that the applicants and the Planning Commission did a great job with this project. She noted that this project pre -dated affordable housing fees. Councilmember Brownrigg asked if the City Attorney would like him to amend the motion to more specifically adopt the findings for why housing is in the City's interest. City Attorney Kane replied in the affirmative. Councilmember Brownrigg amended his motion to more specifically adopt the findings for the need for housing; seconded by Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran. The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote, 5-0. 10. STAFF REPORTS a. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION SUSPENDING CUP TIMELINES FOR 778 BURLWAY DURING EVALUATION OF AN ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT PLAN CDD Gardiner stated that staff is recommending a suspension of the timelines in the October 2016 Conditional Use Permit ("CUP") for 778 Burlway Road. He explained that the CUP initially anticipated the relocation of the existing rental car operation on the site to the then -planned SFO car rental facility. However, he stated that since that time, SFO abandoned the plans for the rental car facility. 6 Burlingame City Council September 21, 2020 Unapproved Minutes Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 10/05/2020 CDD Gardiner stated that the CUP now focuses on a mixed -use development where the rental car operations would remain on the site in a consolidated parking structure. He explained that the remainder of the site would be available for other uses. He stated that in order to work through these changes, Enterprise was granted two nine -month suspensions of the CUP timelines so that they could put together a revised development plan. CDD Gardiner stated that the City Council held a study session on March 16 to review the preliminary concept for the site. He noted that this was part of a larger discussion that involved community benefits and zoning for the Bayfront Commercial District. CDD Gardiner noted that on March 17, the County's shelter -in -place order began. As a result, Enterprise has requested a further six-month suspension of the CUP. Mayor Beach opened the item up for public comment. Enterprise representative Doug Hattori thanked the Council and City staff for the extension. Mayor Beach closed public comment. Councilmember Brownrigg spoke in favor of the extension. He noted that the City is heavily travel and tourist -centric and therefore well aware of the impacts of COVID-19 on the travel industry. He explained that as a member of the ad hoc committee on this issue, he wanted to keep the lines of communication open. Councilmember Ortiz stated that he has been reluctantly approving extensions on the site. However, he noted that this one made sense. Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran concurred with Councilmember Brownrigg about the importance of the ad hoc committee continuing to meet with Enterprise. Councilmember Colson noted that this is not an extension of the CUP as that is still ending in October 2023. She explained that this is an extension of the financial benchmarks in the tolling agreement. Mayor Beach concurred with her colleagues. Councilmember Colson made a motion to adopt Resolution Number 122; seconded by Councilmember Ortiz. The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote, 5-0. b. REVIEW OF THE FY 2019-20 UNAUDITED GENERAL FUND FINANCIAL SUMMARY; AND ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE OPERATING BUDGET TO REFLECT RECEIPT OF CORONAVIRUS RELIEF FUNDS (CRF) IN 2020-21 7 Burlingame City Council September 21, 2020 Unapproved Minutes Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 10/05/2020 Finance Director Augustine stated that it has been six months since the Bay Area shelter -in -place order went into effect. She noted that a solid re -opening is coming later than initially expected. She added that other issues such as social unrest, the wildfires, and the political environment added to the economic uncertainty. Finance Director Augustine showed a slide that displayed how COVID-19 impacts every aspect of the economic landscape including: • The labor market reached historic low levels and persistently low inflationary pressures • The consistent job growth since the recession came to a halt in March • Unemployment peaked in April and May • California continues to experience a higher unemployment rate statewide than the nation as a whole • August job gains in the Bay Area accounted for nearly a third of all jobs added in California Finance Director Augustine stated that the State has paused new unemployment claims until October 5 in order to implement an identification tool. She explained that once implemented, the tool would help to speed up the claims process. Finance Director Augustine stated that a great proportion of jobs lost was in personal services in the hospitality and restaurant sectors. Finance Director Augustine discussed how the Federal Reserve acted promptly to stabilize the market and support the recovery. She showed a group of bar charts that depicted the Federal Reserve's economic projections in June versus their September 16 projections. She noted that in general, the Federal Reserve is not as optimistic as they were in June. Finance Director Augustine showed a slide from PFM, the City's investment management firm, that shows that economists expect a very strong third quarter growth. She noted that the GDP is forecasted to grow by 26.2% in the third quarter, with moderate growth thereafter. Finance Director Augustine stated that the City's revenues in FY 2019-2020 were $1.4 million higher than expected. She added that the City experienced $4.5 million in budgetary savings. Therefore, instead of the General Fund balance decreasing by $11.8 million in the adjusted budget, it decreased by $6 million. She stated that this resulted in an unassigned fund balance of over $13.3 million versus the $8.3 million balance that was expected. Finance Director Augustine stated that the unaudited actuals for the City's top three revenues (TOT, property taxes, and sales and use tax) in FY 2019-20 were $58.3 million. She noted that this is 82.6% of the City's tax revenue and most of the City's General Fund revenue. Finance Director Augustine reviewed the City's property taxes. She stated that the City's property taxes are strong and that there isn't a lot of variance due to the fact that the roll was well established prior to the fiscal year. She stated that the projection is adjusted at Mid -Year for variables such as the ERAF refund. She noted that there was a lot of discussion about the ERAF refund and the in -lieu VLF payments at the FY 8 Burlingame City Council September 21, 2020 Unapproved Minutes Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 10/05/2020 2019-2020 Mid -Year Study Session. She stated that staff hopes that there won't be as much uncertainty around these payments once the State Controller's office issues guidance on ERAF calculations. Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked if she was correct that there has been a decrease in the non -basic aid school districts. Finance Director Augustine replied in the affirmative. Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked if this has an effect on the property taxes that go toward funding the VLF. Finance Director Augustine replied in the affirmative. Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked if staff knew how many districts are non -basic aid and how many more are going to fall off. Finance Director Augustine stated that the County has that information but she was unaware of the number. She added that she would get back to Council with this information. Finance Director Augustine reviewed TOT. She stated that the hotel sector remains the hardest hit sector due to the drop in business and leisure travel. However, she noted that employment in accommodation services increased by more than 15,000 jobs nationally in August. She explained that a full recovery for hotels is anticipated to take longer than other commercial real-estate classes. She stated that hotels located in drive to destinations are already recovering. She added that hotels that largely cater to business and international travelers, like Burlingame, will experience a slower recovery. She stated that CBRE expects that hotel demand will not fully recover until 2024. Finance Director Augustine showed a graph that depicted the average monthly amount of TOT that would be needed to generate the $14 million that is included in the adopted FY 2020-21 budget. She stated that staff only has the July revenues to include on the graph. She noted that July's TOT was approximately $450,000, which is well short of the needed average monthly TOT of $1.17 million. She stated that hotel recovery will depend largely on how confident travelers are in resuming their pre -pandemic travel schedules. Finance Director Augustine reviewed sales and use tax. She noted that she listened in on a presentation from the CDTFA and was surprised to find that statewide, the first quarter of 2020 was similar to the first quarter of 2019. However, she explained that statewide, the second quarter was down 15.2%. She stated that the expectation for the third quarter is for sales and use tax revenue to increase by 2% from the third quarter in 2019. Finance Director Augustine stated that online sales grew by over 50% in 2020. She stated that one of the presenters at the CDFTA meeting stated that consumer spending has held up surprisingly well throughout the pandemic. Finance Director Augustine stated that at the Mid -Year Study Session, staff was poised to recommend an increase in sales and use tax budget for FY 2019-20. She noted that the adopted budget was $14.8 million, but staff adjusted that down to $14.2 million in response to the emergency health order. Councilmember Brownrigg asked about auto sales. Finance Director Augustine replied that auto sales were down 17%. 9 Burlingame City Council September 21, 2020 Unapproved Minutes Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 10/05/2020 Finance Director Augustine reviewed General Fund expenditures. She noted that operating costs contributed $2.8 million to the $4.5 million budgetary savings. She added that salaries, wages, and benefits contributed $1.6 million. She stated that much of the City's casual workforce was furloughed in April and eventually terminated in May. Councilmember Colson discussed the Burlingame Aquatic Center. She stated SMUHSD recently passed a large capital bond. She explained that she thought it would be beneficial to revisit the capital structure of the pool given how well financed the District is for capital needs. She asked if $480,000 was what the City has to fund to keep the Aquatic Center afloat this fiscal year. Parks and Recreation Director Glomstad stated that the Aquatic Center line in the General Fund expenditure chart is pass -through money. She explained that the money the City owes the District would be displayed in CIP. She added that because the pool was closed, there would be no pass -through money coming from BAC to the District for operations. Councilmember Colson asked if she was correct that on the Aquatic Center's operating budget, the City would be backfilling to make sure the pool stays open. Parks and Recreation Director Glomstad replied in the affirmative. Councilmember Colson stated that it might be worthwhile to have a conversation with the District in terms of getting bathrooms reoriented to be both ADA and transgender compliant. City Manager Goldman replied in the affirmative. Councilmember Brownrigg endorsed Councilmember Colson's comments. He thanked the City Manager and Finance Director Augustine for their work. He noted that he is pleased to see that the City is still delivering quality services notwithstanding the challenges. Councilmember Brownrigg stated that unfortunately if the City needs to shed costs, the people who are released first are temporary and casual workers. He noted that it is a great shame that $1.2 million (wages for temporary and causal workers) is not in the City's budget to help put food on those individual's tables and provide services to residents. Finance Director Augustine continued discussing General Fund expenditures. She noted that Community Development shows a large budget variance of nearly $500,000. She stated that some of those budgetary expenditures are for economic development programs for small businesses. Finance Director Augustine discussed the General Fund summary. She stated that with FY2019-2020 unaudited revenues at about $70.6 million and expenditures at $70 million, there is a net operating surplus of about $615,000. She noted that after staff transfers funds to the Capital Investment Reserve, as called for in the budget, there will be a deficit of $5.8 million in the General Fund balance. She stated that the General Fund balance in FY 2019-20 is approximately $43 million. She noted that in comparison, the predicted General Fund balance for FY 2020-21 is $38 million. Finance Director Augustine discussed the Coronavirus Relief Funds. She stated that the State distributed the Federal CARES Act funds to local governments. The City received $371,871. She reviewed a chart that 10 Burlingame City Council September 21, 2020 Unapproved Minutes Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 10/05/2020 showed that the City's response exceeded the $371,871 amount. She noted that the City's response equated to approximately $1.15 million, which was spent on the following items: • Rental, food, and housing assistance • Burlingame CARES Debit Cards • Grants to small businesses • Restarting Business Assistance Program • BID Fees • Casual employees' paid leave • Unemployment costs • PPE for City facilities • Improvements in IT Finance Director Augustine noted that in terms of reimbursement, public safety personnel costs are in large part presumed to be engaged in relief activities. However, she noted that they are not included in the chart, nor were they a part of the City's filing with the State for qualified expenditures. She explained that this was because the City exceeded their allotted amount of Federal relief. Councilmember Colson stated that the parklet barriers are not included in the total number spent on COVID relief for the City. She added that while there had been a mixed response about the heavy barriers, recently a car took out half a parklet in San Francisco. Therefore, she was happy that the City implemented the safety elements they had. She asked how much the barriers cost. Finance Director Augustine stated that she would get back to Council with this information. Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran stated that she appreciated the chart that the Finance Director put together. She asked that once staff totals the costs from public works and public safety that they incorporate that information and put it in the eNews. Finance Director Augustine replied in the affirmative. Finance Director Augustine reviewed a Retiree Medical Benefit Funding chart. She explained that this chart is a reminder that the City continues to amortize and expense its retiree medical benefits through a trust. She noted that the trust has over $22.8 million as of June 30, 2020, with a one-year return of 3.49%. Additionally, she discussed the City's contributions to the Section 115 Trust, which is at approximately $12 million. Finance Director Augustine stated that there is $24.6 million remaining in the Capital Investment Reserve after funding the new Community Center project. Councilmember Colson asked about potential layoffs. She noted that she believed that every city on the Peninsula has had to make some adjustments and some layoffs. She stated that she wanted the City to be able to maintain its work force. She thanked City Manager Goldman for keeping the City's workforce lean in order to save funds and be able to maintain their numbers during the pandemic. City Manager Goldman stated that she has held employee town halls to answer staff questions during the pandemic. She noted that the number one question is whether there will be layoffs in the future. She explained that her promise has been to avoid them to the greatest extent possible. She noted that the City doesn't have extra people, and if 11 Burlingame City Council September 21, 2020 Unapproved Minutes Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 10/05/2020 layoffs happen it will force the City to cut programs and services that the community expects to have. She added that she has been through layoffs in prior jurisdictions, and the morale is very difficult for those that leave and for those that stay employed. Councilmember Colson thanked City Manager Goldman and HR Director Morrison for their excellent lines of communication with the City's unions and staff. She noted that she wanted to send a clear message that the Council will do their best to ensure that they maintain the current staffing level. Councilmember Colson asked about inflationary expectations. She stated that she would like to have a little bit more of an understanding of the inflationary outlook. Finance Director Augustine replied in the affirmative. Mayor Beach opened the item up for public comment. No one spoke. Councilmember Ortiz echoed Councilmember Colson's comments about staff and City Manager Goldman's ability to control costs. He noted that it is great to see that the news is less bad than expected. Councilmember Brownrigg made a motion to adopt Resolution Number 123; seconded by Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran. The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote, 5-0. Mayor Beach thanked staff and City Manager Goldman for their great stewardship. c. ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE ADDING CHAPTER 6.10, "MINIMUM WAGE" TO TITLE 6, "BUSINESS LICENSES AND REGULATIONS," OF THE BURLINGAME MUNICIPAL CODE Mayor Beach stated that Council had a three-hour robust and thoughtful conversation on this matter at the last City Council meeting. She explained that when there is a split vote on the first reading of an ordinance, there has been a request to put the item on the agenda as a Staff Report instead of on the Consent Calendar. Mayor Beach opened public comment. Laura Hinz spoke in favor of the ordinance in order to help individuals during the pandemic. She noted that $15 is not a livable wage. Julie Lind encouraged the City to adopt the minimum wage ordinance because of the impact it will have on the lowest wage workers. Melinda asked the Council to adopt the ordinance. She discussed the effects of COVID on low wage workers and stated that the ordinance would assist them. (comment submitted via publiccomment(d),burlin - a�g) 12 Burlingame City Council September 21, 2020 Unapproved Minutes Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 10/05/2020 Madeline Frechette discussed historical moments where workers united to demand better treatment and increased pay. She asked that the Council adopt the ordinance. (comment submitted via publiccommentgburlin am�e.org) San Mateo County Democratic Party Chair Nicole Fernandez stated that it is important that the people that work in the downtown area have the ability to take care of their families. She urged the Council to adopt the ordinance. Rayna voiced her support for the ordinance. California Restaurant Association representative Matt Sutton stated that COVID has severely injured restaurants and that the proposed ordinance would cause additional damage, which could lead to restaurant closures. Ray asked that the Council adopt the minimum wage ordinance. (comment submitted via publiccomment(kburlin ag me.org) Erin Chaser stated that as the cost of living continues to increase, many cities in San Mateo County have increased their minimum wage. She asked that the City do the same. Mike Dunham discussed the number of students that qualify for free and reduced lunches. He asked the City to adopt the ordinance. Mayor Beach closed public comment. Councilmember Ortiz stated that this wasn't a straight forward issue. He noted that he happened to fall on the side of approving the ordinance. He explained that it bothers him when he hears attacks on his colleagues who fall on the other side of the discussion. He stated that Council works hard on making the right decisions and balancing the needs of all residents. Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran thanked Councilmember Ortiz for his kind words. She explained that it isn't the increase in minimum wage that she is against, but the timing of the increase. She noted that the financials show that restaurants are losing 68.3% of taxable sales. Therefore, many of the restaurants are operating on a shoestring, and she worries that this could force restaurants to make hard staffing decisions. She stated that she would be inclined to approve the increase if it was delayed until June 2021. She discussed the issues with getting through the new State COVID tiers and how restaurants will lose money during the holidays, which is usually their big season. Councilmember Colson thanked Councilmember Ortiz for his words. She noted that any time you are talking about livelihoods, a robust conversation is healthy and important. She stated that the Council cares and wants to make sure businesses and employees are able to survive the winter when people won't want to dine outside. She explained that she would be able to support an increase if it is deferred until the spring or 13 Burlingame City Council September 21, 2020 Unapproved Minutes Agenda Item 8a Meeting Date: 10/05/2020 summer. She added that if the ordinance is approved, the City should help the restaurants by educating the community on why prices are likely to increase. Councilmember Colson stated that the thing that has bothered her the most is that the ordinance doesn't include a mandatory minimum wage for anyone that is unionized. She noted that staff would be bringing back an amendment if the ordinance is approved to ensure that union employees are not exempt. Councilmember Brownrigg stated that he appreciated Councilmember Ortiz's comments. He noted that it isn't easy to make decisions on matters of this nature. He stated that he believed that passing a minimum wage ordinance was important. He added that he appreciated the perspectives that Councilmember Colson and Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran brought to the discussion. Councilmember Brownrigg made a motion to adopt Ordinance 1982; seconded by Councilmember Ortiz. Mayor Beach commented on the motion and thanked the Council for the robust discussion. The motion passed by roll call vote, 3-2 (Councilmember Colson and Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran voted against.) 11. COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND ACTIVITIES REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS a. MAYOR BEACH'S COMMITTEE REPORT 12. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS There were no future agenda items. 13. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The agendas, packets, and meeting minutes for the Planning Commission, Traffic, Safety & Parking Commission, Beautification Commission, Parks and Recreation Commission, and Library Board of Trustees are available online at www.burlin ag me.org. 14. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Beach adjourned the meeting at 9:33 p.m. in memory of Annette Ayoob. Respectfully submitted, Meaghan Hassel -Shearer City Clerk 14 Burlingame City Council September 21, 2020 Unapproved Minutes BURS— INGAME AGENDA NO: 8b STAFF REPORT MEETING DATE: October 5, 2020 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: October 5, 2020 From: Kevin Gardiner, Community Development Director — (650) 558-7253 Ruben Hurin, Planning Manager — (650) 558-7256 Kathleen Kane, City Attorney — (650) 558-7204 Subject: Adoption of an Ordinance Amending the Zoning Code (Donnelly Avenue Commercial District) to Allow Multifamily Residential Uses Above the First Floor on Properties Located North of Donnelly Avenue that Have Sole Frontage on Donnelly Avenue and Adoption of Resolutions Amending the Downtown Specific Plan (Donnelly Avenue Area), Making Findings Relative to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and Approving Design Review, Conditional Use Permit for Building Height, Condominium Permit, and Lot Combination for a Proposed Fourteen (14) Unit Mixed Use Commercial/Residential Development to be Located at 1214-1220 Donnelly Avenue RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council take the following actions: 1. Adopt the following Ordinance: "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Burlingame Amending Title 25 (Zoning Code) - Section 25.36.020 of the Burlingame Municipal Code to Allow Multifamily Residential Uses Above the First Floor on Properties Located North of Donnelly Avenue that have Sole Frontage on Donnelly Avenue as a Permitted Use in the Donnelly Avenue Commercial (DAC) District". 2. Adopt the following Resolution: "Resolution of the City Council of the City of Burlingame Amending the City's General Plan/Downtown Specific Plan (Donnelly Avenue Area) to Allow Multifamily Residential Uses Above the First Floor on Properties Located North of Donnelly Avenue that have Sole Frontage on Donnelly Avenue". 3. Adopt the following Resolution: "Resolution of the City Council of the City of Burlingame Recommending a Finding that there is No Substantial Evidence that the Approval of a Request for Amendment to the Zoning Code (Donnelly Avenue Commercial District) and Downtown Specific Plan (Donnelly Avenue Area), Design Review, Conditional Use Permit, Condominium Permit and Lot Combination for a New Three -Story, 14-Unit Mixed Use Commercial/Residential Development at 1214-1220 Donnelly Avenue Will Have a Significant Effect on the Environment as Defined in the California Environmental Quality 1 1214-1220 Donnelly Avenue October 5, 2020 Act (CEQA), Pursuant to the Findings Stated and Mitigation Measures Outlined in Mitigated Negative Declaration ND-607-P". 4. Adopt the following Resolution: "Resolution of the City Council of the City of Burlingame Approving Applications for Design Review, Conditional Use Permit, Condominium Permit and Lot Combination for a New Three -Story, 14-Unit Mixed Use Commercial/Residential Development at 1214-1220 Donnelly Avenue (Assessor Parcel Nos: 029-151-150, 029- 151-160 And 029-151-170)". BACKGROUND The City Council introduced the proposed ordinance to amend Title 25 (Zoning Code) - Section 25.36.020 of the Burlingame Municipal Code to allow multifamily residential uses above the first floor on properties located north of Donnelly Avenue that have sole frontage on Donnelly Avenue as a permitted use in the Donnelly Avenue Commercial (DAC) District at its regular meeting of September 21, 2020. Further, the City Council conducted a public hearing to consider the proposed ordinance, as well as all applications related to a proposed 14-unit mixed use development to be constructed at 1214-1220 Donnelly Avenue (applications listed below). There were no changes to the proposed ordinance at introduction; therefore, the Council directed staff to bring the ordinance back for adoption on October 5, 2020. At the same time, resolutions memorializing all other aspects of the application package for the project at 1214-1220 Donnelly Avenue are presented to the Council for adoption to ensure that action on these items coincides with the Amendment to the Zoning Code. Application Elements: ■ Mitigated Negative Declaration: A determination that with mitigation measures there will be no significant environmental effects as a result of this project. ■ Amendment to the Donnelly Avenue Commercial (DAC) District and Downtown Specific Plan (Donnelly Avenue Area) to allow multifamily residential uses above the first floor on properties located on the north side of Donnelly Avenue that have sole frontage on Donnelly Avenue; ■ Design Review for construction of a new three-story, mixed use commercial/residential building with at -grade parking (C.S. 25.36.045, 25.57.010 (c)(1) and Chapter 5 of the Downtown Specific Plan); ■ Conditional Use Permit for building height (43'-10" to top of parapet and 54'-Y to top of stairway enclosure proposed, where a Conditional Use Permit is required for any building exceed 35-0"; 55-0" maximum building height allowed) (C.S. 25.36.055); ■ Condominium Permit for 14 residential condominium units (each unit to be privately owned) (C.S. 26.30.020); and ■ Lot Combination to combine three existing lots (1214, 1218 and 1220 Donnelly Avenue) into one lot. 2 1214-1220 Donnelly Avenue October 5, 2020 FISCAL IMPACT None Exhibits: • Ordinance — Amending Title 25 (Zoning Code) — Code Section 25.36.020 of the Burlingame Municipal Code, Donnelly Avenue Commercial (DAC) Zoning District ■ Resolution - Amendment to Downtown Specific Plan (Donnelly Avenue Area) ■ Resolution — CEQA ■ Resolution — Project Entitlements 3 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AMENDING TITLE 25 (ZONING CODE) — CODE SECTION 25.36.020 OF THE BURLINGAME MUNICIPAL CODE TO ALLOW MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES ABOVE THE FIRST FLOOR ON PROPERTIES LOCATED NORTH OF DONNELLY AVENUE THAT HAVE SOLE FRONTAGE ON DONNELLY AVENUE AS A PERMITTED USE IN THE DONNELLY AVENUE COMMERCIAL (DAC) DISTRICT The City Council of the City of Burlingame hereby ordains as follows: Division 1. Factual Background WHEREAS, on May 16, 2016, John Britton filed an application with the City of Burlingame Community Development Department — Planning Division requesting approval of the following requests: ■ Amendment to the Downtown Specific Plan (Donnelly Avenue Area) and Donnelly Avenue Commercial (DAC) District to allow multifamily residential uses above the first floor on properties located north of Donnelly Avenue that have sole frontage on Donnelly Avenue; ■ Design Review for construction of a new three-story, mixed use commercial/residential building with at -grade parking (C.S. 25.36.045, 25.57.010 (c)(1) and Chapter 5 of the Downtown Specific Plan); ■ Conditional Use Permit for building height (43'-10" to top of parapet and 54'-3" to top of stairway enclosure proposed, where a Conditional Use Permit is required for any building exceed 35'-0"; 55-0" maximum building height allowed) (C.S. 25.36.055); ■ Condominium Permit for 14 residential condominium units (each unit to be privately owned) (C.S. 26.30.020); and ■ Lot Combination to combine three existing lots (1214, 1218 and 1220 Donnelly Avenue) into one lot; and WHEREAS, the proposed zoning amendment would allow multifamily residential uses, including live/work, above the first floor in the Donnelly Avenue Commercial (DAC) District, limited to properties located north of Donnelly Avenue that have sole frontage on Donnelly Avenue; as reflected in the amendment to Title 25, Code Section 25.36.020; and WHEREAS, after considering all written and oral testimony presented at the August 10, 2020 public hearing, the Planning Commission voted 6-0-0-1 to recommend to the City Council adoption of an ordinance amending Title 25 (Zoning Code) - Section 25.36.020 of the Burlingame Municipal Code, to allow multifamily residential uses above the first floor on properties located north of Donnelly Avenue that have sole frontage on Donnelly Avenue; and ORDINANCE NO. WHEREAS, at its regular meeting of September 21, 2020 the Burlingame City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the Planning Commission's recommendation to amend Title 25 (Zoning Code) - Section 25.36.020 of the Burlingame Municipal Code, to allow multifamily residential uses above the first floor on properties located north of Donnelly Avenue that have sole frontage on Donnelly Avenue, and following conclusion of the public hearing and consideration of all written and oral testimony provided during the hearing, introduced the ordinance, by title only, waiving further reading. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Division 2. Burlingame Municipal Code Section 25.36.020 is amended and shall be enacted as follows: Chapter 25.36 DAC (DONNELLY AVENUE COMMERCIAL) DISTRICT REGULATIONS 25.36.020 Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted in the DAC District: (a) Retail uses which achieve contiguous, pedestrian -oriented, retail frontage such as drug, liquor, variety stores, paint and hardware, apparel, accessory, stationery, florists, household furnishings, and furniture; (b) Personal services, such as barber and beauty shops, photographic studios, shoe repair and laundry and dry cleaning services which do not include on -site processing; (c) Business services, such as printing services, mailing services and post office box services; (d) Grocery stores and markets; (e) Travel agencies; (f) Government agencies; (g) Offices, including health services and real estate, with parking as required by Chapter 25.70; (h) Financial institutions; (i) Hotels. 