HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - CC - 2018.05.21City of Burlingame
Meeting Agenda - Final
City Gouncil
BURLINGAME CITY HALL
501 PRIMROSE ROAD
BURLINGAME, CA 94010
Monday, May 2'1,20'18 7:00 PM Council Chambers
Note: Public comment is permitted on all action ifems as noted on the agenda below and in the
non-agenda public comment provided for in item 7.
Speakers are asked to fill out a "request to speak" card located on the table by the door and
hand itto staff, although the provision of a name, address or other identifying information is
optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each; the Mayor may adjust the time limit in
light of the numher of anticipated speakers.
All votes are unanimous unless separately noted for the record.
1. CALL TO ORDER - 7:00 p.m. - Council Chambers
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
3. ROLL CALL
4. REPORT OUT FROM CLOSED SESSION
5. UPCOMING EVENTS
6. PRESENTATIONS
a. Commendation for Charles Dila Veloso
b. Get Us Movinq Presentation
c. SB 450 "Voter's Choice Act" Presentation
7. PUBLIG COMMENTS, NON-AGENDA
llembers 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.
8. APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR
Consent calendar items are usually approved in a single motion, unless pulled for separate dlscussion.
Any member of the public wishing to comment on an item listed here may do so by submifting a speaker
slip for that item in advance of the Council's consideration of the consent calendar.
City of Burlingame Page 1 Printed on 5/17/2018
City Council Meeting Agenda - Final May 21,2O1a
a. Adootion of Citv Council M ino Minutes Aoril 16. 2018
allechments: lvleetino Minutes
b. Adootion of Citv Council no Minutes Mav 7 . 2018
c
Attachnents: Meetino lvlinutes
Adootion of a Resolution ADDrovinq the Re lof a Five-Year Aoreement with Veolia
West ODeratino Services for the Ooeration and Maintenance of the Wastewater
Treatment Plant Facilitv
attach,,enls: Staff Reoo(
Resolution
Veolia Aoreement
VWOS O&M Cost omDarison Survev
VWOS Contract Performance Analvsis Report
d. Adoption of a Resolu on Awardino a Construction Contract to Golden Bav Con struction
Inc.. for the 2018 Sidewalk Repair ProqratL Citv Proiect No. 85250. and Authorizino the
Citv Manaoer to Execute the Construction Contract
Atlachmenls:Staff Report
Resolution
Bid Summa
Construction Contract Aoreement
Proiect Location Mao
e. Adoption of Resolution s Confirmino the Aooointment of Finance Director/Treasu rer and
Desiqnatinq Certain E molovees as Official Sionatories on Citv Banki no and lnvestme nt
Accounts
Attachmen's:Staff Reoort
Resolution - B ofA
Resoluti n - LAIF
9. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Public Comment)
a.
10. STAFF REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS (Public Comment)
Page 2 Pnnted on 5/17/2018
Public Hearino to Renew the Lew and Collection of Assessments for the Downtown
Burlinqame Avenue Streetscape lmprovements Proiect for Fiscal Year 2018-'1 I
Attachrnenls: Staff Reoort
Resolution
Enoineeas Report FY 2018-19
City ot Burlingame
City Council Meeting Agenda - Final May 21,2014
a ToDoolf Uodate and Adoption of a Resolution Authorizino the Citv Manaoer to Execute an
Exclusive Neqotiation Aoreement with T olf for the Use of Golf Center Prooertv
12. FUTUREAGENDAITEMS
13. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I4, ADJOURNMENT
Printe.l on 5/17/2018
Attachments: Staff ReDort
Resolution
Drafr Exclusive Neootiation Aoreement
11. COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND ACTIVITIES REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
Councilmembers repoft on committees and activities and make announcements.
a. Vice Mavor Colson's Committee Report
allachmenls: Colson Reoort - Mav 21.doc
b. Councilmember Beach's Committee Report
atlachments: Beach Committee ReDort- Mav 21.doc
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.bufiingame.org.
Notice: Any attendees wishing accommodations for disabilities please contact the City Clerk at
(650)55&7203 at least 24 hours before the meeting. A copy of the Agenda Packet is available fot
public review at the City Clerk's office, City Ha , 501 Primrose Road, from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
before the meeting and at the meeting. Visit the City's website at www.burlingame.org. Agendas and
minutes are available at this site.
NEXT clTY COUNCIL MEETING - Next regular City Council Meeting - Monday, June
4,2018
VIEW REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING ONLINE AT www.burlingame.org/video
Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the City Council regarding any item on this agenda
will be made available for public inspection at the Water Office counter at City Ha at 501 Primrose
Road duing notmal bus,ness hours.
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Datez 5/2L/LB
BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL
Unapproved Minutes
Regular Meeting on April 16,2018
1. CALL TO ORDER
A duly noticed regular meeting of the Burlingame City Council was held on the above date in the City Hall
Council Chambers.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
The pledge of allegiance was led by Dr. Kevin Skelly.
3. ROLL CALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Beach, Brownrigg, Colson, Keighran, Ortiz
MEMBERS ABSENT: NONE
4. CLOSED SESSION
a. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL. EXISTING LITIGATION. ONE CASE:
(GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9) NAME OF CASE: CLACK V. CITY OF
BURLINGAME (SAN MATEO SUP. CT. 17CIVO3O91)
City Attorney Kane reported that direction was given but no reportable action was taken.
5. UPCOMING EVENTS
Mayor Brownrigg reviewed the upcoming events taking place in the City
6. PRESENTATIONS
There were no presentations.
Burlingame City Council
Unapproved Minutes
1
April 16, 2018
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 5/2L/LB
7. PUBLIC COMMENT
Vice President of the San Mateo Union High School District Board Greg Land thanked the City Council for
their assistance in improving the aquatic center and discussed the relocation of the Peninsula High School.
Superintendent Kevin Skelly discussed the great partnership between the City and District. He explained the
need to relocate Peninsula High School and why it would benefit the community.
8. CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Brownrigg asked the Councilmembers and the public if they wished to remove any item from the
Consent Calendar. Mayor Brownrigg pulled items 8b and 8e.
Councilmember Ortiz made a motion to adopt 8a, 8c, and 8d; seconded by Councilmember Keighran. The
motion passed unanimously by voice vote, 5-0.
i. ADOPTION OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL 2. 2018
City Clerk Hassel-Shearer requested Council adopt the City Council Meeting Minutes of April 2,2018
b. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AWARDING A CONTRACT TO UNIVERSAL
BUILDING SERVICES FOR JANITORIAL SERVICES
Mayor Brownrigg voiced his surprise that the City only received one bid for this RFP. He asked if this was
because of the housing/wage gap in the Bay Area. DPW Murtuza replied in the affirmative.
GRANITE ROCK COMPANY FOR THE PORTAL AND TROUSDALE CHANNEL
REHABILITATION. PHASE 2 CT _ CITY PROJECT NO. 83230
Burlingame City Counci I
Unapproved Minutes
2
April 16,2018
Mayor Brownrigg asked that Universal Building Services and all future janitorial contractors sign a pledge
ensuring that they have a sexual harassment policy and training. DPW Murtuza replied in the affirmative.
Mayor Brownrigg opened the item up for public comment. No one spoke.
Mayor Brownrigg made a motion to adopt Resolution Number 47-2018; seconded by Councilmember Ortiz.
The motion passed unanimously by voice vote, 5-0.
c. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE SOUTH ROLLINS ROAD UTILITY
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT BY CRATUS INC.. CITY PROJECT NO. 83520
DPW Murtuza requested Council adopt Resolution Number 48-2018.
d. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AWARDING A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 5/2L/LB
DPW Murtuza requested Council adopt Resolution Number 49-2018.
e. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION A G THE MAYOR TO SEND A LETTER OF
OPPOSITION REGARDING AB 1912. PUBLIC EMPLOYEES, RETIREMENT: JOINT
POWERS AGREEEMENTS: LIABILITY
Mayor Brownrigg explained that he would like to add a few paragraphs to the letter. He read his preferred
additions to the Council.
Mayor Brownrigg asked if there was an immediate urgency to the letter or if there was time to tweak it. HR
Director Morrison explained that there was some urgency to the letter as a hearing on the bill was scheduled
for April 18,2078 at the CaIPERS Pension Board. She stated that local agencies would be testifying at this
hearing and would like to deliver letters of opposition at that time. City Manager Goldman added that she
would work with the Mayor on his requested changes in order to meet the deadline.
Mayor Brownrigg opened the item up for public comment. No one spoke.
Vice Mayor Colson made a motion to adopt Resolution Number 50-2018 with the Mayor's changes;
seconded by Councilmember Keighran. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote, 5-0.
a.UPDATE REGARDING HOME FOR ALL COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT PILOT
PROGRAM
Planning Manager Gardiner gave an update regarding the City's Home for All Community Engagement Pilot
Program. He explained that Home for All is a San Mateo County initiative to address the large gap between
new jobs and housing units. The community engagement pilot program was intended to create an alternative
approach to discussing housing matters in the community. To date the community engagement program has
included survey outreach and a community conversation.
Planning Manager Gardiner explained that staff coordinated with Vice Mayor Colson and Councilmember
Keighran, both of whom are members of the Home for All committee, on outreach efforts for this program.
Planning Manager Gardiner explained that the community events associated with this initiative are called
"conversations" because the intent is to have people talk with each other instead of at each other. The first
community conversation was on Saturday, February 10, 2018. Nearly 100 people attended the first meeting.
He explained that this meeting focused on people from a range of backgrounds sharing their individual
experiences. A summary of the meeting is included in the staff report.
a
Burlingame City Council April I 6, 2018
Unapproved Minutes
9. PUBLIC HEARINGS
There were no public hearings.
10. STAFF REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
Agenda ltem 8a
Meeting Date: 5/2L/tB
The upcoming meeting on April 28,2018 is at the Masonic Lodge. This meeting will focus on potential
responses to housing challenges and broaden the understanding of housing issues. Additionally, the meeting
will discuss steps the City has taken to address housing issues.
Planning Manager Gardiner introduced William Lowell from Home for All. Mr. Lowell thanked the City for
continuing to keep housing a priority. He encouraged individuals to attend the April 28,2018 meeting.
Mayor Brownrigg opened the item up for public comment
Burlingame resident Brian stated he was excited that the City was hosting these events. Additionally, he
asked that the City consider repealing Measure T.
Burlingame resident Alisa Ruiz Johnson stated that the community had spoken at the 2016 election against
repealing Measure T.
Burlingame resident Kristen Parks asked that the Council review Measure T.
Mayor Brownrigg closed public comment.
Mayor Brownrigg thanked Planning Manager Gardiner for the presentation and encouraged the community
to attend the meeting.
b. HOUSING ELEMENT ANNUAL PROGRESS REPORT (APR) ON THE
Planning Manager Gardiner explained that the State requires each local jurisdiction to prepare a Housing
Element as part of its General Plan. Every year, the City is required to file an annual report that documents
its implementation of the Housing Element. The report includes a series of tables that outline the types of
housing units that received permits and a progress report on the implementation of programs in the Housing
Element. The report only counts building permits and net new units, not projects that are in the approval
process.
Councilmember Keighran noted that HIP Housing is a great resource for providing housing to low and very
low incomes. She asked how many single rooms are rented in Burlingame utilizing HIP Housing. Planning
Manager Gardiner replied that he would work with HIP Housing to get these numbers.
Councilmember Beach reviewed the State standards of 50oh AMI for very low income and 80% AMI for low
income. She stated that under the proposed Burlingame Village Project, there are over 100 units that the
City expects to be at 60Yo AMI. She asked if these would count towards low income or very low income.
Planning Manager Gardiner stated that those units would count towards low income.
Burlingame City Council
Unapproved Minutes
4
April 16,2018
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE HOUSING ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 5/2L/LB
Vice Mayor Colson stated that the staff report lists five permits for ADUs. She explained that while this may
not seem like a lot, it is a good start. She pointed out that Home for All is working to streamline the ADU
process and provide a funding source for homeowners.
Vice Mayor Colson asked if staff knows what category the ADUs count towards in the Housing Element.
Planning Manager Gardiner stated that without a verification mechanism, ADUs count towards market rate.
Mayor Brownrigg opened the item up for public comment.
Burlingame resident Cindy Cornell voiced her concerns about the Peninsula Healthcare District using
taxpayer funds to build market rate senior housing units. She asked that the District build below market rate
units.
Mayor Brownrigg closed public comment.
Councilmember Beach stated that after looking at what is in the pipeline, it is clear that the City still has a lot
of work to do on very low income levels.
Mayor Brownrigg warned the Council that they should not be surprised if the RHNA numbers become
quotas instead of guide posts. Therefore, he believed the City needed to prioritize meeting those numbers.
Councilmember Keighran made a motion to accept the Housing Element Annual Progress Report; seconded
by Councilmember Beach. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote, 5-0.
c. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION OPPOSING REGARDING SB 827 (WIENER) -
AND ZONING: TRANSIT.RICH H ORIZIN
THE MAYOR TO SEND A LETTER CONVEYING THE CITY'S POSITION
Councilmember Keighran stated that she has been working with San Mateo County Supervisors with regards
to this bill and therefore recused herself from the matter.
Planning Manager Gardiner stated that SB 827, known as the Transit-Rich Housing Bonus, was proposed in
January 2018 and is currently under review. The intent of the bill is to promote housing construction
throughout the state, especially areas around transit. Under SB 827, parcels within a half-mile of major
transit hubs or within a quarter-mile of high frequency bus stops would be exempt from a variety of local
development standards. He reviewed some of the standards that parcels would be exempt from including:
height limitations, density, parking requirements, and design review.
Planning Manager Gardiner stated that the League of California Cities' concerns with the proposed
legislation are outlined in the staff report. The primary objection from the League is that the proposed
legislation would undermine general plans. This is particularly relevant in Burlingame, where the City has
spent the past three years updating its General Plan. He explained that the City's proposed update shares
many of the objectives of SB 827, including expanding the housing supply near transit. However, he noted
Burlingame City Council
5
Unapproved Minutes
APril 16' 2018
Agenda Iten 8a
Meeting Date: 5/2L/LB
that while SB 827 utilizes a one-size-fits-all approach, the City's updated General Plan carefully plots out
where new growth should be in the community.
Planning Manager Gardiner explained that staff prepared a letter for the Mayor's signature that articulates
the City's concerns with the one-size-fits-all approach.
Mayor Brownrigg discussed Senator's Wiener's recent comments about the bill. He explained that Senator
Wiener had explained that cities would be able to maintain their design review processes. City Manager
Goldman stated that the current version of the bill does not include this language and therefore, the City
needed to articulate its position.
Councilmemb er Ortiz asked if Broadway Station is re-opened, would it become a housing target under the
bill. Planning Manager Gardiner replied in the affirmative.
Mayor Brownrigg opened the item up for public comment.
A Burlingame resident asked if land east of 101 would be covered under this bill. Mayor Brownrigg replied
in the negative.
Mayor Brownrigg closed public comment.
Councilmember Ortiz stated that he supported the letter.
Vice Mayor Colson stated that she supported the letter. She voiced her concern about the impact this bill
would have on schools in Burlingame. She explained that SB 827 does not provide a funding source for
school districts that could see increased enrollment.
Councilmember Beach voiced her support for the letter. She explained that SB 827 flies in the face of local
control. She stated that the City has taken a thoughtful approach with the update to the General Plan on
where new housing should be put in the city. She explained that the one-size-fits-all approach is not fair.
Councilmember Beach agreed with Vice Mayor Colson's concems about the impact of SB 827 on schools.
Vice Mayor Colson explained that she approved of the section of the bill that mandates affordable housing.
She asked staff to review the effects of SB 827 on Measure T.
Mayor Brownrigg stated that it isn't settled law that Measure T prohibits inclusionary housing. He explained
that this has been the interpretation.
Councilmember Beach made a motion to adopt Resolution Number 5l-2018; seconded by Councilmember
Ortiz. The motion passed by voice vote 4-0-1. (Councilmember Keighran was recused).
Burlingame City Council
Unapproved Minutes
6
April 16,2018
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 5/2L/LB
d. DISCUSSION OF SKYLINE PARK
Recreation Supervisor Nicole Acquisti explained that members of the community have requested more off-
leash options. In September 2016, the Skyline Park was brought to the attention of the Dog Park Task Force
as a potential off-leash site. She explained that staff conducted public outreach on the possibility of using
Skyline Park as an off-leash site. She stated that the public voiced concerns about: hours of usage, signage
stating the rules, and park maintenance. She noted that staff took the public's concerns and further reviewed
the site and updated the proposal. She added that the project is currently unfunded.
Mayor Brownrigg stated that he was having a hard time understanding the location of the site. Recreation
Supervisor Acquisti reviewed the location using an overhead map. City Manager Goldman added that it is
where the temporary fire station was going to be located.
Mayor Brownrigg stated that he supported the project. He voiced his concern about the amount of poison
oak that was located on the site. Parks and Recreation Director Glomstad stated that staff was aware of it
and working to remove it.
Mayor Brownrigg opened the item up for public comment.
Burlingame resident Alisa Ruiz Johnson voiced her support for the planned off-leash park.
Burlingame resident Steve Epstein discussed the challenges of the off-leash option at Cuernavaca Park. He
explained that it is frequently closed because of weather issues. Accordingly, he stated his support for the
project and thanked the City for taking action.
Burlingame residents Vicki Boyd, Lisa Stoltz, and Eileen Kim voiced their support for the project.
Two Burlingame residents voiced their concerns about the project including: regular park cleanings, smells,
parking, traffrc, and safety issues.
Mayor Brownrigg closed public comment.
Councilmember Beach asked if staff had concerns about the public comments on potential health and safety
issues. Parks and Recreation Director Glomstad replied in the negative.
Councilmember Ortiz stated that Council has discussed the need to add open space. He explained that he
believed this project was a great opportunity. He added that he believed staff was working to address the
public's health and safety concems.
Councilmember Keighran concurred with Councilmember Ortiz. She explained that the City didn't have a
lot of open space and that there wasn't anything in that area for residents.
Burlingame City Council
Unapproved Minutes
7
April 16,2018
Agenda Item 8a
Meeting Date: 5/2L/tB
Mayor Brownrigg asked if staff was asking for a cost allocation. Parks and Recreation Director Glomstad
stated that the cost estimate needs to be updated and wanted it to be part of next year's CIP.
Councilmember Beach thanked the neighbors for their concerns so that staff could help address these issues.
She stated that on the issue of safety, she was in favor of a space that is dedicated to dogs.
Vice Mayor Colson stated that it was a good use for an underutilized space
Vice Mayor Colson made a motion to have staff include the proj ect in the 20 1 8- I 9 CIP budget; seconded by
Councilmember Keighran. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote, 5-0.
e. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A FINANCIAL CONTRIBUTION TO
THE CITIZENS OF SAN MATEO COUNTY GUN BUYBACK PROGRAM
Police Chief Wollman explained that since late February 2018, the Citizens for San Mateo County Gun
Buyback have been working to obtain funds for a gun buyback event. He explained that gun buyback
programs can be an effective way to get guns out of the public's hands. The organization is working with the
San Mateo County Sherriff s department to hold a gun buyback event on May 5. He noted that the Sheriff s
department estimates that $75,000 is needed to run a successful event.
Police Chief Wollman stated that San Carlos is contributing $50,000 in matching funds. The towns of
Portola Valley and Woodside are contributing $10,000 each, with $5,000 matching fund grants. The cities of
Belmont, Redwood City, and San Mateo are contributing $5,000 each.
Councilmember Ortiz asked how much the event would be paying for the guns. Nilu Jenks from Citizens for
San Mateo County Gun Buyback stated that it would be $100 for pistols and $200 for assault weapons.
Councilmember Beach asked if there was any momentum from Burlingame students to raise matching
grants. Police Chief Wollman replied that he was not aware of any efforts by the students.
Vice Mayor Colson recommended reaching out to the PTAs to see if they would be willing to make
donations. She asked that after the event, Council be given a summary of how many guns were purchased,
what types, etc.
Mayor Brownrigg opened the item up for public comment.
Nilu Jenks from Citizens for San Mateo County Gun Buyback stated that the event would be held in
Redwood City and thanked the Council for their consideration.
A Burlingame resident talked about reaching out to Burlingame residents that had attended March for Our
Lives about donating money to the event.
Burlingame City Council
Unapproved Minutes
8
April 16,2018
Agenda ftem 8a
Meeting Date: 5/2L/LB
A Burlingame resident talked about the importance of getting guns out of children's homes and
communities.
Mayor Brownrigg closed the public comment.
Vice Mayor Colson made a motion to adopt Resolution Number 52-2018; seconded by Councilmember
Ortiz. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote, 5-0.
11. COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND ACTIVITIES REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
^. VICE MAYOR COLSON'S COMMITTEE REPORT
b. COUNCILMEMBER 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, Parking & Safety
Commission, Beautification Commission, Parks and Recreation Commission and Library Board of Trustees
are available online at www.burlinsame.orq.
14. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Brownrigg adjourned the meeting at 9:03 p.m. in memory of Calvin Joe.
Respectfully submitted,
Meaghan Hassel-Shearer
City Clerk
Burlingame City Council
Unapproved Minutes
9
April 16,2018
Agenda Item 8b
Meeting Date: 5/2L/tB
BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL
Unapproved Minutes
Regular Meeting on May 7,2018
1. CALL TO ORDER
A duly noticed regular meeting of the Burlingame City Council was held on the above date in the City Hall
Council Chambers.
2. PLEDGE OFALLEG TO THE FLAG
The pledge of allegiance was led by the Youth Advisory Committee.
3. ROLL CALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Beach, Brownrigg, Colson, Keighran, Ortiz
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
4. CLOSED SESSION
a.CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS : (GOVERNMENT CODE
SECTION 54956.8): 1200 OLD BAYSHORE IIIGHWAY . BURLINGAME. APN
NO. 026-142-130 AGENCY NEGOTIATORS; SYED MURTUZA. CAROL AUGUSTINE.
LISA GOLDMAN. KATHLEEN KANE NEGOTIATING PARTIES: SAN MATEO COUNTY
TNANSIT AUTHORITY AND CITY OF BURLINGAME UNDER NEGOTIATION: PRICE
AND TERMS
City Attorney Kane stated that direction was given but no reportable action was taken.
5. UPCOMING EVENTS
Mayor Brownrigg reviewed the upcoming events taking place in the City.
6. PRESENTATIONS
a. YAC PRESENTATION
Burlingame City Council
Unapproved Minutes
1
May 7,2018
Agenda Item 8b
Meeting Date: 5/2L/LB
Recreation Coordinator Nicole Rath introduced the Youth Advisory Committee (YAC). She explained that
YAC is comprised of 13 teens from seventh to twelfth grade, all with the passion of giving back to their
community. She introduced the members of YAC: Taylor Abbey, Jiana Ang, Tiana Carrol, Nicole Chan,
CannaHusain, Aiden Mendoza, Diana Milne, Sophia Morales, Lauren Shannon, Kaia Stannard-Stockton,
and Ethan Wan.
YAC representatives discussed events they assisted with this past year including: Fall Fest, Holiday Helping
Hands, Burlingame Muddy Mile, Royal Ball, Senior Valentine's Dance, YAC Attack, and Streets Alive.
Mayor Brownrigg thanked YAC for their hard work. He asked how YAC sets their agenda. Recreation
Coordinator Rath explained that at the beginning of every school year, YAC has an initial planning meeting
to discuss what events they want to take on.
Vice Mayor Colson asked when students would be able to submit an application to join YAC. Recreation
Coordinator Rath stated that openings would be announced in August. She explained that to join YAC,
students must be in seventh to twelfth grade, a resident of Burlingame or attend a school in Burlingame,
attend one meeting a month, and assist with various events during the year.
Councilmember Beach stated that seeing YAC in action was impressive, as they make each event better.
Councilmember Keighran asked if there are opportunities for YAC to talk about issues that they are
concemed about in Burlingame. YAC representative Aiden Mendoza stated that at each of their monthly
meetings there is time to discuss issues that arise. Recreation Coordinator Rath added that YAC invites
speakers to attend their meetings and speak to the students about issues in the community.
Councilmember Keighran stated that it would be great for Council to receive feedback from YAC on
different projects in order to obtain the youth's perspective.
Councilmember Ortiz stated he would like to see a few of the Councilmembers attend a YAC meeting. The
Council agreed.
7. PUBLIC COMMENT
There were no public comments.
8. CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Brownrigg asked the Councilmembers and the public if they wished to remove any item from the
Consent Calendar.
Councilmember Ortrzmade a motion to adopt the Consent Calendar; seconded by Councilmember Keighran.
The motion passed unanimously by voice vote, 5-0.
Burlingame City Council
Unapproved Minutes
2
May 7 ,2018
Agenda Iten 8b
Meeting Date: 5/2L/LB
a. APPROVAL OF A LETTER AUTHORIZING THE CITY'S PARTICIPATION IN THE
SUNSHARES 2018 PROGRAM
Sustainability Coordinator Michael requested Council approve a letter authorizing the City's participation in
the Sunshares 2018 Program.
b. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION G AN AGREEMENT WITH CATEGRAPH
SYSTEMS LLC TO PROVIDE ASSET MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE SERVICES FOR THE
MAINTENANCE DIVISIONS OF THE PUBLIC WORKS AI\D PARKS AND RECREATION
DEPARTMENTS
DPW Murtuza requested Council adopt Resolution Number 53-2018.
c.ADOPTION OFA RESOLUTION ACCE G THE NEIGHBORHOOD STORM DRAIN
PROJECT NO. 9. CITY PROJECT NO. 84780
DPW Murtuza requested Council adopt Resolution Number 54-2018.
d. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE POLICE DEPARTMENT HVAC
IMPROVEMENTS BY MARINA MECHANICAL. CITY PROJECT NO. 84330
DPW Murtuza requested Council adopt Resolution Number 55-2018.
e.APPROVING A PROFESSIONAL SERVI
AGREEMENT WITH CSG CONSUL ANTS. INC.. FOR CONSTRUCTION
DPW Murtuza requested Council adopt Resolution Number 56-2018
f. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
AGREEMENT WITH CSG CONSULTANTS,INC.. FOR CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION
AND MATERIAL TESTING SERVICES FOR PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
(SUMMERHILL HOMES AND BURLINGAME POINT)
g. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTIONS INITIATING PROCEEDINGS TO RENEW THE LEVY
AND COLLECTION OF ASSESSEMENTS FOR THE DOWNTOWN BURLINGAME
AVENUE STREETSCAPE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2018-19
DPW Murtuza requested Council adopt Resolution Number 58-2018, Resolution Number 59-2018, and
Resolution Number 60-201 8.
a
Burlingame City Council May 7, 2018
Unapproved Minutes
MANAGEMENT SERVICES FOR THE EL PORTAL 7 TROUSDALE CHANNEL
REHABILITATION. PHASE 2. AND SANCHEZ LAGOON FLAP GATES PROJECTS
DPW Murtuza requested Council adopt Resolution Number 57-2018.
Agenda Item 8b
Meeting Date: 5/2L/L8
BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT ASSESSMENTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2018.19 AND
SETTING PUBLIC HEARING FOR JUNE 4. 2018: AND APPROVING THE DISTRICT,S
ANNUAL REPORT FOR 2017.18
Finance Director Augustine requested Council adopt Resolution Number 61-2018.
i. QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPORT. PERIOD ENDING MARCH 31.2018
Finance Director Augustine requested Council approve the Quarterly Investment Report, period ending
March 31, 2018.
j. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTTON OF OPPOSITION TO THE PROPOSED TAX FATRNESS
AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT OF 2018 BALLOT MEASURE
City Manager Goldman requested Council adopt Resolution Number 62-2018
K. MAYOR BROWNRIGG RECOMMENDATION REGARDING MAYORS PLEDGE
AGAINST ILLEGAL GUNS
Mayor Brownrigg requested Council's approval regarding the Mayors' Pledge against illegal guns.
9. PUBLIC HEARINGS
There were no public hearings.
10. STAFF REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
a. CONSIDERATION OF APPOINTMENTS TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Mayor Brownrigg introduced this item by stating that the Council interviewed nine applicants on April 25,
201 8.
Councilmember Beach stated that last year she recused herself because of a connection she had with a
candidate that applied and re-applied this year. She explained that while an economic connection existed
between the candidate and herself last year, it no longer exists. Therefore, after discussing the matter with
the City Attorney, she was informed that she could vote this year.
Mayor Brownrigg opened the item up for public comment. No one spoke.
The Council voted and handed their ballots to the City Clerk.
City Clerk Hassel-Shearer read the ballots.
Burlingame City Council
Unapproved Minutes
4
May 7,2018
h. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO LEYY BROADWAY AVENUE
Agenda ltem 8b
Meetingr Date z 5/2L/L8
Mayor Brownrigg congratulated Will T.oftis, Richard Terrones, and Audrey Tse on being appointed to the
Planning Commission.
Mayor Brownrigg thanked all applicants.
b. UPDATE ON LIMEBIKE BIKE SHARING PILOT PROGRAM
Sustainability Coordinator Michael gave an update on the LimeBike pilot program. In December 2017, the
City agreed to a six month pilot program with LimeBike to initiate bike-sharing in the City. The pilot
program was at no cost to the City and allowed LimeBike to use the City's public right-of-way for parking
bikes. She stated that the City's goal was to provide the community with an alternative transportation
option and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Sustainability Coordinator Michael stated that in the past two months, LimeBike averaged 4,000 unique
rides a month in Burlingame. She added that the electric bikes were the most popular option.
Councilmemb er Ortiz asked why there was a spike in February of 5,670 unique rides. Sustainability
Coordinator Michael stated that she believed this was due to free promos.
Sustainability Coordinator Michael compared Burlingame's numbers to Alameda and South San Francisco,
two other cities using LimeBike. She explained that Burlingame's numbers are comparable to the other
cities. Next, she showed a heat map that highlighted the areas of town with the greatest number of rides.
Sustainability Coordinator Michael reviewed the concerns some members of the public have with the
program: bikes blocking pathways, cluttering streets, and kids not wearing helmets. She noted that the
number of complaints has decreased since the proglam's inception in January.
Sustainability Coordinator Michael stated that South San Francisco is extending their pilot program for
another six months. Alameda's pilot program ended, and the City will be releasing an RFP this week,
looking for a single operator. Additionally, she stated that LimeBike is undertaking pilot programs in San
Mateo, Palo Alto, Mountain View, San Jose, Walnut Creek, and Gilroy.
Sustainability Coordinator Michael discussed LimeBike's electric scooters. She reviewed the safety and
public concems that have been raised by their presence in Oakland and San Francisco. She noted that while
the City has not approved of their addition to the pilot program, San Mateo has, and therefore they will end
up in Burlingame.
Sustainability Coordinator Michael recommended that the City extend the pilot program for another six
months in order to collect a full year of data. She also recommended conducting a community survey and
creating a bike sharing policy.
Vice Mayor Colson asked if the City would issue an RFP after the extension of the pilot program ends.
Sustainability Coordinator Michael stated that the City could issue an RFP for a single operator like
5
Burlingame City Council MaY 7,2018
Unapproved Minutes
Agenda Item 8b
Meeting Date: 5/2L/L8
Alameda. She noted that another option would be to follow San Francisco's approach and allow for all
operators to apply for permits to operate their business in the City.
Vice Mayor Colson asked if there is an increase of electric LimeBikes in Burlingame. LimeBike
representative Alex replied in the affirmative.
Councilmember Keighran stated that she thought the pilot program was working well. However, she voiced
concem about bicycles blocking sidewalks. She asked that the pilot program include an educational
component for students on proper bike etiquette and where to park bikes. Alex stated that LimeBike is
creating videos about how to properly use the bike-sharing program and where to park bikes. Additionally,
he stated LimeBike has been reaching out to schools to provide helmets and conduct educational events.
Councilmember Beach stated that she received public feedback about residents' frustration with LimeBike's
customer service. She asked that LimeBike share with the City the kinds of complaints they receive from
residents and how they are responding. Alex responded in the affirmative.
Councilmember Beach stated that another comment she was hearing is that the bikes aren't located in areas
to help residents with the first mile of their commute. She asked if LimeBike was looking at usage and
creating new hotspots for stocking purposes. Alex replied in the affirmative. He added that LimeBike
retrieves bikes in neighborhoods to proactively combat complaints of bikes blocking sidewalks. However,
he noted that they would look into additional locations.
Councilmember Beach stated that she loved the idea of a community survey
Councilmemb er Ortiz stated that the feedback on the pilot project has been positive. He stated that he does
have concerns about the electric scooters and didn't want to see them in Burlingame at this time.
Mayor Brownrigg asked if 4,000 rides a month in the City equates to success for LimeBike. Alex replied in
the affirmative and added that the City has consistent usage.
Mayor Brownrigg asked that LimeBike provide users with a message at the end of their rides, reminding
them not to park on the sidewalk. Alex replied in the affirmative.
Mayor Brownrigg stated that after the pilot program ends, he would prefer a single operator for the City.
Mayor Brownrigg opened the item up for public comment.
A Burlingame resident asked how the City benefits from this pilot. Sustainability Coordinator Michael
stated that when the City was first looking at bike share programs, staff initially wanted a docking program.
However, after reviewing San Mateo's experience it was clear that the docking programs were more
expensive. She stated that South San Francisco used LimeBike and based on their good reviews, staff chose
this option for the pilot program.
Burlingame City Council
Unapproved Minutes
6
May 7,2018
Agenda Iten 8b
Meeting Date: 5/2L/LB
Mayor Brownrigg added that the City is not paying or being paid during the pilot program.
Mayor Brownrigg closed public comment.
Councilmember Beach asked about stocking LimeBikes at BART stations. Alex stated that LimeBike is in
discussions with BART to identify locations at the stations.
Councilmember Beach stated that she read articles that dock-less bike-sharing programs are starting to think
about creative ways to incentivize parking in desirable locations. She asked if LimeBike was doing the
same. Alex replied in the affirmative and stated that this was one of their top priorities.
Vice Mayor Colson concurred with Councilmember Ortiz's comments. She stated that she would like to
receive statistics on community outreach events including helmets given away and education events.
Additionally, she asked LimeBike to provide numbers at the end of the year concerning the City's
greenhouse gas reduction by using the bike-sharing program. She noted that she concurred with Mayor
Brownrigg that if the City goes out for an RFP, they should follow the same model as Alameda.
Vice Mayor Colson made a motion to authorize the City Manager to extend the pilot program for six months
with data reported back by request of the Council; seconded by Councilmember Ortiz. The motion passed
unanimously by voice vote, 5-0.
c. REVIE W OF A USER FEE COST RECOVERY POLICY FOR OF BURLINGAME
SERVICES;PTION OF A RESOL OF INTENT TO AMEND THE CITY OF
BURLING MASTER FEE SCHEDULE R THE 2018-19 FISCAL AR: AND SET
THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR SUCH AMENDMENT FOR JUNE 4. 2018
Finance Director Augustine stated that the User Fee Cost Recovery Policy was first brought to Council's
attention a few years ago after consultants undertook the Cost Allocation Plan and Cost Recovery Study.
She explained that the intent of reviewing the policy and Master Fee Schedule was not to grow revenues but
rather to lend some guidance to the establishment of fees.
Mayor Brownrigg explained that the questions being considered were if the City provides a service should
the individual pay for it, and if so, how much.
Finance Director Augustine stated that there are three types of fees that are charged:
1) user fees -when the user receives all or some of the benefit including park/facility rental
2) regulatory fees - include planning review and permits
3) fines and penalties - not voluntary and are enacted to discourage illegal or undesirable activities
She noted that user fees and regulatory fees are included in the Master Fee Schedule.
Finance Director Augustine stated that the more the community as a whole benefits from a service, the more
willing the City is to pay for those services out of the General Fund. She reviewed a list of things to consider
when setting fees including: 1) user versus community-wide benefits; 2) effect of fees on service use; 3)
Burlingame City Council ' *aY 7,2018
Unapproved Minutes
Agenda Iten 8b
Meeting Date: 5/2L/LB
feasibility of collection; 4) discounted rates; 5) cost allocation plan; and 6) making comparisons with other
communities/private sector.
Finance Director Augustine discussed the foundations of a good cost recovery policy. She explained that
cost recovery should be based on the full cost of the service, including direct and indirect costs. Direct costs
are the personnel and contracts associated with providing the service. Indirect costs include legal resources
and use of the facility. She noted that the policy should be a living document that is periodically reviewed
and updated. Additionally, the policy should include explanations of all the fees and factors considered.
Councilmember Ortiz asked if the annual update to the Master Fee Schedule includes an annual review of
costs associated with fees or does staff apply CPI to existing fees. Finance Director Augustine stated that
staff applies CPI even though costs may have increased more than that. She added that a fee study is done
every five to eight years to review the costs of all services.
Councilmember Keighran asked about the storm water pollution prevention construction permit fee. She
asked why the deposit has increased dramatically, while the fee has remained the same. DPW Murtuza
stated staff noticed that after the permit is pulled, contractors are not following through with the requirement.
Therefore, the deposit ensures that the work is being carried out.
Councilmember Keighran asked about the doubling of the Planning noticing fees from $320 to $640 and the
design review noticing fee from $445 to $890. CDD Meeker stated that this is because the City wasn't
capturing the double noticing requirement.
