Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso - PC - 2024-03.25-9ARECORDING REOUESTED BY Planning Department City of Budingame WHEN RECORDED [,1AIL TO CO[/MUNIry DEVELOPMENT DEPART[/ENT CITY OF BURLINGAME 501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURTINGAME, CA 94010 2024-030194 4119 pm O6t11t2O24R1 Fee: NO FEE Countof pages 17 Recorded in Off icial Recods Co unty of San fulateo Mark Church 1;r{ i rryiiffi 'il l,nil iirri,rtilfirfl r[ ruU fr irrU r rurl Resolution No. 2024-03.25-9A 9OO PALON4A AVENUE APN 025-221-130 I hereby certify this to be a full. true and conect mpy of the document it purports to be, the original of which is on file in my office. 5 2024 b^,n hrkwv ct7 Y ATED UU bNE Date Kevin Gardiner, AICP, Community Development Di DocuSign Envelope lD: FBE65DDE-3519-447C-880A-A7F336C210A1 ,{ TITLE OF DOCUMENT RESOLUTION APPROVING CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION, DESIGN REVIEW, AND FENCE VARIANCE RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Burtingame that WHEREAS Review for a Categorical Exemption has been prepared and application has be en made for Desion contains an existinoa new.tvvo-story sinqle-unit dwellino and a ched oaraqe on lot that sinole-unit llinq (to remain) and Fen ce Variance at 900 P 2 o m Avenue Zon 900 PalomaedR-2 LLC, orooertv owner , APN: 025-221-130 WHEREAS, said matters were heard by the Planning Commjssion of the City of Burlingame on March 25.2024, at which time it reviewed and considered the staff report and all other written matenals€nd testimony presented at said hearing. Now, THEREFORE, it is RESOLVED and DETERMTNED by this ptanning commission that. on the basis of the lnitial study and the documents submitted and reviewed, and comments received and addressed by this Commission, rt is hereby found that there is no substantial evidence that the project set forth above will have a significant effect on the environment, and categorical exemption, per CEQA Section 15303 (a), which states that construction of a limited number of new, small facilities or structures including one single family residence or a second dwelling unit in a residential zone is exempt from environmental review. ln urbanized areas, upto three single-family residences maybe constructed or converted under this exemption, is hereby approved. Said Design Review and Fence Variance are approved subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. Findrngs for such Design Review and Fence Variance are set forth in the staff report, minutes, and recording of said meeting. 1 2 J do hereby certify that the foregoing Planning Commission held on , Secretary of the Planning Commission of t resolution was introduced and adopted at a the 25th dav of March. 2024 by It is further directed that a certified copy of this res the County of San Mateo. L tl) be re d in the official records of irperson ,.p6\ftt he City of Burlingame, regular meeting of the the following vote: gqp PALOIA AVE - RESO 202lHxt.2s4AAYES; HORAX, LOWEI|TH-AI- PFAFF, SCHMID, S}IC'RES. TSENOES: NOi{E ABSEI{T NOI{E RECUSED: COIIAROTO t, Secretary EXHIBIT "A" Conditions of Approval for Categorical Exemption, Design Review, and Fence Variance 900 Paloma Avenue Effective April 4, 2024 Page 1 ,1 that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submiiled to the Planning Division date stamped March 5, 2024, sheets T1.0 through Ai.0, A1..1 through A9.0, ADUl ihrough ADU4, L-1 through L-3, and C-0 through C-4; that on the new two-story single-unit building, the height of the stucco siding shall be reduced and replaced with horizontal cedar siding shown on the upper floor; and that the knee braceand horizontal trim (between the stucco and horizontal siding) design elements on the accessory dwelling unit structures be incorporated into to the single-unit building; that the property owner shall be responsible for implementing and maintaining all treeprotection measures as defined in the arborist report prepared by Kielty Arborist-Services, dated September 26,2023: requtred tree protection zones (fencing) shall be installed prior toany demolition or constructton, that any changes to building materials, exterior finishes, windows, architectural features, roofheight or pitch, and amount or type of hardscape materials shall be subject to planning Division or Planning commission review (Fyl or amendment to be determined by planning stafO; that any changes to the size or envelope of the basement, first or second floors, or garage,which