2 ORDINANCE NO. 0) Above the first floor only: (1) Multifamily residential uses, including live/work, on properties located north of Donnelly Avenue that have sole frontage on Donnelly Avenue, with an average maximum unit size of one thousand two hundred fifty (1,250) square feet. Average maximum unit size is defined as the maximum value allowed when averaging the square footage of gross floor areas of all residential units in a project. Division 3: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The Council declares that it would have adopted the Ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. Division 4: This Ordinance shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation in accordance with California Government Code Section 36933, published, and circulated in the City of Burlingame, and shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its final passage. Emily Beach, Mayor I, Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, certify that the foregoing ordinance was introduced at a public hearing at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 21st day of September, 2020, and adopted thereafter at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 5tn day of October, 2020, by the following vote: AYES: Councilmembers: NOES: Councilmembers: ABSENT: Councilmembers: Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk 3 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AMENDING THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN/DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN (DONNELLY AVENUE AREA) TO ALLOW MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES ABOVE THE FIRST FLOOR ON PROPERTIES LOCATED NORTH OF DONNELLY AVENUE THAT HAVE SOLE FRONTAGE ON DONNELLY AVENUE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME hereby finds as follows: WHEREAS, the change to allow residential uses above the first floor is consistent with Goal/Policy LU-6.1 of the Downtown Specific Plan which encourages allowing housing in the Howard Avenue area as well as on the periphery of Downtown; and WHEREAS, the change to allow residential uses above the first floor on properties located north of Donnelly Avenue that have sole frontage on Donnelly Avenue is consistent with the adjacent high density multifamily residential land use designation for the abutting properties to the north and will not alter the land use patterns in the area; and WHEREAS, the change to allow residential uses above the first floor on properties located north of Donnelly Avenue is consistent with Goal/Policy LU-3 of the Downtown Specific Plan in that it ensures a sensitive transition between the existing abutting residential areas and the downtown area; and WHEREAS, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.4 — Donnelly Avenue Area, of the Downtown Specific Plan has been amended to show that residential uses are allowed above the first floor on properties located north of Donnelly Avenue that have sole frontage on Donnelly Avenue, as shown on the attached Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, Table 3-1 of the Downtown Specific Plan has been amended to show that residential uses are allowed above the first floor on properties located north of Donnelly Avenue that have sole frontage on Donnelly Avenue, as shown on the attached Exhibit B; and WHEREAS, following a duly noticed public hearing on September 21, 2020, the City Council considered the Planning Commission's August 10, 2020 recommendation in support of amending the City's General Plan/Downtown Specific Plan to allow multifamily residential uses above the first floor on properties located north of Donnelly Avenue that have sole frontage on Donnelly Avenue. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby adopts the amendments to Chapter 3 — Land Use of the Burlingame Downtown Specific Plan as described herein. The Community Development Director shall have the discretion to make any other edits in the Downtown Specific Plan if they are deemed necessary in order to be consistent with the amendments to Chapter 3 as described herein. RESOLUTION NO. Emily Beach, Mayor I, Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 5t" day of October, 2020 by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: 4 Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk 3.0 Land Use 3.3 PLANNING AREAS 3.3.3 CHAPIN AVENUE AREA The Chapin Avenue area consists of properties on either side of Downtown Burlingame is divided into a series of Planning Areas, as identified Chapin Avenue and is bounded by Primrose Road to its east and in the Planning Areas Map (Figure 3-2). Upon implementation of the plan, each El Camino Real to its west. Chapin Avenue is characterized by a planning area or district will provide for a different mix of uses and intensities concentration of financial and real estate offices. Office uses are as described below. To allow finer grain distinctions, each area is further divided allowed on the ground floor of the Chapin Avenue area. into blocks which are numbered on the map. 33.1 BURLINGAME AVENUE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT 3.3.4 DONNELLY AVENUE AREA The Donnelly Avenue area consists of properties on either side The Burlingame Avenue area is the commercial and retail heart of of Donnelly Avenue between Primrose Road and Lorton Avenue. Downtown Burlingame. Burlingame Avenue features a mixture of Ground floor retail use is allowed but not required. Existing residential restaurants, national retail stores, and many locally based retailers. The uses may remain and be improved, but new residential uses are not eastern end of Burlingame Avenue area near the train station has a allowed, except that new residential uses may be allowed above the concentration of restaurants and is active during both day and evening first floor and only on Properties located north of Donnelly Avenue hours, while the western end towards El Camino Real provides more that have sole frontage on Donnelly Avenue. retail and is less active. Ground floor retail or personal service use is required in the Burlingame Avenue area. Office uses are allowed on the upper levels in commercial areas. Existing residential uses on upper floors may remain and be improved, but there should not be new residential uses within the Burlingame Avenue Commercial District. 3.3.2 HOWARD AVENUE MIXED USE DISTRICT The Howard Avenue Area is the area to the south of Burlingame Avenue and consists of a mix of uses, including retail and office along Howard Avenue, and multifamily residential uses between Howard and Peninsula Avenues. Burlingame Avenue and Howard Avenue together form the `Burlingame commercial" area. Ground floor retail use is encouraged, and housing is allowed on the upper levels above commercial uses. The interceding side streets --Lorton Avenue, Park Road, Primrose Road and Highland Avenue --will act as connector streets with the commercial uses along those streets strengthening the relationship between Burlingame Avenue and Howard Avenue. 3.3.5 CALIFORNIA DRIVE MIXED USE DISTRICT The Auto Row area is the area along California Drive between Burlingame and Peninsula Avenues. Automobile -related uses dominate in this area. Auto showrooms, hotel or retail uses are permitted on the ground floor, and housing, offices or hotel uses can be allowed on upper floors. Non -auto uses should be carefully considered to ensure compatibility with the area's traditional focus on automobile businesses; retail, personal and business services, and hotels require a conditional use permit, as do commercial uses greater than 5,000 square feet. 3.3.6 NORTH CALIFORNIA DRIVE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT The North California Drive Commercial District is the area along the west side of California Drive north of Bellevue Avenue to Oak Grove Avenue. Service Commercial uses dominate in this area. Retail or hotel uses are permitted on the ground floor whereas offices or hotel uses can be allowed on upper floors. 3.0 Land Use 3.4 LAND USE DESIGNATIONS Table 3-1 summarizes the uses allowed for each planning area. TABLE 3-1— PLANNING AREA LAND USES Land Uses Burlingame Howard Chapin Donnelly California North Myrtle Anita R-3 R-4 Base R-4 Bayswater Avenue Avenue Avenue Avenue Drive/ Auto California Road Mixed Road District District Incentive Mixed Use Commercial Mixed Use Area Area Row Drive Use Area Area District Area District Commercial District 1 Retail Downtown Retail P P P P C P P Corner Store Retail C C C Personal Services P P P P C P P P Business Services P P P P C P P P 2 Residential P/ U P' P/U C P P P P P 3 Civic, Quasi -Civic, P P P P P P P P P P P P Cultural 4 Office P/U P/U P P P/U P P C 5 Service Commercial P P P P C for non - auto > 6,000 sq ft 6 Lodging/Hotel P P P P C P 7 Live/Work P/U P P C P P = Permitted C = Permitted with Conditions /G = Ground F1oorOnly /U = Upper Floors Only ' Residential use permitted only on upper floors and only on properties located north of Donnelly Avenue that have sole frontage on Donnelly Avenue. RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME RECOMMENDING A FINDING THAT THERE IS NO SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE THAT THE APPROVAL OF A REQUEST FOR AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING CODE (DONNELLY AVENUE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT) AND DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN (DONNELLY AVENUE AREA), DESIGN REVIEW, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, CONDOMINIUM PERMIT AND LOT COMBINATION FOR A NEW THREE-STORY, 14-UNIT MIXED USE COMMERCIAL/RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AT 1214-1220 DONNELLY AVENUE WILL HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT AS DEFINED IN THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO THE FINDINGS STATED AND MITIGATION MEASURES OUTLINED IN MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION ND-607-P THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME hereby finds as follows: Section 1. On the basis of the Initial Study and the documents submitted and reviewed, and comments received and addressed by this council, it is hereby found that there is no substantial evidence that the project set forth above will have a significant effect on the environment, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration, per Mitigated Negative Declaration ND-607-P, is hereby approved. Section 2. It is further directed that a certified copy of this resolution be recorded in the official records of the County of San Mateo. Emily Beach, Mayor I, Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 51" day of October, 2020 by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME APPROVING APPLICATIONS FOR DESIGN REVIEW, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, CONDOMINIUM PERMIT AND LOT COMBINATION FOR A NEW THREE-STORY, 14-UNIT MIXED USE COMMERCIAL/RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AT 1214-1220 DONNELLY AVENUE (ASSESSOR PARCEL NOS: 029-151-150, 029-151-160 AND 029-151-170) THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME hereby finds as follows: WHEREAS, on May 16, 2016, John Britton filed an application with the City of Burlingame Community Development Department — Planning Division requesting approval of the following requests: ■ Amendment to the Downtown Specific Plan (Donnelly Avenue Area) and Donnelly Avenue Commercial (DAC) District to allow residential use above the first floor on properties located north of Donnelly Avenue that have sole frontage on Donnelly Avenue; ■ Design Review for construction of a new three-story, mixed use commercial/residential building with at -grade parking (C.S. 25.36.045, 25.57.010 (c)(1) and Chapter 5 of the Downtown Specific Plan); ■ Conditional Use Permit for building height (43'-10" to top of parapet and 54'-3" to top of stairway enclosure proposed, where a Conditional Use Permit is required for any building exceed 35-0"; 55'-0" maximum building height allowed) (C.S. 25.36.055); ■ Condominium Permit for 14 residential condominium units (each unit to be privately owned) (C.S. 26.30.020); and ■ Lot Merger to combine three existing lots (1214, 1218 and 1220 Donnelly Avenue) into one lot; and WHEREAS, on October 9, 2018, the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing (environmental scoping session and design review study meeting) to review a 14- unit mixed use commercial/residential development and to identify subjects to be analyzed in the project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND). At that time direction was provided to the applicant regarding issues to be addressed in the project IS/MND; and WHEREAS, on October 28, 2019, the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing (design review study meeting) to review changes made to the project in response to the Planning Commission's direction and comments previously provided to the applicant; and RESOLUTION NO. WHEREAS, an IS/MND was prepared to analyze project impacts; said IS/MND was circulated for public review and comment commencing on May 15, 2020 and concluding on June 15, 2020; and WHEREAS, on August 10, 2020, the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing and voted 6-0-0-1 to recommend approval of the applicant's requests for Design Review, Conditional Use Permit, Condominium Permit, and Lot Combination; and WHEREAS, on September 21, 2020, the City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider all project entitlements, at which time it reviewed and considered the staff report and all other written materials and oral testimony presented at said hearing; and WHEREAS, as a result of the oral and written testimony presented at the September 21, 2020 public hearing, as well as the analysis in the staff report, the City Council hereby makes the following findings relative to each aspect of the project application: Design Review Findings: ■ That the project is consistent with the diverse architectural styles of existing residential and commercial buildings in the area characterized by simple massing, an articulated fagade with windows, entry doors and awnings on the ground floor, and articulated walls and fenestration on the upper floors, including covered balconies, substantial recesses and varied architectural features throughout the building; the project mediates between existing buildings in the area ranging from one to three stories in height and a six -story office building at the corner of Donnelly Avenue and Primrose Road, is well articulated, and embraces the street and the pedestrian realm; ■ That the architectural style is compatible with adjacent neighborhoods and the City as a whole, and that human scale is provided at the street level by incorporating several entry elements and canvas awnings along the front of the building, and on the upper levels individual balconies provide residential scale and character; ■ That parking for the project does not dominate the street frontage because the garage has been located behind the ground floor building fagade with one driveway access to the garage measuring 18 feet in width, or 12.2% of the frontage along Primrose Road; ■ That the building is characterized by a single contemporary architectural style and its design fits the site and is compatible with the surrounding development by exhibiting thoughtful massing, character and pedestrian scale, and successfully creates a good transition between the existing commercial neighborhood and the residential neighborhood to the north with well -articulated massing and a variety of architectural elements, textures and colors; 4 RESOLUTION NO. ■ That the building is compatible with the mass, bulk, scale, and existing materials of existing development in that the exterior building materials include cement plaster siding (smooth steel troweled finish), Hardie "Reveal" panel system and trim (along blind wall on east elevation), smooth lap siding and exposed concrete or concrete block at the blind walls, decorative metal guardrails, decorative foam relief panels, and metal clad wood windows with simulated true divided lites on the upper floor residential units; aluminum window sashes, painted wood entry doors, canvas awnings and a painted metal garage door on the ground floor; and varying architectural elements, including Spanish barrel clay roof tiles with foam eave brackets/corbels, a wood trellis along the front fagade, and articulated parapets with ornamental metal trim along the upper portion of the building; and ■ That site features such as low stucco walls and entry gates, a variety of landscaping and hardscape along the front of the building, and pedestrian circulation will enrich the existing opportunities of the commercial neighborhood. Conditional Use Permit Findings ■ That the proposed three-story building, measuring 43'-10" to the top of the building parapet and 54'-Y to the top of the stairway enclosure, at the proposed location, will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare or convenience, since it is well articulated with substantial recesses and will be compatible with buildings in the area that are one to six stories in height; ■ That the proposed mixed use commercial/residential use will be located and conducted in a manner in accord with the Burlingame general plan and the purposes of this title; and ■ That reasonable conditions are proposed to assure operation of the use in a manner compatible with the aesthetics, mass, bulk and character of existing and potential uses on adjoining properties in the general vicinity. Condominium Permit Findings: ■ That the 14-unit mixed use commercial/residential development is compatible with the surrounding development by exhibiting thoughtful massing, character and pedestrian scale, and successfully creates a good transition between the existing commercial buildings in the neighborhood and the residential neighborhood to the north, and will not have a significant impact on public health, safety and general welfare; ■ That based on the environmental analysis, it was determined that the proposed project would have no adverse environmental impacts (with mitigations for utilities) on schools, parks, utilities, neighborhoods, streets, traffic, parking and other community facilities and resources; and 3 RESOLUTION NO. ■ That this application incudes a request for Amendment to the Downtown Specific Plan (Donnelly Avenue Area) to allow residential use above the first floor. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME THAT the applications for Design Review, Conditional Use Permit, Condominium Permit and Lot Combination are hereby granted, subject to the following conditions: 1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Division date stamped July 9, 2020, sheets A0.0 through A4.3, C-1 through C-3 and L1.1 through L2.2; 2. that prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of the project, the project construction plans shall be modified to include a cover sheet listing all conditions of approval adopted by the Planning Commission, or City Council on appeal; which shall remain a part of all sets of approved plans throughout the construction process. Compliance with all conditions of approval is required; the conditions of approval shall not be modified or changed without the approval of the Planning Commission, or City Council on appeal; 3. that prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall apply for a tentative and final condominium map with the Public Works, Engineering Division for processing in conformance with the Subdivision Map Act; 4. that any changes to the size or envelope of the building, which would include expanding the footprint or floor area of the structure, replacing or relocating windows or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to Planning Commission review (FYI or amendment to be determined by Planning staff); 5. that the final inspection shall be completed and a certificate of occupancy issued before the close of escrow on the sale of each unit; 6. that the developer shall provide to the initial purchaser of each unit and to the board of directors of the condominium association, an owner purchaser manual which shall contain the name and address of all contractors who performed work on the project, copies of all warranties or guarantees of appliances and fixtures and the estimated life expectancy of all depreciable component parts of the property, including but not limited to the roof, painting, common area carpets, drapes and furniture; 7. that a Klaus TrendVario 4200 parking lift system, or an equivalent parking lift system, shall be installed, with the following conditions: a. the parking lifts shall be properly illuminated to provide safety for easy loading and unloading, while not causing excessive glare. rd RESOLUTION NO. b. signage shall be installed explaining the proper use of the lifts and emergency contact information for lift maintenance or problems. C. the final design of the parking lifts shall be subject to the review and approval of the Community Development Director. 8. that if the City determines that the structure interferes with City communications in the City, the property owner shall permit public safety communications equipment and a wireless access point for City communications to be located on the structure in a location to be agreed upon by the City and the property owner. The applicant shall provide an electrical supply source for use by the equipment. The applicant shall permit authorized representatives of the City to gain access to the equipment location for purposes of installation, maintenance, adjustment, and repair upon reasonable notice to the property owner or owner's successor in interest. This access and location agreement shall be recorded in terms that convey the intent and meaning of this condition; 9. that all construction shall abide by the construction hours established in the Municipal Code; 10. that the project applicant and its construction contractor(s) shall develop a construction management plan for review and approval by the City of Burlingame. The plan must include at least the following items and requirements to reduce, to the maximum extent feasible, traffic and parking congestion during construction: a. A construction parking plan to provide worker parking off site and generally off neighborhood streets, with shuttles or other transportation as needed to transport workers to the site; b. A set of comprehensive traffic control measures, including scheduling of major truck trips and deliveries to avoid peak traffic hours, detour signs if required, lane closure procedures, signs, cones for drivers, and designated construction access routes; C. Identification of haul routes for movement of construction vehicles that would minimize impacts on motor vehicular, bicycle and pedestrian traffic, circulation and safety, and specifically to minimize impacts to the greatest extent possible on streets in the project area; d. Notification procedures for adjacent property owners and public safety personnel regarding when major deliveries, detours, and lane closures would occur; e. Provisions for monitoring surface streets used for haul routes so that any damage and debris attributable to the haul trucks can be identified and corrected by the project applicant; and f. Designation of a readily available contact person for construction activities who would be responsible for responding to any local complaints regarding traffic or 5 RESOLUTION NO. parking. This coordinator would determine the cause of the complaint and, where necessary, would implement reasonable measures to correct the problem. 11. that the applicant shall submit an erosion and sedimentation control plan describing BMPs (Best Management Practices) to be used to prevent soil, dirt and debris from entering the storm drain system; the plan shall include a site plan showing the property lines, existing and proposed topography and slope; areas to be disturbed, locations of cut/fill and soil storage/disposal areas; areas with existing vegetation to be protected; existing and proposed drainage patterns and structures; watercourse or sensitive areas on -site or immediately downstream of a project; and designated construction access routes, staging areas and washout areas; 12. that the applicant shall submit a Construction Noise Control Plan. This plan would include measures such as: ■ Using smaller equipment with lower horsepower or reducing the hourly utilization rate of equipment used on the site to reduce noise levels at 50 feet to the allowable level. ■ Locating construction equipment as far as feasible from noise -sensitive uses. ■ Requiring that all construction equipment powered by gasoline or diesel engines have sound control devices that are at least as effective as those originally provided by the manufacturer and that all equipment be operated and maintained to minimize noise generation. ■ Prohibiting gasoline or diesel engines from having unmuffled exhaust systems. ■ Not idling inactive construction equipment for prolonged periods (i.e., more than 5 minutes). ■ Constructing a solid plywood barrier around the construction site and adjacent to operational businesses, residences, or other noise -sensitive land uses. ■ Using temporary noise control blanket barriers. ■ Monitoring the effectiveness of noise attenuation measures by taking noise measurements. ■ Using "quiet" gasoline -powered compressors or electrically powered compressors and electric rather than gasoline- or diesel -powered forklifts for small lifting. 13. that construction access routes shall be limited in order to prevent the tracking of dirt onto the public right-of-way, clean off -site paved areas and sidewalks using dry sweeping methods; 14. that during construction, the applicant shall provide fencing (with a fabric screen or mesh) around the project site to ensure that all construction equipment, materials and debris is kept on site; 15. that storage of construction materials and equipment on the street or in the public right-of- way shall be prohibited; X RESOLUTION NO. 16. that if construction is done during the wet season (October 1 through April 30), that prior to October 1 the developer shall implement a winterization program to minimize the potential for erosion and polluted runoff by inspecting, maintaining and cleaning all soil erosion and sediment control prior to, during, and immediately after each storm even; stabilizing disturbed soils throughout temporary or permanent seeding, mulching matting, or tarping; rocking unpaved vehicle access to limit dispersion of mud onto public right-of- way; covering/tarping stored construction materials, fuels and other chemicals; 17. that trash enclosures and dumpster areas shall be covered and protected from roof and surface drainage and that if water cannot be diverted from these areas, a self-contained drainage system shall be provided that discharges to an interceptor; 18. that this project shall comply with the state -mandated water conservation program, and a complete Irrigation Water Management and Conservation Plan together with complete landscape and irrigation plans shall be provided at the time of building permit application; 19. that all site catch basins and drainage inlets flowing to the bay shall be stenciled. All catch basins shall be protected during construction to prevent debris from entering; 20. that this proposal shall comply with all the requirements of the Tree Protection and Reforestation Ordinance adopted by the City of Burlingame in 1993 and enforced by the Parks Department; complete landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted at the time of building permit application and the street trees will be protected during construction as required by the City Arborist; 21. that the applicant shall coordinate with the City of Burlingame Parks Division regarding the planting of five (5) street trees along Donnelly Avenue; 22. that the project shall comply with the Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance which requires affected demolition, new construction and alteration projects to submit a Waste Reduction plan and meet recycling requirements; any partial or full demolition of a structure, interior or exterior, shall require a demolition permit; 23. that demolition or removal of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on the site shall not occur until a building permit has been issued and such site work shall be required to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District; 24. that the applicant shall comply with Ordinance 1503, the City of Burlingame Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance; 25. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes, as amended by the City of Burlingame; 26. that this project shall comply with Ordinance No. 1477, Exterior Illumination Ordinance; 7 RESOLUTION NO. The following conditions shall be met during the Building Inspection process prior to the inspections noted in each condition: 27. that prior to scheduling the foundation inspection a licensed surveyor shall locate the property corners, set the building envelope; 28. that prior to underfloor frame inspection the surveyor shall certify the first floor elevation of the new structure(s) and the various surveys shall be accepted by the Building Division; 29. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection, the project architect, engineer or other licensed professional shall provide architectural certification that the architectural details such as window locations and bays are built as shown on the approved plans; if there is no licensed professional involved in the project, the property owner or contractor shall provide the certification under penalty of perjury. Certifications shall be submitted to the Building Division; 30. that prior to final inspection, Planning Division staff will inspect and note compliance of the architectural details (trim materials, window type, etc.) to verify that the project has been built according to the approved Planning and Building plans; 31. that the maximum elevation to the top roof parapet shall not exceed elevation 143.90', as measured from the average elevation at the top of the curb along Donnelly Avenue (100.34') for a maximum height not to exceed 43'-10" to the top of the parapet; the garage finished floor elevation shall be elevation 100.34'; the top of each floor and final roof ridge shall be surveyed by a licensed surveyor who shall provide certification of that height to the Building Division; Should any framing exceed the stated elevation at any point it shall be removed or adjusted so that the final height of the structure with roof shall not exceed the maximum height shown on the approved plans; The following conditions of approval are from Downtown Specific Plan: 32. the project sponsor shall implement all appropriate control measures from the most currently adopted air quality plan at the time of project construction; 33. the project sponsor shall implement the following Greenhouse Gas reduction measures during construction activities: a. Alternative -Fueled (e.g., biodiesel, electric) construction vehicles/equipment shall make up at least 15 percent of the fleet. b. Use at least 10 percent local building materials. C. Recycle at least 50 percent of construction waste or demolition materials. 34. the project sponsor shall provide adequate secure bicycle parking in the plan area at a minimum ratio of 1 bicycle spot for every 20 vehicle spots; 8 RESOLUTION NO. 35. the condominium management shall post and update information on alternate modes of transportation for the area (i.e. bus/shuttle schedules and stop locations, maps); 36. the project sponsor shall incorporate commercial energy efficiency measures such that energy efficiency is increased to 15% beyond 2008 title 24 standards for electricity and natural gas; 37. the project sponsor shall incorporate recycling measures and incentives such that a solid waste diversion rate of 75% is achieved upon occupation of each phase of plan development; 38. the project sponsor shall incorporate residential water efficiency measures such that water consumption is decreased by a minimum of 10 percent over current standard water demand factors; 39. that construction shall avoid the March 15 through August 31 avian nesting period to the extent feasible, as determined by staff. If it is not feasible to avoid the nesting period, a survey for nesting birds shall be conducted by a qualified wildlife biologist no earlier than 7 days prior to construction. The area surveyed shall include all clearing/construction areas, as well as areas within 250 ft. of the boundaries of these areas, or as otherwise determined by the biologist. In the event that an active nest is discovered, clearing/construction shall be postponed within 250 ft. of the nest, until the young have fledged (left the nest), the nest is vacated, and there is no evidence of second nesting attempts; 40. that for projects within the Plan Area that require excavation, a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (and Phase II sampling, where appropriate) would be required. If the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment determines that remediation is required, the project sponsor would be required to implement all remediation and abatement work in accordance with the requirements of the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), or other jurisdictional agency; 41. the following practices shall be incorporated into the construction documents to be implemented by the project contractor. a. Maximize the physical separation between noise generators and noise receptors. Such separation includes, but is not limited to, the following measures: - Use heavy-duty mufflers for stationary equipment and barriers around particularly noisy areas of the site or around the entire site; - Use shields, impervious fences, or other physical sound barriers to inhibit transmission of noise to sensitive receptors; - Locate stationary equipment to minimize noise impacts on the community; and - Minimize backing movements of equipment. 