Vice Mayor Colson discussed the potential ballot measure regarding fees. She asked how many of the City's
fees would be impacted by the passage of this measure. Finance Director Augustine stated that she needed to
review the measure's impact and noted that it would change from year to year. City Manager Goldman
added that the measure would also limit future opportunities for jurisdictions to place taxes on the ballot.
Mayor Brownrigg discussed the fee covering the cost of inspecting industrial and commercial facilities for
storm water discharge compliance. He explained that the County used to undertake this inspection but that
recently the County cut this service. He asked if the City's fee was comparable to what the County charged.
DPW Murtuza stated that he would need to get back to Council with this information. He noted that the
County's fee didn't cover the cost of inspections. Additionally, there were concems from the Regional
Water Board that the County's inspections were inadequate. He explained that the City's fee is based on the
actual costs associated with the inspections.
Mayor Brownrigg discussed the encroachment fee for sidewalk tables. He stated that staff was
recommending increasing the fee from approximately $1200 to $1600. He explained that he wasn't clear if
this fee was by restaurant, by table, or by square foot. He noted that he believed that the community
benefited from having sidewalk tables. DPW Murtuza stated that the encroachment fee covers the cost of
inspections, reviewing layout, checking and clearing utilities, finalizing an agreement, and reviewing
insurance. He added that while there is ongoing work (for example: code enforcement violations, meetings
Burlingame City Council
Unapproved Minutes
8
May 7,2018
Agenda Item 8b
Meeting Datel. 5/2L/LB
with the business, and annual insurance updates) related to encroachment permits, the City only charges a
one-time fee.
Mayor Brownrigg stated that he believed a lot of restaurants were scraping by and that the fee should not be
increased. He stated his preference was for a more modest fee, and fines for those that don't comply with the
permit.
Councilmember Ortiz asked about the annual cost to renew an encroachment permit. DPW Murtuza stated
that it is a one-time fee, and while there are ongoing annual costs, the City doesn't collect additional fees.
Councilmember Beach stated that she previously brought up the same concems. However, she was
compelled by stafPs explanation of the different costs associated with this fee, that the fee is reasonable. She
explained that because it is a one-time fee, businesses that are using the public right-of-way, for business
purposes, are essentially getting an extension of their business for free. She noted that Council needed to be
mindful of giving a benefit to some, when others don't get the same benefit.
Councilmember Keighran stated that it is a privilege for these businesses to be able to extend their business
onto City property. Therefore, she believed that the fee was fair. She stated that on a future agenda she
would like Council to address the issue of keeping Burlingame Avenue clean, as she was noticing that some
businesses were not cleaning up in front of their stores. She explained that this results in the City needing to
spend additional funds to keep Burlingame Avenue pristine.
Councilmemb er Ortrz stated that he liked the idea of a penalty for businesses that don't keep their portion of
the sidewalk clean. He gave the example of a temporary suspension of a business' encroachment permit.
Mayor Brownrigg stated that he would suggest that staff and Council think through this fee and what other
ways it could be charged over the next year. He added that he didn't support the fee increase.
Mayor Brownrigg opened the item up for public comment. No one spoke.
Vice Mayor Colson made a motion to bring this item back for public hearing; seconded by Councilmember
Beach. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote, 5-0.
d.UPDATE ON POST O CE PROJECT AND ADOPTION OF RESO ,UTION APPROVING
EXTENSION OF EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATION AGREEMENT REGARDING PARKING
LOT E
City Attorney Kane discussed the background of the Post Office project. She stated that the City has had
ongoing discussions with the owner about incorporating Lot E into the project. She explained that there are
several requirements that must be met in order to allow Lot E to be incorporated into the project including
replacing all existing parking onsite and providing a large public plaza. She noted that the City will need to
undertake negotiations about the term and price of the conveyance of Lot E.
Burlingame City Council
Unapproved Minutes
9
May 7 ,2018
Agenda Item 8b
Meeting Date: 5/2L/LB
City Attorney Kane explained that the Post Office itself is protected by the Historic Covenant. The
Covenant ensures that certain aspects of the property, including the fagade on Park Road, remain intact.
City Attorney Kane stated that the City entered into exclusive negotiations shortly after the sale of the Post
Office. The original term of the exclusive negotiation agreement ("ENA") lapsed due to environmental and
economic constraints of the project. She explained that staff is asking Council to extend this agreement in
order to protect the City. She noted that the ENA extension does not bind the Council to any particular
action, nor does it assume anything about the environmental analysis. She added that the extension also
benefits the other party as they are assured that Lot E won't be marketed to others.
CDD Meeker proceeded to give a planning update on the project. He stated that staff released an RFP
seeking consultant services to prepare the environmental documents for the project. He explained that
because the project's application has not been submitted, staff used the description of the last concept, with
the understanding that when staff receives the formal application it may need to be tweaked. He stated that
staff is in the process of reviewing the RFP responses. He noted that staff will require full funding from the
applicant prior to the environmental review being undertaken.
City Attorney Kane stated that because the Post Office is a historic structure, there are concerns about
ensuring the property is maintained during this process. Therefore, City officials, along with members of the
public and the applicants, did an inspection of the Post Office to make sure it is safe. Subsequently, there
were minor repairs done to the satisfaction of the Building Department.
Vice Mayor Colson asked if the Historic Covenant covers additional portions of the Post Office. City
Attorney Kane stated that the Covenant goes into considerable detail. She explained that she highlighted the
fagade because it is the entire fagade and its relationship to Park Road. However, there are also a number of
architectural aspects of the building that need to be preserved.
Vice Mayor Colson asked what happens if a member of the public doesn't believe the Covenant is being
followed and seeks recourse. City Attorney Kane noted that there is a timeframe in which concerns can be
raised and that all of the documents will be available for review.
Councilmember Ortiz asked if the ENA includes any language about affordable housing and whether it
should be included. City Attorney Kane stated that the ENA quotes from the Downtown Specific Plan,
which talks about having mixed income. However, affordable housing hasn't been a focus of the project but
is something that can be discussed during negotiations for Lot E.
Councilmember Beach asked if there were any plans to have workshops for the public (outside of the public
hearings on the project) concerning the Post Office project. CDD Meeker stated that once the application is
received, staff will work with the applicant to encourage public meetings outside of the ordinary scope.
Councilmember Keighran asked that the City continue to inspect the property as needed. City Attorney
Kane replied in the affirmative.
Burlingame City Council
Unapproved Minutes
10
May 7,2018
Agenda Item 8b
Meeting Date: 5/2L/18
Councilmember Beach discussed the parking requirements and the potential in-lieu fees for the project. She
explained that she thought the radius for the in-lieu fees should be revisited.
Vice Mayor Colson asked if there was a mandate concerning where the parking in-lieu fees can be used.
CDD Meeker stated that parking in-lieu fees were adopted by resolution, and their usage is for the two
downtown areas.
Councilmember Ortiz stated that the number one complaint that he hears is not enough parking downtown.
Therefore, he is happy with the radius as it is.
Mayor Brownrigg opened the item up for public comment. No one spoke
Councilmember Beach made a motion to adopt Resolution Number 63-2018; seconded by Councilmember
Ortiz. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote, 5-0.
11. COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
a. MAYOR BROWNRIGG'S COMMITTEE REPORT
b. VICE MAYOR COLSO N'S COMMITTEE REPORT
c. COUNCILMEMBER BEACH,S COMMITTEE REPORT
12. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
Vice Mayor Colson asked that the Council discuss bee protection. The Council agreed to agendize this
matter
Mayor Brownrigg talked about a special impact fee for properties east of l0l because of the need to build a
levee. He asked that this be talked about at a Council meeting. Council agreed to discuss this matter.
13. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The agendas, packets, and meeting minutes for the Planning Commission, Traffic, Parking & Safety
Commission, Beautification Commission, Parks and Recreation Commission and Library Board of Trustees
are available online at www.burlinqame.org.
Burlingame City Council
Unapproved Minutes
11
May 7, 2018
Agenda Item 8b
Meeting Datez 5/2L/LB
14. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Brownrigg adjourned the meeting at9:13 p.m. in memory of Nancy Ortiz, Bryce Nelson, and Donald
Lloyd Huff.
Respectfully submitted,
Meaghan Hassel-Shearer
City Clerk
Burlingame City Council
Unapproved Minutes
t2
May 7, 2018
STAFF REPORT AGENDANO: 8c
MEETING DATE: May 21,2018
To:Honorable Mayor and City Council
Date: May 21,2018
From: Syed Murtuza, Director of Public Works - (650) 558-7230
Subject:Adoption of a Resolution Approving the Renewal of a Five-Year Agreement
with Veolia West Operating Services for the Operation and Maintenance of
the \lUastewater Treatment Plant Facility
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution approving the renewal of a
five-year agreement with Veolia West Operating Services (\ /VOS) for the operation and
maintenance of the Wastewater Treatment facility.
BACKGROUND:
\ /VOS has operated and maintained Burlingame's Wastewater Treatment Plant (\ A/VTP) facility
for the last 45 years. Although there have been several corporate name changes over the years,
this public-private partnership with M/VOS has been continuous. The City entered into the current
agreement with \AIVOS on July 1,2013, and the agreement is set to expire on June 30,2018. As
a result, in accordance with the renewal provisions of the contract, staff has spent the last several
months reviewing the operations, maintenance, and cost of providing \ A /TP services. Based on
the review of operations and performance of the \ AIVTP, staff finds that VWOS continues to meet
and exceed the State and federal requirements for treatment and discharge of wastewater.
Additionally, staff has completed a cost reasonableness suryey to verify that \AIVOS services and
costs are reasonable in comparison to other treatment plants in the area.
DISCUSSION:
The proposed renewal is a continuation of the same services as provided in the current
agreement with VWOS. The key terms of the agreement are:
Full turnkey operation and maintenance of processes at the treatment plant, as well as
maintenance of facilities, buildings, equipment, and the site in compliance with State and
federal regulations;
a
a Fullturnkey operation and maintenance of the 1079 Rollins Road Sewage Pump Station;
a New five-year agreement term to expire on June 30,2023;
1
Renewal of Veolia Wastewater Treatment Plant Agreement
Compensation for services to be annually adjusted based on consumer price index for the
San Francisco area;
Continuation of annual cost reasonableness review requirements to ensure cost effectiveness
of operations and maintenance, and adjustments as needed;
Updated responsibilities for treating wastewater in compliance with new permit to be issued
by the RegionalWater Quality Control Board (RWaCB);
Continuation of storm water pollution program responsibilities including sewer system,
overflow and illicit discharge prevention program based on latest RWQCB requirements; and
Updated five-year capital outlay and capital improvement plans
Attached is a survey that compares Burlingame's wastewater treatment services and operational
costs with those of other jurisdictions on the San Francisco Peninsula. Burlingame's \ A/VTP
facility is considered a "small" plant by industry standards as it processes significantly less than
10 million gallons of wastewater per day (MGD). Though small in size, it ranks third out of seven
wastewater treatment plants in the area in terms of cost of services efficiency. \ /UOS competes
very closely with the larger-volume regional treatment plants in the area without the benefit of the
same economies of scale efficiencies. When compared to the four other small treatment plant
facilities treating less than 10 MGD, Burlingame ranks first (lowest-cost service provider), at a
cost of approximately 39% less than the next lowest cost agency, and 45% lower than the
average cost for the seven comparison treatment plant facilities.
ln the last five years, VWOS has had no violations, no reported odor complaints, and no loss of
work time as well as no preventable accidents since 2013. ln the last five years, the Burlingame
\ AruTP has received five safety awards from the California Water and Environment Association
(cwEA).
lndustrial waste monitoring and inspection program;
Fats, Oil and Grease (FOG) control program;
Amalgam monitoring/filtering at dentistry clinics to prevent mercury discharge in the
wastewater;
Plan checking and inspection of private development construction to ensure compliance with
state regulations;
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a Community education about sewer science and pollution prevention programs;
2
May 21, 2018
ln addition to providing wastewater treatment operation and maintenance services, \N/OS
provides the following services to the City:
a
a
Renewal of Veolia Wastewater Treatment Plant Agreement May 21, 2018
Management of the annual Bayfront Cleanup event, including trash and litter cleanup along
the shorelines and Burlingame Lagoon; and
Repair and replacement of machine and equipment parts and administration and coordination
of large capital projects.
ln addition, \ /VOS has made positive contributions to the community including sponsoring the
Music in the Park event for the past 12 years, and providing sewer science and environmental
pollution prevention education programs to students in Burlingame High School.
Based on the attached cost comparison survey, the valuable community services MffOS
provides, and their outstanding performance in operating and maintaining the \MI/TP, staff
recommends approval of the five-year agreement with M/VOS.
FISGAL IMPACT:
The compensation to M/VOS for the \MruTP operation and maintenance services is $281,363 per
month, for a total of $3,376,356 for FY 2018-19. This cost will be adjusted annually per the
Consumer Price lndex for the San Francisco Bay Area. Sufficient funds are included in the
proposed FY 2018-19 budget for this purpose. Funding for future years' operations and
maintenance services for the \ /WTP will be programmed in future years' budgets.
Exhibits.
. Resolution
. Agreement
. \AAIVTP O&M Cost Comparison Survey
. MTVOS Contract Performance Analysis Report
3
RESOLUTTON NO. _
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNGIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME APPROVING
THE RENEWAL OF A FIVE-YEAR AGREEMENT WITH VEOLIA WEST OPERATING
SERVICES (VWOS) FOR THE OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF THE WASTEWATER
TREATMENT FACILITY
WHEREAS, the CITY has jurisdiction over the wastewater treatment plant located in
Burlingame (hereinafter called the FACILITY); and
WHEREAS, it is in the public interest that the FACILITY continue to be operated in the
most efficient and safe manner possible, while complying with all laws; and
WHEREAS, the CITY and VWOS have had an agreement for the operation and
maintenance of the FACILITY for forty-five (45) years; and
WHEREAS, staff has compared the CITY'S cost for wastewater treatment services with
the costs paid by other jurisdictions on the Peninsula and determined that the operational cost
for VWOS is substantially lower than the average cost per million gallon treatment of
wastewater; and
WHEREAS, based on staff's comparison of the wastewater operations costs for other
jurisdictions, the valuable community services provided to the CITY and outstanding
performance in delivering these services, staff recommends approval of the agreement renewal
with VWOS.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME
RESOLVES AND ORDERS AS FOLLOWS:
1. The City Council finds that all of the facts recited above and stated in the staff
report are true and correct.
2. The City Council approves and authorizes the City Manager to execute the
renewed agreement between the City of Burlingame and VWOS for the operation and
maintenance of the City's wastewater treatment facility, in the form attached to this resolution.
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 21st
day of May, 2018, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT
COUNCIL[iIEMBERS
COUNCIL[iIEMBERS
COUNCIL[iIEMBERS
City Clerk
version 2.0 02/26/20L9
City of Burlingame
Agreement
with
Veolia llater tlest Operating ServiceE Inc.
for
Operations and Maintenance
of the
City of Burlingame llastewater Treatment Facility
vereion 2.O 02/26/2078
rABtE OF CONTENIS
SectiON I. EMPLOYMENT
Section II. TERM
Secti.on III. VWOS SI{ALL PROVIDE THE FOLLOV{ING SERVICES
A. Facility Scope
B. Staffing
C. Technical Support
D. Employee Programs
E. Computer Systems
G. Service Patments
H. General Facility Maintenance System
I. Capital Outlay Plan
,1. Capital Improvement PIan
K. Plant Loadings
L. Reports
M. fndustrial Waste Program (IWP) and Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Program (STOPPP)
N. Evidence of Insurance
O. Compliance with Laws
P, l,aboratory
O. North Bayside System Unit (NBSU)
R. Conflicts of fnterest
Section IV. CITY RESPONSIBILITIES
A. Compensation
B. Audits
C. Easements and Liens
D. Existing Inventories
E. Capital Outlay and Capital Improvement PIan Reimbursements
F. Emergency Repairs
G. Digester Cleaning
Section V. LIMITATIONS
O&M Agreenent
Burlingame Wastewater Traatfient Eaci Tity
4
c.
E,
5
5
6
6
6
6
1
1
7
7
I
B
9
11
11
11
72
L2
L2
13
l_3
13
14
14
r-5
1E
3
verslon 2,0 02/26/2018
A. Influent Characteristics
B. City Acts
C. Eorce Majuere
D. Labor Conditions
E. Changes in Law
Section Vf . INDUSTRIAI WASTE PROGRAM (IWP), and slsRr'{},s1Es
por1,utroN pREtrrENrroN pRocRAM (STOPPP)
Section VII. ELECTRICAL PROGRAM
Section VIII. GENERAL PROVISIONS
A. Renewal
B. Termination
C. HoId Harmless
D. Water Ouality Protection
F. Insurance
G. City Financial Review
H. WOS Capital
I. VWOS Independent Contractor
.T. Waiver of Rights
K, Assignment
L, Equal Opportunity Employnent
M. Agreement Limits
O. Notices
ATTACH}GNT A
A, Adjustments to Compensation
B. Annual Adjustments - CPI-W
C. Periodic Adjustments
D. General Eacility Maintenance Payments
E. Capital Outlay Payments
F. Capital Improvement Payments
ATIACHI4ENT B
IIST OF VEHICLES AND EQU]PMENT
Laboratory Equipment
ATTACHMENT C
O&M Agreelnent
BurlLngame wasLewater rreatment. FaciTTty
15
L5
L6
16
t6
15
t?
L7
'17
18
L9
20
27
21
21.
2t
21
2L
22
22
22
24
24
24
25
27
27
27
28
2B
29
32
4
Version 2,0 02/26/2018
]NDUSTRIAL VSASTE PROGRAM
STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PROGRAM
Reference Material A-l
ROI.,L]NG FIVE YEAR CAPITAI, OUTLAY PI,AN
Reference Materiaf B-1
ROLLING FIVE YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
O&M Agteement
BurLingane Wastewatez freatment Fac!17ty
32
32
39
39
40
40
5
Version 2.A 02/26/2018
THIS AGREEMENT,
20L8 by and between:
entered into this _ day of
City of Burlingame, in the State of California(hereinaft.er called City)
and
Veolia water west operating services rnc., hording carj_fornia
General Contractors License Number 866429, a Delaware Corporationwith offi-ces located at:
3731 Wilshire BIvd., Suite 600 Los Angeles, CA 9O0j_0(hereinafter called VWOS)
WHEFEAS: CITY has jurisdiction over the wastewater treatmentplant located in the city of Burlingame (hereinafter called theFACILITY); and
WHEREAS: crrY is desirous that the FACrLrry be operated andmaintained in the most efficient and safe manner possibre, whilecomplying with all FederaL and State lawsi and
WHEREAS: vwos is a corporation speeializing in the businessof supplying operation, rnai-ntenance, and manaqement servj-ces forsuch waste treatment plants;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the
contaj-ned herein, the parties agree as follows:
promises and terms
SEction I. EMPI.oYA{ENT
The crrY engages WIos to provide operations, maintenance, andmanagement services for the wastewater treatment rACILITY underthe jurisdiction of the crry, and located at l-j_03 AirportBourevard, valves, and force rnain between the FAcrlrry and theRollins Road Pump Station, the Rol-lins Road lift station locatedat LA79 Rollins Road, and the landfill flare station located atthe FACILITY. VWOS shall perform the stornwater inspection for thewastewater treatment facility. wos shalr monitor the gascollection system at the randfill for proper operation and gasproduction of carbon dioxide and methane. WOS shalI ensure thatno pipe breakag:es have occurred., and that condensate drain sumpsremain functional.
O&M Agreenent
BurlTngame wastewater ryeatment tracl-ljty
6
Version 2.0 02/26/20La
Seclion II. TERM
The contract term shal-r commence on July L, zoLg and expire five(5) years thereafter unless renewed. in accord.ance with Sectionvrrr-A. Prior to each renewal, the city wilr work with vwos incompreting reasonableness cost review to verify that the city, swastewater treatment costs are comparable to other localcommunities with similar demographics and similar treatment plantfacirities. This study will recognize val-ue-added servicesprovj-ded to the City by WOS.
This contract may be renewed pursuant to provisions in sectionVIIf-A of this contract.
section rrr. vltos slrAtr. PRovrDE Tm rotl.owrNc sERvrcEs
A. Facility Scope
VWos shall operate and maintain the treatment processes that.incrude, but are not limited to, screening, griL removal, primaryclarification, acti-vated srudge, secondary clarification,chrorination, giravity thickening, anaerobic biosolid.s digestion,sorids dewatering, odor control- systems, recraim water system, andcogeneration facilities, Final effruent pumping and de-ehlorination systems wirl be operated as necessary. VWos shar]_also operate and maintain the RoLrins Road pump station at 1079Rorlins Road and the varves and force rnain located between theMain Pump Stat,ion and the FACILITY.
VWOS shall provide a complete assessment of the valves and forcemain located between the Main Pump Station and shall submit to thecity a budget for aIr reguired repairs or repracements by secondyear of the five-year contract. term. rt is understooa tnat a:_rrepairs and replacements will be successfully completed by woseither as a capit.al or maintenance repair project.
B. Staffing
VwoS shall staff the FACIIITY with qualified employees experiencedin wastewater treatment process contror and maintenanceprocedures. rt is the int.ention of wos to rnake operation of theTreatment Plant a model facirity for the san Erancisco Bay andsurrounding area- VWOS shalt provid.e the leve1 of coverage neededto ensure monitoring of arr routine wastewater treat,mentoperations called for in this Agreement. vwos sha11 staff theEACTLTTY with employees that meet or exceed necessary
O&M Agreement
Burlingiame llasteeJater lreatnent Fact)ity
7
Version 2.0 02/26/20t8
certification required by governmental ageneies as wel-I as provide
continued upgrading, education and training of these emproyees in
modern wastewater control, safety, environmental compliance, and
eguipment maintenance .
C. fechnical Support
vhios shall provj-de, as necessary, resources and professionars withexpertise and experience in process control, maintenance,
managemenL, and engineering from its affiliated companies andfaciliLies located throughout North America.
D.EmpJ.oyee Programs
VWOS shall maintain an education and safety program
employees. This program is to be patterned after the WOS
currently utilized at all- V[{OS -operated facil-ities. The
this prograrn will be the responsibility of WOS.
for all
Programcost of
E. Computer Systems
VWos shalr use a computer system and its proprietary software for
the generation of process information for FACILITY control. Tn theevent of contract termination, this software sha11 become theproperty of the CITY.
E. Fermit Conditions
VV[os shalI operate the FACTLf rY in compliance with the NPDESpermit (No. CA0037788. as amended. Average monthly limits for BOD,
and suspended solids are currently at 30 mg/L BOD5 and 30 mg/t
suspended solids. Should any changes occur in a new permit, Veolia
shall- comp j.y with new conditions and said changes will- be
addressed according to Attachment A, Section C, *PERIODIC
AD.]USTMENTS. "
G. Service Payments
VWOS sha1l pay all expenses required for the normal operation and
maintenance of the FACrLrrY, which includes (1) personnel costs,(2) utilities, (3) chemicals, (4) fuels and l-ubricants, (5) normal
operating supplies, (6) all residuals, including bio-solids r griL,
and screenings, and except as limited in .. I and J,, below,
maintenance repairs and replacement of capital equipment.
O&M Agreement
BurTingame Wagtewater ?rea tilent Faci 7i ty
B
Version 2-0 A2/26/20L8
H. General FaciJ.ity Maintenanee Systeil
VVitros shall provide maintenance and repairs for the equipment,
structures, and vehicl-es consistent with industry preventive
maintenance standards and practices and/or manufacturer, sspecifications utilizing a computerized maintenance management
system. The CITY shall have the right t.o inspect. these maintenance
records during normal business hours. The crry shall have theright to engage a consultant to review maintenance at the
FACIL]TY.
I Capital Outlay PIan
VWOS shall annually develop and submit to the City by February 28
of each year a fj-ve (5) year rolling Capital Outlay plan- This
Capital Out.lay plan will be revj-ewed and approved by the City by
June 30. See Reference Material- A, It is agreed to by both parties
that the City wiIl retain all maintenance and repair funds
developed with this rolling five 5) year Capital Outlay plan, but
t,hat WOS shaLl direct and manage all projects within the Capital
Outlay fund as requJ-red to ensure compliance with all waterqualit.y permits for the FACILITY for which VWOS is responsible.
,.7. Capital Iryrovement FIan
VWOS shal-l annually develop and submit to the City by February 28
a five (5) year rolling Capital Improvement plan. See Referenee
Material B-1. This Capital Improvement plan will be reviewed and
approved by the Cit.y by .7une 30. It is agreed to by both parties
that the City will retain funds developed with this rolling
five (5) year Capital Improvement p1an, but that WOS shall direct
and manage aII projects within the fund as required to ensure
compliance with all water quality permits for the FACILITY for
which WOS is responsible.
K. Plant Loadings
VWos agrees to maintain copies of prant loading and performance
data over the term of this Agreement. This data shalt coverT at
any given time during the execution of this Agreement, theprevious five years of operation up to the current time, fn the
event of premature contract termination, these records will become
the property of the CITY.
O&M Agreement
Burl ingane ttasteuater ?reatment Facil [ty
9
velslon 2.0 02/26/20LA
t. Reports
l-) Monthly - WOS shal_I provide the CITY with monthlyreports that summarize capitar outlay and capital improvementactivities. vwos shalr provide an accounting summary of monthlycapital outlay and capital improvement expenditures.
2l Annual - VWOS shall provide the CITY with an annualreport by ,January 31- of each year that summarizes prant
performance and major evenLs and activities which affected theoperation of the FACILITY.
3) NPDES VWOS shall prepare all- NPDES permit reports
and submit these to the CITY for approval prior to transmittal toappropriate agencies,
4) An annual meeting wirr be herd between the city and
WtrOS to review facility performance in relation to contracLual_indices'and triggers. The meeting wiIl be conducted prior to March1 and will focus on data collected over the previous calendaryear. VWos shalr prepare for city a report that reviews datacorl-ected over the preceding year and wirr summarize the emergingtrends. The indices to be assessed incrude, but are not rimitedto, the fol-l-owing:
a. Flow
b. 5-Day Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD,) Ioading
c. Total Suspended Solids (fSS) Ioading
d. Electrical consumption
e. E.l-ectrical unit cost
f . Biosol-ids quantities
g. Biosolids unit disposal cost
h. Grit and Screenings quantities
i. Grit and Screenings unit disposal cost
shourd VV[os find that its costs are outstripping the adjustmentsauthorized by this contact, it may meet with the City to review
sueh it,ems. The city and vwos agree that they will negotiate ingood faith to reach an equitabte adjustment to compensation,incruding overhead and profit, refrecting such cost of increasesor decreases.
M fndustrial Waste Program (IICP) and Sto:m l|ater poLlution
Prevention Program (SIOPPP)
O&M Agreement.
Burlinqame wastewatet freatment Facility
L0
version 2.0 02/26/2A18
\/tl{OS shall provide the CITY with an Industrial ?{aste Program,
a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program. These programs
discussed in more detai]- in Section 6 of this contract
Attachment C.
and
are
and
t-
N. Insurance
VWOS shall maintain insurance during the life of this Agreement in
compliance with the following provisions:
WitrOS shatl not commence work under this Agreement until it
shall have obtained aII insurance required under this SECTION
which is reasonably commercially available and such insurance
sha1l have been approved by CITY as to form, in the amounts
specified herein , nor shall VWOS allow any subcontractor to
coflunence work on its subcontract until aIl simil-ar i-nsurance
required of the subcontractor shall have been so obtained. and
approvedr or in such form and limits as the CITY shall
otherwise reasonably approve prior to the commencemenL of such
work by the subcontractor.
L . Compensation lnsurance. WIOS shall take out and maj-ntain,
during the life of this Agreement, Workers Compensation
insurance as required by State Law for aII its employees
employed at the FACILITY and j-n case any work is sublet, VWOS
shaII require its subcontractor simiJ-arIy to provide Workers
Compensation insurance for alI of the latt.er's employees,
unless such employees are covered by the protecti-on afforded by
VWOS. In ease any class of employees engaged in work under this
Agreement at the FACIIITY is not protected under this Agreement
at the FACILITY is not protected under any Workers Compensation
Iaw, VWOS sha1l provide, and shall cause each subcontractor to
provide, adequate insurance for the protection of employees not.
otherwise protected, VWOS indemnifies CITY for any damage
resulting to it from f ailure of either VWOS or any
subcontractor to take out or maintain such insurance.
l-. Commercj-a1 General Liabil-ity,- Automobile Liab--ility, Pollution
Liabilitv, and Professional Liabil-itv Insurance. VWOS shall
take out and maintain during the life of this Agreement such
commercial general Ilability, automobile Iiability,,pollution
liability, and professional Iiability insurance as shall
protect CITY, its elective and appointive boards, officers,
aqents and employees, WVOS and any subcontractor performing
work covered by this Agreement from claims for damages for
personal injury, including death, as wel-l- as from claims for
property damage which, may arise from VWOS' or any
O&M Agreenent
Burlingame r9asteHater lxeatment Eaci Tity
t- 1_
version 2.0 02/26/2A18
subcontractor/ s operations under this Agreement, whether suchoperations be by vwos or by any subcontractor, or by anyonedlrectry or indirectry ernployed by either VWos or anysubcontractor provided, however, that vwos is required to takeout and maintain insurance only against cl-airns to which vwos,ho]d harmless of city set forth in section vrrrc of thisAgreement appries. The amounts of such insurance shalr be asfoll-ows:
a)Commerc al General Li ability PubIic Liabilitv (per sonalfniurv and Propertv.Damaqe) fnsurance. In an amount not lessthan $2r 000r 000.00 (each occurrence) for injuries,incruding, but not limited to, death to any one person and,subject to the same limit for each person, in an amount notless than $4,000r000.00 qeneral aggregate Iimit , and in aform at least as broad as fso "occurrence" Form cG 0o0l_.
b)Arrt-omotr Ie Liabilitv I surance for Au s Owned or Man qed bvwos.limit
fn an amount not less than $2r000r000 combined singleper accident for bodily injury and property damage-
c) PoIl-ution Liability- Insurance, f n an arnount
$2,000,000 per claim for bodily injury orbecause of a pollution event resulting
operations or completed operations.
not l-ess thanproperty damagefrom covered
d) Pro{gssionar Li-abiritv reisurance. rn an amount not ress
$1r 000r000 per claim sufficient to insure VWOSprofessional errors or omissions in the performance ofparticular scope of work under this agreement.
than
for
the
1. Proof of carriase of Insurance. VWos sharl furnish crry/through the Public works Director, concurrentry with theexecution hereof, with satisfactory proof of carriage of theinsurance required, and that each carrier shalr give crry atleast thirty days prior notice of the cancerlation of anypolicy during the effective period. of this Agreement. VWosshal1 provide an endorsement to its commerciar generarliability automobile liability, and pollution fiififi_tyinsurance policy demonstrating that the crry, its elective andappointive boards, officers, agents, and. emproyees have beennamed as additional insured, s to provide indemnity pursuant tosubparagraph 3 above. A11 insurance sharr be primary, and anyinsurance or serf-insuxance maintained by crry sha1l be excessof vwos' insurance and sharr not contribute to it. vwos,insurance shall- appry separately to each insured agrainst whom a
O&M Agreenent
Burlingame Wastevrater ?reatrnenE FaclJi ty
L2
I
version 2.0 02/26/20L9
claim is
Iimits of
rnade or suit
the insurer's
insurers with a Best,s
authorized to do business
brought, except with respect to theIiability.
rating of no less than A-:VIIin the State of California.
with
and
1-. Deducti.b.].9s. Any deductibles and self-insured retentions mustbe declared to and approved by crrY, such approval not to beunreasonably withheld.
L. Acceptabilitv of Insurers.Insurance shaII be placed
O. CoupJ.ianee with Xears
sharr comply with all applicable state, federal and locar
and ordinances as they apply to the EACILITY.
VWOS
Iaws
CONTRACTORS ARE REQUIRED BY LAW TO BE LICENSED AND REGUI,ATED BY
THE CONTRACTORS ' STATE LICENSE BOARD, WHICH HAS ,JURISDICTION TO
IN\TESTIGATE COMPLAINTS AGAINST CONTRACTORS IF A COMPLAINT
REGARDING A PATENT ACT OR OMISSION IS FILED WITHIN FOUR YEARS OF
THE DATE OF THE ALLEGED VIOLATION. A COMPLAINT REGARDING A I,ATENT
ACT OR OMISSION PERTAINING TO STRUCTURAIJ DEFECTS MUST BE F]LED
WTTHIN 10 YEARS OF THE DATE OT THE AILEGED VIOLAT]ON. ANY
QUESTIONS CONCERNING A CONTRACTOR MAY BE REEERRED TO THE
REGISTRAR, CONTRACTORST STATE LTCENSE BOARD, p.O. BOX 26000,
SACRAMENTO, CA 95826.
P. Laboratory
L) NPDES - VV{OS wiII perform aII laboratory sampling,testing, and anaryses presently required by existing NpDEs permit
No. cA 0037788, to be lssued Jury Lt 20L8, and provide a eA/ecprogram. Perform Lab analysis for potable water samples for crryon an as needed basis. The frequeney for the analyses wourd bedetermined by an event or failure of Iab services provided byothers to the City.
2t Sampling perform the sampling and. analysis forPriority Porrutants, Monthry Metars, Toxicity Testing, semi-Annualsludge Testing, and waste Minimization program. samplingparameters and sampring freguency are provided in NpDES permit No.
cA 0037788.
3) Accreditation - Conduct four (4) sets of fieldtesting and pay the required fees to attain accreditation forthe laboratory at the FACILITY.
O&N Agreement
BurlJ-ngame ldastewa 8er lreatment Eaci 7 ity
J.J
velsion 2.a 02/26/2oLg
A. Norttr Bayside Systen Unit (![BSU]
The North Bayside System Unit. (NBSU) is the Joint. Powers Authority
responsj-ble for operation of certain shared transport and disposal
facilities. The NBSU provides de-chlorination and effluent
disposal services for four municipal wastewater treatment plants:
Burlingame, MiIlbrae, SF Airport, and South San Francisco/San
Bruno. The joint effluent is de-chlorinated prior to discharge
into San Francisco Bay. VWOS shall monitor and report to the City
any changes in the Joint Powers Authority. VWOS sha1l operate the
Facility in a manner that conforms to effluent parameters set
forth in the treatment plant's NPDES permit #CA0037788. \/!1]OS shal_I
attend NBSU meetings and keep Lhe City appraised of pertinent
issues. VWOS shaLl assist the City in the evaluation process
involved with annual rnaintenance and repairs of the NBSU Iine.
WOS shall assist the City with development of SOP's for planned
and emergency shutdown procedures of the NBSU l-ine.
R. Conflicts of Interest
VWOS understands that its professional responsibilities are so1eIy
to the CITY. VWOS has not and shall not obtain any business
holdings or financial interest in the City of Burl-ingame. WOS has
no business holdings or agreements with any individual member of
the Staff or management of the CITY or its representatives nor
shall it enter into any such holdings or agreements with such
individuals. In addition, VWOS warrants that it does not presently
and shal1 not acguire any direct or indirect financial interest
adverse t.o those of the CITY in the subjeet of this Agreement, and
it shall immediately disassociaLe itself from such an interest
should it discover it has done so and shaIl, at the CITY's sole
discretion, divest itself of such interest. VWOS shall not
knowingly and shall take reasonable steps to ensure that it does
not employ a person having such an interest in this performance of
this Agreement. If after employment of a person/ VWOS discovers it
has employed a person with such direct or indirect interest, VWOS
shaIl promptly notify CITY of t.his employment relationship, and
shaIl, dL the CfTY' s sole discretion, sever any such employment
relationship, or at the discretion of VWOS, no longer employ that
individual in the performance of the Agreement. The term
"financial interestr " as used in this Paragraph, does not include
this Agreernent, or any obligations undertaken by VWOS pursuant to
the Agreement, or any Iitigation, lawsuits or claims that may
arise from VWOS's operations under this Agreement.
Section fV. CITY RESPONSIBILITIES
O&M Agzeement
Bur]ingame Waatewater freatment FaciTity
L4
version 2.0 02/26/20L9
A. Compensation
Effective .fu1y 1, 2018, the CITY shall pay to VWOS as compensation
for t.he services performed, t.he sum of $281,353 based on the CPI-W
increase for San Francisco Bay area as published for the month of
February 201-g by the U.S. Department. of Labor, Bureau of Labor
Statistics. This compensation amount shall be payable at the first
of each month the services are to be rendered. Compensat.ion will be
subject to annual adjustment as described in At.tachment A. Payment.
to VWOS for this and all other compensation or reimbursemenL arising
from other provisi-ons of this Agreement. shalI be made within twent.y
(20) days after receipt of invoice. Late payments in excess of 20
days will be subject to a service charge of 1.5? permonthormaximum
Iegal rate, whichever is less.
It. is agreed and understood that the process for payment provided
in this Agreement is intended to accommodat.e an ongoing system.
Therefore, it is expected that t.he City shall pay compensation under
this section that the City may dispute in either amount or extent,
and that payment by the City shall not be interpreted to wai-ve any
rights the City may assert to dispute the amounts claimed by VWOS
through the dispute resolution process of this Agreement or
otherwise.