would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s). shall require an amendmenito thispermit; that any recycling containers, debris boxes or dumpsters for the construction project shall beplaced upon the private property, if feasible, as determined by the community development Director; that demolition for removal of the existing structures and any grading or earth moving on thesite shall not occur until a building permit has been rssued and iuch site work inatt oerequired to comply with all the regulations of the Bay Area Air euality Management District; thal 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 approvaladopted by-the Planning commission, or city council on appeal; which shall remain a part ofall sets of approved plans throughout the construction process. compliance *itn ,ltconditions 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; that all air ducts, plumbing vents, and flues shall be combrned, where possible, to a singletermination and installed on the portions of the roof not visible from the sireet; and that theseventing details shall be included and approved in the constructron plans before a Buildingpermit is issued; that the project shall comply with the construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance which requires affected demolition, new construction and alteration prolects tosubmit a waste Reduction plan and meet recycling requirements; any pariial' or fulldemolition of a structure, interior or exterior, shall require a demolition permit; 2 4 5 6 7 I I 3 10. 11 . that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Uniform Fire Codes, in effect at time of building permit submittal, as amended by the City of Burlingame: THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET DURING THE BUILDING INSPECTION PROCESS PRIOR TO THE INSPECTIONS NOTED IN EACH CONDITION: 12. that prior to scheduling the framing inspection the applicant shall provide a certification by theproject architect or residential designer, or another architect or residential design professional, that demonstrates that the project falls at or below the maximum approved floor area ratio for the property; EXHIBIT "A" 14 15 16 that prior to scheduling the foundation inspection, a licensed surveyor shall locate the property corners, set the building footprint and certify the flrs!floor elevation of the new structure(s) based on the elevation at the top of the form boards per the approved plans; this survey shall be accepted by the City Engineer; that prior to scheduling the framing inspection the project architect or residential designer, or another architect or residential design professional, shall provide an architectural certification that the architectural details shown in the approved design which should be evident at framing, such as window locations and bays, are built as shown on the approved plans; architectural certification documenting framing compliance with approved design shall be submitted to the Building Divisron before the final framing inspection shall be scheiuled; that prior to scheduling the roof deck inspection, a licensed surveyor shall shoot the height of the roof ridge and provide certification of that height to the Building Division; and that prior to final inspection, Planning Division staff will inspecl 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. Conditions of Approval for Categorrcal Exemption, Design Review, and Fence Variance 900 Paloma Avenue Effective April 4, 2024 BURLINGA}IE CITY COU\CIL Approved Minutes Regular Citv Council Meeting on Ma1' 6, 2024 A duly noticed meeting ofthe Burlingame City Council was held on the above date in person and via Zoom at 7:05 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ATTEGIANCE TO THE FLAG The pledge of allegiance was led by Andrea Pappajohn. Mayor colson welcomed councilmember Pappajohn. Councilmember Pappajohn thanked everyone who supported her. MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: Beach, Brownrigg, Colson*, Pappajohn, Stevenson None Mayor Colson appeared via Zoom. Th ere was no request 5. REPORT OUT FROM CTOSED SESSION There was no closed session 1 7, UPCOMING EVENTS 1. CALLTO ORDER 3. SWEARING IN a. SWEARING lN OF DISTRICT 1 INTERtM C|TY COUNCTLMEMBER ANDREA pAppAJOHN Kimathi Marangu swore in District 1 lnterim City Councilmember Andrea pappajohn. 