9 RESOLUTION NO. b. Use quiet construction equipment whenever possible. C. Impact equipment (e.g., jack hammers and pavement breakers) shall be hydraulically or electrically powered wherever possible to avoid noise associated with compressed air exhaust from pneumatically -powered tools. Compressed air exhaust silencers shall be used on other equipment. Other quieter procedures, such as drilling rather than using impact equipment, shall be used whenever feasible. 42. the project sponsor shall incorporate the following practice into the construction documents to be implemented by construction contractors: The project sponsor shall require that loaded trucks and other vibration -generating equipment avoid areas of the project site that are located near existing residential uses to the maximum extent compatible with project construction goals; 43. that if the project increases sewer flows to the sanitary sewer system, the project sponsor shall coordinate with the City Engineer to determine if improvements to public sanitary sewer infrastructure are needed. If improvements are needed, the following shall apply: ■ that prior to issuance of a building permit, the project sponsor shall develop a plan to facilitate sanitary sewer improvements. The plan shall include a schedule for implementing sanitary sewer upgrades that would occur within the development site and/or contribution of a fair share fee toward those improvements, as determined by the City Engineer. The plan shall be reviewed by the City Engineer. 44. that prior to issuance of a building permit, the development plans shall be reviewed by the Fire Marshal to determine if fire flow requirements would be met given the requirements of the proposed project, and the size of the existing water main(s). If the Fire Marshal determines improvements are needed for fire protection services, then the following shall apply: • that prior to issuance of a building permit the project sponsor shall be required to provide a plan to supply adequate water supply for fire suppression to the project site, consistent with the Fire Marshal's requirements. The plan shall be reviewed by the Fire Marshal. The project sponsor shall be responsible for implementation of the plan including installation of new water mains, and/or incorporation of fire water storage tanks and booster pumps into the building design, or other measures as determined by the Fire Marshal. 45. that if evidence of an archeological site or other suspected cultural resource as defined by CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, including darkened soil representing past human activity ("midden"), that could conceal material remains (e.g., worked stone, worked bone, fired clay vessels, faunal bone, hearths, storage pits, or burials) is discovered during construction -related earth -moving activities, all ground -disturbing activity within 100 feet of the resources shall be halted and the City of Burlingame shall be notified. The project sponsor shall hire a qualified archaeologist to conduct a field investigation. The City of Burlingame shall consult with the archeologist to assess the significance of the find. 10 RESOLUTION NO. Impacts to any significant resources shall be mitigated to a less -than significant level through data recovery or other methods determined adequate by a qualified archaeologist and that are consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Archeological Documentation. Any identified cultural resources shall be recorded on the appropriate DPR 523 (A-J) form and filed with the NWIC; 46. that should a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature be identified at the project construction site during any phase of construction, the project manager shall cease all construction activities at the site of the discovery and immediately notify the City of Burlingame. The project sponsor shall retain a qualified paleontologist to provide an evaluation of the find and to prescribe mitigation measures to reduce impacts to a less -than -significant level. Work may proceed on other parts of the project site while mitigation for paleontological resources or geologic features is carried out. The project sponsor shall be responsible for implementing any additional mitigation measures prescribed by the paleontologist and approved by the City; and 47. that if human remains are discovered at any project construction site during any phase of construction, all ground -disturbing activity within 100 feet of the resources shall be halted and the City of Burlingame and the County coroner shall be notified immediately, according to Section 5097.98 of the State Public Resources Code and Section 7050.5 of California's Health and Safety Code. If the remains are determined by the County coroner to be Native American, the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) shall be notified within 24 hours, and the guidelines of the NAHC shall be adhered to in the treatment and disposition of the remains. The project sponsor shall also retain a professional archaeologist with Native American burial experience to conduct a field investigation of the specific site and consult with the Most Likely Descendant, if any, identified by the NAHC. As necessary, the archaeologist may provide professional assistance to the Most Likely Descendant, including the excavation and removal of the human remains. The City of Burlingame shall be responsible for approval of recommended mitigation as it deems appropriate, taking account of the provisions of State law, as set forth in CEQA Guidelines section 15064.5(e) and Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The project sponsor shall implement approved mitigation, to be verified by the City of Burlingame, before the resumption of ground -disturbing activities within 100 feet of where the remains were discovered. Mitigation Measures from Initial Study Aesthetics 48. The project developer shall install low -profile, low -intensity lighting directed downward to minimize light and glare. Exterior lighting shall be low mounted, downward casting, and shielded. In general, the light footprint shall not extend beyond the periphery the property. Implementation of exterior lighting fixtures on all buildings shall also comply with the standard California Building Code (Title 24, Building Energy Efficiency Standards) to reduce the lateral spreading of light to surrounding uses, consistent with City Municipal Code 18.16.030 that requires that all new exterior lighting for residential developments be 11 RESOLUTION NO. designed and located so that the cone of light and/or glare from the light element is kept entirely on the property or below the top of any fence, edge or wall. In addition, lighting fixtures would not be located more than nine feet above adjacent grade or required landing; walls or portions of walls would not be floodlit; and only shielded light fixtures which focus light downward would be used, except for illuminated street numbers required by the fire department. Air Quality 49. During any construction period ground disturbance, the applicant shall ensure that the project contractor implement measures to control dust and exhaust. Implementation of the measures recommended by BAAQMD and listed below would reduce the air quality impacts associated with grading and new construction to a less -than -significant level. Additional measures are identified to reduce construction equipment exhaust emissions. The contractor shall implement the following BMPs that are required of all projects: a. All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day. b. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off -site shall be covered. C. All visible mud or dirt track -out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited. d. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 miles per hour (mph). e. All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used. f. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations (CCRj). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points. g. All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer's specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified mechanic and determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation. h. Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the Lead Agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District's phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. 12 RESOLUTION NO. 50. The project shall develop a plan demonstrating that the off -road equipment used on site to construct the project would achieve a fleet -wide average 20- percent reduction in DPM exhaust emissions or greater. One feasible plan to achieve this reduction would include the following: a. All diesel -powered off -road equipment, larger than 25 horsepower, operating on the site for more than two days continuously shall, at a minimum, meet U.S. EPA particulate matter emissions standards for Tier 3 engines that include CARB- certified Level 3 Diesel Particulate Filters (DPF)12 or equivalent. Alternatively, equipment that meets U. S. EPA Tier 4 standards for particulate matter or the use of equipment that includes electric or alternatively -fueled equipment (i.e., non- diesel) would meet this requirement. Biological Resources 51. Activities related to the project, including, but not limited to, vegetation removal, ground disturbance, and construction and demolition shall occur outside of the bird breeding season (February 1 through August 31) if feasible. If construction will commence during the breeding season, then a pre -construction nesting bird survey shall be conducted no more than 7 days prior to initiation of ground disturbance and vegetation removal. The nesting bird pre -construction survey shall be conducted within the disturbance footprint and a 300-foot buffer for raptors and 150-foot buffer for passerines where access can be authorized. The survey shall be conducted by a biologist familiar with the identification of avian species known to occur in San Mateo County. If nests are found, an avoidance buffer (which is dependent upon the species, the proposed work activity, and existing disturbances associated with land uses outside of the site) shall be determined and demarcated by the biologist with bright orange construction fencing, flagging, construction lathe, or other means to mark the boundary. All construction personnel shall be notified as to the existence of the buffer zone and to avoid entering the buffer zone during the nesting season. No ground disturbing activities shall occur within this buffer until the avian biologist has confirmed that breeding/nesting is completed, and the young have fledged the nest. Encroachment into the buffer shall occur only at the discretion of the qualified biologist. Cultural Resources 52. In the event Native American or other archaeological resources are encountered during construction, work shall be halted within 100 feet of the discovered materials and workers shall avoid altering the materials and their context until a qualified professional archaeologist has evaluated the situation and provided appropriate recommendations. If an archaeological site is encountered in any stage of development, a qualified archeologist will be consulted to determine whether the resource qualifies as an historical resource or a unique archaeological resource. In the event that it does qualify, the archaeologist will prepare a research design and archaeological data recovery plan to be 13 RESOLUTION NO. implemented prior to or during site construction. The archaeologist shall also prepare a written report of the finding, file it with the appropriate agency, and arrange for curation of recovered materials. 53. In the event that human remains are discovered during project construction, there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains. The county coroner shall be informed to evaluate the nature of the remains. If the remains are determined to be of Native American origin, the Lead Agency shall work with the Native American Heritage Commission and the applicant to develop an agreement for treating or disposing of the human remains. Geology and Soils 54. Project design and construction shall adhere to Title 18, Chapter 18.28 of the City Municipal Code, and demonstrate compliance with all design standards applicable to the California Building Code Zone 4 would ensure maximum practicable protection available to users of the buildings and associated infrastructure. 55. Foundations of the project will be reinforced to tolerate differential soil movement. The project may be supported on a reinforced concrete mat foundation bearing on a properly prepared and compacted soil subgrade and a non -expansive fill section. Alternately, the project may be supported on a conventional spread footing foundation bearing on stiff native soils. Implementation of a reinforced foundation would reduce the potential for damage caused by liquefaction. 56. Project design and construction, including excavation activities, shall comply with Chapter 33 of the CBC, which specifies the safety requirement to be fulfilled for site work. This would include prevention of subsidence and pavement or foundations caused by dewatering. 57. The applicant shall prepare a monitoring program to determine the effects of construction on nearby improvements, including the monitoring of cracking and vertical movement of adjacent structures, and nearby streets, sidewalks, utilities, and other improvements. As necessary, inclinometers or other instrumentation shall be installed as part of the shoring system to closely monitor lateral movement. The program shall include a pre -construction survey including photographs and installation of monitoring points for existing site improvements. 58. A discovery of a paleontological specimen during any phase of the project shall result in a work stoppage in the vicinity of the find until it can be evaluated by a professional paleontologist. Should loss or damage be detected, additional protective measures or further action (e.g., resource removal), as determined by a professional paleontologist, shall be implemented to mitigate the impact. 14 RESOLUTION NO. Hazards and Hazardous Materials 59. The contractor shall comply with Title 8, California Code of Regulations/Occupational Safety and Health Administration requirements that cover construction work where an employee may be exposed to lead. This includes the proper removal and disposal of peeling paint, and appropriate sampling of painted building surfaces for lead prior to disturbance of the paint and disposal of the paint or painted materials. 60. The applicant shall contract a Certified Asbestos Consultant to conduct an asbestos survey prior to disturbing potential asbestos containing building materials and following the Consultant's recommendations for proper handling and disposal. 61. Workers handling demolition and renovation activities at the project site will be trained in the safe handling and disposal of any containments with which they are handling or disposing of on the project site. Noise 62. Prior to the issuance of building permits, mechanical equipment shall be selected and designed to reduce impacts on surrounding uses to meet the City's 60 dBA daytime and 50 dBA nighttime requirements at the property lines of surrounding noise sensitive uses. Section 5.2.5.8 of the City of Burlingame DSP includes a provision for rooftop equipment: Mixed -use buildings with a residential component should exhibit rooflines and architectural character consistent with the Downtown commercial character. Rooftop equipment shall be concealed from view and/or integrated within the architecture of the building and screened for noise. A qualified acoustical consultant shall be retained to review mechanical noise as these systems are selected to determine specific noise reduction measures necessary to reduce noise to comply with the City's noise level requirements. Noise reduction measures could include, but are not limited to, selection of equipment that emits low noise levels and/or installation of noise barriers, such as enclosures and parapet walls, to block the line -of - sight between the noise source and the nearest receptors. 