To the extent that any portion of the compensatj_on described
herein violates applicable law or the t.erms of any existing debt,
bonds, grants or other financing or debt incurred by the CITY
prior to the effective date relating to any of the FACILITv, VWOS
and the CITY shaI1 adjust the compensation to comply with such
applicable law or the terms of such existing debt, bonds, grants
or other financing or debt, as applicable, in order Lo provide
VWOS with the amount. of compensat.ion contemplated under this
Ag,reement.
B. Audits
The CITY, at its own expense, shal1
costs at any t.ime during the life of
have the right to audit VWOS
this Agreement.
C. Easements and tiens
VWOS shalI maintain existing easements, l-icenses, and warranties
for the mutual- benefit of both parties.
D. Existing fnvent,ories
O&M Agreenent
BurTingame Wast.ewater Treatment FaciTity
13
verslon 2.o 02/26/20t8
The City shall provide vehicles and equipment listed in AttachmentB for use by wos (as identified on Eebruary 26, 20j-B). This listsha]l be updated annually and included in the annual budget updatereport as an amendment to Attachment B. Said vehicres andequipment shall be in good and serviceable condition and sha11comply with al-I OSHA and State licensing requirements. Should CITYerect to remove any item listed. in At.tachment B from use, crryagrees to replaee said item immediately with comparable vehiclesor equipment, and the city shal-r be responsible for providingproper maintenance on said repl-acement vehicres or equipment.
E- Capital. Ortlay and Capital Irprovement Plan Reifibursenents
City shall pay for all capital outlay and capital improvernent planimprovements so that the water quality and other performanceguarantees are not compromised. payment for these invoicedservices is detailed in Attachment A - Sect,ion E.
Capltal Out,layllmprovement items that will improve productivity orother savings to the operator will not be approved unless the CfTywil-I reeeive a satisfactory portion of the economic benefit.Capital Outlay,/Improvement items related to personnel and. publicsafety, facility protection, compr5-ance with nev, permitrequirements, expanded capacities, or product quality enhancementsha1l be evaluated on their particular meri-ts and purchased inaccordance with available funds; however, these capitaloutray/rmprovement ltems remain the sol-e responsibitity of thecity. The city and VWos understand that add.itional capitaloutlay/rmprovement, items may be requi-red at the facirities andthat VI,[os under a turnkey and financing approach can providesignificant savings to the city. wos shaLl complete a detaileddesign, operation, and finance submittal for the city, s review foreach potentj-al turnkey project. The city, at its sole discretion.can elect to proceed and would then adjust VWOS compensation andcontract term to mutuarly agreeabre payment terms. The crry mayalso proceed to perform the work with its own forces or tocontract otherwise to have the work performed. rn suchcircumstances/ vwos sharr have the option to review such crryperformed work for acceptabirity prj_or to assumption ofresponsibility for operation and maintenance.
F. Emelgency Repairs
wos shall- have the right to make emergency capital outlayexpenditures, with prior notification to the city and cityconsent, if such expenditures are necessary to continue operation
O&1,1 Agreement
ButT inqana flasterater rteatment FaeiJ.Lty
76
VerBlon 2.0 02/26/2018
of the FACTLfTY j-n order to provide for employee pubric safety andenvj-ronmental prot,ection. The CITY will reimburse VWOS for t.heseemergency capitar outlay expenditures in accordance with
Attachment A-Section D.
G. Digester Cleaning
Provide for digester cleaning since it is beyond normarmaintenance practice and is not a normal operating expense.Digester cleani-ng budgeting wirl- be accomplished in the annuarcapitar pran process. Both parties recognize that prant upsets andunusual operations costs could be incurred hy the limitations ofthe digester system during periods of digester creaning. Any costsincurred by VWos due to digester inadequacy during creaningperiods shall be the responsibility of the CITY.
Section V. LilfiTATfONS
A. Inf,luent Characteristics
Should FACIIIIY influent wastewater characteristics exceed
FACTLTTY design parameters as determined by the design engineer asoutLined in the Design Engineer's Memorand.um dated september L2,1990 prepared by Black & Veatch, which states:
Average Annual Daily Flow 4.5 MGD
Biochernical Oxygen Demand (BOD) LOt32O lbs. perTotal Suspended Solids (TSS) l-0,300 lbs. per
da
da
v
v
Or should influent contai-n abnormal, toxic or other substanceswhich cannot be removed or treated. by the existing FACrLrry orcontain discharges which violate the applicable sewage ordinances.
VTIOS does not accept responsibility for associated effluentcharacteristics or damages. VVIOS sha.l-I advise Lhe CITY in writingof the abnormal situation and planned course of action within 4Bhours of occurrence. However, W\JOS in such event agrees to ret,urnFAcrLrrY effluent to contract limits within twenty (20) days afterinfluent returns to acceptable l_imits,
B. City Acts
wrongful, wi11fur, or negligent acts of the crry, through itsofficers, agentsr or employees and wrongfut, willful or negligentacts of third parties r or acts of God, which cause damage to theFACTLTTY or to other parties or properties, sharr be theresponsibility of the CITY.
O&M Agreenent
BurTingame .f,tasteryater Tteatment ?aci)ity
17
a
a
a
vereion 2.0 02/26/2078
VWOS shall not be responsible for:
Wrongful, willfu1 or negligent acts of the CITY, by itsofficers or employees or agents not affiriated with wos, andWrongful, wiIIful, or negligent acts of third. parties notaffiliated with VWOS, and
Act.s of God
which cause damage to the FAcrLrrY or damage or injury to otherparties or properties.
C. Eorce Majeure
Extraordinary or unusuar occurrences associated with frood,earthquakes, fire or acts of God which increase maintenanceexpense, repair costs, or other expense shall be theresponsibility of the CITY.
D. Lahor Conditions
In the event labor stoppage by employee groups (e.g., picketing)
causes a disruption with wos' employees from entering and workingat the treatment prant FAcrLrrY, t,he crrY, with vwos, assistanceor VWOS at its own option shal-I seek appropriate legal injunctionsor court orders. During such a designated period, wos shalr
operate the EACILITY on a best-efforts basis until labor relations
are normalized and shall not be liabl-e for any fines or penalties
that are imposed as a result of such di-sruptions. The CfTY retainsthe right to assume responsibil-ity for the FACILITY should a labor
stoppage endanger public health and safety.
E. Changes in Law
changes in regulations or laws that require modification
treatment processes, addition of new or additional chemicals,
chanqes in staffing regulrements will require modification
contract scope and may require increased palrment by the City
WOS per Attachment A, subparagraph 4,
of
or
of
to
section vr. r![DUsrRrar. lrAsTE PROGRAII (mP] , and sroRu rrargR
potr.urroN pRElrrrrrroN pRoGRAtr (SEOPPP)
WOS shall use its best efforts to operate and manage therndustrial waste Program (rwP) and the storm water pollution
Prevention Program (sroPPP) for the crry. These programs shallconsist of: investigating sources of unusual wastes enterj-ng theCITY's wastewater treatment plant, sewer system overflows, and
O&M Agreement
ButTTngame llastewater lreatment Facili ty
1B
version 2.0 02/26/20L8
wj-nterj-zation of construction projects; documentation of illicit
discharge to the storm water collection system and arrinspectj-ons; performing f ield monitori-ng; inspection ofcomrnercial, industrial, and construction sites (mostry non-residential) for stormwater and if applicabre for grease trapconditions and maintenance; maintenance of equiprnent assigned. tothe program; sample coll-ection and analysis, as per Attachment C;
and laboratory work. Ar1 reports, monthly and annuarry, sharr beprepared by VWos in strict confidence and only submitted to theDirector of Public works or designate. The Director of public
Works shall, at all times, be the Director of the programs.
VVIOS shall pay all expenses j-ncurred in the operation
management of the IWP, and STOPPP including wages, salaries,
consumab.l-es such as gasoline and laboratory chemicals -industrial waste laboratory testing by an outside laboratory,
VWOS sha1l staff the program with qualif ied personnel. Aincrease or decrease in inspection, monitoring, sampling,
testing freguency time for a l-2-month average period from the
described in Attachment Ct sha1l be subject to the terms
conditions of Attachment A, Section D, .\GENERAL PROVISION
ADJUSTMENTS. "
Electric cost baseline information and adjustment termsprovided in Attachment A.
Section VII. ELECTRfCAI. PROGRAU
rt is the int.ent of the electricar program to provide a basis for
a.l-1 electricar costs. The program is keyed on an annualized costper kilowatt-hour and annual total kilowatt-hour consumption.
Adjustments to electricar costs shall be the resurt of (1) changesin erectrical rates by the el-ectrical utirity, (2) major additions
or deletions of plant equipment, and/or (3) events outside thecontrol of WOS that impact overall electrical consumption.
and
and
and
15?
or
Iist
and
EOR
are
Seclion VIIT. GENERAI, PROVISIONS
O&M Agteement
BurLlngafie tlastewater freatment Faci Tlty
L9
Adjustments to the unit cost electrical component of the
compensation shal-I be made annually during the annual- review ofproject indices based on a 1-0+ increase or decrease in the kwhunit price. Should overall electrical consumption over themonitoring period increase or decrease by 1-08 due to circumstances
outside the control of VWOS, compensation shall be adjusted
accordingly.
ve:csion 2,0 02/26/20L9
A. Renewal
This Agreement may be renewed for successive termsyears each as provided in this Section.
of f ive (5)
rf v[[os desires to renew this Agreement, it sharl give writtennotice to the CITY no later than the January 1 preceding the ,JuIy
1 termination date of the Agreement. rf VVVos cond.itions the
renewal of the Agreement on an increase in compeneation above theprice adjustment contained in Attachment A *ADJUSTMENTS TO
COMPENSATION,' VWOS shall include in the notice a clear staternent
of the increased compensation and a justification of the requested
increase.
Upon receipt of a written notice of renewal, the CITY and \/WOS
will prepare a reasonableness rate and cost report to compare theprojected VWOS charges vs. wastewater charges and rates being paid
by other municipalities for comparable wastewater treatment
facilities in the surroundi-ng area. The reasonabl-eness report wiIl
be provided to the CITY no later than April 1 preceding the ,JuIy 1-
termination date. Any costs incurred in preparing the
reasonableness report by an outside agency shall be paid by the
CITY.
Following receipt of the reasonableness report, the CITY may in
its sole discretion deterrnine whether to renew the Agreement on
the terms offered by VWOS, negotiate a different agreement with
VI,IIOS, or take any other action that it, determines appropriate. No
Iater than June 1 preceding the .TuIy 1 termination date, CITY
shall notify VWOS of its decision with regard to renewal. Should
the CITY not provide this written notice, the Agreement wiIl
terminate on the July 1 terminat,ion date.
If the Agreement is noL renewed, VWOS shal-l- continue to provi-de
the current operations staff and perform services in accordance
with this Agreement for one hundred eighty (l-80) days beyond the
date of termination. During this extended period, CITY shatl
compensate VWOS based on VWOS' direct costs X overhead factor of
154 X 1.1 profit fee multiplier.
B. Te:mination
Either party to t.his Agreement may terminate this Agreement upon
mat.erial breach by the other party providing that such terminating
party first provide written notice of such breach to the other
party and such breach is not corrected within ninety (901 days. In
t.his event, VWOS shall continue to provide the current operations
O&M Agreement
Butlingane Wastewater freatment FacTTlty
20
I
Version 2.0 02/26/207A
staff for a period of at least one hundred eighty (180)
beyond the set date of termination. CITY shal-I compensate
based on VVIOS' [ (direct costs x t158] overhead factor) x
profit fee multiplierl.
days
VWos
1.l-
C. BoId Harmlese
VWOS hereby agrees to, and shal1 hold the CITY, its elective and
appointive boards, officers, agents and employees, harmless from
any liability for damage or claims for damage for personal injury,
including death, as well as from claims for property damage which
may arise from WtrOS' operations under this Agreement, whether such
operations be by WOS or by any subcontractor or subcontractors;
provided, however, it is understood that this Agreement does not
apply to bodily injury or property damage arising out of the
diseharge, dispersal, release or escape of the EACILITY effluent
into or upon land, the atmosphere or any water course or body of
water unless as a result of the negligence or willful or wrong,ful
mj-sconduct of VWOS or any subcontractor of VWOS. Except as
provided for above, V[0OS agrees to and shall defend CITY and its
elective and appointive boards, officers, agents and employees
from any suits or actions at 1aw or in equity for damag'es caused
or alleged to have been caused by reason of any of the aforesaid
operations; provided as follows:
a) That CITY does not, and shall not, waive any rights
against VWOS that it may have by reason of the aforesaid
hold-harmless agreement, because of the acceptance by
CITY, or the deposit. with CITY by VWOS of any of the
insurance policies hereinbefore described in Section
III-N.
b) That the aforesaid hold*harmless agreement by VWOS shall
apply to a1I damages and claims for damages of every
kind suffered by reason of any of the aforesaid
operations of VWOS or any subcontractor, regardless of
whether or not such insurance policies shall have been
determined to be applicable to any of such damages or
cl-aims for damaqes, except as provided in the second
paragraph Sect.ion VIII-D.
Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Agreement: (1)
neither VWOS nor its subeontractors or vendors of any tier, nor
their respective officers, directors, ernployees, agents or
representatives, shall- be liab1e to CfTY for conseguential,
incidental, indirect or special damages or loss of actual or
anticipated profits, cost in exeess of estimated costs r or
O&M Agreenent
BurT|ngatne i{as|ewater ?reataent FaciTity
2L
version 2.0 02/26/20L9
increased expenses of manufacturing', relating directly orindirectly to this Agreement; (2) crry/s excl-usive remediesagainst VWos and its subcontractors or vendors of any ti-er, andtheir respective officers, directors, emproyees, agents and.representatives shall be only those expressly provided in thisAgreement; (3) VWOS sha]I name the CITY as an additional insuredon the comprehensive general liability insurance required to becarried under this Agreement, using as the endorsement theattached Exhibit A, with combined sj-ngre limits of liabitity of $2million per occurrence and $+ mirLion aggregate,. and (4) thecumulative 1iability of wos, its insurers, its subcontractors andvendors of any tier, and their respective officers, dJ-rectors,
ernployees, agents and representatives arising from or rerating inany way to the Facility (exclusive of vV{os' riability underSection VIII C for reimbursement of fines and penalties) shall inno event exceed on an annuaf aggregate basis an arnount equal tothe rimits of insurance requj-red to be carried by VWos underthis Agreement, and crrY assumes any excess liabirity. Theforegoing shall apply regardless of whether liability or remediesarise in contract, negligence, st.rict liability or otherwise.
D. Water Quality Protection
VV{OS shall reimburse the CITY for those fines and civil penalties
imposed by regulatory agency on crry during the term of the
AGREEMENT for violations of the crry's NPDES permit #cA003T7BB,issued on ,July L, 20L8, caused solely by VWOS, negligence orwilIfu1 misconduct. VWOS shall be gj-ven full authority to contestsuch violations and crrY shall assist VWos in aIl such
proceedings.
E. Dispute Resolution
If the parties cannot agree upon the respective liabilities of theparties, either party shall notify the other that such a
disagreement exlsts, within ten (l-0) days after receipt of suchnotice, each party shall appoint an arbitrator. Within twenty eAldays after those arbitrators are named, they shall appoint a third.arbitrator. The three arbitrators sha1l forthwith meet and
determine the respective liabilities of the parties. Arbitrationshall- be conduct.ed according to the rules of the AmericanArbitration Assocj-ation, Construction Industries Section. The lawsof the state of california regarding arbitration, insofar asappricable, shall govern any arbitration under this paragraph, Thearbitrators may examine evidence and wj-tnesses. The decision of atl-east two of the three arbitrators shalr be final and binding upon
O&N Agreement
BurT ingame wastewate" Treatment FaciJ ity
22
version 2.0 02/26/2070
the parties hereto. The decision of the arbitrators shalI be in
writing; and immediately upon its completion, one copy shall be
transmitted to the CITY and one copy to VltiOS.
F. Fire Insurance
CITY shall purchase and maintain standard fire insurance policies,
i-neluding extended coverage to the ful1 insurable value of the
EACILITY; and WOS shall be named as an additional insured under
these policies during the life of this cont.ract. VWOS shall have
no liability to CITY with respect to loss, damage, or destruction
covered by such policies. The City may also elect to provide aII
or part of such coverage through self-insurance or coverage
provided by an insurance poo1.
G. City ['inancial Review
WiiOS agrees to make its books and records relative to the
operation of the FACILITY available for inspection by CITY, its
designated aqent r or designated independent accountant for the
specific purpose of determining the validity of any requested
increase for compensation and for the general purpose of
ascertaining compliance with the provisions of this Agreement.
Such inspections shall be made during normal business hours.
E. \II{OS Capital
Any capital equipment provided by VWOS during the term of this
Agreement shall remain the property of WIOS. In the event VWOS
selIs such equipment, the CITY shall have first option to
purchase.
I. \ntOS fndependent Contractor
It is understood that the relationship of VWOS to the CITY is that
of an independent contractor and that none of the employees or
agents of WOS shal1 be considered employees of the CITY.
iI. I{aiver of Rights
The failure on the part of either party to enforce its rights as
to any provision of the Agreement shall not be construed as a
waiver of its rights to enforce such provision i-n the future.
K. Assignment
O&M Aqreement
BurlTngame WasLewater lreatment Ead-)ity
23
vexsion 2,0 02/26/20La
This Agreement shall not be assigned by either party without. the
prior written consent of the other unless such assignment shal-I be
to an affiliate or successor of either party.
L. Equal Opportunity nrFloynent
VWOS warrants that. it is an equal opportunity employer and shal-l
comply with applicable regulations governing equal employment
opportunity. VWOS does not and shall not discriminate against
persons employed or seeking employment with them on the basis of
dger sex, co1or, race, maritaL status, sexual orj-entation,
ancestry, physical or mental disability, national origin,
religion t ot medical condition, unless based upon a bona fide
occupational. qualification pursuant to the California Fair
Employment & Housing Act. fn performing services under this
Agreement, VWOS sha11 not discriminate against. any permit holder
or persons receiving or seeking service on the basis of age, sex,
color, race, marital status, sexual orientation, ancestry,
physical or mental disability, nati-onal orj-gin, religion r or
medical condition.
M. Agrreernent Linits
This Agreement contains the entlre Agireement between the CfTY and
WIIOS and supersedes aII previous or contemporaneous
communications, representations, or agreements. This Agreement may
.be modified only by written amendment signed by both parties.
N. City AcceEs
CITY public works staff shall have access to the EACILITY covered
by this Agreement at all times, but shall be required to first
sign in at the FACILfTY main office.
O. Notices
AIt notj-ces shall be in writing and delivered in pereon or
transmitted by cert.ified mail, return receipt requested, postage
prepaid. Notices reguired to be given to WOS shal1 be addressed
as follows:
Senior Vice President
Veolia West Operating Services, Inc.
3731 Wilshire BIvd., Suite 600
Los Angeles, CA 9001-0
Notices required
follows:
to be given to the CITY. shall be addressed as
O&M AgEeement
BurTTngame Wastawater ?reatment FaciTity
24
I
Version 2.A 02/26/20L8
CITY MANAGER OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME
City HalI
501- primrose Road
Burllngame, CA 94010
or to such other address as may be specified in written notice.
rN wrrNESs WHEREOF, the crry and wos have caused thisAqreement to be duly executed as of the day and year first abovewritten.
By By
CITY MANAGER VEOLIA WEST OPERATING SERVICES,lNC.
CITY ATTORNEY
LtIlrtlAQTF'f rJ IUVr.
CITY CLER.K
O&N Agreement
Burl ingame Wastewatet Treatment FaciTity
Z5
vereion 2.0 02/26/201A
ATEACEMENT A
ADJuSTIIIENTS TO COMPENSATION
A. AdJustments to Couqrensation
From commencernent of Lhe contract until the contract expires,
compensation shall be adjusted to as per herein provided by this
contract. ft is the objective of this contract to minimize such
adjustments. Examples of items that trigger contract adjustment,s
are as foll-ows:
Annual - Consumer Price Index (CPI-W) for a1l- costs other
than electricity.
Perig-dic - Electricity based on an increase or decrease of
l-Ot in the L2 month average unit cost and/or the 1"2 month
consumption of eleetricity in kil-owatt hours.
Periodic - An increase or decrease of more than 10t in 1-2
month averages for flow and loading
Periodic An increase or decrease of more than 10t in
Biosolids and Grit and Screenings wet ton per year volumes
and/or cost required for disposal-.
Periodic Other factors such as changes in regulatory
requirements, approved WIIOS turnkey project improvements,
etc.
The annual CPI adjustment shall be irnplemented on July 1 of
each year based on the change in CPI from February 28 of the
current year and February 28 of the previous year. Al-I periodic
adjustments shall- be discussed during the annual meeting held
prior to March l- of each contract year.
A1I adjustments shall be made retroactive to the date that
the adjustment exceeded the upper or lower trigger values.
Suitable substantiating informatj-on shall be provided by VWOS to
demonstrate the need for the adjustment. Adjustments shall be
based on cosL exclusive of the annua.l changes in CPI and shall be
bitled or credited to the CITY by May l- of that year.
B. AnnuaL Adjustmants - CPI-fl
Compensation shall be increased or decreased annually according to
the following U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistlcs
(B.t.S.) index:
O&M Agreernent
BurTTngame wastewater 8reatment, FaciTity
a
a
a
a
a
Zb
Verslon 2.0 02/2612015
consumer Price rndex (cPr-?[) (san Erancisco-oakLand-san .Tose,
L982-84 : 100). The first increase or decrease in compensationshalr be effective July Lt 2a18 and shall be based. on the sumtotal percentage change in'the above-mentioned indices betweenFebruary 28, 20L7 and February 28, 20L8. Each subsequent increaseor decrease in compensation sharl. be effective each July 1 andsharr be based on the prior February 28 to February 28 change j_n
the B.L.s indices. shourd the B,L.s index change the method and
manner of the cPr-w then both parties agree to deverop a newcompensation standard, which equitabry adjusts the annual
compensatj-on.
The percentage increase or
be calculated annually.
decrease in service compensation is to
WEIGHT rNDEX CHANGE WEIGHTED B CHANGE
0. Bs6 x
(t Change in CPr-W
San Francisco-OakIand-
San Jose L982-84 = 100)
WT. % CHANGE
NorE: weighted factor is based on the percentage of overall basic
compensation contract costs exclusive of electricity.
C. Peri.odic Adjustments
1) Electricity
compensation sharl be increased or decreased for utirity rate
changes and/or overarl electricar consumption. Adjustments tothe unit cost electrical component of the compensation sharl be
made annually during the annuar review of project indices-based
on a LOt increase or decrease in the annualized kilowatt-hour
unit price. should overall electricar consumption over themonitoring period increase or decrease by l-0% due to
circumstances outside the control- of vwos, compensation shallbe adjusted accordingly. Adjustments shatl be made retroactive
to the date that the cost impact of the change. was documented
by electric bills.
Initial baseline values for electrical unit cost andoverall electrical consumption are as fo.l-.l_ows:
$0.16 per kilowatt-hour (kWh), Monthly Rolling Averag:e
(MRA) : $O .1842. per kWh
O&M Agreenent
BurTingame Wastewater ?reatmenf FactLtty
21
Version 2.O 02/26/20]-8
5,800 kwh/day, MRA : 5,094 kwh/day
2l FIow and Loading
The Annual Fee for services under this AGREEMENT
the following Project characteristics:
is based upon
Flow
BOD"
TSS
Monthly BOD,
Loading
(lbs. /day1
Monthly
Suspended Sotids
Loading
(Ibs. /dayl
9 mgd,
400 #/day,
/day, MRA =
= 9,009 #/day
# /day
3.
8,
8,400 #
MRA
9, 1.35
Any annualized (l-2-month average) increase or d.ecrease of 10*in f1ow, BoD loading, or ss loading shall give either party theoption to renegotiate service compensation upon 30 days writtennotification to the other party. A1r compensation ad.justmentsshall be retroactive to the beginning of such L2-month period.
BoD roading and ss loading for the purpose of this contractshal1 be calculated as follows:
(monthly average
influent BOD, in
average influent
gallons per day) x
of daily plant
mg/Ll x (monthly
f low in mil-lion
(8.34 Ibs. /salIon)
(monthly average of daily plant
influent suspended solids in mg/t) x(monthly average influent flow inmillion gallons per dry) x (8.34
1bs. /gaIlon)
3 ) Residuals Dj-sposal
Residuals. disposal, which includes screenings, grease, grit,
and biosolids, shall be the responsibility of wos. The currentbaseline conditions for these residual amounts are: Biosolids4,280 Wet Ton/Year and per ton cost of $46.1'7, Grit and.screenings BB wet ron/Year per year and net per ton cost of
$277 .00.
4) General Provision for Adjustments
O&N Agreenent
Butlinqane Wasterater freatmerlt Faci llty
2B
rn the event that any changes in the scope of operation for LheFACILITY shoul-d occur (other than t.hose discussed elsewhere inthis Attachment), incruding but. not limited to changes in flow or
VergLon 2.0 02/26/20L8
loadings, changes in governmental regulations, reporting
requirements, and effLuent standards which increase the cost of
operating the FACILITYT or additions of turnkey capital or
maintenance equipment by VWOS to the City, VWOS shall be entitled
to additional compensation which would include reasonable amounts
for overhead and profit. Such additional compensation will be:(1) negotiated by the parties within a reasonable period of time
orr if no negotiated. agreement can be achieved, (2) set as a
compensation adjustment of [ (direct costs x VWOS 154 overhead
factor) x 1.1 profit fee mul-tiplierl .
D. General- Facility Mainte$ance Payments
The general Facility Maintenance fund encompasses a wide range of
smaller repair and maintenance purchases made during the year. The
contractually approved CPI-W for the San Erancisco-Oakland-San
Jose Bay Area is applied to the General Eacility Maintenance fund
for an annual j-ncrease/decrease depending on the results of the
February B. L. S. index. VWOS shall provide a rnonthly invoice to the
City for all General Eacilit.y Maintenance Expenditures. The
invoice amounts wiII show the actual expense with L58 for overhead
and 108 for profit.
E. Capital outlay Payments
The City agrees to maintain throughout the contract year the
maintenance plan funds that were approved on or before ,June 30.
VWOS shal-I complete these repaj-rs as required in a timely fashion.
It is agreed that as these maintenance projects from the
maintenance plan are completed, VWOS shaIl provide a monthly
invoice to the City for all rnaintenance plan expenditures. The
invoice amount,s will show the actual expense with 158 for overhead
and 10? for profit.
E. Cap:[ta1 Irprovement Payruents
The City ag'rees to maintain throughout the contract year the
Capital Improvement plan funds that were approved on or before
.Iune 30. VWOS shall- complete these repairs as required in a timely
fashion. It is agreed that as these projects from the Capital
Improvement plan are completed, VWOS shal1 provide a monthly
invoice to the City for all Capital frnprovement plan expenditures.
The invoice amounts will show the actual expense with 5? for
overhead and Bt for profit. Capital Improvement plan items shall
exceed the Capital Outlay dollar limit of $50,000 and/or extend
equipment l-ife span. The CITY and VWOS will revj-ew the overhead
o&1,1 Agteefient
BurJ.lngame Wastewat,er Tteatment Facl-flty
29
Version 2.0 02/26/2018
and profit percentages for Capital fmprovement work with respectto reasonabfeness duri-ng the annual review meeting held in March.
AeM Agreement
BurTingame rgasteL'ater freatnent FaciJ.ity
30
r.
velsion 2,0 02/26/2019
Treatrnent Plant
. ISCO Sampler:
ISCO Sampler:
ISCO Sampler:
a ISCO Sampler:
ISCO Sampler:
a ISCO Sampler:
a ISCO Sampler:
t rSCO Sampler:
ISCO Sampler:
Yale Forklift:
O&M Aqreement
BatTingame Wastewater Tteatment FaciTTty
A1TTACIIMENE B
IJIST Ol' VEETCLES AIID EQUIPMENE
a
Model No.
Serial No.
Model No.
Serial No.
Model No.
Serial No,
Model No.
Serial No.
Model No.
Seria] No.
Model- No.
Serial No.
Mode] No.
Serial No.
Model No.
Serial No.
Model No.
Serial No.
Model No.
SeriaI No,
371-0-ER
200M00528
37 L o-FR
02A01-s0s
2900
197L01654
37 00
1_96L00588
3700FR
0921 9249
370 0
8297929L
37 r_0
196L005B8 Backup Head
(no case)
4700
2L2H02]-35
4700
272H00629
GLP0 6ovxNVSQ0 91
B875v03196c
a
a
a
a
2003 Ford Pickup: License +L127574
VIN #1ETYR].OEO3PA32O64
Yard .Tockey used for sludge trailer movement
2006 Equipment Trailer: License 4HP9000
vrN #5NHUEX2 1- 96T6052 l- 9
a
3l-
a
Version 2.0 02/26/20L9
Laboratory Equipment
. Coliform Incubator IC-62 Scientific products
r BOD (Biological Incubator) by Hot Pack
. Blue M-Fecal Coliform H,O Bath, Model: Magni-Whirl
r VWR Drying Oven, Model 1350F
r Market-Forge Autoclave (for Sterilizat,ion)
. Thermolyne 6000 Furnace
r Hach 2L00P Turbidimeter
. MicroMaster Microscope-Fisher Scientifie
r Corning Stirrer/ttotplate
r Tek Pl-ate 20 (Hot Pl-ate)
. Aquafine UV Disinfection Unit
r YSI DO Meter, Model 5000
e Hach DR2700 Spectrophotometer SN: L364962
. Bioassay custom built skid (4' edition)
r MasterFlex peristaltic bioassay feed pump, SN: I02006L73
r Kenmore (4oC Refrigerator), SN 83675403
. Labconco Flask Scrubber (Steam Dishwasher)
e YSf DO Met.er, Model 550A, SN 05D2489 AE
o Thermo Orion pH Meter, 4Star, SN 005355
o YSI DO Meter, Model 59, SN 90L022078
r Troemner Analytical Weights, SN l-1255
Equipment/Instnrments 2017
. OHAUS Pioneer Analytical BaLance
. Oxford Bacti cinerator
. BIue M-Fecaf Cofiform HrO Bath, Model Magni-Whirl
o BOD Incubator (Biological Incubator) by Hot Pack
o Honeywelf BOD Recorder temperature
r Fisher Scientific Centrifuqe-Accuspin tm 400
O&M Agreetuent
BurT ingame t{a.stewater freatment Facility
JZ
Version 2.0 02/26lz0]-g
. EM Science Chemical treatment SpiJ-I Kit
r American Sci-entific Products Coliform fncubatox IC -62
Scientific products
. Coors USA Or/Pyrex England Desiccator
r Coors USA O, Desiccator
o Nalgene/Coors USA 5/32 K Desiccator
r YSI-MultiLab IDS 4010-1 DO meter
. YSI DO Meter Mode1 5000
. YSI DO meter model 550A SN 05D2489 AE
r YSI DO meter model 59 SN 90L022078
r YSI Pro BOD IDS DO Meter Reader (sensor)
o Haws Eye Washer
. Labconco Flask Scrubber Steam Dishwasher
o Hamilton Fume Hood
r Hach 2100N Turbidimeter
r Kenmore refrigerator (A'el, SN 83675403
. Market-Forge Sterilmatic Autoclave (for sterilization)
. MasterFlex Model peristaltic Bioassay feed pump 7524-40
r MicroMaster Microscope - Fisher Scientific
o Celestron Microscope
. Ohaus Balance 14835 Halogen
. Thermo Electron Corporation pH/Conductivity meter
r Therrno Electron Corporation ORfON 4 Star pH/Conductivity
meter (sensor)
. Toledo AG SN 8149521085 pH/meLer
r Pump aerator
r Pump aerator
r Pump aerator
r Emergency Shower
. Spectrophotometer DR 3900 Hach, SN 1700592
r Spectrophotometer DR2700 Hach, SN 1364962
. Corning Stirrer/Hotplate (4 units)
OeM Agreement
ButTlngane Nastewater Sreatirent FaclLity
??
version 2,0 02/26/2OLB
. Corninq PC 420D Stirring-Heater plate
r Thermolyne Furnace 6000
r Heusser Neweigh Thermometer NfST SP l-088 (00-1100C)
r Heusser Neweigh Thermometer NIST SP 1-088 (00-500C)
. OHAUS Explorer Pro Top Loading Balance
r Troemner Weights Lab, SN 11255
. I{ach 2100 P ISO Turbidimeter Kit calibration
. Aquafine UV Disinfection Unit
. VWR Dryer Oven, model 1350E
. VWR Dryer Oven, model 1350G
O&M Agreenent
Butlingame r{a,itegrater freatment Fac777ty
34
Version 2,0 02/26/2018
A:TITACEMENT C
INDUSTRIAT WASTE PROGRAM
In accordance rrith CITY Ordinance Number L512rVeolia shall
continue to implement the "Source Control Program" (also referred
to as an "Industrial Pretreatment Program") as authorized by the
City of Burlingame. CA to regulate the commerci-al and industrial-
wastewater discharges into the municipal sewer system. Veolia
shall adhere to the requirements and conditions contained in CITY
Ordinance Number 1572t 40 CFR Part 403, and San Francisco Bay
Regional Vf,ater Quality Control Board Order No. R2-20L7-0042,
Amendment of Waste Discharge Requirements for Municipal and
Industrial Wastewater Discharges.
The number of
,fune 30, 20L8
industries covered under this program, as of the
staff report is:
Industry Type Number in Category
2018 Contract
Light 1,25
Moderate 30
Heavy 20
Non-Conventional/ Groundwater 6
SIU 1
TOTAL L76
WOS shall be responsible for aI1 rout.ine testing for the above
industries. However, it is anLicipated that additional retesting
beyond that normally required will be necessary. In such
circumstances. VWOS shall invoiee the CITY for actual cost of
these tests.
STORM WATER POLLUTION PRE\IEIITION PROGRA}i
In accordance with NPDES Permit No. CAS6120008 (aka the Municipal
Regional Stormwater Permit and/or l{RP) , and NPDES Permit No.
CAS000001, the annual number of commercial and industrial
facilities to be covered under this program (or activity to be
taken in support of the program) requiring site inspections,
follow-up inspections, routine reports and reporting, assistance
wit.h enforcement actions, meetings, etc, is:
o&M Agreement
BuzTingame rdastet{ater ?reatment FacT Tity
3s
version 2.0 02/26/2AL8
City of BurJ.ingetne and Veolia l{ater
MunLcipal Regional Storunater NPDES Permit Scope of Work -
Instrrection Category Nurnbers
City of Burlingame and Veolia $Iater
Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Per:mit Scope of Work -
Description
O&M Agreement
BurTingame tlastewatet Treatment Facillty
Municipal Regional Permit
Section
Number in Category
(or activity to be taken)
C.3 - New Development and
Redevelopment
r-30
C.4 - Industrial and
Commercial Site Controls
96
C.5 - Illicit Diseharge
DetecLion and Elimination
otr
C.6 - Construction Site
Control
t-0
C.7 - Public Information and
Outreach
Annrraf Bav Sho line Clean-up event
coordi-nation, and Burlingame _on the
Avenue event informational booth
C.L3 - Copper Controls (Assist City staff)
C.15 - Exempted and
Conditionally Exempted
Discharges
(Assist City Staff)
Annual MRP Reporting Assist City staff)
MRP-associated meetings and
conferences
(Attend as required)
STOPPP regulatory review and
commentary
(As required)
Wastewater Treatment Plant
Storm Water Permit Management
and Compliance
1
City Code Enforcement support (Assist. City staff when STOPPP-
related)
36
Version 2.0 02/26/20L8
VeoIia Water will provide support to achieve eompliance with the
Cit.y of Burlingame' s Municipal Regional Storrnwater NPDES permit
(MRP) reguirements. Technical support includes, but is not limited
to, Provj-sions C.3 (New Development and Redevelopment), C.4(Industrial- and Commercial Site Controls), C.5 (Illicit Discharge
Detection and Elimination), and C.6 (Construction Site Control).
Veo1ia staff will also represent the City at the San Mateo
Countlnride Water PoLlution Prevention Program (SMCWPPP) Committee
meetings.
Task 1: Review New Developnent and Redevelop Plans
Provision C.3 of the MRP requires Permittees to use their planning
authorities to include appropriate source control, site design,
and stormwater treatment measures in new development and
redevelopment projects to address stormwater runoff pollutant
dj-scharges and prevent increases in runoff flows from those
proj ects .
Veolia Water will help supporE the following tasks in Provision
C.3 of the l,lRP:
o Attend pre-planning/planning meetj-ngs Lo ensure applicant is
aware of C.3 requirements.. If not regulated by C.3, encourage
green infrastructure and source conLrol measures. (C.3.a)
r Plan check of al1 submitted projects and upon request by City
staff. Review projects to ensure C.3 cornpliance, encourage
green infrastructure and source control measures when not
regulated by C. 3 . (C.3/C.6')
e Develop and maint,ain database (or spreadsheet) of regulated
projects, special projects, and hydromodification management
projects. (C. 3.b.v/ C.3.e.ii/C.3.g.iv)
r fmplernent the Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Verification
Program for install-ed stormwater treatment systemsi conduct
O&M inspections per I.IRP using the OcM inspecti-on form
(c.3.h. )
r Conduct enforcement actions consistent with the Enforcement
Response PIan for all O&M inspections. (C.3.h.ii. (7))
o Review site designs for small projects and detached single-
family home projects. (C.3.i.)
r Attend pertinent'training'. (C.3/C.6\
r Assist with internal compliance assessments, program
improvements, training, outreach, and other t.asks upon
request. (C.3)
r Attend weekly Code Enforcernent Meetings with City staff.