4. ROTT CALL 5. REQUEST FOR AB 2249 REMOTE PARTICIPATION A. RECOGNIZING MAY AS MENTAL HEALTH MONTH NAMI Director Rober Taylor spoke of the importance of recognizing May as mental health month b. AMERICAN PUBTIC WORKS ASSOCIATION ACCREDIATION PRESENTATION American Public Works Association ("APWA") Region Vlll Director Joubin Pakpour congratulated the City, and more specifically the Public Works Department, on their APWA accreditation. He noted that only 17 other organizations in the state are accredited. DPW Murtuza thanked Mr. Pakpour and noted that this is the highest achievement that a public works department can obtain. He thanked the Public Works staff and recognized Lilliana Cifuentes for her lea de rsh ip in the process. The City Council congratulated staff for their hard work and achievement An individual discussed the need for more traffic control on Burlingame Avenue Vice Mayor Beach asked the Councilmembers and the public if they wished to remove any item from the Consent Calendar. Councilmember Brownrigg pulled item 101. City Attorney Guina pulled items 10a through 1.0c. Councilmember Stevenson made a motion to approve the following items for the Consent Calendar: 10d, 10e, 10f, 109, 10h, 10i, 10j, 10k, 10m, 10n, 10o, and 10p; seconded by Councilmember Brownrigg. The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote,5-0. a. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR THE APRIL 15 2024 CITY COUNCIL AND BEAUTIFICATION COMMISSION STUDY SESSION Vice Mayor Beach opened the item up for public comment. No one spoke Councilmember Brownrigg made a motion to approve the City Council Meeting Minutes for the April 15, 2024 City Council and Beautification Commission Study Session; seconded by Councilmember Stevenson Vice Mayor Beach reviewed upcoming events in the city. 8. PRESENTATIONS 9. PUBLIC COMMENTS 10. APPROVAT OF CONSENT CATENDAR 2 The motion passed by roll call vote,4-0-1. (Councilmember Pappajohn abstained because she was not yet a Councilmember at the April 15 meeting). b. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR THE APRIL 1 5 2024 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING Vice Mayor Beach opened the item up for public comment. No one spoke. Councilmember Brownrigg made a motion to approve the City Council Meeting Minutes for the April 15, 2024 Regular City Council Meeting; seconded by Councilmember Stevenson. The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote,4-0-1. (Councilmember Pappajohn abstained because she was not yet a Councilmember at the April 15 meeting). Councilmember Erownrigg made a motion to approve the City Council Meeting Minutes for the April 17, 2024 Special Meeting to lnterview Applicants for the District 1 lnterim Council Seat; seconded by Councilmember Stevenson- The motion passed by roll callvote, 4-0-1. (Councilmember Pappajohn abstained because she was not yet a Councilmember at the April 17 meeting). d. ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE RENEWING THE BURLINGAME POLICE DEPARTMENT MILITARY EQUIPMENT USE POLICY ; CEQA DETERMINATI ON: EXEMPT PURSUANT TO STATE CEQA GUTDELTNES SECTTONS 1s378, 15061(B)(3) Police Chief Matteucci and City Attorney Guina requested Council adopt Ordinance Number 2028. DPw Murtuza requested Council adopt Resolution Number 52-7024. f. ADOPTION OF A RESOTUTION ACCEPTING THE EMS UPGRADES AT THE MAIN LIBRARY BY BAY POINT CONTROI-, INC. DBA MARINA ME CHANICAL,CITY PROJECT NO. 85310 IN THE AMOUNT OF S37s,830 DPW Murtuza requested Council adopt Resolution Number 53-2024 ADOPTION OF RESOLUTIONS INITIATING PROCEEDINGS TO RENEW THE L EVY AND COLLECTION OFc TSCAPE IMPROVEMENTASSESSMENTS FOR THE DOWNTOWN BURLINGAME AVENUE STREE 3 C. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIT MEETING MINUTES FOR THE APRIT 17, 2024 SPECIAL MEETING TO INTERVIEW APPTICANTS FOR THE DISTRICI 1 INTERIM COUNCIL SEAT Vice Mayor Beach opened the item up for public comment. No one spoke. e. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE 2023 STREET RESURFACTNG PROJECT BY INTERSTATE GRADING AND PAVING, INC. CITY PROJECT NO.86400 IN THE AMOUNT OF s1,s17,s70.70 DPW Murtuza requested Council adopt Resolution Number 054-2024, Resolution Number 055-2024, and Resolution Num ber 056-2024. Human Resources Director Saguisag-Sid requested Council adopt Resolution Number 057-2024 i. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION CONFIRMING THE LIST OF DESIGNATED OFFICIALS AND EMPLOYEES REQUIRED TO FIIE FORM TOOS PURSUANT TO THE CIW OF BURLINGAME'S CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE DPW Murtuza requested Council adopt Resolution Number 059-2024 City Clerk Hassel-Shearer requested Council adopt Resolution Number 060-2024 I. ADOPTION OF A RESOTUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGRE EME NT WITH CBRE FOR COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE BROKER SERVICES FOR A NEW CITY HALT Councilmember Brownrigg stated that he pulled this item because he thought it was important that staff do a better job on public outreach regarding the City's need for a new City Hall. City Manager Goldman replied in the affirmative. Vice Mayor Beach opened the item up for public comment. No one spoke. Councilmember Brownrigg made a motion to adopt Resolution Number 061-2024; seconded by Councilmember Pappa.iohn. The motion passed unanimously by roll callvote,5-0. PROJECT tOR FISCAL YEAR 2024-25; APPROVING THE ANNUAL ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR FtSCA| YEAR 2024-25; AND DECLARING THE INTENTION TO LEW AND COLTECT ASSESSMENTS FOR FTSCAL YEAR 2024-25 AND SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING h. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AMENDMENT TO THE UTITITIES INSPECTOR/LOCATOR CTASSIFICATION City Clerk Hassel-Shearer requested Council adopt Resolution Number 058-2024. j. ADOPTTON OF A RESOLUTTON AUTHORTZTNG THE C|TY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAT SERVICES WITH CUMMING MANAGEMENT GROUP, INC. FOR CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT FOR THE CUERNAVACA PARK ATHLETIC TURF RENOVATION PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 86070, IN THE AMOUNT OF S12O,OOO K. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION ORDERING AND CALLING FOR THE NOVEMBER 5, 2024, GENERAL MUNICIPAT ETECTION TO FII-L TWO (FULL TERM) CIW COUNCIL VACANCIES IN COUNCIL DISTRICTS 2 AND 4 AND FILL ONE (PARTIAT TERM) CITY COUNCIL VACANCY IN COUNCIL DISTRICT 1 m. OPEN NOMINATION PERIOD TO FILL ONE VACANCY ON THE LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES 4 City Manager Goldman requested Council approve opening nomination period to fill one vacancy on the Libra ry Board of Trustees. City Manager Goldman requested Council approve opening nomination period to fill one vacancy on the Pa rks and Recreation Commisston. o. APPROVAT OF QUARTERTY INVESTMENT RE PORT PERIOD ENDING MARCH 31. 2024 Finance Direction Yu-Scott requested Council approve the Quarterly lnvestment Report for the period ending March 2L,2024. p UPDATE AND CONFIRMATION OF THE MAYOR'S COUNCIL ASSIGNMENTS FOR 2024 City Clerk Hassel-Shearer requested Council approve the Mayor's CouncilAssignments for 2024. 11. PUBLIC HEARINGS a. CONSIDERATION OF AN APPEAT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF AN APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW AND FENCE VARIANCE FOR A NEW TWO.STORY SINGLE.UNIT DWELLING AND ATTACHED GARAGE ON A LOT CONTAINING AN EXISTING SINGLE-UNIT DW ELLING (TO REM A INI AT 9OO PATOMA AVENUE Vice Mayor Beach reviewed the appeal process. She asked her colleagues if they had any disclosures relevant to the hearing. All Councilmembers acknowledged that they had read the emails from the public and visited the site. CDD Gardiner reviewed the background of the appeal: o Planning Commission approved an application for Design Review and Fence Variance for fence height for a new, two-story single-unit dwelling and an attached garage at 900 Paloma Avenue, zoned R-2, on March 25, ZO24 . Approved project consists of: o building a new, two-story single unit dwelling and an attached garage on a lot that currently contains an existing one-story single-unit dwelling o new carport o two detached ADUS o proposed lot coverage would be 3,392 square feet, which is under the maximum allowed of 4,905 sq uare feet 5 n. OPEN NOMINATION PERIOD TO FILL ONE VACANCY ON THE PARKS AND RECREATTON coMMtsstoN CDD Gardiner stated that the site is located in the Special Flood Hazard Area Zone AH, which requires that the new dwelling and ADUs be constructed at the Design Flood Elevation or above the Base Flood Elevation plus one foot to comply with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and California Building Code requirements. He explained that this requires that the finished floor elevations of the structures be at or above elevation 17'and also provide venting in the crawl space to allow water to pass should there be a flood event. He noted that this application complies with the requirements. He added that during the building permit review, the applicant will be required to provide more detailed civil engineering plans that show drainage and water management on the site. Councilmember