63. As required under Section 9.9.20 of the City of Burlingame DSP, loaded truck and other vibration -generating equipment shall avoid areas of the project site that are located near existing residential uses to the maximum extent possible to still meet construction goals. Additionally, the following measures would be implemented during construction: a. Operating equipment on the construction site shall be placed as far as possible from vibration -sensitive receptors. b. Smaller equipment shall be used to the extent feasible to minimize vibration levels below the limits. 15 RESOLUTION NO. C. Use of vibratory rollers, tampers, and impact tools near sensitive areas shall be avoided to the extent feasible. d. Neighbors within 500 feet of the construction site shall be notified of the construction schedule and that there could be noticeable vibration levels during project construction activities. e. If heavy construction is proposed within 12 feet of commercial structures and/or 18 feet of residential structures, a construction vibration -monitoring plan shall be implemented prior to, during, and after vibration generating construction activities located within these setbacks. All plan tasks shall be undertaken under the direction of a licensed Professional Structural Engineer in the State of California and be in accordance with industry accepted standard methods. The construction vibration monitoring plan should be implemented to include the following tasks: f. The contractor shall conduct a photo survey, elevation survey, and crack monitoring survey for structures located within 25 feet of construction. Surveys shall be performed prior to and after completion of vibration generating construction activities located within 25 feet of the structure. The surveys shall include internal and external crack monitoring in the structure, settlement, and distress, and shall document the condition of the foundation, walls and other structural elements in the interior and exterior of the structure. g. The contractor shall conduct a post -survey on the structure where either monitoring has indicated high levels or complaints of damage. Make appropriate repairs in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards where damage has occurred as a result of construction activities. h. The contractor shall designate a person responsible for registering and investigating claims of excessive vibration. The contact information of such person shall be clearly posted on the construction site. The results of any vibration monitoring shall be summarized and submitted in a report shortly after substantial completion of each phase identified in the project schedule. The report will include a description of measurement methods, equipment used, calibration certificates, and graphics as required to clearly identify vibration - monitoring locations. An explanation of all events that exceeded vibration limits will be included together with proper documentation supporting any such claims. Utilities and Service Systems 64. The project sponsor shall coordinate with the City Engineer to improve the public sanitary sewer infrastructure. Prior to issuance of a building permit, project sponsors shall develop a plan to facilitate sanitary sewer improvements. The plan shall include a schedule for 16 RESOLUTION NO. implementing sanitary sewer upgrades that would occur within the development site and/or contribution of a fair share fee toward those improvements, as determined by the City Engineer. The plan shall be reviewed by the City Engineer. 65. Prior to issuance of a building permit, development plans for projects proposed in the Plan Area, shall be reviewed by the Fire Marshal to determine if fire flow requirements would be met given the requirements of the proposed project, and the size of the existing water main(s). If the Fire Marshal determines improvements are needed for fire protection services, the project sponsor shall be required to provide a plan to supply adequate water supply for fire suppression to the project site, consistent with the Fire Marshal's requirements. The plan shall be reviewed by the Fire Marshal. The project sponsor shall be responsible for implementation of the plan including installation of new water mains, and/or incorporation of fire water storage tanks and booster pumps into the building design, or other measures as determined by the Fire Marshal. Emily Beach, Mayor I, Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 5t" day of October, 2020 by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: 17 Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk To: Date: From: STAFF REPORT Honorable Mayor and City Council October 5, 2020 AGENDA NO: 8c MEETING DATE: October 5, 2020 Syed Murtuza, Director of Public Works — (650) 558-7230 Subject: Adoption of a Resolution Accepting the Neighborhood Storm Drain Project No. 11 by Stoloski & Gonzalez, Inc., City Project No. 85130 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution accepting the Neighborhood Storm Drain Project No. 11 by Stoloski & Gonzalez, Inc. in the amount of $682,062. BACKGROUND On September 16, 2019, the City Council awarded the Neighborhood Storm Drain Project No. 11 to Stoloski & Gonzalez, Inc. in the amount of $620,465. There are 18 project sites at 15 various locations in the city as identified in the attached Project Location Map. The project consisted of installation of approximately 478 linear feet of storm drain pipelines using various methods, 814 linear feet of curb and gutter replacement, 212 linear feet of new valley gutter, four storm drain manhole installations, 11 storm drain inlet replacements/upgrades, and various concrete work on sidewalks and driveways. These infrastructure improvements will help alleviate localized flooding and improve the overall drainage in the affected neighborhoods. DISCUSSION The project construction has been satisfactorily completed in compliance with the plans and specifications. The final construction cost of $682,062 is $61,597 above the awarded contract amount but within the Council -approved 15% construction contingency. The increase in construction cost was due to the following: • Realignment of storm drain pipeline and installation of an additional manhole at Ray Drive and Balboa Way due to unforeseen underground utilities conflict; • Unforeseen sanitary sewer pipeline improvements due to deteriorating condition discovered during site investigation and construction; • Various upgrades for additional capacity and better maintenance access; and • Increases/adjustments in the actual bid quantities used in the field. 1 Resolution Accepting Neighborhood Storm Drain Project No. 11 October 5, 2020 FISCAL IMPACT The following are the estimated final project expenditures. Construction Construction Management and Inspection Administration and Testing Total $682,062 $95,300 $52,638 $830,000 There are adequate funds available in the Capital Improvements budget to cover the estimated final costs. Exhibits: • Resolution • Final Progress Payment • Project Location Map 2 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME ACCEPTING IMPROVEMENTS — NEIGHBORHOOD STORM DRAIN PROJECT NO. 11 BY STOLOSKI & GONZALEZ, INC. CITY PROJECT NO. 85130 RESOLVED by the CITY COUNCIL of the City of Burlingame, California, which finds, orders and determines as follows: 1. The Director of Public Works has certified the work done by Stoloski & Gonzalez, Inc., under the terms of its contract with the City dated September 16, 2019, has been completed in accordance with the plans and specifications approved by the City Council and to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. 2. Said work is particularly described as City Project No. 85130. 3. The work is accepted. 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 5th day of October, 2020, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk Stoloeki end Gonzalez, Inc. ADDRESS: 727 Main Street Half Mee Bay, CA 94019 TELEPHONE: (650) 926-7119 FAA (650) 926-9055 rrrrrr r..... rrrrrrrrr «rrru.rrrrrr urre urrrrr ITEM :rao r rrrrreuara..IM DESCRIPTION oaarer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 11 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 Mobilization Traffic Control .Sheeting, Shoring, and Bracing Construction Staking, and Survey .Site Investigation and Potholing Storm Water Pollution Prevention Remove and Replace SDI Grate, 30' %26' Remove and Replan. SDI Grate, 40' 224' A.ve and Replace Frame A Grate Install Apron Remove existing CB and install type GO :bubble-uo inlet Remove and replaCe/install SDI type GO Assave and replace SDI model CP1618 Remove and replace SOMH Remove and replace sidewalk Remove and replace curb ramp Remove and replace concrete driveway section Install 6- vertical curb R®ove and replace curb and 1.51 gutter Remove and replace curb and 4.5- gutter Remove and replace curb and 5' gutter RanOva and replace Curb through drain Install AC pavemnet Install gravel Install 2-ft valley gutter SS- PVC slip line 12- PVC SO Is- PVC SO 24- PVC ED Remove/Abandon ED Remove SDM Install 12- striping Paint wed curb with Stencil Repaint address on curb Relocate street sign S. PVC Se, subtotal CITY OF BURLINGAME FINAL PAYMENT Neighborhood Storm Drain Project All r ......roar r CITY PROJECT NO. B5130 rrrrrr r rrr«r r uru rr...... =I BID UNIT BID CITY TO $ PRICE CITY FIZZ AMOUNT DATE PAID 556,000 1 IS $56.000.00 100% : 100-00% $4,500 1 IS $4,500.00 100% : 100.00% $39,000 1 IS $39,000.00 100% ; 100-00% $1,800 1 IS $1,600.00 100% : 100-00% $3,000 1 IS $3,000.00 100% : 100-00% $1,800 1 IS $1,800.00 100% : 100.00% $900 : 18 EA $16,200.00 18.00 : 100.00% $950 1 EA $950.00 100% 100.00% $1,500 8 SA $12,000.00 5.00 62.50% $20 360 SF $7,200.00 117.00 32.50% $7,000 : 2 EA $14,000.00 2.00 : 100.00% $8.500 5 EA $42,500.00 6.00 120.00% $3,000 3 SA $9,000.00 3.00 100.00% $14,000 3 Be $42,000.00 2.785 59.52% $20 540 SF $10,800.00 1.358.00 251.48% - $4,000 2 EA $8,000.00 6.00 300.00% $23 540 SF $12,420.00 418.75 77.55% $70 : 50 EA $3.500-00 50.00 : 100.00% $78 985 IF $16,830.00 631.00 64.06% $106 : 65 IF $6,890.00 49.00 75.38% $110 90 LF $9,900.00 134.00 140.89% $225 4 EA $900.00 3.00 75.00% $355 85 TOE $30,175.00 137.41 161.66% $625 11 M $6,875.00 11.00 100.00% $90 : 200 LF $19,000.00 212.00 106.00% $375 90 IF $33,750.00 90.00 100.00% $425 45 EA $19,125.00 48.00 106.67% $515 150 EA $86,250-00 148.00 98.67% $450 : 30 LF $13,500.00 24.00 80.00% $10 210 IF $14,700.00 e2.00 39.05% $3,000 2 FA $6,000.00 0.00% $20 : 210 EA $4,200.00 8.00 3.81% $20 85 IF $1,700.00 44.00 51-76% $400 2 EA $800.00 0.00 0.00% $1,200 1 EA $1.200.00 1.00 100.00% $250 : 20 LF $5,000.00 18.00 : 90.00% _._ $620,465.00 DATE: Se,CB:PI x-16-20 FOR THE MONTH OF: PURCHASE ORDER # 8,02_06 r rrr..o AMOUNT or r eo sea a... PREVIOUS . onus........o i AMOUNT TO DATE r.o.. .............. PAID i THIS INS. r.o.oaa........ $56,000.00 $56,000.00 $0.00 $4,500.00 $4,500.00 $0.00 $39,000.00 $39,000.00 $0.00 $1,800. 00 $l'SOO-00 $0.00 $3,000.00 $3, DOC.00 $0.a0 $1,800.00 $1,600.00 $0-00 $16.200.00 $16, 200.00 $0.00 $950.00 $95 D.0D $0.00 $7,500-00 $7, SOD. 00 $D.00 $2,340.00 $2,340.00 $0.00 $14,000.00 $14.000.00 $0.00 $51,000-00 $51,000.00 $0.00 $9,000.00 $9,000.00 $0.00 $38,990.00 $38,990.00 $0.00 $27,160.00 $27,160.00 $0.00 $24,000.00 $24,000.00 $0-00 $9,631.25 $9,631.25 $0.00 $3,500.00 $3,500.00 $0.00 $49,218.00 $49,218.00 $0.00 $5,194.00 $5,194.00 $0.00 $14,740.00 $14,740.00 $0.00 $675.00 : $675.00 $0.00 $48,7M S5 $48,780.55 $0.00 $6,875.00 $6,675.00 $0.00 $19,080.00 $19,080.00 $0.00 $33,750.00 $33,750.00 $0.00 $20,400-00 $20,400.00 $0.00 $85,100.00 $85,100.00 $0.00 $10,800.00 $10,800.00 $0.00 $5,740.00 $5,740.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $O.DO $160.00 $160.00 $0.00 $880.00 $880-00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0-00 $1,200.00 $1,200.00 $0.00 $4,500.00 $4,500.00 $0.00 $617,463.90 $617,463-80 $0.00 S V, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTORVWROJECTSVCBD :602-66 07-31-M REVISED.vt, (SHEET - PAYMENT NO, 1( 9I164020, 12 U PM PAGE 1 OF 2 Stoloeki ADD Conzalez, Inc. CITY OP BURLINOAMB DATE: September-16-20 ADDRESS: 727 Ma1n Street FINAL PAYMENT! FOR THE MONTH OF: Half Moon RAF, CA 94019 Neignurrhoo6 Storm Drain Project #11 PURCHASE ORDER N 802-06 TELEPHONE: (650) 726-9119 FAA (650) 726-9055 a+uu ++u rruurrrrr a errrrrar uauara+aaau r+uuu r rrr erxu«a CITY PROTECT No. 8513-0 a uua+ +rare r rrr«a«aura+ +u.a..... ru«+u+ ITEN UNIT BID UNIT BID OFF TO r $ ere ear ua« AMOUNT a ura+rrrr err PREVIOUS r rrr a aa+++u rreee AMOUNT M ITEM ➢ESCRIPTION rur« a rrr ua«u..... ueruraa aauuuuuuru PRICE r eee carer QTY SIZE AMOUNT a aura r nee r eeruruauu DATE r ru uer PAID TO DATE PAID THIS PMT. Change Orders r coon+ r reree eau. a..... ee •eau uueeeee CCo1.1 Additional tort to inrtall 24x24 inlet (me used) $1,200.00 1 LS 0% CCO3.2 Cost to inrtall concrete liner In manhole $11,781.50 1 IS $11,787.50 . 100.00% 100.00% $11,787-50 $11,]8].50 $0.00 CCO1.3 Credit to R& RSO MH ($14,000.00) 1 LS ($14,000.00) 100-00% 100.00% ($14,000.00) ($14,000.00) $0.00 CCOIA )nrtall liners in lff(320LF)&18"SD)150LF)Ilr&ding intollatlon oflamphale $64,357.32 1 IS $64,357.32 100-00% 100.00% $64,357.32 $64.357.32 $0.00 CC0IA Credit for 18"pipe inrtall ($58,075.00) 1 IS ($58,075.00) 10D.00% 100.00% ($58,075.00) ($58,075.00) $0.00 CCO2.1 Daily Extra Work Reports $24,401.78 1 IS $24,401.]8 100.00% 100.00% $24.401.78 $24,401.78 $0.00 CCO2.2 Con to modify inlets to SOL $29,426.20 4 31, $]1356.55 4.00 $29.426.20 $29,426.20 $0.00 CCO2.3 Upgrade$Ducture from 12"to 24" $5,500-00 1 IS $5,500.00 100.006 g5,500.00 55,500.00 $0.00 CCO2.4 : Innall SS cleanouts frame and Cover i $1,200.00 2 BA $600-00 2.00 51,200.0o S1.2o0.00 S0.00 re er r eu.u....eeu.. are a..reru.er..uu.. r urn eer er a uu.. • •.....• erueuuu.++ eeue •urn rrr. ....rrr..rreu $64,597.80 r uu+eurer $0.00 • ...... ........... DATE SUBTOT1. ....... r $620,465-00 rrrrrr+r rr*a+++++ $682.061.60 $682,061.60 $0.00 PREPARED BY: 9-16-2020 LESS RETENTION (54) •ee ++++++ $0.00 ($34,103.08) 534,103.08 CNECKED BY: SUETC/fAL 1PITHOUT ➢BDUCTIONS rrrrrr+r : ++++++++r - 5682,061.60 569],958.52 $34,103.08 APPROVED BY AMOUNT DUE FROM CONTRACTOR re ere :none - $0.00 $0.00 CITY ENGINEER: reer . ar..... eeerereer ...rear. eeere APPROVED BY TOTAL T S PERIO[rere e... aara ; u..+re ru mere $682,061.60 $697,958.52 $39.303.03 CONSULTANT: ...... ..r :........ S'.W PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTORY:PROJECT ARMOGS02-0607-31-20 REVISED.xe. (SHEET- PAYMENT NO. t) W16OP20, 12:52 PM PAGE OF NEIGHBORHOOD STORM DRAIN PROJECT NO. 11 f, I u y m SM FRMCISCO BAY ITY OF BURLINGAME v To Date: From STAFF REPORT Honorable Mayor and City Council October 5, 2020 /_CelA\IDLE\16�ln MEETING DATE: October 5, 2020 Kevin Gardiner, Community Development Director — (650) 558-7253 Scott Spansail, Asst. City Attorney — (650) 558-7204 Subject: Introduction of an Ordinance Amending Burlingame Municipal Code Section 18.07.110 to Modify Construction Hours and the Exception Process for Work Conducted Outside of Leaal Hours RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt amendments to Section 18.07.110 of the Burlingame Municipal Code to modify construction hours and exceptions to these hours within the city. In order to do so, the City Council should: A. Receive the staff report and ask any questions of staff. B. Request that the City Clerk read the title of the proposed ordinance. C. By motion, waive further reading and introduce the ordinance. D. Conduct a public hearing. E. Following the public hearing, discuss the ordinance and determine whether to bring it back for second reading and adoption. If the Council is in favor of the ordinance, direct the City Clerk to publish a summary of the ordinance at least five days before its proposed adoption. BACKGROUND At its September 6, 2016 meeting, the City Council introduced an ordinance that proposed restricting construction hours. At the time, the City's construction hours were from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. on weekdays, 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. on Saturdays, and 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. on Sundays and holidays. The new ordinance revised the start time to 8 a.m. on weekdays and prohibited construction on Sundays and holidays. The City Council adopted Ordinance No. 1930 on September 19, 2016, by a unanimous vote. During their June 1 st, 2020 meeting, the Council discussed the possibility of amending these hours to accommodate some particular needs of construction applicants. The amendments below reflect the changes discussed at that time. DISCUSSION Since 2016, applications for construction projects have continued to grow within the city. Developers regularly ask for exceptions to construction hours, often for unavoidable reasons that 1 Construction Hours and Exceptions October 5, 2020 have to do with building and site integrity. Scenarios requiring exceptions that exist in almost every large project include: • extended hours for large