OeM Agreenent.
BuETingafie rrasterrater ?reatftent Facllity
37
vergion 2,0 02/26/20La
. Att.end quarterly SMCWPPP New Development comrnittee meetings
or notify the City if unable to attend.
Tash 2: Stormwater Business Inspections
Provision C.4 of the MRP requires Permittees to implement an
industrial and commercial sj-te contro] program at all sites that
could reasonably be considered to cause or contribute to pollution
of stormwater runoff
Veolia Water will help support the following tasks in Provision
C.4 of the MRP:
r Conduct inspections for commercial and indr-istrial businesses
that have a reasonable likelihood of contributing to
stormwater pollution. Conduct follow-up inspections for
businesses that have potential or actual BMP violations.
Docurnent all site inspections on the C.4 Business Inspection
Form electronically via CloudCompli or on paper. (C.4.b)
r Following slte inspections, assign or update business
priority level (as established in c.4.b.ii. (21 (a) ) for each
facility, site contact information, change of ownership,
closure, etc. in an elect.ronic database. (i.e., CloudCompli)
(c. 4 .b. ii)
r Add new businesses to an efectronic database (i.e.,
CloudCompli) that warrant inspections obtained from drive-by
or monthly business license report. (C.4.b.ii. (2) (c))
o Develop, implement, and update the City's Business Inspection
Plan annually. (C.4,b.)
r Develop, implement, and update the City's Enforcement
Response PIan as needed. (C.4.c.)
r Conduct inspections per BIP and ERP to prevent stormwater
pollution. Ensure that inspections are record using an
inspection form and are uploaded to an electronic dat.abase
(i.e., CloudCompli) , (C.4.d. )
e Attend pertinent staff training(s) as needed. (C,4.e.)
o Attend guarterly SMCWPPP CII meetings or notify the City if
unab]e to attend.
O&M Agreement
BurJ.ingane WaBtewatex Treatnent FaciTity
20
Version 2.0 02/26/20l.8
Eask 3: Illicit Discharge Follow-up Investigations
Provision C.5 of the MRP requires Permittees to implement theillicit discharge prohibition and to ensure iIlicit. d.ischarges are
detected and controlled that are not otherwise controlled under
Provisions C.4 and C.6.
Veoria water will- herp support the forlowingi tasks in provision
C.5 of the MRP:
r Develop, implement, and update the City, s Enforcement
Response PIan as needed. (C.5.b)
e Conduct timely investigations for reports of itlicit spills
and dumping. (C.5.c.)
r Update spill and discharge compliant tracking and enforcement
database (i.e., CloudCompIi) . (C.5.d. )
o Develop and implement etandards and Best Management Practj-ces
(BMPs) for mobile businesses and enforcement strategy.
Conduct outreach to mobile businesses and inspect as needed.
(C.5. e. )
[ask 4: Construction Site Inspections
Provision C.5 of the l4RP requires Permitt.ees to implement a
construction site inspection and control program at aI]
construction sites, with follow-up and enforcement consistent with
each Permittee's respective ERP, to prevent construetion site
discharges of pollutants into the storm drains.
Veolia Water wilI help support the following tasks in Provision
C.6 of the MRP:
e Develop, implement, and update the City, s Enforcement
Response PIan (ERP) as needed. Conduct associated enforcement,per ERP. Ensure timely correctj-on and fo1low-up of potential
and actual non-storrnwater discharges. (C.6,b.)
r Conduct year-round construction inspection prograrn to ensure
BMPs are in place through aII phases of construction until
the site is fully stabilized by landscaping or the
installation of permanent erosion control measures. Oversee,
inspect, and require compliance and cleanup at aII
construction sites year-round. (C.6.c.)
r Review applicant's Stormwater Pollutj-on Prevention PIan
(SWPPP) or erosion control plan to ensure compliance with the
City's Municipal Code and BMP handbook. Verify that sites
disturbing one acre or more of land have filed a Notice of
fntent for permit coverage under the Construction General-
O&M Agreement
BurTingame lgasteNafer Treatment Facility
39
Version 2.0 02/25/20t8
a
Permit. Provide educational materials to
operators/developers, as appropriate. (C. 6.d. )
By September L". each year, notify aII site developers and/or
owners disturbing one acre or more of soil to prepare for
upcoming wet season; conduct monthly inspections during wet
season at particular sites per MRP requirements; develop and
maintain spreadsheet/database of inspections including
frequency, compliance, priority, etc. on CloudCompli; provide
appropriate educational materj-als; reguire timely corrections
as necessary per ERP; and record aII inspections on a written
or elect.ronic inspection form (via CloudCompli). (C.6.e.)
Attend staff training(s) at least every other year. (C,6.f,)a
f,ask 5: Sutrryort Copper Control-E
Provision C.13 of the MRP requires Perrnittees to implement the
control measures and accomplish the reporting on those control
measures according to the provi-sions described in C.13. The
purpose of these provisions is to implement the control measures
identified in the Basin Plan amendment necessary to support the
copper site-specific objectives in San Francisco Bay.
Veolia Water will- help support the foll-owing tasks in Provision
C.13 of the MRP:
r Encourage use of appropriate BMPs for managing waste during
post-constructioni educate installers and operators on
appropriate BMPs for managing eopper-cont.aining wastes;
enforce against noncompliance. (C.13.a. )
r Provide as-needed support through inspections and enforcement
for illicit discharges from pools, spas, and fountains that
contain copper-based chemicals. (C. 13.b. )
o Identify facilities likely to use copper or have sources of
copper and include in inspection program plans; educate
industrial inspectors on industrial facil-ities l-ikely to use
copper or have sources of copper and proper BMPs for them;
and ensure that proper BMPs are in place at such facilities
to minimize discharge of copper to storm drains including
consideration of roof runoff that rnight accumulate eopper
deposits from ventilation systems on site. (C.13.c.)
Task 6: Provide infomation for the Mnp Annua1 Report
The MRP Annual Report is due on September 30 of each year. Each
Annual Report reports on the previous fiscal year beginning ,JuIy 1
and ending June 30.
40O&M Agreenent
Burl inqame ryastevater Treatment Eaci Tity
verslon 2.0 02/26/2018
Veolia Water will help support the following tasks:
o Provide data, including information frorn Tasks 1--5, to the
City in a timely manner for compleLion of the Annual Report.
o Attend the Annual Report, training hosted by SMCWPPP.
Task 7: Organize Annual Bayfront Cleanup Day
The Burlingame Bayfront Cleanup Day is an annual waterway and land
cleanup held on the third Saturday of September. It overlaps with
the California Coastal Cleanup Day, which is the largest volunteer
event that brings the community together in removing trash from
our waterways and prot,ecting our marine environment.
Veo1ia Water wil-I help support the following tasks:
o Serve as primary point of contact for event
r Submit reporting forms as request,ed by the San Mateo County
Environmental Heal-th Services
o Order materials for the event banner and deliver to or
retrieve from the Recreation and Park Department in a timely
manner
o Assist with set up and tear down of event and provide
additional support as needed
O&1,1 Agreement
Bur).Tngame llastewater Treatrnent Faci7ity
4L
Version 2.A 02/26/20\8
O&M Agreelnent
Burllngane wastewatet Treatment Eaci 77ty
Reference Material A-1
ROLLING FI\IE YE;AR CAPItrA], OUIIJIY PI,ATI
42
PLAN
Descriotion 2018t19 20'19t20 2020tr1 2421n2 202223
Modified FY16-17 Pump Evalualion at th€ RRLS (En0lneorin0)
l\rodified FYOT-O8 tt Stston Pumo #1 (rebuild)
Modified FYO7.08 Lifl Station PunD #2 (rebuild)
Modifiod FY14-15 Litl Station Pumo *3 lrebuild)
Ivlodilied FY14-,15 ft Slalion Pumo #4 (reolacc)
Modffied FY04-05 Lift Stallon PumD #5 (rebulld)
Modlfled FY0445 Lift Statim PumD #6 frebuild\
Modified FY16117 Remove and disoose o{ RRLS out of seryico Genset
Modtfled FY12/13 RRLS Gensel Roof end lnterior Rebuild
Modlfied FYo+05 Weismann Bar Scleen (Nil) #1
Modlfled FY15-17 Barsoten ComDaclor #1 Gear.Box Rebulld
ModtflEd FYo+10 Bar€creen Comoaclor #2
Modified FY18-18 Replace Grit Bin BqlLoff Containers (2)
Modified FYOT{a Vortex Grit claEsiflor
Modified FY09-10 Primarv'B'' Clsrifis Drive fTwntable)
Modified FY@-10 Primaru "Al Clarifitr Drive fTurnlsble)
firodifled FYo'!-os Weismann Bar Screen Rebulld #2 50.000
Modlfied FY1S17 Gril Convevor#2 s 15 000 sl 5.000 1 5.000
Arodlfied FY'!G16 Receivirc Slatlon Pumb#1
Modified FY1$'16 Receivino Statlon Pumotl2
Modified FY0&09 Headxorks Odor Control fFan)
o.lified FY07{8 rlnder - Volqalmno al Primarv Plt 18 00{
Modified FY07-08 Penn Vallsv Sludoe PumD Rebuild 18.000
ModiflBd FY0z08 Grit PumD #1 (Robulld)8.000
uodified FY0$06 PLrno #2 {new)E 25.0m
Modified FYOm6 )rimary Sludge Pump #1(New)
Modllied FYoffi )rimary Sludoe Pump #2
Modinsd FY0748 Primarv Sludoe PumD #3 (Double Pislm Pumo)
Modfled FY@og Prlmarv Sludo€ Flow M6(er to GT/Dioosler
Modified FY1+15 rlmarv Llfi PumD #1. Rebuild (3i06)$ 50,000
fi.4odlfied FYl&17 mary Lift Pump #2, Rebuild (9/06)
Modified FY15-16 Prirnary Lift Pump nS, Rcbuild (10/08)I 49.000
Modlfiod FY04-o5 Primarv Lift Punp #4, Rebuild (9/0n i 55.000
ilodified FYle17 marv Llft Pumo #5, Rebuild (2000)I 55,000
ModiUed FY0910 Primarv Lm Pumo #6 Rebuild $1
Moditied FY09-'10 mary Lift Pump #1 VFD Replacemeflt
Modified FY09-'10 Pri,"nary Lifi Pump #2 VFD ReDlacement
Modlfied FY0S10 Primary Lift PumD rl4 VFD RoDlrcemenl 15.000
lodlfied FY09f0 Primary Ln Pump #5 VFD Replacsment (Done in 09)
Modilied FY1+16 IWet weather De,rratertng Pump (Flytt) Replac€
Modilied FYl7-18 12) Prlmqry Efiluenl Flow Meter
Modified FY07.0€ lMixed Liouor Densltv Melers
i
$ 12,000
odtfied FYoCO7 Centrtfuoal Aorallon Blorver Rebulld #1 30.000
Modifled FYo8-og Contr'rfuoai Aeration Blower Rebuild #2
Modified FY07-08 Centrifuoal Aeratlon 8lower Rebuild #3
Mified FY12/13 enlrifusal Aeratlon Blower Rebulld ,r4 s 35.000
oditied FY15/16 Aeration Diflrser Membrane Replac8menl
Modified FY1&17 Anoxic (Flvoht) Aeration s 8.000 ,000 $8.000
Modifled FY14-15 Anoxic Mixer Robulld (Flvaht) Aeratlon Basin.B $8,000 $8.000
lodmed FY06-07 Anoxic Mixe. Rebuild (Flyght) Aeratlon Basin C $8,000 $8,ooo
odified FY06-07 Anoxic Mlxer Rebulld (Flvght) A€ratlon Basin D $8.000 $8,000
Modfied FY04-05 Rabuild Secondary OEck Cran€
Modified FY1$16 RAS Pumo #l (Rebulld)
odined FYo&O7 PumD #2 frebuild)
[rodified FY0m7 Pump #3 (rsilild)
Modlfied FY1$.16 S Pump#4 (rebulld)
IAS Pumo #5 (rebuild
Modlfied FY0S07 I RAS PumD Motor VFD ReDlacement #1
odified FYo&07 I ,S Pumo Motor VFD ReDlEcemenl #2
Modned FYoGo7 I RAS Pump Motor VFD Roptacsmonl #3
Irodified FY06{7 IAS Pump Motor VFD Rep acernent #4
luodlfied FY06-07 RAS Pump Motor VFD Replacernent #5
Modified FY17-18 Seoondarv Scum PumoB ReplaceiRebuild $ 20,ooo
Modiied FY16-17 i econdarv and Flnal Clarifiers t\ilud Valves $ 49,500
Modiied FY0s06 l,\nalyzer Contact/Flocculatlon Basin'A' Replacement (10/08 s 15.mo
Modiffed FYotoo l,
Modified FY0$10 Chlorine lniection PumD "A'I 18.000
Modified FY09l0 I )rine lniedion Pmo "8"i 16,0(x
Modified FY0g.10 rlqine Ccnlact Basin {strsentine reDlacernent) "A"
Modirisd FYo$10 rlorine Conlact Basin (serpentine replacomsnt) '8"
ump Final Emuent Pump #1 EP-K'1 (2013)
Modified FY04-05 Pump Final Effluent Pump #2 EP-K2 (done 201 1 )
Modifled FY04-05 PumD Final Effluent Purnp #3 EP-K3 (2014)
Modlfied FYl4-15 nal E tluent PumD VFD ReDlacemenl PumD #1
Modified FYl4-15 IF nal Efflrent Pump VFD Replacemenl Pump #2 $ 20,000
odified FY04{5 nal Efflrenr Pump VFD Replacement Pump ft3 $ 21.000
odified FYoB-09 xal Effluent Pump Station Roof
Modlfied FY07-08 Final Chlorine Analyzer Replacemed (2ml )20.000
tulodiried FYo&07 3 Water Filter Scteenino Svste,.n
Modified FY07'08 lc ravilv Beft Thickoner - Andritz
MoCified FY04-05 T Piston Pump Rebuild (double plston pump)25,000
s 15 attlo
t
f
s
I
odified FY1 7-18 eolee GT Piston ,umD's PVC srction ms io DIGL n '12.000
acement at Gmvlfo'Sludoe Pump Repodified FY0546 rlckener Bulldins
ModiUed FY04{5
Modined FY04{5
odified FY10-1 1 3T Odor Control Fan #1 f3l10)
odtfled FYIGl'l
odilled FY08{9
Iodified FYlS'16
odtfied FY07-08 Boiler Bulldino Roof (l
Modified FY05/06 Dloester Mlxer Pumo ino Uporsdg
modified FY07l08 Pumo - Dioestcr Rec
Modlfied FY07-08 PurnD - Dlqester Rec
rc #3 (3 pislon pump Rebulld (07)Uodifiad FY1$16 Pumo - Dlqester Rec
odllied FY07-08
odifled FY0&09
eed PumD (RebuildModlfied FY04-05 Grinder - Belt Press
odilied FY06-07 New Bett Press B!
odiflsd FY07-08
odlfled FY'l8-17 s 5.800
10.m0Modifisd FY14-15
odifled FY0&07 Belt Fltter Press Fec(
odified FY18-19 Belt Press Odor Con $ 20,m0
odified FY14-16 $ 10.000Modlfied FYo$10
omoressluodifled FY1&17 Rcplace Belt Press
odlfied FY1 1-12
odlfisd FYI$17 I 10.000Modifiod FY0+05 $ 10.0@lodified FYl+15 Chem Feed Pump #
[6 (RAS bleach pump 10.000Modlfied FY1+15 Chem Feed P'lmp
)di{ied FY 1516 chem Feed Tank
odifisd FYo8-oe
Modilied FY0e07 $ 25.000ModifledAdmin Buildlns FMA(
odifiod FYo4-os .ab Autoclave Unll
odified FYlSl7
odifled FYO$06 Laboratoav Samote 7,000$
$8,0o0ModilSed FYo4-05
Fecal Coliform lncu orModmed FY07-08
odilied FYo&09
oditied FY1&19 ocondition Co-oen (eneftfor $ 20,000
at Cooen Enolne 3 10.000 $ 12,000 $1 3,000 14.000$$ 15,000
lat cogen Enqlne $40,000Modified FYo7-08
s 20.000Uodified FY13/14 Cooeneralion Chllle
odified FY13/14 2013-14)
Emerconcv GeneraModified FY'13i14 I 20.000 $ 25.000 I 25.000 $ 27.500 $ 27.500lilodilied FY1s17 CGGon Filter Skid
irodifiad FY08{9 MCC/Cosen Bu
odlfled FY08/09
Modified FY05/06
3.1 00 3.200 $3.300 $3.400 $5.000Modified FY07-08 Annual Forklifi Main
rdifled FY16-17 ln Plant Pump Statio s 35.(}modifled FY18-t9 Plant Watef ScrB€n n! sYstsm and 10'' l luq Valve
odiflsd FY08/10 ravitv Thlckener B!
Modified FY0&09
Automatic LEbor8tory 5.000Modified FYl&18
15.000$odifiod FYl5-16
odified FYlS16
odlfied FY1+15
Modified FY15-10
lollls Road AnnuncModified FY15-18
odified FY06{7 ParErnelBr Fenclno i
odified FY09/10
Head Worfs Channols Co{ditlon AsEessmonl ( SPecisl
Pmiec,tsI[,todified FY17-18
s 37.000 s45.000 s 45.000[4odirl6d FY1 7-1 I Mah MCC and Rollins Road Switchgear Tesllng (Special
ProieclG)
21.900$$ 22.500 s 23.200Modlfled FY17-18 ects)$ 20,600 $ 21,200
l\4odified FY17-18
Stto Electlicai Equipment Safety lmprovemenls (SP€cial
Proiects)
pavlng Rehabilitation and Coallng lmprovements (Special
Prolects)
Modifled 2017-18 C&can ffir reow cGl. dlqsster delnq q 29,400
345,100 $ 382,900 $ 316,200 $ 234,200 $ 359,700Total
IGT Fan {Fan #21
lQphrh R.ilcr{'l
s
P^nal
lchemiesl Buildino Rmt
s
s
I
I
version 2.0 02/25/201a
O&N Agreement.
Burlingane tlastewateE l,"eatment Faell|ty
Reference Material B-1
ROLLING EIVE YEJAR CAPItrAT IMPROVEIIENT PITAII
43
Citv Accl #20'181201s 2019t2020 2021122 202A23
32733780-220 Aorali0n Blo,ver VFo lnstallatlon (2)
327-8SE80-220
327-85560-220 Emeroency Generator Electrical Panel (ComD
B
NotyWeissman Barscreen Svdem #1 12015-
NBw Weissman BBrscreen System #2 (2012-
2014-1.
scondarv Clarlfl er Tumlable Reolacemenl $1 75.000
econdary Clarilier Tumtable Reolacemanl (g 170.0@
$ 170,000
i 175,000
$ 500.firo
$ 100,000
B Safety Upsrades and lnfiastrudurB Reha
s 100.000
$ 105.OoO
s 110.000
$ 115.000
$65.O0C
$65.000 i 70,000
Gravitv Thick6ner.Cond Assossmont ElBmen 6. ttem 1 60.O00
It€m #$ 176,000
Digester#1, 5olo. A6-sessment, Elem€nt 8, ltem I 2 $ 118,500 $ 1 18.500 s 118.500
GBT Building. Cond. Assessmenl. Elemenl 7.s 158,000
Sludoe Storaoe Tank. 5olo. Elemonl 10. ltern 12',t.7fi $ 121,750 $ 121,750s 200.000
$209.1 00 $ 209,100 $ 209,100
Aeratim and Sec.'Af. A6aB6srnent. Element i 1. ltem i $ 500.000 $500.000
Aerstlon '8", Assessnent, El€menl #1, ltem $500,000
Plan $ 611,000 3 898.000 $ 1,119,350 $ 1,299,350 1.234.350
Total of both capital an ouflav p irs 5 906,100 5 1,030,900 $ ,r,435,s50 $ 1,533,55{r $ 1,594,050
WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
.t FY 20L6/2077 O&M budget obtoined directly from ogency staff. Bockup documentotion avoiloble.
.z FY 2016/2017 totol wastewater treoted obtoined directly from agency stoff. Bockup documentation avoilable.
*t The overage cost for treoting wostewoter per MG is $4,890. Burlingome's cost is 45% (or 52,182) below the overoge,
City of San Mateo 51t,4t7,478 4,595 12.2 52,484 33,5
s4,438City of Daly City s9,1s0,826 2,062
58,280 13.5City of Millbrae ss,620,ooo
FY 16117 O&M
COSTS .
r
FY 16117 TOTAL
WASTEWATER
TREATED (MG)-z
FY 1,61T7 AVERAGE
DAILY FLOW (MGD)
COST FOR TREATING
WASTEWATER PER
MG -:
FTE PER AVERAGE
DAILY MG OF
WASTEWATER
RANKING BY LOWEST
COST OF SERVICE
FULL-TIME
EMPLOYEES (FTE)AGENCY
1s14,089,818 5,782 15.8 $2,293 3.8Silicon Valley Clean Water
2.6
3City ol Burlingome s3,459,549 7,295 3,5 $ztoa 14,5
5.6 20 3.6
$s,oss 41.5 4,6 5City of South San Francisco s 18,601,811 3,287 9.0
7.L6771.9
5.6City of Pacifica s8,124,000 97t $8,367 18
2
4
6
Sveoun
1)
,
i
, --
1
::'t
lru
:fd.:F'illra.
aservtce
to the citizens
Celehrating 45
.*
Burlingame, California Contract Review and Reasonableness of Rate & Cost Report - April 9, 201 I
Executive Summary
Safety
There have been no lost time accidents since contract renewal date July 1, 2013. ln fact, Veolia has completed
more than 2o years of contract performance without a lost time incident. Veolia has been awarded fifteen,
consecutive, first-place awards for safety by the California Water Environment Association and twice recognized
and awarded by the California Water Environment Association the prestigious George W. Burke Jr. Safety Award
Environmental 0orn pliance
There have been no effluent water guality violations to report since contract renewal date July r, zoa3.
S.YEAR EFFLUENT WATER QUALITY PERFORMANCE
SS0 Rernoval ?SS Removai Fry-Fish Survival
97.A 97.8 97.O 9s.7
Vo oh oA Yo
97.3 97.6 97.2 97.3o/o Yo 96 Yo
97.1 97.1, 94.2o/o oA o/o 8,6.2
Permissible
l85o/")
Permissible
(85%l Permissible
(70%)
2014 2015 2016 2017 2014 2015 2016 2017 2014 2015 2016 2011
Reasonableness Rate and Cost Report
A Reasonableness Rate and Cost Report has been completed which compares the projected Veolia charges versus
wastewater charges and rates paid by other municipalities in the surrounding area for comparable wastewater
treatment facilities; thus demonstrating the value of Veolia's facility management. The Burlingame Treatment
Facility is considered a "small" plant as it processes significantly lessthan ro.o MGD. Though small in size it ranks
#3 out of 7 comparison plants in the area in terms of Cost of Service Efficiency. Veolia Burlingame competes very
closely with the larger plants (i.e. #r-silicon Valley Clean Water and #z-City of San Mateo) without the benefit of
the same "economies of scale" efficiencies. When compared to the four other small facilities treating less than ro
MGD, Veolia Burlingame ranks #r at a cost 39% less than the next lowest agency.
Reasonable Rate and Cost Table
Reasonableness of Rate and Cost Table uired Section Vlll.A General
FYr6&t O&M
Costs*'
FY 16l:7 Total
Wagtewater
Treated (MG)='
Average
Daily Flow
Treating
Wastewatet
Full-Tirne
Emphyees
fTE per
Average
Daily MG of
Wastewater
FY 7 Ran
by Lowest Lowest FTESIMG
Cost of Treated {Dai}y,{gency
MG Avera
Silicon Valley
Clean Water
San Mateo 4,595.3 s2,484 2.6
Burlingame t,294.8 4.L
of City $9,15q826 $4,438 20 3.6
South 5an
Francisco
$18,6or,8:.:.3,287 9.o
" Flows, cost, FTE data from municipal agency and regulatory agency website budget & NPDES permit PUblic documents.
NOTE: See APPENDIx on the last page ofthis document for sources.
" Costs exclude capital outlay and capital improvements (which vary from year to year) but, for the exception of Silicon Valley Clean Water, includes all other standard
5,782: x5.8 $2,293 60 3.6 2
1
4
1
05,658 4r.5 4.6 5
Qveolra 2
9:i:.,4t7,478 33.5
3'5 sz,7o8 14.s 3
z,o6z 4 3
5
Burlingame, California Contracl Review and Reasonableness of Rate & Cost Report - April 9, 2018
fiomnnunity and Client Support
During this contract period Veolia has continued to be a solid corporate citizen of Burlingame through its support
of various Community and City events as summarized in the illustration below and listed in greater detail at the
end of this report.
4.YEAR ACCOUNTING OF VEOLIA VALUE-ADDED SERVICES TO THE COMMUNITY
$2,250 S?5O
3 years of HS HS Sports
Sewer Science Program
S2O,OOO s69O
4years of Music ReoPening of
in the Parks Village Park
$+g,2gos21,600
4 years of Shorel ine
Clean-up Day
s4,6(x)
Giveaways at City-
sponsored eventsTotal (non-invoiced) servicee
provided to lfre Cigr of
Eurlingame commuaity
4.YEARS OF VEOLIA VALUE-ADDED SERVICES TO THE CONTRACT
$(nctaniea) S(nottaltied) S(nottallied)
5SO Engineering report SIU permitting
Sampling revrew support
I
$(nottal[ed) S(nottaUi,ed)
Residential Updated City's MRP
STOPPP services Business Plan
$(nottalUed)
Storm water soft-
ware activation
\
$24.@O /
IWP hardware/
software upgrade
Ss,19o
Staffed off-hours
for CalTrans
-
s2t,ooo
Annual cost
IWP/STOPP staff
S(nottaUied) -Extra effort for Zero-
harm safety prognm
S(nottallied)
Non-routine ops
100-year storm
- sso,26o
Extra effort for
high service level
9(no,ttetlied)
Staffed off-hours
for P6&E power
sheedding events
I
s22,260
Blower control
upgrade
I
S{nottallied)
Extra effort for Zero-
NPDES permit violations
Sl,3Oo $(ndtallied) $(Dottalli€d)
De-chlorination City SCADA false Failing liner grit
equip. purchase alarm call-outs corrective actions
$ (nottallied)
Staffed off-hours
for 33-inch line
$124,OL*+$X S (nottalli€d)
Statred off-hours
for storm water
re-routing -
Total (non-iavoiced) value-added
services to the contract provided
to the City of Burlingame
3Qveolta
lt 6t{scHffir"r;NE XH
: :. i
::r: l
INBIBECT
ffi
ffi
Burlingame, Califomia Contract Review and Reasonableness of Rale & Cost Report - April 9, 201 I
Detailed Review of Performance by Contract Sections
The following provides delivery-of-services and/or quality-of-service- delivery details tothe preceding Executive
Summary. Each detail narrative follows the commensurate contract section points and represents the contract
period from July r, zor3 - June 3c, 2oa7.
I. EMPLOYMENT
Contract Deliverable - The contract requires Veolia to provide operations and maintenance (O&M) services for
the Rollins Road Lift Station, the Rollins Road Lift Station Force-main, the Wastewater Treatment Facilities and
the Landfill Gas Flare.
Contract Delivery - Veolia has maintained all facilities and appuftenances to industry standards.
II. TERM
Contract Deliverable -The term of the contract shall be for a period of five years commencing July r, zor3.
Contract Delivery - Veolia has been the contractor of record during the contract term.
. Per provisions within the contract term Veolia:
o Will provide notification of desire to renew the contract (under separate cover).
o Provides the Reasonableness Cost Report to verify that the City's wastewater treatment costs are
comparable to other local communities with similar demographics and treatment facilities.
III. VEOLIA SHALL PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING SERVICES
A. Contract Dellverable * Facility $cope
Contract Delivery-Veolia has maintained all unit process and appurtenances as described in the Facility Scope.
. lncluded in the City's fiscal year (FY) zo:7ho:3 budget is funding for Veolia to perform the condition
assessment on the Rollins Road Lift Station Force-main and appurtenances.
S. Contract Deliverable - Staffing
Contract Delivery - Veolia has:
. Be. Maintained Plant Operations staffwho are responsible for a shift that has a minimum of a Grade lll
certification.
o Of the seven certified Plant Operators, three have a Grade V, one has a Grade lV and three hold Grade ll
certifications. Veolia is conducting on-going staff development to assist Grade ll staff members secure
Grade lll certifications.
- Veolia provides On-call/Standby duty assignments such that the plant is covered during all non-regular
business hours.
. EE:. Maintained four journey-level Maintenance staff members with 43 years of combined project
experience and ro.75 years ofaverage project experience.
4Qveor-ra
Burlingame, Califomia Contract Review and Reasonableness of Rate & Cost Report - April 9, 201 I
o Staff's technical experience has resulted in only specialty contracted services as all other routine
mechanical, electrical, instrumentation and control maintenance services are provided by Veolia staff;
thereby significantly reducing the cost of maintenance services.
. S3. Veolia project personnel files are replete with the record of on-going training of employees in modern
wastewater control, safety, environmental compliance and equipment maintenance.
. 84. Veolia has been recognized by Local and State professional organizationsfor its outstanding safety
record.
o Veolia has received (r5) consecutive awards for safety performance.
o At the time of this report Veolia has exceeded 20 years of having no reportable incidents of injuries.
. 85. Veolia's effectiveness and efficiency per-formance have made the Treatment Plant a model facility forthe
San Francisco Bay and surrounding area. The following tables reflect Veolia's effluent water quality
performance (effectiveness) and Cost/MG-treated (efficiency) performance.
o 85"a. Effectiveness Graphs
S-YEAR EFFLUENT WATER QUALITY PERFORMANCE
BOS R*mcval TSS &*moval Fry-Fish Survival
97.8 Yt.A 97.O 9S.zo/o Vo Yo oA
97.3 gt.6 97.2oA o/o oA
97.3
Yo
97.7, 9,4.2oA Yo
8.6.2
Permissible
(8s%)
Permissible
(85"/.1
2014
Perm issible
(70%\
7A$ 2016 2017 2014 2015 2A]6 2017 2014 2015 2016 2017
- The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NDPES) permit requires greaterthan 85%
Removal of biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) and total suspended solids (TSS); and 7o% Survival Rate
for newly hatched Fat Head Minnows (aka Biologically as "Fry").
- Veolia has operated the Treatment Plant such that it has consistently produced effluent water quality to
the San Francisco Bay that removed greater than 97o/o of BOD|I-SS and provided for Percent Removal
and Survival in excess of gzo/o.
- A comprehensive site inspection conducted by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Ouality Control
Board in May zorT resulted in a report showing no NPDES permits violations during the current contract
period and no areas of administrative or facility non-conformance or non-compliance.
- Veolia's additional cost to operate for energy consumed, chemicals consumed and biosolids disposal
cost to operate at this more-than-required level of effectiveness has been fully borne by Veolia at no less
than approximately $r2,585/year.
AQveoura
Burlingame, California Contract Review and Reasonableness of Rate & Cost Reporl - April 9, 2018
o 85.b. fifficiency Graphs
VEOLIA FY 2OL6_2017 COMPARATIVE EFFICIENCYOF OPERATIONS
Fatifl*a Islillbrne
58,367 $8,280
$outhSan
Francisco
fitvnf : Burlineanae $anlttlat*o $iliconDat3iCity i " VallevClean, 1fll6ter
$s,658
lffi
s4,438
FTElM6$/MC,
iir 3,6
s.6 20.OM6s FTEs
s2,?o8 $2,84 s2393
Is 2e I=
$/MG FTE/MC $/MG FTEIMG $/MC FTE|MG
7.45.6
1.9 13.S
MCs FTES
a* lt
2:t 18.O
MGs FTE5
$/M6 nE/M6 $lMc FrElMc $/MG FTE/MC
- The Burlingame Treatment Plant, from an NPDES-Permitted-Flow size standpoint, is considered "small"
as it processes significantly less than a ro.o-MGD permitted flow. Though small in size and having a
ranking of #3 in terms of Cost of Service efficiency, Veolia staff has managed to compete very closely to
those larger plants (i.e. #r-Silicon Valley Clean Water and #z-City of San Mateo) who are able to achieve
operational "economies of scale" efficiencies as a consequence to being larger plants having permitted
NPDES Flow size that is greater than ro.o-MGD.
- Relative to the above Cost of Service efficiency comparison and performance, it is important to note that
Veolia is able to operate and maintain the City of Burlingame's plant at a cost of now less than 380/o of
the cost as compared to those five comparative agencies of similar size to that of the City of Burlingame
making Burlingame's (Veolia's) Cost of Service efficiency #r out of these five comparison agencies.
S. Contract Deliverable - Technical S*ppart
Contract Delivery-Veolia has continued to provide the necessary resources and professionals with expertise in
process control, maintenance, management and engineering from its affiliated companies and facilities
throughout North America. Examples are as follows:
. Cr. Prccess Control
o Monthly and Annual contact with assigned RegionalTechnical Manager.
o Periodic review by assigned Technical Manager.
o Annual Process Control Management Program (PCMP) Audit -The PCMP is audited annually through a
corporate auditing process and updates are incorporated as/when necessary.
o The rigors of the PCMP have resulted in no effluent water quality violations over the past five years and a
near-f lawless performa nce N PDES permit adm inistration.
. {2. Maintenance
o Monthly and Annual contact with assigned Above-ground Asset Manager.
o Periodic review by assigned Director of Above-ground Asset Management.
#
4t.s
FTEs
ffi
9,O
MCs
12,2 33.sMGs FrEs
aHN
3,S 1{,S
MGs FTES
i#
60.o
FTEs
W
15.8
M6s
6Qveor-re
Burlingame, California Contract Review and Reasonableness of Rate & Cost Report - April 9, 20 1 8
. C3. Manasement
o Weekly, Monthly, Ouarterly and Annual contact and review with assigned Vice-President of Operations
o Monthly and Periodic contact and review by assigned Senior Vice-President.
. C4. fngineering
o Periodic contact and review by assigned (engineering) Technical Manager; including support in Capital
lmprovement and Energy Efficiency projects.
. C5. Induatrial lffastewate r Pretreatment
o Monthly and Periodic contact and review with lndustrial Wastewater Pretreatment Program Manager
. C6. Productn Materials, and Services Sourci*g
o Periodic contact with Sourcing Stafftasked with leveraging and securing least-cost options and Veolia
preferred-vendor service contracts necessary to keep O&M costs low.
ff. Contract Deliverable * Employee Programs
Contract Delivery-Veolia provides education and safety programsforall project employees. Examples of these
programs include:
. Dr. PCMP
o This is a weekly program where staff meets to review and discuss plant performance data, including:
biological performance, chemical performance and electrical power performance. Performance is
measured against developed Key Performance lndicators (KPl's). lf performance shows a trend away from
KPI's, stafftakes the appropriate action to bring the performance trend back toward the KPI standard.
o lmplementation of the PCMP has provided for the project to remain well within, and often below, industry
standards; resulting in contractual effectiveness, as measured by no violations and contractual efficiency,
as measured by the low cost of service.
. D:. General Satcty Program
o Take-Five For Safety- This is a weekly Safety "Tail Gate" meeting that discusses toPics common to Veolia
nation-wide and specific to the water, wastewater and industrial wastewater fields.
o Monthly On-Site Safety Training Schedule - Veolia Corporate has a monthly schedule of training that
covers key areas of Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Cal-OSHA and Corporate
Safety Compliance. Training includes a presentation, hands-on activity and proficiency examination.
o Monthty Web-Based Safety Training Schedule - Veolia Corporate has a monthly schedule of web-based
training that covers areas of OSHA, Cal-OSHA, HR and other similar topics. Training includes a web-based
presentation and a proficiency examination.
o Annual Safety Program Audit-The Safety Program is audited annually by a corporate auditing process
and updates are incorporated as/when necessary.
o The rigors of the General Safety Program have resulted in more than 20 years of no reportable incidence of
injury.
. D3. Maintenance Training Program
o TPC Online Training - Provides staffwith tailored, detailed maintenance training classes on a wide range of
maintenance topics.
7Qveoura
Burlingame, California
E. Ccntract Deliverable - Computer $ystems
Contract Delivery- Veolia has continued to operate and maintain a proprietary software system generating of
process information for facility control. The system (database) provides for:
. Weekly PCMP reports.
. Monthly eSMR /NDPES reports.
. Time-sensitive Requests for lnformation (RFl) from the City of Burlingame.
. Routine off-site review and tracking of project performance by Veolia Corporate staff.
F. Sontra*t Setrlvcrable - Perfiilt Conditions
Contract Delivery- Veolia continues to maintain compliance with NPDES Permit CAoo3788 issued July r,2or3.
Also, as these additional permits (not included in this contract section) were promulgated, Veolia continued to
maintain compliance with those.