Brownrigg asked if he was correct that per the City's regulations, stormwater has to be managed on the applicant's site itself. CDD Gardiner replied in the affirmative. Councilmember Brownrigg asked how the City determines season high groundwater. DPW Murtuza replied that it is based on the groundwater table for a specific area. He noted that one way the project can determine the groundwater level is by drilling. Mr. Borber, speaking on beholf of the appellonts, storted his ten minutes. Vice Mayor Beach then gave Michael Barber, on behalf of the appellant, ten minutes to explain their position. Mr. Barber reviewed the appellants'concerns with the pro.ject including: . the project site includes the Terrace Creek Lagoon, which regularly floods and is at a low point in the neighborhood . neiShbors have purchased industrial sump pumps to address flood concerns and are worried that with more development, more stormwater will be shed downhill, causing more flooding Mr. Barber showed historical maps that outlined the Terrace Creek Lagoon's position in the neighborhood and pictures of the flooding that the neighbors had recently dealt with due to the winter storms. He suggested that the City consider raised pilings for projects in flood zones and voiced concern about monitoring that builders adhere to the building codes. Councilmember Brownrigg asked about Mr. Barber's suggestion for raised pilings. Mr. Barber replied that the pilings would allow standing water to better permeate the ground and flow through properties to the storm drains. Mayor Colson asked if 900 Paloma currently includes any flood mitigation. Mr. Barber replied that he didn't believe so. Project designer Tim Raduenz discussed the project and the public outreach that they conducted. He explained that his team held a community meeting at the Community Center and reviewed the project's civil engineering drawings with members of the public. He added that currently the site has no flood mitigation. He stated that the project design includes: . A new water catchment system under the new driveway 6 Concrete will be replaced with vegetation to allow for water to permeate the ground Mr. Raduenz explained that both City building officials and his team will be inspecting the crawl spaces and the structure elevation to ensure the project's complrance with FEMA and California Building Code req u irements. Mayor Colson asked about the cost of the catchment system. Mr. Raduenz replied that it is estimated to cost between 580,000 and S120,000. Mayor Colson discussed how often frequently pro.Jects are inspected by the City Building Official to ensure the project matches with the approved plan. CDD Gardiner replied that staff are very thorough and regularly check projects. Mayor Colson asked if she was correct that the R2 district that 900 Paloma is located in requires lots to have their own drainage. CDD Gardiner replied that the R2 district has a wide variety of developments, and stormwater standards in the past may not have been as stringent as current standards. Councilmember Pappajohn asked for clarification on water flow on the lot. CDD Gardiner replied that the project is designed in such a way that water should be able to be absorbed through the ground via permeable designed su rfaces. Councilmember Brownrigg asked about the City's liability for approving a development on a property on which flooding may occur. City Attorney Guina replied that the planning and engineering standards that any home must be built to are designed to mitigate risk to the people living in it and the people around it. Vice Mayor Beach stated that the project, which sits in a FEMA flood zone, must adhere to the Burlingame, State, and FEMA regulations. CDD Gardiner replied in the affirmative. Vice Mayor Beach asked if she was correct that the project met these standards. CDD Gardiner replied in the affirmative. Vice Mayor Beach asked if the standards regulate how the development affects neighboring properties. CDD Gardiner replied that the standards require the management of the water that falls on an individual property be treated by that property. Vice Mayor Beach opened the item up for public comment Rosemary Macleod voiced support for delaying the project to address flooding concerns 1 Councilmember Brownrigg asked about the drainage system under the driveway. CDD Gardiner replied that the catchment design allows for the water to be caught, stored, and released in a timely manner, as well as allowing the water to