concrete pours, where interruptions would lead to issues with site and/or building integrity; • complying with Caltrans timelines; • environmental time lines set by federal, state, and local authorities; and • other environmental matters that cannot be controlled or mitigated by the developer. Currently, Section 18.07.110 of the Burlingame Municipal Code only allows exceptions "in the case of urgent necessity in the interest of public health and safety." While the common exceptions listed above may qualify under this criteria, this qualification is not readily apparent from the Code's language. Staff believes that by amending the Code and specifically recognizing these common exceptions, developers will be able to pursue projects in Burlingame without fear of delays that could conflict with time -sensitive construction operations. Such exceptions would be reviewed by the Chief Building Official or their designee, who could impose project -specific conditions that help mitigate any potential impacts on surrounding properties. Staff also believes that amending the construction hours in certain zones to allow an additional hour during weekday mornings will eliminate the need for exceptions in many instances. The Bayfront Commercial (BFC), Innovative Industrial (1/1), and Rollins Road Mixed Use (RRMU) are all zones where staff believes hours could be amended with only minor disruption to residents. Developers have informed staff that a majority of their construction crews commute from areas outside the Peninsula, and that the City's current construction hours require them to drive during peak traffic times. Allowing a 7 a.m. weekday start time in the above commercial zones may at least partially alleviate that issue. At the June 1st meeting, Councilmembers Brownrigg and Ortiz noted that they were not in favor of loud construction activity occurring during that first hour but expressed support for using this hour for staging of personnel and equipment. The proposed Ordinance attempts to balance this concern for excessive construction noise with the builders' need for an earlier start time by prohibiting inherently loud construction activities (such as jack -hammering and pile -driving) during this first hour. Further, it requires that all work during this hour be approved by the Building Official, who will balance the need for additional time with the needs of the community. Finally, staff believes that allowing work to take place outside of construction hours within fully enclosed buildings would have little impact to residents and would allow builders to finish projects in a more expedient manner. As a reference, the City of San Mateo exempts such work in its Municipal Code so long as the work does not exceed the exterior ambient noise level (as measured ten feet from the property line). While this would not eliminate issues arising from construction workers commuting to Burlingame at earlier or later hours, it would allow construction projects to be completed more quickly. FISCAL IMPACT There is no impact on the General Fund. 2 Construction Hours and Exceptions October 5, 2020 Exhibits: • Ordinance 1930 • Minutes from June 1, 2020 Council meeting • City of San Mateo Municipal Code Section 23.06.060 3 CITY OF BURLINGAME ORDINANCE NO. 2020- AMENDING SECTION 18.07.110 OF THE BURLINGAME MUNICIPAL CODE WHEREAS, on September 19, 2016, City Council adopted by unanimous vote Ordinance No. 1930, which changed the City's construction hours from seven (7) a.m. to (7) seven p.m. on weekdays, nine (9) a.m. to six (6) p.m. on Saturdays, and ten (10) a.m. to six (6) p.m. on Sundays and holidays to an eight (8) a.m. start time on weekdays and no construction allowed on Sundays and holidays; WHEREAS, since this time, applications for construction projects have continued to grow within the City, with developers regularly asking for exceptions to construction hours, often with justifications relating to site integrity which are almost universally granted; WHEREAS, the below amendments will address many of these common exceptions, and will encourage developers to pursue projects in Burlingame without fear of delay that could conflict with time sensitive construction operations; WHEREAS, amending construction hours in certain industrial zones within the City may greatly reduce the need for exceptions, while only adding minor disruption to residents; WHEREAS, in all instances, the Chief Building Official or his/her designee will have the ability to regulate the work being permitted to occur outside ordinary construction hours, which will ensure that the proposed construction activity will not result in undue disruption; WHEREAS, allowing work to occur outside construction hours within fully enclosed buildings would have little impact to residents but would allow builders to finish projects in a more expedient manner; WHEREAS, the below amendments will cumulatively allow developers to finish projects in a more expedient manner, while providing the City with the power to monitor their activity and require project -specific conditions that would mitigate any potential impacts to the surrounding properties. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Section 18.07.110 of Chapter 18.07 (Uniform Administrative Code) of the Burlingame Municipal Code is hereby amended as follows (strikethro gh text is deleted, underlined text is added): 4 new first sentence is The following paragraphs are added to Section 305.1 to read as follows: No person shall erect (including excavation and grading), demolish, alter or repair any building or structure other than between the hours of eight a.m. and seven p.m. on weekdays, and nine a.m. and six p.m. on Saturdays, eXGept OR the race of urge- t nenessity in the iRtores+ of p bliG health and safety except in circumstances where continuing work beyond legal hours is necessary to building or site integrity, including (but not limited to) large concrete pours, environmental considerations, state or federal requirements, or in cases where it is in the interest of public health and safety, and then only with written approval from the building official, which appFeval shall be granted for -a area of less than 40,000 square feet; and wheR reasonable to aGGOrnplish the peFied net te eXGeed three (3) days fer projeGtS inGluding StrUGtures with a gross fl demelition, alteration or repair , riot to eXGeed twenty (20) days for oroieots ir,ol,,d'H4 r stFUGtWes with a gross floor area of nn 000 s ore feet reater �zr�curcv-w�mvgrvvv��vvi arca��, v v v�E}�lurc�ce�-6�� ca ccr no longer than necessary to complete the portion of the project for which the exception was granted. No person shall erect (including excavation and grading), demolish, alter or repair any building or structure on Sundays or on holidays, except in the circumstances described earlier in this paragraph, and then only with written approval from the building approval, which shall be granted for no longer than necessary to complete the portion of the project for which the exception was granted. For the purpose of this section, holidays are the days set forth in Section 13.04.100 of this code. The restrictions stated in this section shall not apply to work that does not require a permit under any applicable law or regulation, or to work that takes place inside a completely enclosed building and does not exceed the exterior ambient noise level Der the BMC 25.58.050. In the Bayfront Commercial (BFC), Innovative Industrial (1/1) and Rollins Road Mixed Use (RRMU) zones only, the building official or his/her designee may grant authority for the work described in this section to begin at seven a.m. instead of eight a.m. on weekdays. This additional hour shall only be used to stage equipment and/or personnel, or to perform construction activity that does not create excessive construction noise. Activities such as jack -hammering and pile -driving, as well as other inherently loud construction activities, are deemed activities that create excessive construction noise for purposes of this paragraph. Any application to work during this hour will describe in detail the construction activities that will be performed, and must first be approved in writing by the building official or his/her designee, who will balance the need for additional construction time with the needs of the surrounding community. This approval may be revoked at any time. SECTION 2. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The Council declares that it would have adopted the Ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. SECTION 3. CEQA. The City Council finds and determines that this Ordinance is not a "project" within the meaning of section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines because it has no potential for resulting in physical change in the environment, either directly or ultimately. SECTION 4: This Ordinance shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation in accordance with California Government Code Section 36933, published, and circulated in the City of Burlingame, and shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its final passage. EMILY BEACH, Mayor I, Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, certify that the foregoing ordinance was introduced at a public hearing at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 5th day of October, 2020, and adopted thereafter at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the day of 2020, by the following vote: AYES: Councilmembers: NOES: Councilmembers: ABSENT: Councilmembers: Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk CITY O BURLINGAME $AarEo � xE � BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL Approved Minutes Regular Meeting on June 1, 2020 1. CALL TO ORDER A duly noticed meeting of the Burlingame City Council was held on the above date online at 7:02 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG The pledge of allegiance was led by DPW Murtuza. 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 a. PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING JUNE 2020 AS PRIDE MONTH Mayor Beach read the proclamation that recognized June 2020 as Pride Month. Councilmember Brownrigg thanked then -Mayor Ortiz for adopting a proclamation on tolerance in the community. He voiced his support for recognizing June as Pride Month. San Mateo County LGBTQ Commissioner Guiliana Garcia thanked the Council for recognizing Pride Month. She stated that the Commission's purpose is to bring greater recognition and visibility to the LGBTQ community in San Mateo County. She discussed the history of pride celebrations including the Stonewall Riots and the importance of fighting for equality. Burlingame City Council June 1, 2020 Approved Minutes b. CONSIDERATION OF CONSTRUCTION HOURS AND EXCEPTIONS CDD Gardiner stated that staff is recommending that Council consider potential amendments to construction hours. He explained that prior to 2016, construction hours were from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. on weekdays, 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. on Saturdays, and 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. on Sundays and holidays. In 2016, Council adopted an ordinance that changed weekday construction hours to 8 a.m. to 7 p.m., and prohibited construction on Sundays and holidays. CDD Gardiner stated that staff is now recommending the following additional changes: A. Amend BMC 18.07.010 to change language from "except in the case of urgent necessity on the interest of public health and safety," to "except in circumstances where continuing work beyond legal hours is necessary to building or site integrity, including (but not limited to) large concrete pours, environmental considerations, state or federal requirements, or in cases where it is in the interest of public health and safety." B. Amend BMC 18.07.010 to eliminate exceptions to construction hours based on gross floor area, and replace it with the requirement that all exceptions be approved by the building official through a waiver or other mechanism for no longer than necessary to complete the portion of the project for which the exception was granted. C. Amend BMC 18.07.010 to modify construction hours for the Bayfront Commercial, Innovative Industrial, and Rollins Road Mixed Use zones. These are commercial and mixed -use zones where less restrictive construction hours would benefit construction projects but cause lesser disruption to residents. D. Amend BMC 18.07.010 to exempt all construction work, regardless of hours, that takes place inside a completely enclosed building and does not exceed the exterior ambient noise level per the BMC 25.58.050. CDD Gardiner stated that since 2016, applications for construction projects have continued to grow within the city. He explained that developers regularly ask for exceptions to construction hours, often with justification and reasons that will be granted in most instances. He stated that scenarios requiring exceptions that exist in almost every large project include: • Extended hours for large concrete pours, where interruptions would lead to issues with site and/or building integrity; • Complying with Caltrans timelines; • Environmental timelines set by Federal, State, and local regulations; and • Other environmental matters that cannot be controlled or mitigated by the developer. CDD Gardiner explained that staff is proposing that the exception language of the code be modified to include the above recognized common exceptions so that developers can pursue projects in the city without fear of delay. CDD Gardiner stated that staff is also proposing amending construction hours in certain zones. He noted that the Bayfront Commercial, Innovative Industrial, and Rollins Road Mixed Use are all zones where staff believes hours could be amended with only minor disruptions to residents. He explained that developers 7 Burlingame City Council June 1, 2020 Approved Minutes shared concerns with staff about how the construction hours impact their construction crews. He stated that most of the construction crews commute from areas outside the Peninsula, and the City's current construction hours require them to drive during peak traffic times. Therefore, allowing an earlier start time in the above commercial zones may at least ease this issue. CDD Gardiner stated that staff is also proposing allowing work to take place outside of construction hours within fully enclosed buildings. He explained that staff believes that this work will have little impact on residents and would allow builders to finish projects in a more expedient manner. He noted that this exception is already in place in the City of San Mateo. Councilmember Colson asked if the housing project on Bayswater would be allowed to start at 7 a.m. or because it is in a residential neighborhood, would it start at 8 a.m. CDD Gardiner stated that because there are surrounding residential uses, staff would evaluate the need to start early. He added that the Chief Building Official could also enact conditions for the early start. Councilmember Colson asked if the Lot F and N project would be an 8 a.m. start. CDD Gardiner replied in the affirmative. Councilmember Colson asked about the project at 1095 Rollins Road. CDD Gardiner stated that Hanover has expressed interest in starting at 7 a.m. He noted that North Park Apartments is right next door; therefore this is an instance where an exception could be requested for specific circumstances, however the more blanket 7 a.m. start is not being proposed. Vice Mayor O'Brien Keighran asked what the exception for complying with Caltrans timelines meant. CDD Gardiner explained that this refers to Caltrans jurisdiction over El Camino Real and Highway 101. Mayor Beach opened the item up for public comment. SummerHill Senior Vice President Elaine Breeze stated that SummerHill was in support of staff s suggested amendments. Mayor Beach closed public comment. Mayor Beach stated that staffs suggestions struck her as reasonable. She noted that she appreciated the questions that Councilmember Colson asked as they outlined that residential neighborhoods would not be affected by staffs proposals. Councilmember Ortiz discussed the complaints that the City received when the pile driving was being done at Burlingame Point. He noted that even though it is on the other side of the freeway, there are still residential neighborhoods close by that were impacted. Accordingly, he stated that he wasn't in favor of modifying construction hours for the Bayfront Commercial, Innovative Industrial, and Rollins Road Mixed Use zones. 