. NPDES Permit CAoo3SSg - Wastewater Discharge Requirements for Nutrients from Municipal Wastewater
Dischargesto San Francisco Bay.
. RWOCB Order No. Rz-zce6-ooo8 - Alternative Monitoring and Reporting Requirements for Municipal
Wastewater Dischargersforthe Purpose of Adding Supporttothe RegionalMonitoring Program.
. NPDES Permit CAoo3B84g - Watershed Permit for Mercury and PCB's.
. The San Francisco Bay Regional Monitoring Program as administered through the San Francisco Estuary
lnstitute.
G. Contract Deliverable - Service Payments
Contract delivery - Veolia has continued to include in its cost of services to the City of Burlingame expenses
required for: Personnel, Utilities, Chemicals, Fuels, Lubricants and all residuals (including biosolids, grit and
screenings).
Performance in the use/cost of indices for utilities and residuals are tracked on a 12-month rolling average and
reported to the City on a monthly basis. The following is an example of said performance indices for the month
ending March zor7.
Recent Past and Proposed Contract lndices
!ndex FYe6-r7
lndex
FYrT-r8
lndex
To Date
{ez-month
rolling
average)
Variance+t**/o t*ay'a Vo
Flow 2.8 3.55 4.03 3.29 3.49 -4.8o/o
TSS Loading $8,1oo 98,1oo 8,9ro 7,29o 9,135 rz.8o/o
$/KwH $o.16 so.r6 $o.175o so.r84z :-5.zo/o
Biosolids, Cost per Wet Ton t44.8o s44.8o s49.28 94o.32 $45.o2 o.5o/o
Grit &Tons/Year
Grit & Screenings, Cost per
Ton
130 88 79 84 -4.oo/o
Qveoure
5230.OO 92n.OO $304.7o $249.3o -9.to/o
B
Contract Review and Reasonableness of Rate & Cost Report - April 9, 201 8
Electricity, KWH/Day 5,8oo 5,8oo 6,38o ,220 5,094 -:-z.zoh
Biosolids, Tons/Year i,300 4,280 4,oT1 -4.80/o4,7c,8 3,8s2
97
Burlingame, California Contract Reviewand Reasonableness ofRate & Cost Report -April 9, 2018
H. Contract Dsliverable - General Facility Maintenance $ystem
Contract Delivery - Veolia has continued to provide maintenance and repairs for the equipment, structures and
vehicles consistent with industry preventive maintenance (PM) standards and practices and/or manufacturer's
specifications utilizing a computerized maintenance management system (CMMS). The CMMS is a proprietary
software system which provides for:
. H:. Monthly reports to the City.
. Hz" Monthly reports to Veolia Corporate.
. H3. Time-sensitive RFI's from the City of Burlingame.
. Hr.r. Routine off-site review and tracking of project performance by Veolia Corporate staff.
. l-'l5. Data from the CMMS is used to produce a r3-month PM/Corrective Maintenance (CM) Work Order
performance trend chart as shown in the following example for April-zor7.
. H6. Asset Management Program - Veolia has developed and implemented an asset management program
above and beyond contract requirements. Specific program components include:
o Structured CMMS, including: standardized plant system organization hierarchy, asset types and complete
asset coverage.
o Criticality Analysis: Reviewing consequences and likelihood of failure scenarios. This ranking is
incorporated into the CMMS for work order management and capital planning.
o Condition Assessment: All plant assets are assessed utilizing a standardized ranking process and results are
incorporated into maintenance and capital planning.
o Comprehensive PM Review: Ensures that updated industry best practices and predictive maintenance
(PdM) techniques are incorporated into the PM program.
. l{7. Veolia is in the process of convefting projects from the current Job Plus CMMS software to the more
comprehensive Oracle Work and Asset Management (OWAM) software. This no-cost upgrade will provide
enhanced life cycle cost data capture capabilities for supporting capital planning by easily capturing and
reporting the cost to maintain and repair each asset.
PREVENTIVE/CORRECTIVE WORK ORDER 13-MONTH KPI TRENDS
??!.s3
641.15
573.?5
f,JU. t
q1?
5S7
2
4?A
ii 3:;l
?
64.8
1lt 2
14S.!"".......-..
l',7 IU
596"5S
15r)
Oec-16 ,an-17 Feb-17 MarlT APrU May-U Jun-17 .lul-17
--.*,* Total P&I/CM Worl Orders Hours
" ApproximateUtilization-HrsAvailable
-*o$*. Preventive Work Orders
-f Backlog Hour:
....,. Trend (Backlog Hours)
Aug-17 5ep-,l7 Oct-U Nov-U
*al.* Corrective Work Orders
...... Trend (Conective work orders)
Dec 17
oQveor-ra
Burlingame, California Contract Review and Reasonableness of Rate & Cost Report - April 9, 201 B
L Coratract Deliverable - Capital Sutlay Plan
Contract Delivery- Veolia has continued to develop and submit to the City a five-year rolling Capital Outlay Plan
The Plan is based upon Veolia's recommendation of the most critical Capital Outlay needs forthe facility utilizing
asset management principles. Veolia's abilityto leverage its corporate buying power has resulting in us utilizing
our network of preferred vendors, such that the City realizes a greater breadth of projects for a given dollar
amount. An example of the five-year rolling Capital Outlay Plan for FY zoeS-zor9 is as follows:
5-Year Capital Outlay Plan
:or8l:o:9 zarglzaz.o zozolzazz zaz:-lzazz eatzlzoz3
Lift Station Pump #3 (rebuild)
Weismann Bar Screen Rebuild #u
Grit Conveyor #z 915,OOO
Grinder - Volga at Pit
Penn Val Pump Rebuild
Grit #r (Rebuild)-ffi----
--,
r,r,;;---i-; - ", --- .
Primary Lift Pump #r, Rebuild (3/o5) **_-**, f 5o,ooo
Primary Lift Pump #+, Rebuild (9/oZ) s55,ooo
Primary Lift Pump #z VFD Replacement $15,Ooo
Lift #4 VFD Replacement
Wet weather Dewatering Pump (Flyght) Replace
:.2) Primary Effluent Flow Meter
Centrifugal Aeration Blower Rebuild #r $3O,OOO
Centrifugal Aeration Blower Rebuild #4 $35,ooo
._..1.191.-y!9.[+uild (rlvg.[t]13!1!,91!g:",1L-..---.-**--i8,,i99.- - l8,go"*-. *-----.. ...... $94,99--
Anoxic Mixer Rebuild (Flyght) Aeration Basin B $8,ooo - s8,ooo _- _
1t91t-y'tgrlv,19-ttv-sDl:l{9119:1s-----..---18,999- :999-'*--- ."-"""- _."__-seegg--
Anoxic Mixer Rebuild (Flyght) Aeration Basin D $8,ooo s8,ooo
Scum Replace/Rebuild
Secondary and Final Clariflers Mud Valves
Analyzer Contact/Flocculation Basin "A" Replacement
(1o/08)
$15,OOO
Chlorine on Pump "A"
Chlorine lnjection Pump "B"
Final Effluent Pump VFD Replacement Pump #z
Final Effluent Pump VFD Replacement Pump #3 s21,OOO
Final Chlorine Analyzer Replacement (2oo1)
GT Piston Pump Rebuild (double piston
Replace GT Piston Pump's PVC suction lines to DIGL
Belt Filter Press Booster Water Pump Rebuild #z s5,8oo
Belt Filter Press Feed Pump Rebuild $10,OOO
Belt Press Odor Control Panel
Belt Filter Press Sump Pump Replacement
Chem Feed Pump #z
Qveor-rr
$lorOOO
$10,OOO
10
Chem Feed P #r
Chem Feed Pump #6 (RAS bleach pump)
0escriptian
s5o,ooo
$15rOOO $15,ooo
$18,ooo
$18,ooo
$18,ooo
Primary Lift Pump #5, Rebuild (zooo)955,oOO
Primary Lift Pump #6, Rebuild $12,OOO
t15,OOO
sr6,ooo
$12,OOO
$2O,OOO
$4g,5oo $4g,5oo
$:.8,ooo
$16,ooo
$20,ooo
$20,ooo
$25,OOO
$12rOOO
$20,ooo
s]'o,ooo
$1O,OOO
Burlingame, California Conlract Review and Reasonableness of Rate & Cost Report - April 9, 201 8
s-Year Capital Outlay Plan
Description
Admin Building HVAC
Sam Bottle Washer
BOD lncubator
Recondition Generator
zorBlzorg zo:oftazt zazilzozz eo:z1aou3
tzooo
(6/o6)
Cat Engine Service Heads
Cat Engine Service Lower end
Cogeneration Chiller Skid Chiller Unit Replacement
Main MCC and Rollins Road SwitchgearTesting (Special
Projects)
$14,OOO $15,OOO
$2O,OOO
945,OOO $45,OOo
$21,2OO $21,9OO S22,5OO t23,2OO
$1.O,OOO $12,OOO
Co-Gen Filter Skid Media (Annually) t2o,ooo $25,ooo ,25;ooo $27,5oo _l3ZrSi9_
Annual Forklift Maintenance and Repair t3,1oo t3,2oo_. .. -.._1-J,l"9o-*""_ __._-9:-i__o_9. ..""---._...?.-5.:!33_.-_..-pr;'.,t w.t" sd;;ffi sv;6;;il--iE v.r**--** * -- -"--- G;;;;
Sampler - ISCO Chroni_c To11.,ty*_ *- $r5roo9-
.
Paint and Corrosion Control (Special Projects)
capital OutlayTotal 3415,2oo t332,9oo 3316,200 ,234,2oo $35917@
J. Sontract Deliverable * Capital lnnprovem*rtt Plan
Contract Delivery - Veolia has continued to develop and submit to the City a five-year rolling Capital
lmprovement Plan. The Plan is based upon Veolia's recommendation of the most critical Capital lmprovement
needs for the facility. Because of Veolia's ability to leverage its corporate buying power, Veolia is able to utilize
their network of preferred vendors such that the City realizes a greater breadth of projects for a given dollar
amount. An example of the five-year rolling Capital lmprovement Plan for FY zor8-zor9 is as follows:
5-Year Capital lmprovement PIan
R Rollins Road Lift P #&#
Lift Station Pump #5 (Replace)
Pump Final Effluent Pump #r EP-Kr
ooo
Gravity Thickener, Cond Assessment, Element 5, ltem
#t
se5qooo
Chemical Feed, Cond Assessment, Element 5, ltem #1 sa76,
5ol0. Assessment, Element 8, ltem #z $r:.8,5oo srr8,5oo
GBT Building, Cond.Element 7, ltem#r&3
Sludge Storage f ank, 50/o, Element 10, ltem #z
Qveolra
sr58,ooo
$a2L,75O $a21,,75o $121,750
11
s25,ooo
$8,ooo
$2O,OOO
$4o,ooo
Description aorS/ao:g zorglzoeo 2a2al7a2;-zozrleoza 2ozzlzaz\
$175,OOO
suo,ooo
$uo,ooo
Methane Gas Pipinq Replacement $ry5,ooo
Diqester Mixer Pumping Upgrade $50O,OOO
$IOOrOOO
$1OO,OOO
$1o5,ooo
Lift Station Pump #z (Replace)$11O,OOO
s55,ooo
$65,ooo
$70,OOO
$118,5oo
Eurlingame, California Contract Review and Reasonableness of Rate & Cost Report - April 9, 201 B
Headworks, Coating of Channels $2OO,OOO
Digester #2, 596.Assessment, Element 9,ltem #t&z $2O9,10O $2Og,1OO
'2O9,1OOAeration and Sec."A"Assessment, Element #r, ltem #1 $50q $5oo,ooo
Aeration "B", Assessment, Element #1, ltem #1 $5OO OOO
Total of Capital lmprovement Plan $611rooo 5698rooo $1r119,35O $1r299135O t1r234135O
K" f;ontract ffieliverable - Plant Loadings
Contract Delivery-Veolia has continued to maintain copies of plant loadings and performance data overthe
term of the Agreement. This data resides within the computerized system described earlier in the report, and the
data remains available to the City within the terms of the Agreement.
L. *cntract Oelivarable * R*ports
Contract Delivery- Veolia has continued to provide reports to the City as follows:
. Lr. Monthly - Veolia provides a report that summarizes Capital Outlay and Capital lmprovement activities,
including a summary of these expenditures. Additionally, Veolia providesthe following information in its
monthly report:
o lnformation on Safety compliance and performance.
o lnformation on Environmental compliance and performance.
o lnformation on Plant Operations and plant effectiveness/efficiency performance.
o lnformation on Plant Maintenance activities.
o lnformation on lndustrial Pretreatment Program (lPP) activities.
o lnformation on Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (STOPPP) activities.
o lnformation on Community and Client Support activities.
o General discussion from Veolia's Project Manager that has bearing on both "old" and/or "new" project
business that would be of interest or concern to the City.
. Lz. Annual- Veolia has continued to provide an annual (comprehensive) report to the City that summarizes
plant performance and major events and activities which have affected the operation of the facility.
. L3" Nf DES - Veolia has continued to prepare all NPDES permit reports and has submitted these to the City
for approval priorto transmittalto the appropriate agencies.
. L4. Veolia continues to meet annually with the City to review facility performance in relation to contractual
ind ices and triggers. Prior to this meeting, Veolia has prepares a report which reviews data collected from the
preceding year and summarizes the emerging trends. Trended are indices for:
o Flow.
o BOD Loading.
o TSS Loading.
o Electrical Consumption.
o Electrical Unit Cost.
o Biosolids Ouantities.
o Biosolids Unit Disposal.
o Grit Screenings quantities.
o Grit and Screenings unit disposal cost.
. L5. Following the annual review, negotiations are conducted to address areas where performance has shown
that contract cost adjustments (both favorable and unfavorable to Veolia) and, after which, a table
summarizing the new performance indices is developed as follows:
Qveolre 12
Burlingame, California Contract Review and Reasonableness of Rate & Cost Report - April 9, 201 B
Recent Past and Proposed Contract lndices
lnde x
Flow
BOD5 Loading
TSS Loading
Electricity, s/KWH
Biosolids, Tons/Year
Biosolids, Cost per Wet Ton
fYr6-r7
lndex
FYrT-r8
lndex
58,4oo
$8,1oo
$o.16
5,8oo
4,280
s44.8o
To Date
{r:.-month
rolling
Variance
Vt
-4.8o/o
730/o
tz.8o/o
:.5.zo/o
-:-.z.zo/o
-4.80/o
rrnl}A -eo96
$o.16
3.29 3.49
7,560 9,oo9
7'29o 9,135
so.176o $o.1440 $o.r84z
22.O 5,o94
,7o8 3,852 4,
$40.32 $45.o2
Grit & Screenings, Tons/Year 130 88 84 -4.ooh
-9.t%oGrit & Screenings, Cost per
Ton t23o.oo 92n.oo 53o4.70 t249.3o t251.92
Pd. Contnaet Oeliv*rabtre * lndelstrial lEfaste Program {lWP} & STCIpPP
Contract Delivery- Veolia has continued to provide the City with an IWP and a STOPPP as described in Section
Vl of the Agreement.
Due to the increased complexity and risks associated with IWP and STOPPP programs, in zorS Veolia made
significant personnel changes and hardware/software investments to these Programs. The initial cost was in
excess of $45,ooo and on-going costs are in excess of $zr,ooo/year.
None of the initial or ongoing costs were passed onto the City and were instead viewed as a value-added service
provided by Veolia.
N. Contract Dellverable - lnsurance
Contract Delivery-Veolia has continued to maintain all insurances and insurance coverages as specified in the
Agreement and provisions within the Agreement.
O. Contract Deliverable - Compliance with Laws
Contract Delivery- Veolia has continued to comply with all applicable local, state and federal laws and
ordinances as they aPply to the facility.
F. Contract Delive rable * Laborat*ry
Contract Delivery - Veolia, within the resources provided in the laboratory provided by the City to Veolia to
utilize, has continued to maintain a laboratory for NPDES sampling, testing and analyses required by NPDES
Permit No. CAoo37p88.
. Sampling, testing and analyses that fall outside of the laboratory resources provided are contracted out to a
qualified/certified laboratory by Veolia and at Veolia's expense.
Contract Detivery- Veolia has continued to maintain accreditation with the State of California as an
environmental laboratory approval program (ELAP)-certified laboratory for the Fields of Testing to which the
laboratory is resourced to perform.
. Veolia has also maintained qualified personnel recognized by the ELAP-certification process who are
qualified to manage the on-site laboratory.
Qveor-ra 13
2.8 355 4.03
$8,4oo 9,240
$8,roo 8,9ro
Electricity, KWH/Day 5,8oo 6,38o
3,300
s44.8o $49.28 o.504
97 79
Burlingame, California Contract Review and Reasonableness of Rate & Cost Report - April 9, 201 8
Q. Contract Deliverable - North Bayside $ystern Unit {ilB$U}
Contract Delivery - Veolia has:
. Continued to operate the facility in a manner that conforms to the effluent parameters set forth in the
treatment plant's NPDES permit No. CAoo37788.
. Continued to attend NBSU meetings and keep the City appraised of pertinent issues.
. Continued to assist in the evaluation process involved with the annual maintenance and repairs of the NBSU
line.
. Developed standard operating procedures (SOPs) for planned and emergency shutdown procedures of the
NBSU line.
. Not listed but executed by Veolia as a value-added service, Veolia managed the after-hour shutdown of the
entire wastewater treatment facility effluent shutdown for approximately seven days to accommodate the
Caltrans construction activity at the Caltrans/Broadway overpass project.
o The cost ofthis effort exceeded $5,5oo.
o Though entitled to compensation forthis unscheduled activity, the cost of this effon was absorbed by
Veolia as a value-added service under its current fixed fee.
R. Contract Deliverable - Conflicts of lnterest
Contract Delivery- Veolia has continued to abide by all the terms, conditions and provisions necessary to ensure
that there resides no conflicts of interest for Veolia and/or the City as it relates to this Agreement.
Veolia Value-Added Services
Value-Added lnnovation
Veolia is beginning to explore the possibility of co-digestion of organic waste at the facility. Many municipal
treatment plants in California are exploring the potential use of digestion capacity to provide organics
infrastructure in response to the State's regulatory requirements such as AB r8z5 that requires commercial waste
generatorstosubscribetoorganicsrecyclingprograms. Thepotential benefitforBurlingamewouldbetipfees
associated with acceptance of organic waste and increased biogas generation that could allow the plant to
achieve energy neutrality while reducing overall greenhouse gas emissions in the area. Veolia is experienced with
the integration of co-digestion of organic waste at municipal wastewater treatment Plants.
fiolrrmurity and f;lient $upport
As highlighted at the start of this report, during this contract period Veolia has continued to be a solid corporate
citizen of Burlingame throug h its support of various Community and City events as follows:
4-Year Accounting of Veolia Value-Added Services to the Community
Value-Added
Service Description
Cost o{ Service
to Veolia
4 years of
Music in
the Parks
event $2OrOOO
4 years of Bay
Shoreline Clean-up
Day
This is a summertime annual event in which the City participates along with many other
Bay communities. Over the past 10 years,
for this event at the rate of approximately
Veolia has organized and provided incidentals
$5,4oo/year.
$zr,6oo
3 years of
Burlingame High
School Sewer
Science
fundarmentals of
nd the
as part program
500
$2t250
Burlingame High
School Sports
Veolia has sponsored the Cancer Awareness Month of October zotT
home
@veor-rn
pink soft drink cups for the high school football program to sell as fundraisers at $750
14
environment.
Burlingame, California Contract Review and Reasonableness of Rate & Cost Report - April 9, 2018
?:ll'l::1"",1:']s The City of Burlingame renovated a City park (Village Park) for which a grand re-opening
and Rec park Re- ceremony was heid. veolia ,rpjti"d aril.',[s
"na
snaiks for ihe event. $690
openln9
Ongoing City-event Veolia has procured various pens, flashlights, pads, cups, caps, etc., to provide to the
4-year (non-invoiced) value-added services provided to the City of Burlingame s49,290
4-Year Accounting of Veolia Value-Added Services to the Contract
Value-AddedService Description
NBSU force
nd for
Cost of Service
to Veolia
$5,19o
s24rOOOIWP hardware/
software upgrade
main in conjunction the
ed
to a point
and software to bring the
the expanding needs for this progra ma
Annual Cost of IWP/
STOPPP staff upgrade
commencing zo16
qualified staff were necessary,
complexity and work demands
the for the City to
Veolia a degreed
staff the Waste and
and receive for the program
to re-
Water Pollution Prevention Programs. The higher
the growing regulatory $21,OOO
4-year cost of
effective treatment
plant operations
It is permissible, from a permit-compliance standpoint only, to operate the facility at a
less effective level. However, Veolia is grounded in environmental performance that
consistently strives to exceed the averJge requirements for permit compliance. This
above-and-beyond performance by Veolia comes at a cost to Veolia but, our
commitment to environmental stewardship and the City of Burlingame makes the cost
well worth it.
$50,260
Blower control
upgrade
Utilizing Veolia technical resources and coordinating a PG&E reimbursement program,
Veolia was able to install a blower control system upgrade, resulting in ongoing power $22,26c
and cash from
lndirect savings:
Veolia Zero-Harm
Safety Program
lndirect savings:
Storm Water Software
Application Activation
SSO Sampling
of Burli ngame is Veolia's Zero-Harm Safety
the industry is significant for
calcu to say that
own a thatCity too
Veolia has the
through ongoing
Performed SSO Sampling
late; suffice
safe to all.
5x
$x
$Xrequires lab supportfor domestic water sampling on an occasional
services are not available to be performed by City's contracted lab.
new Storm
the software re-
field trials
two (2) City however, the contract only
basis when such
Engineering Report
Review
Permitting Support
De-chlorination
equipment purchase
Memo's created by and prioritized
for futu
Veolia began the of SIU for two fixed sites and no less
G)zero SIU sites
Veolia equipment on
supporting the City on an NBSU-project occurring in the right-of-way ofthe 33-
Airport.
during an off-hour period on supporting the City on an
$x
$x
$113OO
inch NBSU line by Sa
Veolia staffed theOff-hours staffing for
NBSU-related project N BSU-related project occurring
Francisco lnternational Airport.
Veolia responded to
ofthe 33-inch line by San
STOPPP-related projects on request and in
STOPPP services are restricted to certain
in the NBSU $x
Residential STOPPP-
related services
multiple Residential
Veolia's contractual
Qveor-ra
support of City staff;9X
15
NBSU PWD
Prolect Support
lndirect savings: roo-
year storm event
(non-routine
operations)
$x
lndirect savings:
Veolia Zero-NPDES
Permit Violations
Program
sx
Burlingame, Califomia Contract Review and Reasonableness of Rate & Cost Report - April 9, 201 8
Updated City's MRP
Business lnspection
and Enforcement Plan
Off-hours staffing for
storm water
Off-hours staffing to
accommodate PG&E
Responded to multiple
false-alarm, City-
SCADA call-outs
Ongoing corrective
action to restore grit
removalsystem
caused
4-year (non-invoiced) value-added services provided to the City of Burlingame $124rO1O
Qveor-rn 16
commercial and industrial sites.
Worked multiple extended work shifts accommodating PG&E peak-power-period power
sheddinq events.
5X
$x
Responded to multiple false-alarm call-outs caused by City SCADA communication
anomalies at the Rollins Road Lift Station.$X
$x
Burlingame, Califomia Contract Review and Reasonableness of Rate & Cost Report - April 9, 201 8
Appendix
REASONABLENESS OR RATE AND COST REPORT DATA SOURCES
Public Agency Budgsl,ata Sourc{Flow Data Source FTf Data Source
- ---. ^--..-l h--^r -..L-:rJ
Sum of Julv-zor.G Agency's zo16 Annual Report submitted to the RWOCB
., -,' -,- ' ---- and posted on the RWOIB ClWOs database website; Veolia CY u orS staffingthrougnJune-2o17 plan; staffing plan -
.lT:tli:5:.:J:::::^ ntto,r.i*q, o,ut.,.r,I?lllli lXllliio,r,..u,ionrvrp,r,ri.n remains unchansed ror
Burtinsame tt:::v-:::,:1PT" cY zorT (less siorm- (less annual >Iorm :l-::-'':".',:-{yf::, r'H:'J#liff':,PreventionProgram EilffioDrop=&reoortyearDrop=zorz&runReoort=Ru staf0cost) n+Repoft
-ra Ao"pdd -
Business Plan, pp 166- and posted on the RWQCB CIWOS database website; Business Plan, pp 166-
474 website address:
http://ciwqs.waterboards.ca.gov/ciwqs/readO nly/PublicR
eportEsmrAtGlanceServlet?reoortlD=r&firstR un=Y&facil
ityName=&oartyName=®Drop=&cou ntyDrop=&orde
rNo=&wd id =&npdesPernr it=&ci No=&reportTvpeDrop=&
reportFreqDrop=&repodYearDrop=2o17& runReport=R u
n+Reoort
474
Silicon Valley
Clean Water
z.or5-zor7 Annual
Adopted Budget, and
pp 23-31
Agency's 2015 Annual Report submitted to the RWOCB
and posted on the RWOCB CIWQS database website;
website address:
http://ciwqs.waterboards.ca.gov/ciwoslreadOnly/PublicR
eportEsmrAtGla nceServlet?reportlD=r&firstRun=Y&facil
itvName.&oartvName=&reoDroo=&countvDroo=&orde
rNo=&wd id=& n odesPerm it=&ciNo=&reoortTypeDrop=&
reportFreqDroo=&reportYearDroo=zorz&runReport=R u
n+Report
zo:.6-zor7 Annual
Adopted Budget, and
pp 23-31
South San
Francisco
Adopted Operating
Budget & Capital
lmprovement Plan
Fiscal Year zo16-u or7,
pg. H-z and J-9
Agency's zo16 Annual Report submitted to the RWOCB
and posted on the RWOCB CIWOS database website;
website address:
htto://ciwos.waterboards.ca.oov/ciwoskeadOnlvlPublicR
eoortEsrn rAtGla nceServlet?repoft lD=1&firstRu n=Y&facil
ityName=&oartvName=®Drop=&countyDrop=&orde
rNo=&wd id=&npdesPerm it=&ciNo=&reportTvoe Drop=&
reDortFreo Droo=& reportYea rDroo= 2o17& run ReDort=R u
n+Report
Adopted Operating
Budget & Capital
lmprovement Plan
Fiscal Year zo16-zor7,
p9.J-9
Pacifica zo16-zor7 Annual
Operating Budget
Report, pg. GF-8
Agency's zo:.6 Annual Self-Monitoring Report submitted
to the RWOCB and posted on the RWOCB CIWOS
database website; website address:
http://ciwqs.waterboards. ca.gov/ciwos/read Only/PublicR
eportEsmrAtGlanceServlet?reportlD=1&firstRun=Y&facil
ityNa me=& partyNa me'& regDrop=&cou ntvDrop=&orde
rNo=&wdid=&npdesPermit=&ciNo=& reoortTypeDrop=&
reportFreqDrop=& reoortYearDrop= 2o17&run Rego,t=R u
Agency's zo16 Annual
Self-monitoring Report
submitted to the
RWOCB and available
on the RWOCB CIWOS
database
n+Reoort
Report, pg. rz and pg.3 and posted on the RWOCB CIWOS database website; Report' Attaihment E website address:
http:/lciwqs.waterboards. ca. gov/ciwqslreadOnly/Pu blicR
eoortEsmrAtGlanceServlet?reoortlD=e&firstRu n=Y&facil
itv Name=&PartvNa me=& regD
reoortFreoDrop=&reportYearDroE=2o17& runReport=R u
ft&eeart
Qvtor-ta 17
STAFF REPORT AGENDANO: 8d
MEETING DATE: May 21 ,2018
To:Honorable Mayor and City Council
Date: May 21,2018
From: Syed Murtuza, Director of Public Works - (650) 558-7230
Subject:Adoption of a Resolution Awarding a Construction Contract to Golden Bay
Construction lnc., for the 2018 Sidewalk Repair Program, City Project No.
85250, and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Construction
Contract
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution awarding a construction
contract to Golden Bay Construction, lnc., for the 2018 Sidewalk Repair Program in the amount of
$882,986 and authorizing the City Manager to execute the construction contract.
BACKGROUND
On March 5,2018, City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2018-1949 to update Chapter 12.12o'f
the Burlingame Municipal Code "sidewalk and Parkway Maintenance." The updated municipal
code reverses the previous 50/50 sidewalk repair program, in which the affected property owners
were required to contribute 50% of the sidewalk repair costs, and the City would contribute the
remaining 50% of the costs. The updated code authorizes the City to implement the sidewalk
repairs through the Capital lmprovement Program utilizing 100o/o City funds with no contributions
from the property owners based on funding availability. This will significantly help improve the
program delivery and will improve efficiency in implementing sidewalk repairs. Based on staff's
assessment of sidewalk repair needs, this year's sidewalk repair program will primarily be
concentrated in two areas. The first area is enclosed by Trousdale Drive, Ashton Avenue,
Murchison Drive, and El Camino Real. The second area is enclosed by Burlingame Avenue,
Rollins Road, Toyon Drive, Edgehill Drive and El Camino Real.
DISCUSSION
The project was advertised for bids on April 19,2018. The bids were opened on lt4ay 15, 2018,
and three bids were received ranging from $882,986 to $2,022,852. Golden Bay Construction,
lnc. submitted the lowest responsible bid in the amount of $882,986, which is 13.3% lower than
the engineer's estimate of $1,000,000. Golden Bay Construction, lnc. has met the project
requirements and has successfully completed similar projects for other agencies. As a result,
staff recommends that the City Council award the contract to Golden Bay Construction, lnc.
1
Award of the Construction Contract for the 2018 Sidewalk Repair Program May 21, 2018
Additionally, due to favorable bid pricing, staff is requesting that the City Council authorize up to
25% contingencies to perform additional sidewalk repairs, install curb and gutter, and Americans
with Disability Act (ADA) curb ramps by taking advantage of the low-bid prices.
FISCAL !MPACT
Estimated Proiect Expenditures:
The following are the estimated project construction expenditures:
Construction
Construction Conti nge ncy (25o/o)
Engineering Administration and lnspection
$ 882,986
$ 220,747
$ 146,267
Total $ 1,250,000
Fundinq Availabilitv
There are adequate funds available in the Capital lmprovement Program for sidewalk, curb
ramps, and curb and gutter to complete the project.
Exhibits:
. Resolution
o Bid summary
. Project location map
. Construction contract agreement
2
RESOLUTION NO,
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME
AWARDING A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO GOLDEN BAY CONSTRUCTION,
INC. FOR THE 2018 SIDEWALK REPAIR PROGRAM, AND AUTHORIZING THE
CIry MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR
CITY PROJECT NO. 85250
WHEREAS, on April 19, 2018, the City issued a notice inviting bid proposals for the
2018 Sidewalk Repair Program, CITY PROJECT NO 85250; and
WHEREAS, on lvlay 15, 2018, all proposals were received and opened before the City
Clerk and representatives of the Public Works Department; and
WHEREAS, Golden Bay Construction, lnc., submitted the lowest responsible bid for the
job in the amount of $882,986.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it RESOLVED, ANd ORDERED, thAt thE PIANS ANd
Specifications, including all addenda, are approved and adopted; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the bid of Golden Bay Construction for the 2018
Sidewalk Repair Program, CITY PROJECT NO 85250 in the amount of $882,986 is accepted;
and
BE lT FURTHER RESOLVED that a contract be entered into between the successful
bidder and the City of Burlingame for the performance of said work, and that the City Manager is
authorized on behalf of the City of Burlingame to execute said contract and to approve the
faithful performance bond and the labor materials bond required to be furnished by the
contractor.
Mayor
l, Ivleaghan 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 2 1ST
day of MAY, 2018, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
City Clerk
CITY OE BURLINGA},IE
2018 SIDEWAIK MAINTEI{ANCE PROGRAM
CITY PROJECT NO. 85250
ENGINEER'S ESTII'{ATE Golden Bay Constluction
Ilalryard, CA
J\lR Construction, Inc
San Mateo, CA
FEID vanguard Construction, In(
Livemore, CA
TMM
ITEM DESCRIPTION
UNIT AREA UNTT ENGTNEER'S
ESTIMATE
UNlT BID I'NIT BID UNIT BID
NO.PRICE QUANTITY SIZE PRICE A}IOI'NT PRICE A{OUNT PRICE AMOI'NT
1 REMOVE AND REPLACE S]DEWAIK $16.00 25, 000 ;. F.$400 , 000 .00 $15. s0 $387 , s00 .00 $16.1r0 $410 ,000 . 00 $40.00 $1 , oo0, 000 .00
2 REr'IOVE AND RIPLACE DRMWAY $20.00 4,000 l. F.$80 , 000 .00 918.00 $72,000.00 $23. s0 $94 , 000 .00 $49.00 $195 ,000 . 00
3 REMOVE AND REPI,ACE COIORED SIDE}IAIK 920 .00 2,OOO l. F.$40 , 000 .00 $18.00 936,000 . oo $18.90 937 , 800 .00 s42.00 s84 , 000 .00
A REMOVE A},ID REPLACE CIOLORED DRIVETIAY $2s .00 s00 l. E.$12,500.00 $24 .00 s12, 000 .00 $28.00 $14 ,000 . 00 950.00 $2s, 000 .00
5 REMOVE AND REPIACE CURB AND GUTTER 970.00 2,000 L. F.$140 ,000 . 00 s68.00 9136,000 . 00 s62.75 $125,500.00 $75. 00 91s2,000.00
6 REMC'\IE AND REP],ACE CURB 940.00 100 L.F $4 , 000 .00 $s5.00 95, 600 . 00 940.00 s4,000.00 $60.00 $6,000.00
7 CROSS GUTTER $40.00 1,000 l. F.$40 , 000 .00 $22.OO 922,000.00 s37.00 $37 ,000 .00 $40.00 $40,000.00
I CONSTRUCT CURB RAMP $4 ,2s0 .00 EACH $8s,000 . 00 $s,019.00 $100 ,380 . 00 9s,136.00 $102, ?20.00 s9, s00 . 00 s190,000.00
9
INSTAIL DETECTABI,E I^IARNING SI,RFACE ON EXISTING
RAMP $7s0.00 20 EACH $1s, 000 . 00 $653. 00 s13,050.00 9500.00 $10,000.00 $377.00 $7, s40.00
10 REMOI/E SIDEIVAIK A}ID REPIACE WITH TOP SOI],$10.00 1,000 s.E $10, 000 .00 910 .00 $10 , 000 .00 97.3s $7 , 350 .00 $1s.00 91s, 000 .00
11 AGGREGATE BASE $40 . 00 25 TONS 91,000.00 $200.00 $s , 000 .00 $240.00 $6,000 . 00 $50.00 $1 ,2s0 . 00
L2 REMOVE ASPHALT CONCRETE AND CONCRETE BASE $10.00 2,500 S. F.$2s, 000 .00 $6.00 $ls, 000 . 00 $9.50 $23 , 7s0 .00 $10.00 $25, 000 . 00
13 RE}4OVE ASPHALT CONCRETE ONLY s10.00 1,000 s.F 910 ,000 . 00 $s.00 $s , 000 .00 $7 .00 $7,000.00 $7 .00 97 ,000 .00
!4 NE}I ASPI{ALT CONCRETE SURTACING 9400.00 L20 TONS 948,000.00 $328.00 $39,360.00 9400 .00 $48,oo0.00 $1 , 233 .00 $147,960.00
15 REPAIR IRRIGATION SYSTEM $3,100.00 1 L.S $3,100.00 $3, 131 . oo $3, 131 . 00 $1 .00 $1.00 $1 6, 000 . 00 916 ,000 . 00
16 REMOVE TREE AND GRIND STUMP (<24" DIA}.,'ETER)93, soo . oo EACIT $17, s00 .00 $800.00 $4,000.00 $4, s00.00 s22, s00 . 00 $4, s00.00 $22, s00 .00
t7 RET'{OVE TREE AND GRIND STUMP (>24" DTAMETER)$6,s00.00 10 EACH $6s, 000 . oo $1,300.00 $13, 000 . 00 $3,000.00 $30, 000 .00 $7 ,500 . 00 97s, 000 .00
18 NEW SEWER CLEAN-OUT FRAME AI.ID COVER 9300.00 1 EACI{s300.00 $275.00 $27s. 00 $200 .00 9200.00 $s80 .00 s580.00
19 REPAIR / REPTACE WATERIINE (10' MAX.}$2 ,000 . 00 1 EACH $2,000.00 $2 ,200 . 00 $2 , 200 .00 $s00 .00 $s00.00 $7, 198 .00 $7, 198 .00
20 AD.]UST I4ANHOLES TO GRADE 91,000.00 1 EACH 91,000.00 9850.00 $8so.00 s1 , 000 .00 $1,000.00 $3, 000 .00 $3 , 000 .00
27 SIGN POST s300.00 L EACH $300.00 s31s. 00 $315.00 $2s0.00 s250.00 $912.00 $912.00
NEIT PARKING METER POSTS s300.00 1 EACH $300.00 931s. 00 $315. 0O 92s0.00 s2s0 .00 $912.0O $912.00
rorAr= 91,000,000.00 ToTAI: $882,986.00 ToTAI: $981,821.00 TOTAL: $2,O22,A52.OO
AGREEMENT FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT
2018 SIDEWALK REPAIR PROGRAM
CITY PROJECT NO. 85250
THIS AGREEMENT, made in duplicate and entered into in the City of
Burlingame, County of San Mateo, State of California on _, 2018 by and
between the CITY OF BURLINGAME, a Municipal Corporation, hereinafter called "City",
and Golden Bav nstruction. lnc a State of incorporation, hereinafter called
"Contractor."