permeate through the ground. Jonathan voiced concern about protecting the trees on 900 Paloma and also about potential flooding from 900 Paloma onto neighboring lots. Vice Mayor Beach closed public comment Vice Mayor Beach gave the a ppe lla nt an opportunity for a reb utta L Mr. Barber discussed his belief that the FEMA standards were low. standards should consider a Iarger storm event than a 10-year flood He explained that he thought the Jonathan voiced concerns about the catchment system Councilmember Brownrigg asked staff if the City needs more time to study the hydrology of the area. DPW Murtuza replied that in order for the project to get its building permit, it must submit a hydrology report and calculations. He noted that once that is submitted, staff will review the report and calculations. He added that staff will look at whether this project will increase flooding on the nearby properties and have an adverse impact on potential flooding. Mayor Colson stated that the community's concerns might open up a larger conversation about flooding and flood mitigation techniques in conjunction with One Shoreline. Mayor Colson stated that because the developer met the required City, State, and FEMA standards and the Planning Commission approved the project, she is inclined to deny the appeal. Councilmember Brownrigg concurred with Mayor Colson. However, he asked if it would be feasible to have the project come back to Council with an update, once the hydrology report has been received and reviewed by staff. Vice Mayor Beach stated that the project was approved by the Planning Commission after it was determined that it met the required standards. She added that she believed the parcel will fare better with the proposed flood mitigation techniques. Councilmember Stevenson concurred with Vice Mayor Beach. City Attorney Guina clarified that the conditions of approval include some additional items addressing the catch basement and tree mitigation issues. He noted that if the developer does not meet the checkmarks 8 Councilmember Stevenson stated that currently, there are no flooding mitigation measures on the lot, and the lot includes a lot of concrete. He asked if water from 900 Paloma currently floods neighboring properties. DPW Murtuza replied that he was unsure. Councilmember Pappajohn concurred with her colleagues. stated throughout the process or is in violation of the building code, staff can choose to not sign off on the building permit. Councilmember Brownrigg asked about a presentation regarding the results of the hydrology report Mayor Colson suggested that this presentation be given to the Planning Commission CDD Gardiner stated that in addition to the Planning Commission conditions of approval, there are 32 conditions of approval from Public Works, and condition 31 states that due to the surrounding existing drainage pattern, a drainage plan will be required during the building permit phase to quantify the amount of stormwater that will drain to the property and how it will be retained and that no greater than 40% of the parcel can be dascharged from the site, He noted it is unusual to report out on building permit issuances. Mayor Colson made a motion to deny the appeal and confirm the Planning Commission's approval. Councilmember Brownrigg asked if the Mayor would amend her motion to include a presentation to the Planning Commission once the hydrology report was submitted and verified. Mayor Colson replied in the affirmative with the understanding that the report is an informational item not an action item Councilmember Brownrigg agreed, b. PUBLIC HEARING AND ADOPTION OF BROADWAY AREA BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT ASSESSMENTS FOR FISCAL YEAR2024-25 Finance Director Yu-Scott explained that on April 1, the City Council adopted a Resolution of lntention to levy the Broadway Area BID assessments for FY 2024-25 and order a public hearing for May 6. She explained that approximately $32,950 in assessments is collected annually with City business licenses, and all of these funds are forwarded to the Broadway Area Business lmprovement District for improvements as authorized by the BID Board of Directors. Finance Director Yu-Scott asked if the City Clerk received any protests, City Clerk Hassel-Shearer replied in the negative. Vice Mayor Beach opened the public hearing. No one spoke, Councilmember Brownrigg made a motion to adopt Resolution Number 052-2024 seconded by Councilmember Pappajohn. The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote, 5-0. 