8 Burlingame City Council June 1, 2020 Approved Minutes Councilmember Brownrigg asked if he was correct that Ms. Breeze's top priority out of staff s suggestions would be the 7 a.m. start time. Ms. Breeze replied in the affirmative. Councilmember Brownrigg stated that there is a big difference between some construction activities and others. He suggested stating that during the 7 a.m. to 8 a.m. hour, heavy machinery can't be used. CDD Gardiner stated that the 7 a.m. to 8 a.m. hour could be used as a staging time. Councilmember Ortiz stated that he liked CDD Gardiner's suggestion that the first hour be a staging hour as it would prevent the noisier activities from starting until 8 a.m. CDD Gardiner stated that he would consult with the Chief Building Official and the developers to see what is most practical and how to define staging. Councilmember Colson stated that she was contacted about the project at 1095 Rollins Road. She explained that it sounded like they would still have to start at 8 a.m. because of the North Park Apartments. She stated that the developers noted that they got North Park Apartments to sign off on a 7 a.m. start because of a partnership that has been arranged. Mayor Beach thanked staff for their suggestions and asked if they had received direction. CDD Gardiner replied in the affirmative. c. CITY COUNCIL DIRECTION REGARDING PURCHASING RULE 20A WORK CREDITS AT A DISCOUNTED RATE FOR THE UNDERGROUNDING OF OVERHEAD POWER LINES ON EL CAMINO REAL DPW Murtuza stated that staff is requesting Council's direction regarding purchasing Rule 20A work credits at a discounted rate for the undergrounding of overhead power lines on El Camino Real. DPW Murtuza explained that Caltrans is beginning the environmental phase of the El Camino Real Renewal Project to address safety and infrastructure rehabilitation needs and the historic Eucalyptus Grove preservation. He stated that undergrounding overhead utilities in conjunction with the Caltrans work will be a critical component of the overall project. He explained that the City Council identified the undergrounding of overhead power lines along El Camino Real as a high -priority project. As a result, in 2019 the Council established the El Camino Real Underground Utility District 2019-1 to initiate proceedings to implement the project. DPW Murtuza stated that staff has estimated the preliminary cost to underground overhead utilities on El Camino Real to be between $25 million and $30 million. He noted that the City currently has approximately $6.5 million in Rule 20A credits. DPW Murtuza stated that there are a variety of funding mechanisms available to implement the undergrounding including: • Formation of an assessment district 9 Burlingame City Council June 1, 2020 Approved Minutes LAW" San Mateo Law Library IIII LIBRARY W City of San Mateo Municipal Code. 23-06.060 Hours of Work No work regulated by this code shall be permitted between the hours of 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., Monday through Friday, nor prior to 9:00 a.m. or after 5:00 p.m. on Saturday, nor prior to 12:00 noon or after 4:00 p.m. on Sundays and holidays. These hours do not apply to construction work that takes place inside a completely enclosed building and does not exceed the exterior ambient noise level as measured ten feet from the exterior property lines. (Ord. No. 2019-13 § 1(g),; Ord. No. 2016-10 1; Ord. No. 2013-13 § 1; Ord. No. 2007-11 § 1; Ord. No. 2001-4 § 1; Ord. No. 1999-8 § 2; Ord. No. 1992-12 § 1; Ord. No. 1990-4 § 1.) Cross References Section 23.06.061(a), HISTORY Version Current Compare to November 18, 2019 Publication Current The codes and laws on this website are in the public domain. Please do not scrape. Instead, bulk download the HTML [httpgithub.com/cityofsanmateo/law-html] or XML [httpsiggithub.com/cityofsanmateo/law-xml]. Powered by the non-profit Open Law Library. [http: www.openlawlib.org[]. BURi®NGAME AGENDA NO: 9b STAFF REPORT MEETING DATE: October 5, 2020 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: October 5, 2020 From: Kathleen Kane, City Attorney — (650) 558-7204 Subject: Introduction of an Ordinance to Remove an Exemption for Collective Bargaining Agreements from the Burlingame Minimum Wage Ordinance RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council consider introduction of an ordinance amending Chapter 6.10 of the Burlingame Municipal Code to remove an exemption for collective bargaining agreements from the local minimum wage. In order to do so, Council should: A. Receive the staff report and ask any questions of staff. B. Request that the City Clerk read the title of the proposed ordinance. C. By motion, waive further reading and introduce the ordinance. D. Conduct a public hearing. E. Following the public hearing, discuss the ordinance and determine whether to bring it back for second reading and adoption. If the Council is in favor of the ordinance, direct the City Clerk to publish a summary of the ordinance at least five days before its proposed adoption. BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION Following public outreach and consideration in multiple meetings, the Council adopted a local minimum wage requirement for Burlingame. Under the ordinance, which is codified in Chapter 6.10 of the Municipal Code, businesses in the city are required to pay $15.00/hour beginning on January 1, 2021. The ordinance contains certain limited exceptions to the minimum wage requirement, including one covering instances in which a wage below the local minimum has been negotiated as part of a collective bargaining agreement that meets certain notice conditions. At its meeting on September 21, 2020, Council directed that staff return with an ordinance removing this exemption from the local minimum wage requirement. The proposed ordinance attached to this report would make that change. If it is introduced on this agenda and adopted at Council's next regular meeting, it would go into effect before the local minimum wage itself becomes operative on January 1, 2021. FISCAL IMPACT There is no direct fiscal impact to the City from this action. Exhibits: 0 Proposed Ordinance ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AMENDING CHAPTER 6.10 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO REMOVE AN EXEMPTION FOR COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENTS FROM THE LOCAL MINIMUM WAGE WHEREAS, the Burlingame City Council held multiple meetings, conducted public outreach, and considered the implications of adopting a local minimum wage; and WHEREAS, at its meetings of September 8, 2020 and September 21, 2020, the Council held a public hearing on and then adopted a local minimum wage ordinance; and WHEREAS, under that ordinance, businesses in Burlingame will be required to pay fifteen dollars per hour, with certain limited exceptions, beginning on January 1, 2021; and WHEREAS, the minimum wage ordinance that was adopted contains an exemption for certain collective bargaining agreements; and WHEREAS, in the interest of time and providing certainty to businesses, Council determined to adopt the ordinance as presented in September 2020; and WHEREAS, Council simultaneously directed that an immediate amendment to the minimum wage ordinance be brought back to remove the exemption for collective bargaining agreements. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: DIVISION 1: Section 1: Burlingame Municipal Code Chapter 6.10 is amended as follows: The text and section heading for Section 6.10.060 Waiver Through Collective Bargaining is deleted in its entirety. In its stead, the codified version of Section 6.10.060 shall be noted as [Reserved]. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The Council declares that it would have adopted the Ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. DIVISION 3: This Ordinance shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation in accordance with California Government Code Section 36933, published, and circulated in the City of Burlingame, and shall be in full force and effect 30 days after adoption. Emily Beach, Mayor I, Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, certify that the foregoing ordinance was introduced at a public hearing at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 5t" day of October, 2020, and adopted thereafter at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the day of 2020, by the following vote: AYES: Councilmembers: NOES: Councilmembers: ABSENT: Councilmembers: Meaghan Hassel -Shearer, City Clerk I �e Avovwi To: Date: From: Subject STAFF REPORT Honorable Mayor and City Council October 5, 2020 MOM A►1DL'V167 11 1 MEETING DATE: October 5, 2020 Kevin Gardiner, Community Development Director — (650) 558-7253 Discussion of Amending Chapter 25.58 of the Burlingame Municipal Code to Allow Cannabis Distribution Businesses RECOMMENDATION The City Council is asked to provide direction to staff as to whether the City should proceed with an evaluation and potential modification of Chapter 25.58 of the Burlingame Municipal Code to allow cannabis distribution businesses. BACKGROUND On September 17, 2018, the City Council adopted an ordinance to amend Chapter 25.58 of the Burlingame Municipal Code to add regulations regarding cannabis (marijuana). The ordinance allows for the indoor cultivation of up to six cannabis plants but otherwise prohibits commercial cannabis activities. The ordinance specifically prohibits the manufacture, processing, laboratory testing, labeling, storing, wholesale, and retail distribution of cannabis. Recently, staff has been approached by a business interested in establishing a cannabis distribution facility in Burlingame. Allowing such a business to operate in Burlingame would require an amendment to the Municipal Code. DISCUSSION On November 7, 2016, the City first adopted an interim urgency ordinance regulating cultivation and prohibiting the manufacture, processing, laboratory testing, labeling, storing, wholesale, and retail distribution of cannabis. The City Council extended the interim ordinance twice, at meetings on December 19, 2016, and September 18, 2017. During these meetings, Council provided staff with guidance about policy considerations for a permanent ordinance regulating cannabis. Among the policy considerations that had been discussed were whether to allow storefront retail establishments for recreational or medical cannabis, whether to allow outdoor cultivation, and whether to allow manufacture or research and development apart from retail or cultivation. The distribution of cannabis products is somewhat different from earlier discussions in that it involves the storage and delivery of goods, but not the direct cultivation or manufacture of such 1 Cannabis Delivery October 5, 2020 goods. As such, its operations could be considered similar to delivery, trans -shipment, and freight forwarding operations. In California, the Bureau of Cannabis Control (BCC) issues licenses for retailers, microbusinesses, distributors, and testing labs, and oversees regulations for technology platforms and delivery. This includes rules for technology platforms, delivery drivers, and delivery vehicles. Regulations are summarized on the attachment to this staff report. Should the City Council choose to consider allowing cannabis distribution operations, it could contemplate limiting the number and location of operations, including considerations such as distances from sensitive uses such as schools or residential uses. For example, Redwood City has limited delivery permits to six, and Mountain View to three. With direction, staff could research regulations from other jurisdictions and identify potential approaches that would address community concerns and objectives. FISCAL IMPACT Currently, sales taxes are received when a cannabis delivery is completed within Burlingame. Revenues could be increased if the City enacted a cannabis tax, which would apply to every transaction from cannabis businesses located in Burlingame regardless of where the cannabis delivery is completed. According to industry representatives, a typical local cannabis tax is in the range of 4% of gross receipts. Exhibit: • California Regulations for Delivery of Cannabis Products — Summary 2 California regulations for delivery of cannabis products The Bureau of Cannabis Control (BCC) issues licenses for retailers, microbusinesses, distributors, and testing labs — and oversees regulations for technology platforms and delivery. Specifically, state rules for delivery include: TECHNOLOGY PLATFORMS MUST Clearly identify the licensed retailers for which they facilitate deliveries — by both their name and license number — prior to the order being placed, and on the receipt DELIVERY DRIVERS MUST • Be employed directly by a dispensary (W2) • Undergo thorough background checks • Carry a copy of the retailer's state license and a laminated ID card • Return to their employer's licensed premises if, after 30 minutes, they have not received an order request from their retailer CANNABIS RETAILERS MUST • Not deliver to parks, schools, day cares, youth centers, public property, or federal property • Provide detailed receipts to customers with the name and license number of the retailer fulfilling that order, as well as all taxes collected DELIVERY VEHICLES MUST Be unmarked, personal vehicles • Have dedicated GPS units tracking the vehicle location at all times • Keep all cannabis products locked in containers that are secured to the interior of the delivery vehicle • Limit carried cannabis goods to $5,000, or $3,000 for dynamic delivery 11a BURLINGAME Memorandum To: City Council Date: October 5, 2020 From: Councilmember Brownrigg Subject: Committee Report ATHERTON DECIDES TO LEAVE SBWMA: In a disappointing development, Atherton has elected to quit the SBWMA. They will pay approx $2 min to defease their portion of the recently issued bonds. This is likely to lead to marginally higher costs for the rest of us since the Recology fixed overhead would now be amortized over fewer agencies going forward — although there is some uncertainty even about that, it might be that Recology has to reduce costs to balance its reduced overhead contributions. Atherton's departure has to be approved by 9 out of 11 remaining SBWMA member agencies, so this will come before our Council, likely in November. I will share my thoughts when it comes before us so as not to raise Brown Act issues here. If you are interested, Carol Augustine also serves on the Advisory and Finance boards; feel free to discuss background with her. LEAGUE OF CITIES REV/TAX COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS "NO POSITION" ON PROP 19. As a member of the League of Cities Revenue and Taxation Committee, I wish to report that our Committee voted to recommend "no position" on Prop 19. Prop 19 is the ballot measure that seeks certain reforms to Prop 13 in terms of how/whether seniors can carry the basis of their house with them when they move and revising certain inheritance provisions, inter alia. I spoke in favor of supporting Prop 19 as did several others, based in part on the policy and on part by the broad array of legislators supporting it including Kevin Mullin, but the overwhelming consensus of our committee (2:1) was to take no position. If anyone is interested in the dialogue, please let me know and I can provide more color. If I were to sum up the debate, I would say that Howard Jarvis camp (opposed) made very predictable arguments. The proponents argued strenuously that this would lead to more income for cities/counties and fire districts — I guess they figured that was their audience -- but a lot of League members could not square that notion with the idea that this was a boon to homeowners. Indeed, it does seem somewhat internally inconsistent. (The logic exists but was somewhat hard to follow.) So, "no position" was what we recommended to the League Board. Looking forward, the League rep expects housing and police measures to re -appear next year, although COVID funding will continue to be their top priority until the virus is beaten. Funding for homelessness solutions will continue. He also warned that the Census would kick in and potentially pose new challenges to funding and programs, TBD. And of course, the results of the federal election could have a significant bearing on whether there is additional federal budget support for California or not. Brownrigg Committee Report October 5, 2020 COVID COUNTY TASKFORCE FOR ECONOMIC RECOVERY WRAPS UP WORK: I have served since March on the economic recovery committee of the County -led task force (which has had several names along the way). Our committee completed its work and submitted a report on various steps for economic recovery and equity to the overall Coordinating Task Force. The overall report covering all the issue areas is now available, let me know if you want a copy. 2