WITN ESSETH:
WHEREAS, City has taken appropriate proceedings to authorize construction of
the public work and improvements herein provided for and to authorize execution of this
Contract; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to State law and City requirements, a notice was duly
published for bids for the contract for the improvement hereinafter described; and
WHEREAS, on Mav 21 . 2018 after notice duly given, the City Council of
Burlingame awarded the contract for the construction of the improvements hereinafter
described to Contractor, which the Council found to be the lowest responsive,
responsible bidder for these improvements; and
WHEREAS, City and Contractor desire to enter into this Agreement for the
construction of said improvements.
NOW, THEREFORE, lT lS AGREED by the parties hereto as follows:
2. The Contract Documents.
The complete contract betlveen City and Contractor consists of the following
documents: this Agreement; Notice lnviting Sealed Bids, attached hereto as Exhibit A;
the accepted Bid Proposal, attached hereto as Exhibit B; the specifications, provisions,
addenda, and detailed drawings contained in the bid documents titled "2018 Sidewalk
Repair Program, City Project No. 85250" attached as Exhibit C; the State of California
AGREEMENT. 1
1. Scope of work.
Contractor shall perform the work described in those Contract Documents
entitled: 2018 SIDEWALK REPAIR PROGRAM, CITY PROJECT NO. 85250.
3. Contract Price.
The City shall pay, and the Contractor shall accept, in full, payment of the work
above agreed to be done, the sum of eight hundred and eighty two thousand, nine
hundred and eighty six dollars ($882,986), called the "Contract Price". This price is
determined by the lump sum and unit prices contained in Contractor's Bid. In the event
authorized work is performed or materials furnished in addition to those set forth in
Contractor's Bid and the Specifications, such work and materials will be paid for at the
unit prices therein contained. Said amount shall be paid in progress payments as
provided in the Contract Documents.
4. Term ination
At any time and with or without cause, the City may suspend the work or any
portion of the work for a period of not more than 90 consecutive calendar days by notice
in writing to Contractor that will fix the date on which work will be resumed. Contractor
will be granted an adjustment to the Contract Price or an extension of the Time for
Completion, or both, directly attributable to any such suspension if Contractor makes a
claim therefor was provided in the Contract Documents.
The occurrence of any one or more of the following events will justify termination
of the contract by the City for cause: (1) Contractor's persistent failure to perform the
work in accordance with the Contract Documents; (2) Contractor's disregard of Laws or
Regulations of any public body having jurisdiction; (3) Contractor's disregard of the
authority of the Engineer; or (4) Contractor's violation in any substantial way of any
provision of the Contract Documents. ln the case of any one or more of these events,
the City, after giving Contractor and Contractor's sureties seven calendar days written
notice of the intent to terminate Contractor's services, may initiate termination
procedures under the provisions of the Performance Bond. Such termination will not
affect any rights or remedies of City against Contractor then existing or that accrue
AGREEMENT - 2
Standard Specifications 2010, as promulgated by the California Department of
Transportation; prevailing wage rates of the State of California applicable to this project
by State law; and all bonds; which are collectively hereinafter referred to as the Contract
Documents. All rights and obligations of City and Contractor are fully set forth and
described in the Contract Documents, which are hereby incorporated as if fully set forth
herein. All of the above described documents are intended to cooperate so that any
work called for in one, and not mentioned in the other, or vice versa, is to be executed
the same as if mentioned in all said documents.
5. Provisions Cumulative.
The provisions of this Agreement are cumulative and in addition to and not in
limitation of any other rights or remedies available to the City.
6. Notices.
All notices shall be in writing and delivered in person or transmitted by certified
mail, postage prepaid.
Notices required to be given to the City shall be addressed as follows:
Victor Voong
Associate Engineer
City of Burlingame
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, Califomia 9401 0
Notices required to be given to Contractor shall be addressed as follows:
Golden Bay Construction, lnc
Johnny Zanette, President
3826 Depot Road.
Hayward, CA 94545
7. lnteroretation
As used herein, any gender includes the other gender and the singular includes
AGREEMENT - 3
thereafter. Any retention or payment of moneys due Contractor will not release
Contractor from liability. At the City's sole discretion, Contractor's services may not be
terminated if Contractor begins, within seven calendar days of receipt of such notice of
intent to terminate, to correct its failure to perform and proceeds diligently to cure such
failure within no more than 30 calendar days of such notice.
Upon seven calendar days written notice to Contractor, City may, without cause
and without prejudice to any other right or remedy of City, terminate the Contract for
City's convenience. ln such case, Contractor will be paid for (1) work satisfactorily
completed prior the effective date of such termination, (2) furnishing of labor, equipment,
and materials in accordance with the Contract Documents in connection with
uncompleted work, (3) reasonable expenses directly attributable to termination, and (4)
fair and reasonable compensation for associated overhead and profit. No payment will
be made on account of loss of anticipated profits or revenue or other economic loss
arising out of or resulting from such termination.
the plural and vice versa.
B. Waiver or Amendment.
No modification, waiver, mutual termination, or amendment of this Agreement is
effective unless made in writing and signed by the City and the Contractor. One or
more waivers of any term, condition, or other provision of this Agreement by either party
shall not be construed as a waiver of a subsequent breach of the same or any other
provision.
9. Controllinq Law.
This Agreement is to be governed by and interpreted in accordance with the laws
of the State of California.
'10. Successo rs and Assiqnees.
This Agreement is to be binding on the heirs, successors, and assigns of the
parties hereto but may not be assigned by either party without first obtaining the written
consent of the other party.
1 1 . Severability.
lf any term or provision of this Agreement is deemed invalid, void, or
unenforceable by any court of laMul jurisdiction, the remaining terms and provisions of
the Agreement shall not be affected thereby and shall remain in full force and effect.
1 2. lndemn ification.
Contractor shall indemnify, defend, and hold the City, its directors, officers,
employees, agents, and volunteers harmless from and against any and all liability,
claims, suits, actions, damages, and causes of action arising out of, pertaining or
relating to the actual or alleged negligence, recklessness or willful misconduct of
Contractor, its employees, subcontractors, or agents, or on account of the performance
or character of the services, except for any such claim arising out of the sole negligence
or willful misconduct of the City, its officers, employees, agents, or volunteers. lt is
understood that the duty of Contractor to indemnify and hold harmless includes the duty
to defend as set forth in section 2778 ol the California Civil Code. Notwithstanding the
foregoing, for any design professional services, the duty to defend and indemnify City
shall be limited to that allowed by state law. Acceptance of insurance certificates and
endorsements required under this Agreement does not relieve Contractor from liability
AGREEMENT - 4
under this indemnification and hold harmless clause. This indemnification and hold
harmless clause shall apply whether or not such insurance policies shall have been
determined to be applicable to any of such damages or claims for damages.
lN WITNESS WHEREOF, two identical counterparts of this Agreement,
consisting of five pages, including this page, each of which counterparts shall for all
purposes be deemed an original of this Agreement, have been duly executed by the
parties hereinabove named on the day and year first hereinabove written.
CITY OF BURLINGAME,
a Municipal Corporation
Bv
Lisa K. Goldman, City Manager
Approved as to form:
Kathleen Kane, City Attorney
ATTEST:
Meaghan Hassel-Shearer, City Clerk
.CONTRACTOR"
BY
Print Name:
Golden Bay Construction, lnc.
AGREEMENT - 5
2018 SIDEWALK REPAIR PROGRAM
VICINITY MAP
b\
$
STAFF REPORT AGENDA NO: 8e
MEETING DATE: May 21 ,2018
To:Honorable Mayor and City Council
Date: May 21,2018
From: Carol Augustine, Finance Director - (650) 558'7222
Subject: Adoption of Resolutions Confirming the Appointment of the Finance
Director/Treasurer and Designating Certain Employees as Official
Signatories on City Banking and lnvestmen!A9qeqnlq
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the following resolutions:
A. Resolution au.thorizing the City of Burlingame signatories for city checks, drafts, and other orders
drawn on the Bank of America; and
B. Resolution authorizing the City of Burlingame investment of monies in the State of California
Local Agency lnvestment Fund (LAIF)
BACKGROUND
Ms. Karen Huang has been selected as the City's new Deputy Finance Director/Deputy Treasurer.
This staffing change (effective March 20, 2018) requires confirmations of signatories for the
purposes of making financial transactions with Bank of America and the State of California Local
Agency lnvestment Fund. The City has accounts for its regular banking and investments as well
as accounts for depositing bond proceeds. Once these resolutions are adopted by the City Council,
staff can move foruyard with updating the signatories with the appropriate financial institutions.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no budget impact.
Exhibits:
o Resolution of the City of Burlingame for Bank of America
. Resolution of the City of Burlingame for LAIF
1
RESOLUTTON NO._
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
BURLINGAME AUTHORIZING CITY OF BURLINGAME
SIGNATORIES FOR CITY CHECKS, DRAFT AND OTHER ORDERS
ON BANK OF AMERICA
WHEREAS, the City of Burlingame has a long-established relationship with the Bank of
America; and
WHEREAS, the Bank of America requires the City to adopt a resolution in order to allow
funds to be deposited with the Bank of America and to identify and authorize certain City officers
to sign checks, drafts, and other orders of said bank.
The City Council authorizes that funds of the City of Burlingame may be deposited with
Bank of America subject to the terms and the signature card, rules of the Bank, including
all amendments and additions thereto, all applicable laws, regulations and practices of
the Bank in force from time to time, and all service charges now or hereafter established
or allowed by law.
2. The City Council authorizes the following City officers to sign checks, drafts, or other
orders for and on behalf of the City of Burlingame; the signature of one of these officers
shall be required for checks, drafts, or other orders of less than $5,000.00; the signature
of two of these officers shall be required for checks, drafts, or other orders of $5,000.00
or more.
J.
a. Lisa K. Goldman, City Manager
b. Carol Augustine, Finance Director/Treasurer
c. Karen Huang, Deputy Finance Director/Deputy Treasurer
d. Margaret Ono, Accounting Technician
4. The City Council authorizes each of the above-named persons to endorse checks,
drafts, and other orders for and on behalf of the City of Burlingame for deposit,
encashment, or otherwise, and further, the City Council authorizes the Bank of America
to honor and pay on account any and all checks, drafts, or other orders signed and/or
endorsed herewith, or, if said checks, drafts, or other orders are presented unendorsed
for deposit to City's account, to supply any required endorsement.
5. The City Council agrees that any sum at any time in the account with the Bank of
America shall be subject to the right of offset for monies owed by City to Bank of
America to the extent legally permissible; further, the City Council agrees to pay the
1
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME
RESOLVES AND ORDERS AS FOLLOWS:
6. The City Council authorizes the Bank of America to hold all statements and vouchers
until called for, and, if not called for within thirty (30) days, to mail said statements.
Michael Brownrigg, Mayor
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Councilmembers:
Councilmembers:
Councilmembers:
Meaghan Hassel-Shearer, City Clerk
Bank of America on demand, the amount of overdrafts on this account and any amounts
for account fees and rates according to the current schedule of fees and rates.
l, Meaghan Hassel-Shearer, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame eertify that the
foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the
Burlingame City Council held on May 21, 2018, by the following vote:
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME
AUTHORIZING INVESTMENT OF MONIES IN
THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FUND
WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code sections 16429.1 to 16429.4, the State has
created a Local Agency lnvestment Fund in the Treasury of the State of California for the deposit of
money of local agencies for the purposes of investment with the California State Treasurer; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Burlingame hereby reaffirms that the deposit and
withdrawal of money into and out of the Local Agency lnvestment Fund in accordance with the
provisions of the California Government Code and the City of Burlingame's lnvestment Policy are in
the best interest of the City of Burlingame;
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Burlingame resolves as follows:
The City Council authorizes the deposit and withdrawal of funds of the City of Burlingame
into and out of the Local Agency lnvestment Fund in the California State Treasury in
accordance with the provisions of the California Government Code 1 6429.1 for the
purpose of investment as stated herein, and further, the City Council authorizes the State
Treasurer's Office to verify all banking information provided in that regard.
2. The City Council authorizes the following City officers or their successors in office, to
deposit or withdraw City of Burlingame funds into or out of the Local Agency lnvestment
Fund:
1
CAROL AUGUSTINE
Finance Director
MARGARET ONO
Accounting Technician
3. The City Council directs that these authorizations and designations shall remain in effect
until such time as the City notifies the Local Agency lnvestment Fund in writing of any
changes.
MICHAEL BROWNRIGG, tvlayor
l, Meaghan Hassel-Shearer, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, certify that the foregoing
Resotution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 21"tday of tvlay, 2018,
and was adopted thereafter by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEII/BERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMElI/BERS:
MEAGHAN HASSEL-SHEARER, City CIeTK
RESOLUTION NO.
KAREN HUANG
Deputy Finance Director
STAFF REPORT AGENDANO: 9a
MEETING DATE: May 21,2018
To:Honorable Mayor and City Council
Date: May 21,2018
From: Syed Murtuza, Director of Public Works - (650) 558-7230
Subject: Public Hearing to Renew the Levy and Collection of Assessments for the
Downtown Burlingame Avenue Streetscape lmprovements Project for
FiscalYear 2018-19
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council take the following actions to renew the levy and collection
of assessments for the Downtown Burlingame Avenue Streetscape lmprovements Assessment
District No. 201 2-1 for fiscal year 2018-19:
1. Hold a Public Hearing; and
2. Adopt the attached resolution confirming the assessments and ordering the levy for the
Downtown Burlingame Avenue Streetscape lmprovement Assessment District No. 2012-1
for fiscal year 2018-19.
BACKGROUND
On April 2, 2012, the City Council initiated the proceedings to form the Downtown Burlingame
Avenue Streetscape lmprovement Assessment District No. 2012-1. The proceedings were
conducted underthe provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Actof 1972,Part 2, Division 15
of the California Streets and Highways Code (Act). Weighted ballots were sent via certified mail
to the property owners on April 5, 2012. On May 21, 2012, the City Council conducted a Public
Hearing to tabulate ballots for the Assessment District. The results of the ballot showed no
"majority protest", thereby allowing the City Council to order improvements, form the Assessment
District, and levy assessments totaling $335,787 annually for 30 years to the downtown
Burlingame Avenue property owners. Property owners were given the option to pre-pay their
assessments to avoid paying annually. To date, five property owners have exercised this option.
DISCUSSION
The Engineer's Report is updated annually to reflect any changes that may have occurred to
property configuration in the Assessment District. There have been no changes to the prior year
Annual Report concerning the levy and collection of assessments within the Assessment District.
The Act requires an annual Public Hearing to confirm and levy the assessment.
1
D ow ntow n B u rl i n g a m e Av e n u e Sfeetscape I m p rove m e nts Assessments May 21,2018
FISCAL IMPACT
The total assessment for fiscal year 2018-19 is $310,156, which reflects pre-payments by
property owners. Funds collected through assessments will be used as part of debt payment for
Burlingame Avenue Streetscape bonds.
Exhibits:
. Resolution
. Engineer's Report FY 2018-19
2
RESOLUTION NO._
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA,
CONFIRMING THE ASSESSMENT AND ORDERING THE LEVY FOR THE
DOWNTOWN BURLINGAME AVENUE STREETSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 201 2-1
FOR FISCAL YEAR 2018-19
The City Council (the "Council") of the City of Burlingame (the "City") resolves as follows:
WHEREAS, the Council previously completed its proceedings in accordance with the
Landscaping and Lighting Aci of 1972, Part 2, Division 15 of the California Streets and Highways
Code (commencing with Section 22500) (the "Act") to establish the City's Downtown Burlingame
Avenue Streetscape lmprovement POect (the "Assessment District"); and
WHEREAS, the City has, by previous resolution, declared its intention to hold a Public
Hearing concerning the levy and collection of assessments within the Assessment District; and
WHEREAS, a Public Hearing has been held and concluded and notice thereof was given
in accordance with Section 22626 of lhe Act; and
WHEREAS, at the time and place specified in the Resolution of Intention the City
conducted such hearing and considered all objections to the assessment'
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, DETERMINED, AND ORDERED BY THE
COUNCIL, AS FOLLOWS:
1. Confirmation of Assessment and Diagram: The Council confirms the assessment and
the diagram as is described in full detail in the Annual Report on file with the Clerk.
2. Levy of Assessment: Pursuant to Seclion 22631 of the Act, the adoption of this resolution
shall constitute the levy of an assessment for the fiscal year commencing July 1 , 2018 and
ending June 30, 2019.
3. Ordering of the Levy: The Council orders City staff to prepare and submit the levy of
assessments to San l\4ateo County for placement on the Fiscal Year 2018-19 secured
property tax roll, including executing any necessary and appropriate documents on behalf
of the City to accomplish the levy and collection of assessments.
Michael Brownrigg, Mayor
l, 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 21sr day of lt/ray,
2018 and was adopted thereafter by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Meaghan Hassel-Shearer, City Clerk
City of Burlingame Assessment District
No. 2012-1, Downtown Burlingame Avenue
Streetscape lmprovement Project
Engineer's Report
City of Burlingame
Fiscal Year 2018/19
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1-1
2. INTRODUCTION 2-1
Background of District 2-1
3. PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS 3-1
Description of the Boundaries of the District
2.1 .
2.2.
2.3.
3.1.
2.t
5.J.
5.1.
5.2.
5.3.
5.4.
5.5.
Description of the District lmprovement Project................
Map of District lm provement Project................
3-1
3-'1
3-1
4-1
4-1
5-1
4. ESTIMATE OF COSTS
4.1. District lmprovement Project Costs
5. SPECIAL AND GENERAL BENEFIT
lntroduction 5-1
ldentification of Benefit 5-1
Separation of General Benefit 5-3
5-4Quantification of General Benefit
Apportioning of Special Benefit. ..................5-5
6. METHODASSESSMENT 6-1
6.1. Assessment 8ud9e1.................. ..................6-1
6.2. Method of Assessment Spread. ..................6'2
6.3. District lmprovement Project Debt Financing. ......................6-2
6.4. Assessment Prepayment Formu|a...................... .................6-3
7. ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM 7-1
8. ASSESSMENTROLL 8-1
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City Council of the City of Burlingame ("City Council"), pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act
of 1972, being Division 15, Part 2 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California ("1972 Act"),
previously formed the assessment district known and designated as "Assessment District No. 2012-1,
Downtown Burlingame Avenue Streetscape lmprovement Project", (hereafter referred to as the "District").
The City Council has initiated proceedings directing the preparation and filing of a report for Fiscal Year
2018119 presenting the improvements, an estimated cost, including debt financing, of the improvements,
annual administrative costs, and a diagram showing the area and properties to be assessed.
The following assessment is authorized in order to pay the estimated costs, including debt financing of the
improvements and annual administrative costs to be paid by the assessable real property within the
boundaries of the District in proportion to the special benefit received. The following table summarizes the
assessment:
Description Amount
District lm provem ent Project Costs $11,227,015
Less: Allocation to General Benefit(1 )(3,238,994)
Subtotal: Allocation to Special Benefit $7,988,021
Less: Sewer and Water Enterprise Fund Contribution(2)($e22,ooo)
Less:TLC Grant (301,000)
Less: Additional Contribution from Parking Enterprise Fund (782,432)
Less: Additional City Contribution (20,195)
Total Amount to be Specially Assessed $5,962,394
Total Amount Pre-Paid During 30 Day Gollection Period $341,582
Annual Assessable Budget:
Average Annual Debt Service Payment(3)$31 0,1 56
Total Annual Assessable Budget $31 0,1 56
(1) See Section 5.4.
(2) Contemporaneously with the District lmprovement Project, the City, using sewer and water
enterprise funds, replaced the sewer and water lines under Burlingame Avenue (the overall total
cost for all projects is $15,443,660). A portion of the money for that project was allocated for
patching the streets and sidewalks. Since the District lmprovement Project eliminates the need
for patching, the $922,000 is being contributed to the District lmprovement Project.
(3) See Section 6.3.
This annual report represents no changes to the Fiscal Year 2Ol7/18 annual report.
Art Morimoto
Assistant Public Works Director
City of Burlingame
Assessment District No. 2012-1 - City of Burlingame
Fiscal Year 2018119
3-1
fit //{*,;6
2, INTRODUCTION
2.1. Background of District
The City of Burlingame ("City'') has completed, in coordination with planned utility improvements, the
Downtown Burlingame Avenue Streetscape lmprovement Project ("District lmprovement Project"). The
District lmprovement Project provided an opportunity for community stakeholders to plan and implement
streetscaping and sidewalk improvements that complement the evolving vision and needs of the
Burlingame Avenue property owners, merchants and community. The District lmprovement Project
improves the public infrastructure that fronts property along Burlingame Avenue (and portions of certain
side streets at intersections with Burlingame Avenue) between El Camino Real and California Drive.
Further, the District lmprovement Project enhances the overall experience of merchants and visitors by
creating a memorable Burlingame Avenue for shopping, dining, and strolling.
2.2. Reason for the Assessment
The assessment covered by this Engineer's Report will generate the assessment revenue necessary to
provide for a portion of the public improvements provided by the District lmprovement Project and further
described in Section 3.2 of this Engineer's Report. The District improvements may include but are not
limited to, all of the following: streetscape improvements, sidewalk improvements, District financing costs,
and administrative costs associated with the ongoing annual administration of the District.
2.3. Establishment of the Assessment
The City formed the District and established assessments by complying with the procedures specified in
Article XlllD and the Proposition 218 Omnibus lmplementation Act ("Proposition 218"). ln November'1996,
the voters in the State of California added Article XlllD to the California Constitution imposing, among other
requirements, the necessity for the City to conduct an assessment ballot procedure to enable the owners
of each property on which assessments are proposed to be enacted, the opportunity to express their
support for, or opposition to the proposed assessment. The basic steps of the assessment ballot procedure
are outlined below.
The City prepared a Notice of Public Hearing ("Notice"), which describes, along with other mandated
information, the reason for the proposed assessments and provided a date, time, and location of a public
hearing to be held on the matter. The City prepared an assessment ballot, which clearly gave the property
owner the ability to sign and execute their assessment ballot either in favor of, or in opposition to, the
assessment. The Notice and assessment ballots were mailed to each affected property owner within the
District a minimum of 45 days prior to the public hearing date as shown in the Notice. The City held
community meetings with the property owners to discuss the issues facing the District and to answer
property owner questions directly.
After the Notice and assessment ballots were mailed, property owners were given until the close of the
public hearing, as stated in the Notice, to return their signed and executed assessment ballot. During the
public hearing, property owners were given the opportunity to address the City Council and ask questions
or voice their concerns. After the public hearing, the returned assessment ballots received prior to the close
of the public hearing were tabulated, weighted by the proposed assessment amount on each property and
the results were announced by the City Council.
Article XlllD provides that if, as a result of the assessment ballot proceeding, a majority protest is found to
exist, the City Council shall not have the authority to enact the assessments as proposed. A majority protest
Assessment District No. 2012-1 - City of Burlingame
Fiscal Year 2018119
4-1
exists if the assessments represented by ballots submitted in opposition exceed those submltted in favor
of the assessment. All returned ballots were tabulated and weighted according to the financial obligation
of each particular parcel. There wasn't a majority protest as described above and the City Council approved
the District formation and assessments.
The City Council will annually declare its intention to levy and collect the assessments within the District
and hold a public hearing concerning such levy of assessments. At such time all interested persons shall
be afforded the opportunity to hear and be heard.
Assessment District No. 2012-1 - City of Burlingame
Fiscal Year 2018119
2-2
3. PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS
The District provides for various Burlingame Avenue streetscape and sidewalk improvements located within
the public righfof-way and dedicated easements within the boundaries of the Distrlct.
3.1. Description of the Boundaries of the District
The boundaries of the District include properties located along Burlingame Avenue within the City. The
District runs along Burlingame Avenue and is bounded on the east by California Drive and on the west by
El Camino Real. The City will not provide public improvements from the District lmprovement Project to
any area localed outside of the District boundaries.
Section 7 of this Engineer's Report provides an assessment diagram that more fully provides a description
of the District's boundaries and the parcels within those boundaries.
3.2. Description of the District lmprovement Project
The District lmprovement Project includes streetscape items such as sidewalk, street and pedestrian
lighting, trees and landscaping, seating, signage, kiosks, gateway treatments, site furnishings, and other
parking improvements, appurtenant facilities, and soft costs. The District lmprovement Project provides for
public improvements to be distributed throughout the entire District, and as such, are of direct and special
benefit to the parcels within the District. The District lmprovement Project consists of a classic design style
with touches of traditional and contemporary design. This desired design style creates a structured, timeless
design with patterned, elegant materials consistent throughout the Burlingame Avenue area.
Not only does the District lmprovement Project provide necessary street improvements, but it allows for an
increase in pedestrian space along Burlingame Avenue. To allow for this additional pedestrian space,
parallel parking replaced the existing angled parking. The change from angled parking to parallel parking
will allow for an expanded 16 foot width of sidewalk area on both sides of Burlingame Avenue. This
additional sidewalk area can provide sufficient space for seating, art features, landscaping, and lighting.
Burlingame Avenue will be maintained with two-way traffic and 10 foot wide travel lanes. The parallel
parking stalls, with a parking assist zone, will have a width of nine feet. The parking assist zone allows for
car door openings and limited bike through lanes along Burlingame Avenue.
At the intersection corners along Burlingame Avenue bulb-outs are proposed to allow for additional
pedestrian areas. ln addition to providing an enhanced pedeskian area, lhe corner intersection bulb-outs
witl reduce pedestrian crossing distances. As an additional safety feature, the crosswalks will be of a
different construction material than the street surface to provide a warning for traffic to slow down.
The District lmprovement Project includes asphalt paving in the roadway and colored concrete for the
parking and parking assist zones. The sidewalks, corner intersection bulb-outs and cross walks will be
constructed of concrete pavers. Trees, street lights with limited features, and other public furnishings are
also included throughout the District.
3.3. Map of District lmprovement Project
The following map provides the approximate location (for reference only - may not include all) of the
improvements provided by the District lmprovement Project throughout the District.
Assessment District No. 2012-1 - City of Burlingame
Fiscal Year 2018/19
3-1
Burlingame Ave Streetscape Improvements Proiect - Draft Concept Plan
,t
)r
\
Burlingame Ave Streetscape lmprovements
February 28,?.017
$
,l t':-
I'
,l "'i
It'
8r_rf]"
ffiw; nrn rr a
!
I
a
l
]
rTn
t f
\ \-*
* -,.-
{
*"__.uS
I
I
,
rI\
\
i
.}
\
t t
B
I I
,l l
4, ESTIMATE OF COSTS
The estimated cost of the District lmprovement Project as more fully described in Section 3 of this
Engineer's Report is outlined below.
4.1. District lmprovement Project Costs
The following table provides the costs for the District lmprovement Project. Refer to Section 6 for more
detail on the financing plan and the annual assessment budget.
Description Amount
District lmprovement Project Costs
Construction $9,709,355
Construction Management 825,660
Construction En gineerin g 332,000
Engineering Adm inistration 360,000
Total District lmprovement Project Costs $11,227,015
Contemporaneously with the District lmprovement Project, the City, using sewer and water enterprise
funds, replaced the sewer and water lines under Burlingame Avenue (the overall total cost for all projects
was $15,443,660). By completing the District lmprovement Project in coordination with the utility
improvements, it saved significant project costs and minimize the construction impacts to property and
businesses along Burlingame Avenue. A portion of the planned utility improvement budget, $922,000, was
allocated for patching the streets and sidewalks. Since the District lmprovement Project eliminates that
need for patching, the $922,000 is being contributed to the streetscape project from the sewer and water
enterprise funds and thus will not be specially assessed. Thus, overall, the District lmprovement Project
was funded by state gas tax, Measure A funds, grant funds, sewer and water enterprise funds, the parking
enterprise fund, and revenues from District special assessments.
Assessment District No. 2012-1 - City of Burlingame
Fiscal Year 2018119
4-1
5.1. lntroduction
Pursuant to Article XlllD, all parcels that receive a special benefit conferred upon them as a result of the
improvements shall be identified, and the proportionate special benefit derived by each identified parcel
shall be determined in relationship to the entire costs of the improvements. Division 12 of the Streets and
Highways Code, the Landscaping and Lighting Acl of 1972, permits the establishment of assessment
districts by local agencies for the purpose of providing certain public im provements necessary or convenient
for providing certain public services.
Section 22573 of the Landscaping and Lighting Act ol 1972 requires that assessments must be levied
according to benefit rather than according to assessed value. This Section states:
"The net amount ,o be assessed upon lands within an assessmenl district may be
apportioned by any formula or method which fairly distributes the net amount among all
assessab/e lots or parcels in propottion to the estimated benefit to be received by each
such lot or parcelfrom the improvements."
Article XlllD, Section 4(a) of the California Constitution limits the amount of any assessment to the
proportional special benefit conferred on the property. Article XlllD also provides that publicly owned
properties must be assessed unless there is clear and convincing evidence that those properties receive
nospecial benefitfrom the assessment. Examplesof parcels exempted from the assessmentwould be the
areas of public slreets, public avenues, public lanes, public roads, public drives, public courts, public alleys,
public easements and rights-of-ways, public greenbelts, and public parkways.
Furthermore, Proposition 218 requires that the City separate the general benefit from special benefit, so
onlyspecial benefit may be assessed.
5.2. ldentification of Benefit
The District lm provem ent Project will provide benefits to both those properties within the District boundaries
and to the community as a whole. The benefit conferred to property within the Districtcan be grouped into
three primary benefit categories; aesthetic benefit, safety benefit, and economic activity benefit. The three
District benefit categories are further expanded upon in each section below.
Aesthetic Benefit
The aesthetic benefit relates to the increase in the overall aesthelics as a result of the District lmprovement
Project. The District lmprovement ProJect will provide public street and sidewalk infrastructure
beautification throughout the District, that will enhance the overall image and desirability of the properties
within the District. Burlingame Avenue streetscape improvements within the District were last completed
back in the early 1960s. Since that time, the public facilities have deteriorated. The following aesthetic
benefits will be provided as a result of the District lmprovement Project:
. The District lmprovement Project enhances the community identity of the Burlingame Avenue area,
which will lead to a stronger and healthier street corridor. The image of the Burlingame Avenue
area will be increased by correcting the visual clutter such as lrash containers and news racks that
currently encroach on the pedestrian area.
. Uniform and up to date streetscape and sidewalk improvements creates cohesion throughout the
District from El Camino Real to California Drive. This District cohesion enhances the retail
experience as well as encourage Ihaximum use of space.
Assessment District No. 2012-'l - City of Burlingame
Fiscal Year 2018/19
5-'1
5. SPECIAL AND GENERAL BENEFIT
Upgraded streetscaping and sidewalk amenities provided by the District lmprovement Project
enhances lhe appearance, desirability, and "livabilit/ of the property directly fronting the
improvements provided throughout the District.
As a result of the District lmprovement Project, the overall "livability" of the District increases. "Livability''
encompasses several qualities and characteristics that are unique to a specific area. The Victoria Transport
Policy lnstitute (www.vtpi.org) expands on the concept of "livabilit/ and the various benefits associated
with that designation:
"The livability of an area increases propefiy desirability and business activity. Livability is
largely affected by conditions in the public realm, places where people naturally interact
with each other and their community, including streets, parks, transpoftation terminals and
other public facilities. Livability also refers to the environmental and social quality of an
area as perceived by employees, customers and visitors. This includes local environmental
conditions, the quality of social interactions, oppoiunities for recreation and enteftainment,
aesthelics, and existence of unique cultural and environmental resources."
Safetv Benefit
The District lmprovement Project provides an increased level of safety to the property, businesses, and
visitors to the District. Additionally, the District lmprovement Project help mitigate potential crim inal activity
throughout the District area. The following safety benefits are provided as a result of the District
lmprovement Projecl:r The District lmprovement Project repaired uneven and deteriorating sidewalks within the District.
lmprovements to the existing sidewalk infrastructure will reduce the number of future trip and fall
occurrences potentially occurring in front of District property.
. The District lm provement Project provides better lighting throughout the Burlingame Avenue area.
The improved lighting ensures that sidewalks, streets, and property fronts are more visible. This
increased level of visibility reduces the opportunities for vandalism to property within the District.
. Wider sidewalks provide additional space between vehicle and property as well as vehicle and
pedestrian, which provides a safety benefit for both property and pedestrian.
. Traffic calming improvements can reduce automobile traffic and speeds, which in turn, increases
the safety for vehicular passengers, pedestrians, and other non-motorized travels.
The streetscaping strategies utilized in the development of the District lmprovement Project provide
numerous safety benefits to property and people throughout the District. Again, the Victoria Transport
Policy lnstitute (www.vtpi.org) notes the safety benefit attributable to streetscaping improvements:
'Severa/ sludles indicate that common streetscaping strategies, such as landscaping and
narrowing traffic lanes, tend to increase traffic safety. Streetscaping that reduces traffic
speeds and improves pedestrian crossing conditions can significantly reduce collisions.
Research by the U.S. Highway Safefy Research Syste m concludes that road diets brterial
street traffic calming) typica y reduce crash rctes by 47yo on maior highways through small
urban areas, by 1qyo on corridors in larger city suburban areas, and 29%o overall."
Assessment District No. 2012-1 - City of Burlingame
Fiscal Year 2018/19
Economic tivitv Benefit
The economic activity benefit relates to the increase in the District's economic activity and further potential
as a result of the District lmprovement Project. The economic activity for property within the District can
best be described as the ability for the property within the District to develop and operate at the property's
highest and best use. Properties within the Diskict receive the following economic activity benefits as a
result of the District lmprovement Project:
r The District lmprovement Project revitalizes the Burlingame Avenue area. This revitalization will
encourage new business developmentand existing business expansion which will reduce vacancy
rates and increase lease rates for property within the District.
. The streetscaping improvements encourages an increase in commerce throughout the Diskict.
The Burlingame Avenue area will become more pedestrian friendly, thus improving customer
activity for stores and restaurants.
The streetscaping improvements not onty add economic value to property adjacent to the improvements,
but the improvements make the property appear more stable and prosperous. The National Complete
Streets Coalition (www.completestreets.org) notes that:
"street design that is inclusive of all modes of transportation, where appropriate, not only
improves conditions for existing businesses, but a/so is a proven method for revitalizing an
area and attracting new development. Washington, DCb Barracks Row was experiencing
a steady decline of commercial activity due to uninviting sidewalks, lack of streetlights, and
speeding traffic. After many design improvements, which included new patterned
sidewalks, more efficient public parking, and new traffic signals, Barrackb Row attracted
44 new businesses and 200 new jobs. Economic activity on this three-quaier mile strip
(measured by sales, employees, and number of pedestrians) has more than tripled since
the inception of the project."
5.3. Separation of General Benefit
Section 4 of Article XlllD of the California Constitution provides that once a local agency which proposes to
impose assessments on property has identified those parcels that will have special benefits conferred upon
them and upon which an assessment will be imposed, the local agency must next "separate the general
benefits from the special benefits conferred," and only the special benefits can be included in the amount
of the assessments imposed.
General benefit is an overall and similar benefit to the public at large resulting from the improvements to be
provided by the assessments levied. The District improvements, which are more fully presented in Section
3.2 of this Engineer's Report, will be constructed and provided within the District boundaries only. There
will be no improvements from the District lmprovement Project constructed outside of the District
boundaries.
The District lmprovement Project provide aesthetic, safety, and economic benefits to the property within
the District, but it is recognized that the District lmprovement Project also provides a level of benefit to some
property and businesses within proximity to the Oistrict, as well as visitors and individuals passing through
the District. Vehicular and pedestrian traffic from property within and outside of the District as well as
individual passing through the dowr'rtown Burlingame Avenue area are able to utilize the improvements to
not only access property and businesses located within a close proximity to the District, but also roadways
located outside of the District. Therefore, the generalbenefit created as a resultofthe District lmprovement
Project has been considered.
Assessment District No. 2012-1 - City of Burlingame
Fiscal Year 20'18/ 1 I
5.4. Quantification of General Benefit
ln order for property within the District to be assessed only for that portion of special benefit received from
the District lmprovement Project, the general benefit provided by the District lmprovement Pro.iect needs to
be quantified. The amount of general benefit provided from the District lmprovement Project can not be
assessed to the benefitting properties within the District. To quantify the general benefit provided to the
variety of traffic that passes through the District for the general benefit of enjoying the surrounding
atmosphere, observing the level of economic activity, or accessing adjacent property or arterial streets in a
more efficient and safe manner, both vehicular and pedestrian traffic flows have been incorporated in the
quantification of general benefit.
Vehicular Traffic Activitv
Access to the Burlingame Avenue commercial core area is provided by major north-south arterials. Those
major arterials are El Camino Real to the west of the District and California Drive to the east of the District.