9 Mayor Colson's amended motion was seconded by Councilmember Stevenson. The motion passed unanimously by roll callvote,5 0. Finance Director Yu-Scott stated that the City hired Matrix Consulting Group to perform a comprehensive study analyzing the cost-of-service relationships that exist between fees for service activities in the following areas: Building, Public Works, Finance, City Clerk, Library, Parks and Recreation, Planning, and Police. She explained that the results ofthe study provide a tool for understanding current service levels, the cost and demand for those services, and what fees for service can and should be charged. She noted that as costs associated with the services fluctuate over time, a significant component in the development of any fee schedule is that it allows the flexibility to remain current. Vice Mayor Beach voiced her concern regarding building fees for smaller projects. Matrix Consulting Group representative Khushboo Ingle replied that the fees are set up to represent the true cost of staff providing that pa rticula r service. Councilmember Brownrigg asked if the City could offer a 5500 subsidy on all building projects, thus depressing the cost of the smaller projects substantially. Ms. Ingle replied that if you subsidize the smaller projects, you start getting into the unfairness of permit valuations and projects potentially lying about their valuations. CDD Gardiner stated that one of the reasons a lower valuation has such a high fee is that the smaller projects do use a d isproportionate amount of staff time. Vice Mayor Beach asked if adoption of the Master Fee Schedule could be delayed until a financial analysis of Councilmember Brownrigg's idea was conducted. Finance Director Yu-Scott replied in the affirmative. Mayor Colson argued that Council should pass the fee schedule as is, and if needed, come back and amend the schedule with any changes after doing the analysis, Vice Mayor Beach agreed with Mayor Colson. Mayor Colson made a motion to adopt Resolution Number 063-2024; seconded by Councilmember Brownrigg. The motion passed unanimously by roll callvote,5-0. 12. STAFF REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE OF THE PARKLET PROG 10 RAM BEYOND IUNE 30 2024 c. PUBLIC HEARING AND ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE CITY OF BURLINGAME MASTER FEE SCHEDULE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024-25; AND ADOPTION OF A RESOTUTION UPDATING THE USER FEE COST RECOVERY POTICY FOR THE CITY CDD Gardiner stated that at the December 4,2023 meeting, the Council indicated support for establishing a semi-permanent parklet program, beyond the current temporary program's expiration on June 30, 2024. This matter was then brought to the Economic Development Subcommittee on March 13 and April 10, 2024. CDD Gardiner explained that following direction from the City Council and Economic Development Subcommittee, the following changes would be made to the parklet program: 11 . Parklets will only be allowed for businesses that already have a parklet as of lune 30, 2024. New parklets where there was not already a parklet previously will not be permitted, and once a parklet is removed, it will not be allowed to be replaced. The intent is to encourage new businesses to utilize the sidewalk for outdoor dining, rather than adding a new parklet. o Parklets will only be allowed within the frontage of the business storefront. Parklets will no longer be allowed to utilize the frontage of adjacent storefronts. The intent is to provide equity with non- restaurant commercial businesses that have not had the benefit of a parklet, and to restore on- street parking spaces. o Parklets located adjacent to intersection crosswalks will be required to be setback at least 15 feet from a bulb-out crosswalk or 20 feet from the crosswalk. The intent is to provide visibility for pedestrians, cyclists, and vehicles at intersections, and to comply with Assembly Bill (AB) 413. o Water-walls will be required to be covered/clad on both sides, facing both the interior of the parklet as well as the street and surrounding parking spaces. The intent is to offer an attractive appearance from both the sidewalk and the street. o Curb gutters will be required to be kept unobstructed to allow proper drainage. o Roofs, trellises, or tent shade structures will no longer be allowed. No structural elements will be allowed to extend beyond the top of the walls. Umbrellas will be allowed for shade. The intent