Loading...
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=&regDrop=&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=&regDrop=&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