Collector streets feed traffic to these and other arterials throughout the City. As such, Burlingame Avenue
is considered a collector street within the City. ln 2010, the City adopted the Burlingame Downtown Specific
Plan ("Specific Plan"). The Specific Plan included a Traffic lmpact Analysis Technical Memorandum
("Traffic Analysis") prepared by Wilbur Smith Associates. This Traffic Analysis evaluated existing traffic
conditions at various points throughout the project area. One point evaluated by the consultants was
existing travel conditions al the intersection of Burlingame Avenue and Park Road. The Traffic Analysis
evaluated, among other characteristics, traffic counts, turning movement data, vehicle delay, and level of
service for each intersection. Existing conditions for the project area intersections, including the Burlingame
Avenue intersection, were evaluated during a weekday, evening peak hour timeframe. There were 664
observed traffic counts at the intersection of Burlingame Avenue and Park Road. Park Road terminates at
Burlingame Avenue requiring traffic to either turn left or right onto Burlingame Avenue. ln addition to the
Traffic Analysis, information related to vehicle trips by purpose was used from the Summary of Travel
Trends 2009 National Household Travel Survey ('2009 NHTS") sponsored by the U.S. Department of
Transportation Federal Highway Administration. Of the observed 2,171 vehicle trips in the 2009 NHTS
survey, 643 trips represented social, recreational and other travel purposes; the remaining 1,425 vehicle
trips represented work, shopping and other errands. Applying this vehicle trip breakdown to the observed
traffic counts at the intersection of Burlingame Avenue and Park Road, 207 of the traffic counts represent
social, recreational, and other travel purposes not directly related to District activities but more likely utilizing
Burlingame Avenue as a collector street to feed to one of the adjacent arterial streets. This non-District
related traffic count represents approximately 31.20% of the total observed traffic counts and is considered
to be general benefit from the District lmprovement Project.
Pedestrian T raffic Activitv
As result of the sidewalk improvements and beautification provided by the District lmprovement Project,
there is a level of benefit to those pedestrians not involved with any of the shopping, dining, or other
commerce activities provided by the District properties. People walk for a variety of reasons; work, errands,
shopping, recreation, health, and many others. Further, pedestrians will seek out and utilize sidewalk
facilities that provide a safe place to walk as well as an environment that provides a certain amount of visual
interest. Again, the 2009 NHTS analyzed the annual num ber of walking trips and the purpose of the walking
trips made by individuals surveyed. Of the annual total 40,962 (in millions) walking trips, 30,129 of those
walking trips were for travel, work, shopping, errands, business obligations, and meals; the remaining
10,833 walking trips were for social, recreational, and other purposes. The social, recreational, and other
purpose walking trips represented 26.5% of the total walking trips reported. Therefore, to account for that
portion of the Burlingame Avenue pedestrian activity utilizing the improvements provided by the District
lmprovement Project for non-District related activities, 26.50% of pedestrian traffic activity is considered to
be of general benefit.
Since the District lmprovement Project provides a blend of both vehicular and pedeslrian activlty the two
categories must be addressed in a collective form rather than independently. Therefore, to appropriately
quantify the overall level of general benefit provided by the District lmprovement Project the arithmetic mean
Assessment District No. 2012-1 - City of Burlingame
Fiscal Year 2018/19
5-4
of the general benefit percentages from the vehicular traffic activity and the pedestrian traffic activity has
been calculated. This general benefit result is provided in the table below.
Description Percentaqe
GeneralBenefit 28.85%
Accordingly, 71.15o/o of the benefits from the District lmprovement Project are considered to provide special
benefits to the properties within the District and thus could be subject to assessment therein.
5.5. Apportioning of Special Benefit
As outlined above, each of the parcels within the District is deemed to receive special benefit from the
District lmprovement Project. Each parcel that has a special benefit conferred upon it as a result of the
District lmprovement Project is identified and the proportionate special benefit derived by each identified
parcel is determined in relationship to the entire cost of the District lmprovement Project.
Benefit Point Assignment
Aesthetic Benefit Points
Aesthetic benefit points are assigned based upon not only the property's location to the District
lmprovement Project, but also the property's zoning designation. All District parcels are located within the
Burlingame Avenue Commercial District, which has a commercial zoning designation. Additionally, since
the District lmprovement Project is provided uniformly throughoutthe District all properties within the District
are within the same proximity to the location of the infrastructure provided by the District lmprovement
Project. Therefore, the aesthetic benefit to each parcel in the District is deemed to be the same. Each
propertywithin the District is assigned one (1.00) benefit point for the aesthetic benefits received from the
District lm provem ent Project.
Safetv Benefit Points
The safety benefit points are assigned based upon not only the property's location to the District
lmprovement Project, but also the property's zoning designation. All District parcels are located within the
Burlingame Avenue Commercial District, which has a commercial zoning designation. Additionally, since
the District lmprovement Project is provided uniformly throughoutthe District all properties within the District
are within the same proximity to the location of the infrastructure provided by the District lmprovement
Project. Therefore, the safety benefit to each parcel in the District is deemed to be the same. Each property
within the District is assigned one ('1.00) benefit point for the safety benefits received from the District
lmprovement Project.
Economic Activitv Benefit Points
The economic activity benefit points are assigned based upon not only the property's location to the District
lmprovement Project, but also the property's zoning designation. All District parcels are located within the
Burlingame Avenue Commercial District, which has a commercial zoning designation. Additionally, since
the District lmprovement Project is provided uniformly throughout the District all properties within the District
are within the same proximity to the location of the infrastructure provided by the District lmprovement
Project. Therefore, the economic activity benefit to each parcel in the District is deemed to be the same.
The Burlingame Avenue Commercial District is already a well-established commercial district with a strong
economic activity presence. The Burlingame Avenue area features a mixture of restaurants, national retail
stores, and many locally based retailers. Marketing and promotional efforts to increase the economic
presence of an expanded area that includes the District boundaries is currently being funded by the
Burlingame Avenue Downtown Business lmprovement District ("DBlD'). ln an effort to increase the
economic presence, business owners within the DBID pay an annual assessment to fund various activities
that aid in the promotion, advertising and image building of the businesses within the DBID boundaries.
Existing marketing and promotional activities throughout the District area have resulted in higher tenant
lease rates. According to Loopnet.com on March 23, 2012, the average lease rate along Burlingame
Assessment District No. 2012-1 - City of Burlingame
Fiscal Year 2018119
5-5
Avenue was approximately 45% higher than the average lease rate along the City's Broadway Avenue,
another commercial area. Retail sales are also strong within the District, according to City Economic
Development data, with sales per square foot generally ranging from $300 to $800+ per square foot.
Further, there were a few new buildings constructed in the downtown around the time of formation of the
District and several major remodels of existing buildings to accommodate new retail uses generally limited
to tenant improvements. Given this already existing strong economic activity presence throughout the
District, as well as lhe potential for property to further develop and enhance their economic presence, each
property within the District is assigned one-half (0.50) benefit point for the economic activity benefits
received from the District lmprovement Project.
The following table provides a summary of the special benefit points assigned to each parcel within the
District.
Parcel Land Use
Classification
Aesthetic
Benefit Point
Assignment
Safety
Benefit Point
Assiqnment
Economic
Activity Benefit
Point Assignment
All District Parcels 1.00 '1.00 0.50
Parcel Factors
The method of apportioning the benefit to the parcels within the District reflects the proportional special
benefit assigned to each property from the District lmprovement Pro.ject based upon the various property
characteristics for each parcel as compared to other properties within the District. As part of the special
benefit analysis, various property characteristics were analyzed including parcel size, street frontage,
building size, land use, trip generation etc. Given that the special benefits provided by the District
lmprovement Project focuses on aesthetic benefit, safety benefit, and economic activity benefits it was
determined that linear frontage and lot square footage are the most appropriate parcel factors. Each
parcel's linearfrontage and lot square footage have been used as the prim ary assessment variables forthe
calculation and assignment of parcel factors.
By adjusting the assigned special benefit points set forth above by parcel factors, a more complete picture
of the proportional special benefits received by each parcel from the District lmprovement Project is
presented. Therefore, linear and lot parcelfactors were calculated for each parcel in the District according
to the formulas below:
Linear Factor
Pursuant to Section 25.32.050 of the City's Zoning Code for the Burlingame Avenue Commercial District,
each lot shall have a street frontage of at least 50 feet. Utilizing the prescribed street frontage as set forth
in the City's Zoning code, a linear faclor is calculated for each parcel based upon the assigned linear
frontage for the parcel divided by 50.00:
Linear Factor Parcel's Assigned
Linear Street Frontage 50.00
There are several parcels located at street intersections within the Diskict. The District lmprovement
Project partially extends along the side streets at these intersections with Burlingame Avenue. To account
for the partial extension of the District lmprovement Project at each street intersection, the side street linear
frontage of the improvement has been added to each corner parcel to account for this increased linear
frontage adjacent to the Diskict lmprovement Project.
Assessment District No. 2012-1 - City of Burlingame
Fiscal Year 2018/19
5-6
Lot Factor
Pursuant to Section 25.32.050 of the City's Zoning Code for the Burlingame Avenue Commercial District,
each lot shall have an area of at least 5,000 square feet. Utilizing the prescribed lot square footage as set
forth in the City's Zoning code, a lot factor is calculated for each parcel based upon the assigned lot square
footage for the parcel divided by 5,000:
Lot Factor Parcel's Assigned
Lot Square Footage 5,000
Total Special Benefit Point Galculation
Parcel's Total
SpecialBenefit
Points
Parcel's Total
Aesthetics Points
+Parcel's Total
Safety Points
+Parcel's Total Economic
Activity Points
Parcel's Total Aesthetic Points
The District lmprovement Project, as well as the store and property fronts that are adjacent to those linear
improvements provide an enhanced level of interest and "curb appeal" that add to the overall experience
along Burlingame Avenue. Since the improvements and furnishings are uniform throughout the District,
the "curb appeal" is consistent for the front of each parcel located within the District. Additionally, the
uniform landscaping aids in softening the surrounding edges of each parcel's front exposure to the District
lmprovement Project by adding life, color, and texture to the property's appearance, and overall pedestrian
experience. Given the linear nature of the aesthetic benefits provided by the District lmprovement Project,
the aesthetic benefit that each property receives is also perceived on a linear basis. To appropriately
quantify and assign the aesthetic benefit received by each parcel within the District, the aesthetic benefit
point is further adjusted according to the formula below:
Parcel's Total
Aesthetic Points
Aesthetic Benefit
Points Assigned X Linear Factor
Parcel's Total Safetv Points
The District lmprovement Project provides enhanced lines of travel and sight along Burlingame Avenue,
which increases the level of safety by mitigating potential accidents and crime by having the additional
exposure to property and traffic. The lighting improvements also increase the visual sight line by providing
additional exposure to property fronts, especially during the evening hours. This additional exposure
reduces the potential for crime and vandalism to the front of property throughout the District. Further, the
sidewalk and parking zone along Burlingame Avenue provides a buffer for traffic and the property frontage.
Again, given the linear nature of the safety benefits provided by the District lmprovement Project, the safety
benefit that each property receives is also perceived on a linear basis. To appropriately quantify and assign
the safety benefit received by each parcel within the District, the safety benefit point is further adjusted
according to the formula below:
Parcel's Total
Safety Points
Safety Benefit
Points Assigned X Linear Factor
Parcel's Total Economic Activitv Points
The District lmprovement Project creates a more pedestrian friendly and inviting Burlingame Avenue
environment that supports and encourages additional commerce activity throughout the District. The
improvements allow parcels within the District to develop and redevelop to their highest and best use in
accordance with City zoning and development regulations. However, the one limiting property
characteristic that constrains a parcel from developing to the highest and best use is the size of the parcel
itself. The size of a parcel limits the amount of development and redevelopment that may occur on the
footprint of the parcel. Larger parcels allow for greater area to develop and redevelop than do smaller
Assessment District No. 2012-1 - City of Burlingame
Fiscal Year 2018119
5-7
parcels, which corresponds to larger parcels receiving proportionally greater econom ic activity benefit when
compared to smaller parcels within the District. Therefore, the economic activity benefit for parcels in the
District is in direct proportion to the size of the parcel. Since the economic activity benefits are in direct
relation to the size of a parcel, then the economic activity benefils provided by the District lmprovement
Project is also perceived on a parcel size basis. To appropriately quantify and assign the economic activity
benefit received by each parcel within the District, the economic activity benefit point is further adjusted
according to the formula below:
Parcel's Total Economic
Activity Points
Economic Activity
Benefit Points Assigned x Lot Factor
Data Considerations and Parcel Changes
The use of the latest San Mateo County Assessor's Secured Roll information served as the basis in
determining each parcel's linear frontage and lot square footage, unless better data was available to the
City. ln addition, if any parcel within the District is identified by the San Mateo County Auditor/Controller to
be an invalid parcel number, the linear frontage and lot square footage of the subsequent valid parcel shall
be the basis for assigning the future total special benefit points. lf a single parcel subdivides into multiple
parcels, the total special benefit points shall be apportioned based on the linear frontage and lot square
footage of the newly created parcels.
Total Special Benefit Points
The total special benefit points assigned to the parcels at formation of the Distdct were 183.28. The
following table provides a breakdown of the total special benefit point assignment for each parcel in the
District:
Assessment District No. 2012-1 - City of Burlingame
Fiscal Year 2018/19
5-8
Assessor's
Parcel
Number ID
Aesthetic
Benefit
Points
Safety
Benefit
Points
Economic
Activity
Benefit Points
Linear
Frontaqe
Linear
Factor
Lot
Square
Footage
Lot
Factor
Total
Aesthetic
Benefit
Points
Total
Safety
Benefit
Points
Total Economic
Activity Benefit
Points
Total
Special
Benefit
Points
029-122-190 1"1.00 1.00 0.50 70.00 1.40 2,123 0.42 1.40 1.40 0.21 3.01
029-122-220 2 '1.00 1.00 0.50 50.50 1.01 10,776 2.16 1.01 1.01 1.08 3.10
029-122-230 J 1.00 1.00 0.50 50.00 1.00 10,286 2.06 1.00 1.00 1.03 3.03
029-122-240 4 '1.00 1.00 0.50 50.00 1.00 9,791 1.96 1.00 1.00 0.98 2.98
029-122-250 5 1.00 1.00 0.50 50.00 1.00 9,971 1.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 3.00
029-122-260 t)1.00 1.00 0.50 50.10 1.00 6,195 1.24 '1.00 1.00 0.62 2.62
029-122-270 7 't.00 '1.00 0.50 49.90 1.00 13,897 2.78 1.00 1.00 '1.39 3.39
029-122-280 o 1.00 1.00 0.50 55.00 1.10 10,879 2.18 1.10 1.10 1.09 3.29
029-122-330 I 1.00 1.00 0.50 50.00 1.00 6,829 1.37 1.00 1.00 0.69 2.69
029-122-360 10 1.00 1.00 0.50 I 16.00 2.32 16,786 3.36 2.32 2.32 1.68 6.32
029-122-999 11 1.00 1.00 0.50 147.00 2.94 28,296 5.66 2.94 2.94 2.83 8.71
029-152-110 12 1.00 1.00 0.50 80.00 1.60 5,748 1.15 1.60 1.60 0.58 3.78
029-152-120 13 1.00 1.00 0.50 25.00 0.50 2,853 0.57 0.50 0.50 0.29 1.29
029-152-160 14 1.00 1.00 0.50 60.00 1.20 9,596 1.92 1.20 1.20 0.96 3.36
029-152-190 15*1.00 1.00 0.50 65.00 1.30 8,1 34 1.63 1.30 1.30 0.82 3.42
029-152-200 16 1.00 1.00 0.50 65.82 1.32 8,237 1.65 1.32 1.32 0.83 3.47
029-152-210 17 1.00 1.00 0.50 60.00 1.20 7,200 1.44 1.20 1.20 0.72 3.12
029-152-220 '18 1.00 1.00 0.50 41.57 0.83 4,988 1.00 0.83 0.83 0.50 2.16
029-152-230 19 '1.00 1.00 0.50 65.00 1.30 6,000 1.20 1.30 1.30 0.60 3.20
029-152-270 20 1.00 1.00 0.50 60.00 1.20 7,508 1.50 1.20 1.20 0.75 3.15
029-152-310 21"1.00 1.00 0.50 60.00 1.20 8,322 1.66 1.20 1.20 0.83 3.23
029-152-320 22 1.00 1.00 0.50 104.58 2.09 27,590 5.52 2.09 2.09 2.76 6.94
029-1 52-330 23 1.00 1.00 0.50 75.00 1.50 8,572 1.71 1.50 1.50 0.86 3.86
029-1 53-090 24 1.00 1.00 0.50 91.50 1.83 3,726 0.75 1.83 1.83 0.38 4.04
029-153-120 25 1.00 1.00 0.50 88.33 1.77 3,781 0.76 1.77 1.77 0.38 3.92
029-1 53-1 50 26 1.00 1.00 0.50 95.50 1.91 10,347 2.07 1.91 1.91 1.04 4.86
029-201 -030 27 1.00 1.00 0.50 40.00 0.80 5,000 1.00 0.80 0.80 0.50 2.10
029-201-040 28 1.00 1.00 0.50 50.00 1.00 6,250 1.25 1.00 1.00 0.63 2.63
029-20'1-060 29 1.00 1.00 0.50 108.08 2.16 14,823 2.96 2.16 2.16 1.48 5.80
029-201-070 30*1.00 1.00 0.50 54.00 1.08 9,069 1.81 1.08 1.08 0.91 3.07
029-201 -080 3'1 1.00 '1.00 0.50 54.08 1.08 9,643 '1.93 1.08 1.08 0.97 3.13
029-201 -1 00 32 1.00 1.00 0.50 50.00 1.00 3,750 0.75 1.00 1.00 0.38 2.38
029-201-110 JJ 1.00 1.00 0.50 86.00 1.72 3.750 0.75 1.72 1.72 0.38 3.82
029-201-320 .A 1.00 1.00 0.50 159.39 3.19 13,316 2.66 3.19 3.19 1.33 7.71
029-201 -360 35 1.00 1.00 0.50 100.00 2.OO 18,000 3.60 2.OO 2.00 1.80 5.80
029-201-370 36 1.00 1.00 0.50 25.00 0.50 3,125 0.63 0.50 0.50 0.32 1.32
029-20'1-380 37 1.00 1.00 0.50 25.00 0.50 3,125 0.63 0.50 0.50 0.32 1.32
029-202-010 JO 1.00 1.00 0.50 136.00 2.72 12,675 2.54 2.72 2.72 1.27 6.71
029-202-020 39 1.00 '1.00 0.50 60.50 1.21 7,086 1.42 1.21 1.21 0.71 3.13
5-9Assessment District No. 2012-1 - City of Burlingame
FiscalYear 2018119
Assessor's
Parcel
Number ID
Aesthetic
Benefit
Points
Safety
Benefit
Points
Economic
Activity
Benefit Points
Linear
Frontage
Linear
Factor
Lot
Square
Footage
Lot
Factor
Total
Aesthetic
Benefit
Points
Total
Safety
Benefit
Points
Total Economic
Activity Benefit
Points
Tota!
Special
Benefit
Points
02s-202-030 40.1.00 1.00 0.50 25.00 0.50 2,552 0.51 0.50 0.50 0.26 1.26
029-202-040 41 1.00 1.00 0.50 25.00 0.50 2,403 0.48 0.50 0.50 0.24 1.24
029-202-080 42 1.00 1.00 0.50 75.06 '1.50 4,453 0.89 1.50 1.50 0.45 3.45
029-202-090 43 1.00 1.00 0.50 51.24 1.02 4,770 0.95 1.02 1.02 0.48 2.52
029-204-030 44 1.00 1.00 0.50 55.00 1.10 5,500 1.10 1.10 't.10 0.55 2.75
029-204-040 45 1.00 1.00 0.50 45.00 0.90 4,500 0"90 0.90 0.90 0.45 2.25
029-204-050 46 1.00 1.00 0.50 45.00 0.90 4,500 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.45 2.25
029-204-060 47 1.00 1.00 0.50 94.00 1.88 5,850 1.17 1.88 1.88 0.59 4.35
029-204-270 48 1.00 1.00 0.50 1 16.50 aaa 8,1 00 1.62 2.33 2.33 0.81 5.47
029-211-010 49 1.00 1.00 0.50 103.33 2.07 4,417 0.88 2.07 2.07 0.44 4.58
029-211-260 50 1.00 1.00 0.50 169.00 3.38 15,400 3.08 3.38 3.38 1.54 8.30
Totals:50.00 50.00 25.00 3,527.93 70.56 420,488 84.13 70.56 70.56 42.16 183.28
* lndicates assessment has been prepaid
Assessment District No.2012-1- City of Burlingame
FiscalYear 2018119
5-1 0
6. METHOD ASSESSMENT
6.1. Assessment Budget
ln order to assess the parcels within the District for the special benefits received from the District
lmprovement Project, the general and special benefits must be separated. As previously quantified in
Section 5.4 of this Engineer's Report, the general benefit received from the District lmprovement Project is
28.85%. Accordingly,71.15% of the benefits from the District lmprovement Project are considered to
provide special benefits to the properties within the District and thus could be subject to assessment therein.
However, as shown below, because of contributions from various funds available to the City, including the
sewer, water, and parking enterprise funds, Measure A funds, and grant funds, only 53.'11% of the District
lmprovement Project costs are being specially assessed. Reducing the District lmprovement Project costs
by these contributions, the total District lmprovement Project costs to be specially assessed are as follows:
(1),812 the lmprovement Project costs have been financed over a period 30 years
The City issued bonds for the total District lmprovement Project costs assessed for special benefit and will
use the assessment revenues to repay the bonds, over a period of 30 years, for the District's portion of that
cost, $5,620,812, plus the City's estimated financing and interest costs. Section 6.3 of this Engineer's
Report provides the basis of the average annual debt service payment used to establish the annual
assessments.
Assessment Rate per Special Benefit Point
The assessment rate per special benefit point is calculated by dividing the total annual assessable budget
by the totalspecial benefit points assigned to the parcels in the District. The following formula provides the
assessment rate per special benefit point calculation:
Assessment District No. 2012-1 - City of Burlingame
FiscalYear 2018119
AmountDescription
$11,227,015Total Net District lmprovement Project Costs
(3,238,994)Less: General Benefit Contribution (28.85%)
$7,988,021Subtotal- Portion of Budget Assessable for Special Benefit
($e22,ooo)Less: Sewer and Water Enterprise Fund Contribution
Less: TLC Grant (301,000)
(782,432)Less: Additional Contribution from Parking Enterprise Fund
(20,1e5)Less: Additional City Contribution
$5,962,394Total District lmprovement Project Costs Assessed for Special Benefit(1)
$341,582Total Amount Pre-Paid During 30 Day Collection Period
Annual Assessable Budget:
$31 0,1 56Average Annual Debt Service Payrnent for District lmprovement Project Costs
$310,1 56Total Annual Assessable Budget
6-1
I
I
Total Annual Assessable Budget / Total Special Benefit Points =
Assessment Rate per Special Benefit Point
$310,156 / 169.29 = $1,832.10
The total amount of financed District lmprovement Project costs, which has been determined to provide
special benefit to parcels within the Diskict, will be assessed over a period of 30 years. The individual
assessments are shown on the assessment roll in Section I of this Engineer's Report.
6.2. Method of Assessment Spread
(A) Parcel's
Total Aesthetic
Points
(B) Parcel's
Total Safety
Points
(c)
Parcel's Total Economic
Activity Points
(D)
Linear Factor
(E)
Lot Factor
(F) Parcel's
Total Special
Benefit Points
Parcel's Assigned Aesthetic
Benefit Points (1.00)
Parcel's Assigned
safety Benefit Points (1 .00)
Parcel's Assigned Economic
Activity Benefit Points (0.50)
Parcel's Assigned
Linear Frontage
Parcel's Assigned
Lot Square Footage
(D)
Linear Factor
(D)
Linear Factor
(E)
Lot Factor
50.00
5,000
(c)
Parcel's Total Economic
Activity Points
x
X
x
(A)
Parcel's Total
Aesthetics Points
+
Assessment Rate
$1 ,832.10
(B)
Parcel's Total
Safety Points
+
x
(F) Parcel's
Total Special
Benefit Points
6.3. District lmprovement Project Debt Financing
The $5,620,812 portion of District lmprovement Project costs assessed to property within the District has
been financed over a period of 30 years. ln addition to the amount of financed District lmprovement Project
costs, any financing costs related to the issuance of debt such as the cost of issuance, original issue
discount, and contingencies were included as part of the total amount financed. The City has calculated
the annual assessment based on its costs of flnancing the District's portion of the District Improvement
Assessment District No. 2012-1 - City of Burlingame
Fiscal Year 2018/'19
The method of assessment is based upon a formula that assigns the special benefit to each parcel, with
special benefit points being adjusted by parcel linear and lot factors. The formulas below provide a
summary of the annual assessment calculation for each parcel in the District.
Parcel's Annual
Assessment
Project assessed for special benefit costs over a 30 year period, and has determined that it requires an
annual assessment amount of $310,156 from the District. The difference between the original estimated
financing costs and the actual financing costs will not affect the annual assessments shown in this
Engineer's Report.
6.4. Assessment Prepayment Formula
Assessment Prepayment Formula During the 30 Days Following District Formation
ln the 30 days after the form ation of the District, property owners had the option to prepay and permanently
satisfy their portion of the total District lmprovement Project costs assessed for special benefit, without
interest, and without financing costs, according to the following formula:
Parcel's 30 Day
Prepayment Amount
Total District
lmprovement Project
Costs Assessed for
Special Benefit
$4,475,000
Parcel's Total
Special
Benefit Points
District's Total
Special
Benefit Points
183.28
x
Parcel's 30 Day
Prepayment Amount x
Parcel's Total
Special
Benefit Points
Assessment Prepayment Formula After the 30 Day Period Following District Formation
Property owners within the District may prepay and permanently satisfy their entire portion (no partial
prepayments) of the total annual assessment of an assessor's parcel, provided that a prepayment may be
made only if there are no delinquent assessments with respect to such assessor's parcel at the time of
prepayrnent. An owner of an assessor's parcel intending to prepay the ongoing annual assessment
obligation shall provide the City with written notice of intent to prepay. Within 30 days of receipt of such
written notice, the City shall notify such owner of the prepayment amount of such assessor's parcel. The
assessment prepayment amount shall be calculated by the following steps:
Step 1: Compute the special benefit points that could be assigned to the assessor's parcel prepaying the
annual assessment obligation in the fiscal year in which the prepayment would be received by the City.
Step 2: Divide the special benefit points computed pursuant to Step 1 for such assessor's parcel by the
total special benefit points that could be assigned in that fiscal year to property in the entire District.
Step 3: Multiplythe quotient computed pursuant to Step2 bythetotal annual assessmentto compute that
portion of the total annual assessment to be prepaid ("Parcel's Annual Assessment Amount").
Step 4: Calculate the revenue stream produced by the Parcel's Annual Assessment Amount from the date
of prepayrnent up to and including the maturity date of the District, June 30, 2042, except lhat this assumed
final maturity date may be amended by the City no later than the time of the calculation of the prepayment.
Step 5: Calculate the present value of the annual revenue stream determined in Step 4. The present value
shall be calculated using that discount rate which, when the prepayrnent is invested in City approved
available investments earning a rate of interest equal to the discount rate, would produce annual revenues
equal to the amount calculated in Step 4.
Assessment District No. 2012-1 - City of Burlingame
Fiscal Year 2018/19
o-J
)
Step 6: Determine the prepayment amount by adding to the present value calculated in Step 5 anyfees or
expenses incurred by the City in connection with the prepayment calculation or the application of the
proceeds of the prepayment.
Assessment District No. 20'12-1 - City of Burlingame
Fiscal Year 2018/19
6-4
7. ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM
An Assessment Diagram for the Dislrict is shown on the following page. The lines and dimensionsof each
lot or parcel within the District are those lines and dimensions shown on the maps of the County Assessor
of the County of San Mateo, at the time this report was prepared, and are incorporated by reference herein
and made part of this Engineer's Report.
Assessment District No. 2012-1 - City of Burlingame
Fiscal Year 2018/19
7-1
SUPERIITE EXACIAM
NDEHTOF OUNTOT'
8,1REET8
FORTIiE
I!ACH
.N,I8E8IINI !
HT
LEVIEDAGI
UN&TI!ACH
PMCEL
OF
,D
a
Io
It
ill
ilt
S4
O
- () ()
-'lto
---o t
-
v
-
41
4l
'4.1
at
LAN)SHOWNON
I HISASSESSMENI'DIAORATI.
CITYa.ERK
CITYOFBUWNCIAME
SAN waEO<:OUNTY, CM-FCRNIA
RECORDED IN I HEOFFICEOFTIiESIAHN I ENDENI'OFSTI IEET'6
SUPERIITENDEI'ITOF81 REETS
C]ITYOIBUWNCIAME
OFT+}EEffYOFBUII,IIIWE,TIIiS DAYOIl-20I2
lW waEOCOUNTY, CM-FCRNIA
OO{,ITYRECORIER
t l{ llAlEO COUXTY. CALFORX1A
FLEDIHIS DAVOF 20I2,ATI IEHOUROF
O'CI. OCK_M. II BOOK-OFI\4APSOF AN D
CONII\tUNlTY FACILmESDIS'IRICT&ATPAGE_I NI I I EOFFICEOF
IIIE COUNTY RECORDEROFI HE COLNTYOF8I\N IWEO. S-TOF
CALIFORNIA,
-
8. ASSESSMENT ROLL
The assessment roll is a listing of the assessment apportioned to each lot or parcel, as shown on the last
equalized roll of the Assessor of the County of San Mateo. The following table summarizes the
assessments for the District for Fiscal Year 2018119:
Property Land
Use Type
Parcel
Gount
Total
SpecialBenefit
Points
Allowable Annual
Assessment
Total Annual
Assessment
All Parcels 45 169.29 $1,832.10 per special
benefit point $31 0,1 56
Total 45 169.29 $310,156
The assessment roll is a listing of the District assessment apportioned to each lot or parcel, as shown on
the last equalized roll of the Assessor of the County of San Mateo. The assessment roll for the District is
listed on the following page.
Assessment Distrlct No. 2012-1 - City of Burlingame
Fiscal Year 2018119
B-1
Assessor's Parcel
Number
Assessment
ID
city of Burlingame
City of Burlingame Assessment District No. 2012-1
Downtown Burlingame Avenue Streetscape lmprovement Proiect
Fiscal Year 2018/19 Assessment Roll
Annual
Assessment(1)
029-122-220
029-122-230
029-122-240
029-122-250
029-122-260
029-122-270
029-122-280
029-122-330
029-122-360
029-122-999
029-152-110
029-152-120
029-152-160
029-152-200
029-152-210
029-152-220
029-152-230
029-152-270
029-152-320
02s-'ts2-330
029-153-090
029-153-120
029-153-150
029-20'1-030
029-201-040
029-20't-060
029-201-080
029-201-100
029-201-110
029-201-320
029-201-360
029-201-370
029-201-380
029-202-010
029-202-020
029-202-040
02s-202-080
029-202-090
029-204-030
029-204-040
029-204-050
029-204-060
029-204-270
029-211-010
029-211-260
$5,679.51
5,551.26
5,459.66
5,496.30
4,800.10
6,210.82
6,027.61
4,928.35
11,578.87
15,957.59
6,925.34
2,363.41
6,155.86
6,357.39
5,716.15
3,957.34
5,862.72
s,771.12
12,714.77
7,071.91
7,40't.68
7,18'1.83
8,904.0'l
3,847.41
4,818.42
10,626.18
5,734.47
4,360.40
6,998.62
14,125.49
10,626.18
2,418.37
2,418.37
12,293.39
5,734.47
2,271.80
6,375.71
4,561.93
5,038.28
4,122.23
4,122.23
7,969.64
't0,021.59
8,391.02
15,206.43
2
3
4
5
6
7
I
I
10
11
12
13
14
16
17
18
20
22
23
25
26
27
28
3'1
32
34
36
37
39
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
50
1420 BURLINGAI\,,IE AVE
1426 BURLINGAIVE AVE
1436 BURLINGAME AVE
1442 BURLINGAME AVE
1448 BURLINGAME AVE
1460 BURLINGAME AVE
1462 BURLINGAI\,IE AVE
1408 BURLINGAIV]E AVE
14SO BURLINGAME AVE
1476-80 BURLINGAME AVE
12OO BURLINGAIVE AVE
1208 BURLINGAI\4E AVE
1232 BURLINGAI\4E AVE
,I3,I6 BURLINGAME AVE
1348 BURLINGAME AVE
1354 BURLINGANTE AVE
1380 BURLINGAI\,4E AVE
13OO BURLINGAIV]E AVE
,1218 BURLINGAME AVE
1210 BURLINGAI\,IE AVE
11OO BURLINGAME AVE
1,150-60 BURLINGAI\,llE AVE
1 1 08.1 B BURLINGAI\,,IE AVE
1471 BURLINGAME AVE
'1461 BURLINGAME AVE
1435 BURLINGAME AVE
1423 BURLINGAME AVE
1407 BURLINGAME AVE
1401 BURLINGAI\,IE AVE
1479-91 BURLINGAI\,IE AVE
1417 BURLINGAIVE AVE
1453 BURLINGAIVE AVE
1451 BURLINGAIVE AVE
1375 BURLINGAME AVE
1325 BURLINGA[/]E AVE
1315 BURLINGAME AVE
1301 BURLINGAME AVE
1309 BURLINGAI\,4E AVE
1221 BURLINGAI\,4E AVE
1213 BURLINGAME AVE
1207 BURLINGAIVE AVE
1205 BURLINGAME AVE
1227 BURLINGAME AVE
1101 BURLINGAME AVE
11 1,1 BURLINGAME AVE
3.10
3.03
2.98
3.00
2.62
3.39
3.29
2.69
8.71
3.78
1.29
3.47
3.12
2.16
3.20
3.15
6.94
3.86
4.04
3.92
4.86
2.10
2.63
5.80
3.13
2.38
3.82
7.71
5.80
1.32
1.32
6.71
3.13
1.24
3.45
2.52
2.75
2.25
2.25
4.35
5.47
4.58
8.30
TOTALS:
(1) Difference due to rounding
169.29 $3r0,156.23
Page 1 of 1
Site Address
Total Special
Benefit Points
STAFF REPORT AGENDA NO: 10a
MEETING DATE: May 21,2018
To:Honorable Mayor and City Council
Date: May 21,2018
From:Margaret Glomstad, Parks and Recreation Director - (650) 558-7307
Kathleen Kane, Gity Attorney - (650) 558-7263
Subject: Topgolf Update and Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager
to Execute an Exclusive Negotiation Agreement with Topgolf for the Use of
Golf Center Property
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council review the status of the Topgolf project and adopt a
resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute an exclusive negotiation agreement with
Topgolf for the use of the Golf Center Property.
BACKGROUND
On June 20,2016, the City issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the lease management of
the Golf Center site for the operation of golf or other recreational or entertainment activities that
would be open to the public. Because the site includes a closed landfill, and the City does not
permit housing in the Bayfront area, the Council determined that the site was not appropriate for
housing proposals. The RFP was issued on October 12, 2016; US Badminton Center Group
(USBC), Mid-Peninsula lce Rink Foundation (MIRF), and Topgolf lnternational submitted
responses. USBC and MIRF eventually withdrew their proposals, and on lVlarch 21,2017, the
City Council selected Topgolf lnternational as the preferred operator of the site. The Topgolf
proposal included building a 65,000 sq. ft. LEED Silver-certified facility with 102 hitting bays,
3,000 sq. ft. of event space, a full-service restaurant and bar, a rooftop terrace, pool tables,
shuffle board, and supporting areas. The facility, which would be built on the existing Golf Center
site, would offer general entertainment, food and music, golf lessons for all ages, summer camps,
tournaments, and leagues.
On April 3,2017, the City Council held a closed session to discuss real property negotiations-
price and terms, for the Topgolf lease. The City Council gave direction to then-lt/ayor Ortiz and
then-Councilmember Colson, the ad hoc Council subcommittee, to negotiate various terms with
Topgolf, such as the length of the lease, the rent payment, community benefits, and sustainability
measures. After negotiating with Topgolf and City Council discussion, the City Council approved
the Term Sheet on July 3,2017.
1
Topgolf llpdate and Exclusive Negotiating Agreement May 21, 2018
Update
Since the time of the approval of the Term Sheet, City staff has worked with Topgolf legal counsel
on an access agreement to permit Topgolf consultants on the Golf Center site to begin their
geotechnical work. The access agreement was finalized earlier this year, thereby allowing
Topgolf to schedule the borings, which serve to verify soil conditions prior to designing building
locations and foundations. The borings have been completed, and Topgolf is waiting for the lab
results, which are expected to be completed in late May.
ln addition, Topgolf has engaged Environmental Advisors and Engineers, lnc. as the
environmental consultant to complete Phase I and Phase ll of the environmental site assessment
(ESA) for the property. Phase I reviews the environmental records, both onsite and offsite, for
any recognized environmental concerns that could affect the property. The scope of Phase ll will
involve testing based on the recommendations from Phase l. The timeframe for Phase ll is
unknown at this time; staff will be able to provide a timeline once Phase I is completed. Topgolf
anticipates that Phase I will be completed by the end of May. Concurrently, the site survey and
traffic and parking analysis are underway and are also estimated to be completed by the end of
May.
Once the geotechnical report and survey work are complete, design work will be finalized on the
site locations, floor plans, and elevations. Topgolf intends to submit a complete Commercial
Design Review application to the City in July.
ln order to ensure a smooth and efficient process for this project, staff has scheduled a standing
monthly conference call with Topgolf. This will allow City staff from different departments to keep
up{o-date on the status of the Topgolf project and provide support and direction in a timely
manner.
Excl u s iv e Neg oti ati o n Ag reem ent
Concurrently with the work described above, staff has negotiated an exclusive negotiation
agreement (ENA) with Topgolf to cover the environmental and design review period. The Council
cannot enter into any final lease agreement that would commit the City to a particular project until
after a full and independent environmental and design review process. The ENA governs the
relationship of the parties during this interim period, providing assurance to Topgolf that the City
will not be marketing the property to another company while they are spending money developing
plans and getting approvals, while preserving the independence of the review and approval
process. Staff recommends that the Council approve the ENA in the form attached, which
represents a negotiated resolution of several issues and has been approved by Topgolf's legal
and real estate teams.
2
DISCUSSION
Topgolf Update and Exclusive Negotiating Agreement May 21,2018
FISCAL IMPACT
Adoption of the ENA will provide for reimbursement of the City's outside consultant and legal
costs during the review period for the project.
Exhibits:
o Topgolf Status Report
o Draft Exclusive Negotiation Agreement
3
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATION
AGREEMENT WITH TOPGOLF USA BURLINGAME, LLC
WHEREAS, on June 20,2016, the City issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for
the lease management of the Golf Center site for the operation of golf or other
recreational or entertainment activities that would be open to the public; and
WHEREAS, on March 21 ,2017, the City Council selected Topgolf lnternational
as the preferred operator of the site; and
WHEREAS, initial work on design and environmental analysis has begun, with
the project intending to submit a formal design and environmental application to the City
during the summer of 2018; and
WHEREAS, Topgolf and the City wish to enter into an exclusive negotiation
agreement (ENA) to govern their relationship during the design and environmental
review process; and
WHEREAS, the purpose of the ENA is to assure Topgolf that the City will not
market the property while it is working to secure entitlements and to assure the City that
the environmental and design review processes remain independent and objective and
that the City is not bound to accept the project prior to those processes' completion.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE lT RESOLVED that the City Council authorizes the City
Manager to execute an exclusive negotiation agreement for the Burlingame Golf Center
site with Topgolf in the form attached to this Resolution.
Michael Brownrigg, Mayor
l, 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
21st day of May, 2018, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES;
ABSENT
Councilmembers:
Councilmembers:
Councilmembers
RESOLUTTON NO._
Meaghan Hassel-Shearer, City Clerk
AGREEMENT TO NEGOTIATE EXCLUSIVELY
THIS AGREEMENT TO NEGOTIATE EXCLUSIVELY ("Agreement") dated
for reference purposes as of May _, 2018 ("Date of Agreement"), is entered into by
and between the CITY OF BURLINGAME, a Califomia municipal corporation ("City")
and TOPGOLF USA BURLINGAME, LLC, aDelaware limited liability company
("Developer").
RECITALS:
A. On or about October 12,2016, City issued a Request for Proposals
("RFP") seeking qualified developers interested in developing the approximately 13-acre
parcel of City-owned land formerly occupied by a golf driving range (known as the
Burlingame Golf Center), located at250 Anza Blvd., Burlingame, California, adjacent to
the Burlingame Soccer Complex (commonly known as Murray Field), as depicted in
Exhibit A attached hereto ("Site").
B. On or about December 4,2016, City reviewed three proposals from sports
and recreation-related entities, including Developer. Developer's proposal is to develop a
sports entertainment facility on the Site, substantially similar to Topgolf facilities it has
built and continues to operate in other cities in Califomia and across the United States
and abroad, as further described herein.
C. City and Developer commenced preliminary discussions regarding the
proposed Topgolfproject in January of2017, and subsequently exchanged versions ofa
proposed draft letter of intent/term sheet. On July 3, 2017 , City Council unanimously
voted to continue negotiations with Developer.
D. City and Developer now desire to enter into this Agreement in order to
memorialize preliminary negotiations accomplished to date, and to set forth the terms
under which City and Developer will exclusively negotiate the terms and conditions of a
proposed Lease Disposition and Development Agreement (together with the Ground
Lease, the "LDDA") providing for City's ground lease of the Site to Developer for
development of the Project (defined below) on the Site.
NOW THEREFORE, for good and lawful consideration, the receipt of which is
hereby acknowledged, City and Developer hereby agree as follows:
AGREEMENZS
1. Neqotiations.
1.1 Good Faith Negotiations. City and Developer, acknowledging that time is
of the essence, agree for the Negotiation Period (as defined in Section 1.2 below) to
negotiate diligently and in good faith to prepare an LDDA to be considered for approval
by City and Developer, in the manner set forth herein, with respect to the ground lease
-1-
and development of the Site. City agrees, for the Negotiating Period set forth in Section
1.2 below, not to solicit, entertain offers or proposals, or negotiate with any other person
or entity regarding the sale, lease or development of the Site or any portion thereof. An
LDDA resulting from the negotiations hereunder shall become effective only if and after
an LDDA has been considered and approved by the Developer and the City Council at a
public hearing called for such purpose. If an LDDA is executed by City and Developer,
the LDDA shall thereafter govern the rights and obligations of the parties with respect to
the development of the Site. City shall deliver an initial draft of the LDDA and Ground
Lease to Developer on or before July l, 201 8. The parties will negotiate with diligence
and good faith thereafter to reach a mutual resolution of all issues as quickly as possible.
I.2 Duration of this Aereement. This Agreement shall become effective upon
execution by the parties and shall remain in effect until December 31 ,2018
("Negotiation Period"). Upon expiration of the Negotiation Period, this Agreement
shall automatically terminate, unless the Negotiation Period has been mutually extended
by City and Developer as provided below. The City Manager has the discretion to
approve an extension of the Negotiation Period for up to an additional ninety (90) days, if
he (she) determines in his (her) sole discretion that Developer has made substantial
progress towards meeting the performance milestones identified in the Schedule of
Performance attached hereto as Exhibit B ("schedule of Performance"). Any further
extension of the Negotiation Period shall require the approval of the City Council, which
may be granted or denied in its sole discretion.
1.3 Deposit. Within five (5) business days following execution of this
Agreement by Developer and City, Developer shall submit to City a good faith cash (or
check) deposit in the amount of forty thousand dollars ($40,000) ("Deposit"). City shall
deposit such funds in an interest-bearing account and such interest, when received by
City, shall become part of the Deposit.
City is authorized to use the Deposit to pay its actual, reasonable out-of-pocket
expenses incurred in carrying out its obligations under this Agreement, including the
costs of City's economic/financial consultant and special legal counsel fees and costs
incurred by City in connection with the negotiation, drafting and consideration of the
proposed LDDA for approval (collectively, "Cify Expenses"), but specifically excluding
the cost of City staff time, including City Attorney work, which shall be borne by City.
The City anticipates incurring expenses related to its obligations under this Agreement,
including for pro forma review and analysis and for special counsel legal services to be
performed by Burke Williams & Sorensen LLP in connection with the negotiation and
drafting of the proposed LDDA and ground lease ("Anticipated City Expenses"). on a
periodic basis and upon request from Developer, City shall transmit to Developer a copy
of a statement detailing the City Expenses incurred for the applicable period. City shall
be free to withdraw funds from the Deposit provided it has submitted such a statement to
Developer and the statement is solely for City Expenses. City's legal and advisory
services shall be redacted as necessary to preserve attorney-client privilege. Anticipated
City Expenses do not include the costs of processing Project entitlement applications or
preparing an appropriate CEQA document for the Project; all such costs shall be bome by
Developer and paid pursuant to one or more separate reimbursement agreements to be
-2-
entered into between City and Developer. The parties acknowledge and agree that if and
when City Expenses reach $30,000, the parties will work together to set a budget and
identify anticipated future City Expenses.
If, notwithstanding City's and Developer's mutual diligent, good faith
negotiations, the parties have not entered into a LDDA on or before expiration of the
Negotiation Period or any extension thereof, City shall return to Developer the
unexpended portion of the Deposit, if any. If City and Developer complete a LDDA
within the time provided by this agreement or as extended, any unused portion of the
Deposit (deducting incurred but not billed expenses) shall be retumed to Developer or
credited to payments owed by Developer to City, at the Developer's discretion.
1.4 Preliminary Business Terms. To memoialize negotiations between City
and Developer undertaken to date, and to facilitate the orderly preparation, drafting and
negotiation of an LDDA, and not as a limitation on either Party to raise issues of concern
for discussion and negotiation during the Negotiation Period, City and Developer have
prepared a list of preliminary business terms ("Preliminary Business Terms") setting
forth non-binding business terms to be further developed and negotiated as part of the
proposed LDDA. Major points of the Preliminary Business Terms are outlined and
attached hereto as Exhibit C. Nothing herein shall preclude either Party at any time
during the Negotiation Period from expanding upon one or more of the general terms in
the Preliminary Business Terms, or adding additional terms for negotiation and possible
inclusion in a proposed LDDA. However, with respect to those business terms set forth in
the Preliminary Business Terms, the Parties agree that the negotiations hereunder shall be
conducted in a manner that is substantially consistent with such Preliminary Business
Terms.
2. Development Concept. The negotiations hereunder shall be based on the
Developer's proposed development concept that includes the concurrent development of:
an approximately 80,000 square foot golf recreation center with three decks and
approximately I20 bays, restaurant and bar, entertainment areas, outdoor patio and
parking facilities (collectively, the "Project"). The description of the Project is
preliminary and subject to further design revisions during the entitlement process.
3. Developer's Responsibilities.
3.1 Full Disclosure. Developer is required to make full disclosure to City of
its principals; officers; major stockholders, partners or members;joint venturers; and its
directly involved negotiators, development managers, consultants and managerial
employees (collectively, "Developer Parties"). Developer shall notify the City Manager
of any material change in the structure of Developer. Developer shall make and maintain
full disclosure to City of its proposed methods of financing to be used in the ground lease
of the Site and development of the Project. Final approval of financing will be addressed
in the LDDA.
3.2 Schedule of Performance; Proeress Reports. Developer shall commence
and use commercially reasonable efforts to complete performance of the work described
-3 -
in the Schedule of Performance within the times set forth therein. Upon request by the
City, Developer will update the city as to the status of all work to be undertaken by or on
behalf of Developer as described in the Schedule of Performance as provided herein.
Within ten (10) days following City's request, which may be made from time to time
during the Negotiation Period, Developer.shall submit to City a written progress report
advising City on the status of all work being undertaken by or on behalf of Developer.
4. City's Responsibilities. City shall cooperate with Developer by providing
information regarding the development potential of the Site that is requested by
Developer and by responding to inquiries from and/or attending meetings with Developer
Parties regarding the development potential of the Site and/or regarding the Project in a
method and manner consistent with then current City practices.
5. Access to Site. Developer's due diligence inspection of the Site is already
underway. City and Developer will continue to cooperate to enable representatives of
Developer to obtain the right of access to all portions of the Site for the purpose of
obtaining data and making surveys and tests necessary to evaluate the development
potential of the Site, including the investigation of the soils and environmental condition
of the Site. All costs of investigating the physical and environmental condition of the
Site, including a Phase 1, Phase 2, geotechnical and soils investigations, and biological
survey if elected by Developer, shall be paid by Developer at its expense and shall not be
considered part of City Expenses. Developer agrees to notify City in writing at least two
(2) business days prior to undertakingany studies or work upon the Site; however ,in the
event of a conflict between this agreement and any then-current site access/right of entry
agreement, the site access/right of entry agreement shall control. Any preliminary work
by Developer shall be undertaken only after securing (1) such insurance as may be
reasonably required by City in the Access and Subsurface Boring Agreement between the
parties dated December 26,2017 to protect City and Developer from damages and losses
that may arise from such investigative work, and (2) any and all necessary permits from
the appropriate governmental agencies. Such work shall be done without unduly
disturbing existing occupants of the Site, if any. In the event that Developer causes any
damage to any portion of the Site or any adjacent properties or the existing improvements
thereon, including the engineered land fill cap, Developer, at its expense, shall promptly
restore the Site, adjacent properties and existing improvements thereon as nearly as
possible to the physical condition existing immediately prior to Developer's entry onto
the Site. Developer's obligations under this Section 5 shall survive the expiration or
termination of this Agreement.
6. Defaults and Remedies.
6.1 Default. Failure by either party to comply with the terms and provisions
provided in this Agreement shall constitute an event of default hereunder. Except as
otherwise set forth in Section 7 below with respect to City's immediate right to terminate,
the non-defaulting party shall give written notice of default to the defaulting party,
specifying the nature of the default and the required action to cure the default. If such
default remains uncured ten (10) business days after receipt by the defaulting party of
such notice, the non-defaulting party may exercise the remedies set forth in Section 6.2 or
-4-
6.3 below, as applicable, unless additional time is needed to remedy the default, in which
event the defaulting party shall commence the cure of the default within the ten (10) day
period and thereafter diligently pursue the cure to completion with additional time up to
but not in excess ofsixty (60) days.
6.2 Exclusive Remedies for Citv Default. In the event of an uncured default
by City, Developer's sole and exclusive remedy shall be to terminate this Agreement,
upon which termination Developer shall be entitled to retum of the remaining
unexpended and uncommitted balance of the Deposit, if any.
6.3 Exclusive Remedies for Developer Default. In the event of an uncured
default by Developer, City's sole and exclusive remedies shall be: (1) to seek specific
performance or other equitable relief (which shall not include requiring Developer to
enter into the LDDA or Ground Lease) and/or to recover actual damages if the default is
a result of Developer's failure to meet its indemnity obligations set forth herein, or (2) for
any other Developer default, to terminate this Agreement and retain that portion of the
Deposit needed to pay City Costs incurred prior to the date of such termination. In the
event of a Developer default, Developer shall have the continuing obligation to restore
the Site to its prior condition as described in Section 5.
6.4 Limitation on Damages. Except as otherwise provided in Section 6.3
above, neither party shall have any liability to the other for actual damages for any
default. Each party specifically waives and releases any rights or claims it may otherwise
have at law or in equity to recover consequential, special or punitive damages from the
defaulting parly.
7. Lobbyine and Campaipn Contribution Prohibition. Developer agrees and
acknowledges that the LDDA negotiations shall take place with the City Manager, the
City's legal, financial and planning advisers, and such other City parties as may be
designated by the City Manager from time to time (collectively, the "City-Designated
Team"). Developer shall not engage in discussions, negotiations or lobbying of any City
Council or Planning Commission members or other City employees or officials as may
be designated by the City Manager from time to time (collectively, "Excluded City
Parties") regarding the terms of a potential LDDA, unless requested to do so by the
City-Designated Team for specific purposes related to the negotiations. Further,
Developer shall not make any contributions to the political campaigns of any City
Council or Planning Commission members. Nothing in this Section 7 shall prevent: (1)
providing information about Topgolf s potential operations, responses to requests for
information from one or more Excluded City Parties, provided such responses are
directed to the City-Designated Team; (2) Developer's participation in any question-and-
answer sessions, workshops, or tours approved in writing by the City-Designated Team;
or (3) Developer's participation in public events or community fora at which one or more
Excluded City Parties are present, provided Developer does not engage in
communications with such Excluded City Parties at such events that are intended to
influence the LDDA negotiations. In the event of Developer's violation of its obligations
under this Section 7 , City may immediately terminate this Agreement by written notice to
Developer without affording Developer any opportunity to cure such violation.
-5-
8. Riehts Following Expiration or Termination. Following expiration or termination
of this Agreement, neither party shall have any further right against or liability to the
other under this Agreement except as otherwise provided herein. Following expiration or
termination of this Agreement, unless a LDDA is signed by Developer, approved by the
City Council, and executed by City, City shall have the absolute right to pursue
disposition and development of the Site in any manner and with any party or parties it
deems appropriate.
9. Confidentiality of Information. Any information provided by Developer to City,
including pro formas and other financial projections (whether in written, graphic,
electronic or any other form) that is clearly marked as "CONFIDENTIAL /
PROPRIETARY INFORMATION" ("Confidential Information") shall be subject to
the provisions of this Section 9. Subject to the terms of this Section, City shall use good
faith diligent efforts to prevent disclosure of the Confidential Information to any third
parties, except as may be required by the California Public Records Act (Government
Code Secti on 6253 et seq.) or other applicable local, state or federal disclosure law
(collectively, "Public Disclosure Laws"). Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, City
may disclose Confidential Information to its officials, employees, agents, attomeys and
advisors, but only to the extent necessary to carry out the pu{pose for which the
Confidential Information was disclosed. Developer acknowledges that City has not made
any representations or warranties that any Confidential Information City receives from
Developer will be exempt from disclosure under any Public Disclosure Laws. In the
event the City Attorney determines that the release of the Confidential Information is
required by Public Disclosure Laws, or order of a court of competent jurisdiction, City
shall notify Developer of City's intention to release the Confidential Information at its
earliest reasonable opportunity. If the City Attomey, in her discretion, determines that
only a portion of the requested Confidential Information is exempt from disclosure under
the Public Disclosure Laws, City may, with notification to Developer, redact, delete or
otherwise segregate the Confidential Information that will not be released from the non-
exempt portion to be released.
Developer acknowledges that in connection with City Council's consideration of
any LDDA as contemplated by this Agreement, City will need to present a summary of
Developer's financial projections, including anticipated costs of development, anticipated
Project revenues, and returns on cost and investment. To the extent possible, the parties
will use good faith efforts to keep such information confidential and non-public. If this
Agreement is terminated without the execution of a LDDA, City shall return to
Developer any Confidential Information.
If any litigation is filed seeking to make public any Confidential Information, City
and Developer may mutually agree in writing to defend the litigation, and if the parties
agree to defend the suit, Developer shall pay City's reasonable costs of defending such
litigation and shall indemnify City against all costs and attorneys' fees awarded to the
plaintiff in any such litigation. Altematively, Developer may elect to disclose the
Confidential Information rather than defend the litigation. Developer's indemnity
obligations under this Section 9 shall survive the expiration or termination of this
Agreement.
-6-
The restrictions set forth herein shall not apply to Confidential Information to the
extent such Confidential Information: (1) is now, or hereafter becomes, through no act or
failure to act on the part of City, generally known or available to the public; (2) is known
by the City at the time of receiving such information as evidenced by City's public
records; (3) is hereafter furnished to Cityby a third party, as a matter of right and without
restriction on disclosure; (4) is independently developed by City without any breach of
this Agreement and without any use of or access to Developer's Confidential Information
as evidenced by City's records; (5) is not clearly marked
CONFIDENTIAL/PROPRIETARY INFORMATION" as provided above (except where
Developer notifies City in writing, prior to any disclosure of the Confidential
Information, that omission of the "CONFIDENTIAL/PROPRIETARY
INFORMATION" maTk was inadvertent), or (6) is the subject of a written permission to
disclose provided by Developer to City.
10. Real Estate Commissions. City shall not be liable for any real estate commission
or brokerage fees which may arise from the ground lease or other acquisition of the Site
or any portion thereof or interest therein. Developer represents and warrants to City that
it has not engaged any broker, agent or finder in connection with the ground leasing or
development of the Site other than The Retail Connection, and Developer agrees to
indemnify, defend and hold City harmless from any claim by any broker, agent or finder
retained by, or alleged to have been retained by, Developer. Developer's indemnity
obligations under this Section 10 shall survive the expiration or termination of this
Agreement.
I L Notices. Any approval, disapproval, demand or other notice which either party
may desire to give to the other party under this Agreement must be in writing and may be
given by any commercially acceptable means, including first class mail, personal
delivery, or ovemight courier, to the party to whom the notice is directed at the address of
the party as set forth below, or at any other address as that party may later designate by
notice.
To City:City of Burlingame
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010-3997
Attention: City Manager
Telephone (650) 558-7200
with a copy to:City of Burlingame
501 Primrose Road
Burlingame, CA 94010-3997
Attention: City Attorney
Telephone (650) 558-7200
Topgolf USA Burlingam e, LLC
8750 N. Central Expressway, Suite 1200
Dallas, TX 75231
Attention: Elizabeth Bonesio, Esq.
-7 -
To Developer:
Telephone (214) 37 7 -0622
with a copy to:Miriam Montesinos, Esq
Any notice shall be deemed received on the date of delivery if delivered by
personal service, three (3) business days after mailing if sent by first class mail, and on
the date of delivery or refused delivery as shown by the records of the overnight courier if
sent via overnight courier.
12. Limitations of this Aereement. This Agreement (and any extension of the
Negotiating Period) shall not obligate either City or Developer to enter into a LDDA on
or containing any particular terms. By execution of this Agreement (and any extension of
the Negotiating Period), City is not committing itself to, or agreeing to, undertake
disposition of the Site or any portion thereof or interest therein and Developer is not
committing itself to lease the Site or any portion thereof or interest therein. Execution of
this Agreement by City and Developer is merely an agreement to conduct a period of
exclusive negotiations in accordance with the terms hereof, reserving for subsequent City
action the final discretion and approval regarding the execution of a LDDA and all
proceedings and decisions in connection therewith. Any LDDA resulting from
negotiations pursuant to this Agreement shall become effective only if and after such
LDDA has been considered and approved by the City Council, following conduct of all
legally required procedures, and executed by duly authorized representatives of City and
Developer. Until and unless a LDDA is signed by Developer, approved by the City
Council, and executed by City, no agreement drafts, actions, deliverables or
communications arising from the performance of this Agreement shall impose any legally
binding obligation on either party to enter into or support entering into a LDDA or be
used as evidence of any oral or implied agreement by either party to enter into any other
legally binding agreement. This Agreement, which pertains only to negotiating
procedures and standards between City and Developer, does not limit in any way the
discretion of City in acting on any applications for permits or approvals for the proposed
Project. The parties understand that the City has the complete and unfettered discretion
ty approve or deny the Project. The parties acknowledge that Califomia Environmental
Quality Act ("CEQA") compliance will be required in connection with consideration of
such permits and approvals, and that City shall retain the discretion in accordance with
CEQA and other applicable law before action on any such permits or approvals to (1)
identify and impose mitigation measures to mitigate significant environmental impacts,
(2) select other feasible alternatives to avoid significant environmental impacts, (3)
balance the benefits of the proposed Project against any significant environmental
impacts prior to taking final action if such significant impacts cannot otherwise be
avoided, or (4) determine not to proceed with the Project. Developer shall have the right
to take all of the above actions into consideration in determining whether to move
forward with the Project.
-8-
13. Third Party Reports. Upon the termination of this Agreement or in the event the
parties elect not to enter into an LDDA or Ground Lease, and upon request by the City,
Developer shall submit copies of any third party geotechnical, environmental and/or
traffic study report prepared by Developer and related to the Site, provided the City does
not then have a copy of such report in its possession.
14. Inteqration. This Agreement contains the entire understanding between the
parties relating to the matters set forth herein. All prior or contemporaneous agreements,
understandings, representations and statements, oral or written, are merged in this
Agreement and shall be of no further force or effect.
15. Modifications.Any alteration, change or modification of or to this Agreement, in
order to become effective, shall be made in writing and in each instance signed on behalf
of each party.
16. Severability. If any term, provision, condition or covenant of this Agreement or
its application to any party or circumstances shall be held, to any extent, invalid or
unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement, or the application of the term, provision,
condition or covenant to persons or circumstances other than those as to whom or which
it is held invalid or unenforceable, shall not be affected, and shall be valid and
enforceable to the fullest extent permitted by law.
17. Applicable Law: Venue. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with
the law of the State of California without reference to choice of laws principles, and
venue for any action under this Agreement shall be in San Mateo County, Califomia.
18. No Assignment. The qualifications and identity of Developer and the Developer
Parties are of particular concern to City. It is because of those unique qualifications and
identity that City has entered into this Agreement with Developer. Accordingly, except
as provided below, Developer may not assign its right to negotiate with City to any other
person or entity. Any purported voluntary or involuntary assignment of Developer's
negotiation rights shall be null and void. Notwithstanding the foregoing, City
acknowledges that Developer intends to form one or more single purpose limited liability
companies or limited partnerships, all owned and controlled by Developer (the "SPV")
for the exclusive purpose of ground leasing and developing the Site. City further
acknowledges and agrees that if a LDDA is approved by City, the SPV may enter into
such LDDA and ground lease the Site without any assignment of this Agreement by
Developer to the SPV; provided, however, that the foregoing shall not in any way limit
Developer's obligations hereunder or under the LDDA (if any).
19. Waiver of Lis Pendens. It is expressly understood and agreed by the parties that
no lis pendens shall be filed against any portion of the Site with respect to this Agreement
or any dispute or act arising from this Agreement.
20. Counterparts. This Agreement may be signed in multiple counterparts which,
when signed by both parties, shall constitute a binding agreement.
-9 -
21. Interpretation. As used in this Agreement, masculine, feminine or neuter gender
and the singular or plural number shall each be deemed to include the others where and
when the context so dictates. The word "including" shall be construed as if followed by
the words "without limitation." This Agreement shall be interpreted as though prepared
jointly by both parties. Titles and captions are for convenience of reference only and do
not define, describe or limit the scope or the intent of this Agreement or any of its terms.
22. Joint and Several. If Developer consists of more than one entity or person, the
obligations of Developer hereunder shall be joint and several.
23. Authority. If Developer is a corporation, limited liability company, partnership,
trust, association or other entity, Developer and each person executing this Agreement on
behalf of Developer does hereby covenant and warrant that (l) Developer is duly
incorporated or otherwise established or formed and validly existing under the laws of its
state of incorporation, establishment or formation; (2) Developer has and is duly qualified
to do business in Califomia; (3) Developer has full corporate, partnership, trust,
association or other power and authority to enter into this Agreement and to perform all
of Developer's obligations hereunder; and (4) each person (and all of the persons if more
than one signs) signing this Agreement on behalf of Developer is duly and validly
authorized to do so.
-10-
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of
the date set opposite their signatures. The Date of Agreement shall be the date this
Agreement is signed by City.
CITY:DEVELOPER:
CITY OF BURLINGAME, A
California municipal
corporation
By:
Lisa Goldman, City
Manager
Date:
2018
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Kathleen A. Kane,
City Attorney
ATTEST:
By:
Meaghan Hassel-
Shearer, City Clerk
TOPGOLF USA BURLINGAME,LLC, a Delaware
limited liability
By:
Name:
Title:
Date:2018
- 11-
EXHIBIT A
DIAGRAM OF SITE
lConceptuallv ok with this but tables on left and references to 66Exhibit D" should be
deletedl
@@t,&l'
BToPEoLF
&lMrraoEA
*!f.en$.s':a
$NAmPAlre, '6elG^|:rer&pffir t9.9/F'lor[Pffirrc@m. algr€
@ 21r$ fie6 A6Eg
affr.E
Exhibit A
&r*
NORTH
t;
.:
.''Exhibi[
lrN:rjt::_.r ta1:
EXHIBIT B
SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE
1 Effective
throueh
Date Developer to continue due diligence including
environmental investigation of the Site.
2 By day [TBD]Developer to prepare and submit to City a progress report
including updated pro forma identifying all hard costs, soft
costs, financing costs and contingencies for the proposed
Project.
By day [TBD]Developer to provide City with copies of all due diligence
materials, including any Phase 1 or Phase 2 reports available
at that time.
4 By July l, 2018 City to provide initial draft of LDDA and Ground Lease to
Developer.
5 By day [TBD]Developer to prepare and submit to City conceptual
drawings for the Project, which must include, at minimum,
a final dimensioned and detailed Site plan, parking and
circulation plan, elevations of all four sides of the proposed
Project, elevations of major public spaces and tabulation of
areas/uses. Such materials shall be considered
CONFIDENTIAL by the parties and shall not be included as
exhibits to the LDDA other than an agreed upon Site Plan of
the Topgolf facility.
6.By day [TBD]Developer to execute LDDA for the Project in form
acceptable to City staff and City legal counsel and submit
said LDDA to the City Council for consideration and
approval.
Exhibit B
J.
EXHIBIT C
PRELIMINARY BUSINESS TERMS
1. Term. Twenty (20) year primary term with four (4) options to extend at
five (5) years each.
2. Rent. Construction Period Rent (described in the mutually agreed Term
Sheet) will be due and payable commencing after Topgolf breaks ground on for
City's conveyance of a ground leasehold interest in the Site to Developer and
continuing until the earlier of completion of the Project or the end of Lease Year
2. Following completion of construction, fixed rent will commence as provided
below:
a. Lease Years I and2 (or until Project is complete with occupancy permits,
whichever is earlier): $5000 per month.
b. Earlier of Lease Year 3 or completion of Project - Lease Year 5: $1,500,000
per annum
c. Lease Years 6-10: $1,650,000 per annum
d. Lease Years l1-15: $1,850,000 per annum
e. Lease Years 16-20: $1,996,500 per annum
f. Rent will increase by I0% every 5 years thereafter for Option Periods
exercised by Tenant.
3. Community Benefit Fees. Developer will pay to City $500,000 in
community benefit funds as follows: (D 250,000 within ten (10) business days
after receipt of all permits and approvals, including building permits, and (ii)
$250,000 within ten (10) business days after opening of the Project to the public.
4. Commercial Linkaee Fee. Developer will pay applicable commercial
linkage fees on total build out square footage (estimated at 65,000 square feet for
this project). These commercial linkage fees will then be set aside for affordable
housing. In the event that the one-time commercial linkage fee payable by
Developer exceeds $350,000, the amount of that overage may be deducted from
the second community benefit payment described above.
Exhibit C
AGENDA NO: 1la
Memorandum MEETING DATE: May 21,2018
To:City Council
Date: May21,20lB
From: Vice Mayor Colson
Subiect: Committee Report
Tuesday. May B - Governor Debate
o Attending local debate on California state issues. Focusing on housing, traffic
and congestion, public education, climate and budget.
Tuesday, May 8 - Peninsula Clean Energy Finance and Audit Committee Meeting
Wednesday, May 9 -o f oined Bike to School day at McKinley School. City Staff lunch at Recreation Centero Budget Committee Meeting
Thursday. May 10 - Home forAll Meetingo Steering Committee Update: Work plan update for next year
o Second Unit workbooks are in draft form and should be ready this summer.o CASA will provide presentation on their work and how it is integrated into our
planning
o HEART - First 45 units teacher housing in Pacifica is going to get fundingo fohn Sobrato - Conversation around Prop 13 rollback for commercial real
estate and those incremental funds would be set aside for housing - restart of
the redevelopment agency.
o Stanford - Building new office and requesting that there is a sharing of impact
fees with San Mateo County.
o Chan-Zuckerberg Initiative with SF Foundation and one other non-profit
creating a pool of funds to get into the affordable housing market. Initial $50
million.o New Projects:
o Land:
Second Units, support HEART teacher housing
' State and Local Land Use Legislation - Possibly a meeting in Fall
' Opportunity Sites - Work with ABAG andZl Elements, TOD workshop,
Middle Housing workshopo .,'i''fr,:ffi
: I ffi S;:,1 J:1T l:,:i: j, ff :Tl J*Tf, :",llH, X I
1
May 21,2018
o
. Track Measure K housing investments. Philanthropy and business investments
' Second Units - Develop and roll out Ioan program. Idle Public Funds - Interest in lending or pooling ideal public funds
Community Engagement:. Marketing and Materials - websites, social media, HFA champions. Learning Network - peer sharing and education. Community Engagement Pilot Projects - impact of new housing on
schools, addZ new pilot cities, impact of housing on schools. Convenings - hold three in winter/spring 2019. Messaging - frameworks cohort for partners. Parking and Traffic - Working with Mineta Transportation - other ideas,
walking tour, technical expertise on "car lite" - framing workshop on
traffic, city pilot project focused on traffic and parking.. Note - Gensler - Adaptive reuse of parking technologies - parking ramps
on the edge so that one day we can change those floor plates into other
uses.
The plan was adopted for the upcoming year and will move forward.
Friday, May 11-
o Mollie Stone's opening - Great opening of the local store remodel. Wonderful staff with
strong commitment to the local community including our schools, library, and park and
recreation foundation.
o Lunch with HIP Housing - Great friend raising and fundraising day with an update on the
four areas of business - the Share Housing, Family Counseling, property management and
the affordable housing ownership.
Tuesdav, Mav 15 - CALPERS Meetins. Attended Committee Meeting to review AB 1912 around JPAs and the revised impact of
this legislation in particular with regard to the retroactivity of pension benefit liabilities.
Spoke on behalf of a take no position until this element can be reviewed and a viable
solution proposed.
Thursday. May 17 - CalMatters Meeting
. CA unemployment rate 4oh and surplus is $9 billion and is larger than the entire budgets of
9 other states.
. Global leader AB 32 on climate change - these goals are now extended to 2030 for and
goal 50o/o of energy for renewable resources.
. Water - More to do on this and passed groundwater legislation so you cannot deplete.. Poverty and Wage Disparity - Poor are getting poorer (nearly 40Yo of the state is at or near
Medi-Cal levels).
. K-12 education - local control funding formula back 5 years - we have increased per pupil
spending 66Yo in last five years and we still rank 41st in the nation for per pupil spending.
National test scores we are short of proficiency and the achievement gap has not budgeted.
Black and Latino are still under performing. CALSTRS - $100 billion still has unfunded
liability and moved from 8% of budgets to pay to 20Yo in2020. LA County 22o/o increase
in budget, but will be in the red. Big financial and academic problems.
2
Colson Committee Report
Colson Committee Repoft May 21,2018
Higher education - tumed away 40K qualified students tumed away from the schools of
their choice.
$400 billion in total unfunded pension and $25 billion is current payrnent - there are going
to be taxes and service cuts and possible for some to go bankrupt.
Wildfires - Big issue - $100 million extra into his budget to fight the wildfires. Liability
issues for pensions and we have over 130 million dead trees from drought and bugs. This is
from the Senate President and State likely to pass big legislation
Other issues - Recycling and garbage - with China no longer accepting garbage and
recycle. Now piling up in warehouses and filling up landfills.
Offices -
Insurance Commissioner matters this year - Due to the Fire Insurance issues
Lt Govemor - Not really a matter except that GN will run for President and then this person may
be the future Governor. Just a scenario.
AG - Also interesting race.
New Media Work -
What Happened to the CA Dream? 2-year long project to review current affairs for State of CA.
Collaboration of media - to tell story in multimedia and a cohesive and thematic way to drive a
state-wide discussion. Will host a debate in the CA on this for the November election. Trying to
create new news distribution channels. Business model for certain type ofjoumalism will require
philanthropy. Some eamed revenue will start - new membership model. Huge reduction in the
number of print specific journalist covering Sacramento and state politics in CA, maybe 75 down
to 20.
a
a
a
a
3
AGENDA NO: 11b
Memorandum MEETING DATE: May 21,2018
To:City Council
Date: MayZL,ZOLB
From: Councilmember Beach
Subiect: Committee Report
Thursday. May 3 - San Mateo County Transportation Authority
o TA financial position remains strong (revenues and investments). Approved draft budget for FY L8/79o Received presentation on Measure A Ferry Service Program; South San Francisco
Ferry performance metrics and strategic plan
o Ferry ridership began in20LZ
o Ridership on upward trend
o Achieved 370/o fare box recovery rate in2077 IMTC target 40o/oby 20lB);
achieves 40% during peak commute times
o TA Board approved funding of feasibility study for Redwood City terminal and
service
Monday, May 7 - City Council Meeting
Tuesday, May B - Gubernatorial Debate: San Jose, CA
Wednesday, May 9 - City Council Annual Budget Session
Thursday. May 10 - Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition Bike to Work Dayo f oined SVBC and a group of elected officials and staff for a 1.5 hour ride touring
cycling infrastructure throughout Redwood City and Menlo Park, including the
prospective Dumbarton Rail Corridor Trail. We experienced every kind of roadway:
Class I-Class IV infrastructure, painted shoulders, sharrows, highway overpass, roads
without any safety infrastructure, and even a fully protected 2-lane bike trail fwith
pedestrian lane) en route to Facebook headquarters. The City required bike/ped
improvements as a condition of approval, so Facebook fully funded and built this
project with collaborative input from the City of Menlo Park and community.
Saturday. May 12 - Burlingame Neighborhood Network Volunteer Appreciation Coffeeo Thanks to the approximate 50 volunteers who attended a thank you reception at the
Firehouse. Fun and educational event. Mayor Brownrigg welcomed veteran and
prospective volunteers. City Manager Goldman, police/fire staff, and I attended.
Tuesday. May 15 - Transportation Authority Subcommitteeo Interviewed 10 terrific candidates for 6 positions on the TA Citizens Advisory
Committee
1
Beach Committee Report May 21, 2018
Wednesday. May 16 - San Mateo County Women's Veterans Summit. Foster City
Included presentations by:
o County staff leaders: County Manager, Director Human Resources, Director of Human
Services
o VA Regional Office
o M.D. from VA Healthcare System focused on Women's Care,
o President of Mills College who presented research on Military Sexual Trauma
o Panel of women veterans
Take-aways:
o County has made significant recent.strides with veterans issues
o Reduced homeless veterans to functionalzero
o About 24,000 veterans in San Mateo County; approximately 60/o are women [and
growing)
o Sexual assault in military: more frequent reporting happening, yet prosecutions
decreasing
o
2