is to address safety during storms and allow better visibility to adjacent businesses. . No gas piping or electrical lines and cords will be allowed to be extended to the parklet. Such lines and cords represent a potential safety issue and conflict with building code requirements. Space heaters will be permitted if they are an outdoor approved type, are in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications, and are located at least two feet from the edge of any umbrella canvas, tablecloths, any foliage, or any other flammable object or material. r Furnishings will not be allowed to be stored in the parklet when not in use. When the business is not open, tables, chairs, and other furnishings must be cleared from the parklet. . All existing parklets will be required to be removed at the conclusion of the current proBram, and any returning parklets will be built anew following review and approval of new permits. The intent is to allow cleaning of the street surface below existing parklets, assess locations of utilities below parklets, and ensure rebuilt parklet structures comply with new design guidelines. . lnspections will be changed from quarterly to annually. Staff believes this will be sufficient to monitor the physical condition of the parklets. However, staff anticipates ongoing enforcement of operations and would inspect parklets on an as-needed basis when compliance issues arise. CDD Gardiner stated that the current fee under the pilot program is S1,590 per year with a monthly cleaning fee of $265. However, he noted that after reviewing several long-term parklet programs, the fee structure varies, with Campbell offering grants ranging from 525,000 to 540,000 for the construction of a parklet to Walnut Creek with a fee of $48 per square foot. Vice Mayor Beach asked if staff considered an escalator for the monthly cleaning fee. CDD Gardiner replied that a fee structure still needs to be determined. However, he noted that the cleaning fee reflects the true cost to clean the area. Vice Mayor Beach asked about the decision to not allow new parklets. CDD Gardiner replied that the concern is there are already a lot of parklets, and if more are added, the commercial district might become too restaurant-heavy and potentially discourage other types of businesses. Mayor Colson stated that the Town Square will create more outdoor dining space in the future. Councilmember Stevenson stated that he thought the program was lucrative to restaurants since the addition of more tables should translate to more revenue. He agreed with the need to tighten up the design of parklets and showed concern for the non-restaurant businesses. Vice Mayor Beach opened the item for public comment. Mr. Mendell, from Kerns Jewelry, voiced concern for the non-restaurant businesses. Mr. Gross, a retail owner, supported the permanent removal of parklets. Mr. Farrell, owner of Paper Caper, supported the removal of parklets. Dimitri voiced support for the parklets and making Burlingame Avenue pedestrian only submitted via oubliccomment@burlingame.orq) Lace voiced support for a long-term parklet program. (Comment submitted via publiccom me nt@ burlinqame.org) Doug Bojack voiced support for a long-term parklet program. (Comment submitted via (Com ment ubliccomment b u rlin a me.o r Councilmember Brownrigg stated that he approved of the parklet designs and concurred that no new pa rklets should be allowed. 1,2 Vice Mayor Beach closed public comment. Vice Mayor Beach stated that she wanted to ensure that the City recovered its costs from administering the program. She voiced support for the parklet program and the vibrancy it brings to Burlingame. She noted that she thought the new program would mean fewer parklets. Vice Mayor Beach summarized Council's direction that Council wanted to see commitment from restaurants with parklets by June 30 that they will continue under a longer-term parklet program 13. COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND ACTIVITIES REPORTS AND ANN OUNCEMENTS Council reviewed their committee appointments. L4. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Councilmember Pappajohn asked to agendize a discussion of micromobility devices (e-bikes, scooters, etc.); seconded by Councilmember Stevenson. 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. 16. ADJOURNMENT Vice Mayor Beach adjourned the meeting at l-0:50 p.m. Respectfu lly su bmitted, Meaghan Hassel-Shearer City Clerk 13 15. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS