Brisbane City Council
September 19, 2024

- 1 -
CITYof BRISBANE
Thursday, September 19, 2024 at 7:30 PM ● Hybrid Meeting 50 Park Place, Brisbane, CA The public may observe/participate in City Council meetings using remote public comment options or attending in person. City Council members shall attend in person unless remote participation is permitted by law. The City Council may take action on any item listed in the agenda.

TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL

IN PERSON
Location: 50 Park Place, Brisbane, CA 94005, Community Meeting Room Masking is not required but according to the California Department of Public Health guidelines, people at higher risk for severe illness should consider masking. To help maintain public health and safety, we respectively request that people not attend in-person if they are experiencing symptoms associated with COVID-19 or are otherwise ill and likely contagious (e.g., respiratory illnesses).

To address the City Council on any item – whether on the posted agenda or not – please fill out a Request to Speak Form located in the Community Meeting Room Lobby and submit it to the City Clerk. Speakers are not required to submit their name or address.

REMOTE PARTICIPATION
Members of the public may participate in the City Council meeting by logging into the Zoom Webinar listed below. City Council meetings may also be viewed live and/or on-demand via the City’s YouTube Channel, youtube.com/brisbaneca, or on Comcast Ch. 27. Archived videos may be replayed on the City’s website, brisbaneca.org/meetings. Please be advised that if there are technological difficulties, the meeting will nevertheless continue if remote participation is available.

The agenda materials may be viewed online at brisbaneca.org at least 72 hours prior to a Regular Meeting, and at least 24 hours prior to a Special Meeting.

Remote Public Comments:

Remote meeting participants may address the City Council. We also encourage you to submit public comments in writing in advance of a meeting. Aside from commenting personally while in the Zoom Webinar, the following email and text line will be also monitored during the meeting and public comments received will be noted for the record during Oral Communications 1 and 2 or during an agenda item.

Email: [email protected] or Text: (628) 219-2922
Join Zoom Webinar: zoom.us (please use the latest version: zoom.us/download) brisbaneca.org/cc-zoom
Webinar ID: 991 9362 8666
Call In Number: 1 (669) 900-9128
Note: Callers dial *9 to “raise hand” and dial *6 to mute/unmute.

City Council Meeting Agenda
1 September 19, 2024 - 2 - 7:30 PM

SPECIAL ASSISTANCE
If you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk at (415) 508- 2113. Notification in advance of the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting.

WRITINGS THAT ARE RECEIVED AFTER THE AGENDA HAS BEEN POSTED Any writings that are received after the agenda has been posted but before 4pm of the day of the meeting will be available for public inspection at the front lobby in City Hall and on the internet (brisbaneca.org/meetings). Any writings that are received after 4pm of the day of the meeting will be available on the internet at the start of the meeting (brisbaneca.org/meetings), at which time the materials will be distributed to the Council.
7:30 P.M. CALL TO ORDER – PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

ROLL CALL
A. Consider any request of a City Councilmember to attend the meeting remotely under the “Emergency Circumstances” of AB 2449

ADOPTION OF AGENDA

AWARDS AND PRESENTATIONS
B. 2024 September Suicide Prevention Month
C. National Hispanic Latinx Heritage Month Proclamation D. Caltrain Electrification Update Presentation
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS NO. 1

CONSENT CALENDAR
E. Introduce an Ordinance of the City of Brisbane Amending Chapter 3.24 of the Brisbane Municipal Code Concerning Voluntary Collection Agreement with Hosting Platforms for the Collection and Payment of Transient Occupancy Taxes F. Authorize the City Manager to Execute a Professional Services Agreement with Good City Co. For the 70 Old County Road Planning Program
(The proposal includes a budget of $150,000. The $150,000 is the amount budgeted in the 2024-25 budget.)
G. Adopt a Resolution for the Recycling Business License Tax for Fiscal Year 2024/2025 2 September 19, 2024 - 3 - 7:30 PM
H. Approve Construction Management and Inspection Services Agreement for Smart Corridors Northern Cities
(It is being recommended to authorize the City Manager to sign the Agreement for Professional Services with MNS Engineers, Inc. and to issue a Task Order to MNS Engineers, Inc. in the amount of $439,762.64 to provide CM services for the Smart Corridors Northern Cities – Brisbane construction contract. This contract is part of an overall project that was subject to CEQA and NEPA review. Caltrans approved a Categorical Exemption under CEQA and a Categorical Exclusion under NEPA for the project in 2020.)

OLD BUSINESS
I. Consider Adoption of Resolution Approving an Agreement for the Purchase and Sale of Vacant City Property in Crocker Park, located generally south of West Hill Road, west of South Hill Place and west of 151 South Hill Place (28,000 +/- square feet, no APN—see map attached to agenda report for location) and Authorizing the City Manager to Sign the Agreement and All Other Documents Necessary to Carry Out the Sale (This action is not subject to further environmental review as it is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act. CEQA Guidelines, Section 15378 (b) (4). This item was not discussed and was continued from the July 18, 2024 City Council Meeting.)

NEW BUSINESS
J. Consider Adopting a Resolution Supporting the Bayshore Blvd/Van Waters and Rodgers Bus Stop Relocation Design Project and Submitting an Application to the San Mateo County Transportation Authority for Cycle 2 ACR/TDM Grant Program

STAFF REPORTS
K. City Manager’s Report on Upcoming Activities

MAYOR/COUNCIL MATTERS
L. Countywide Assignments and Subcommittee Reports
M. Written Communications
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS NO. 2

ADJOURNMENT
3 File Attachments for Item:

E. Introduce an Ordinance of the City of Brisbane Amending Chapter 3.24 of the Brisbane Municipal Code Concerning Voluntary Collection Agreement with Hosting Platforms for the Collection and Payment of Transient Occupancy Taxes
4 Introduce Draft Ordinance – Voluntary TOT Collection Agreement Page 1 of 2

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: September 19, 2024
From: John Swiecki, Community Development Director
Subject: Voluntary Collection Agreement for TOT – Draft Ordinance Community Goal/Result
Fiscally Prudent
Purpose
To amend the Brisbane Municipal Code (BMC) to allow the City to enter into a voluntary collection agreement (VCA) with hosting platforms for the collection and payment of transient occupancy taxes (TOT).

Recommendation
Introduce the attached draft ordinance.

Background
On February 15, 2024, staff provide the Council a report on the implementation of the City’s Short-Term Rental (STR) Program. Among other things, the report recommended that the City Council direct staff to explore obtaining a VCA with Airbnb and other hosting platforms where practical to collect and remit TOT automatically to the City, rather than relying on permit holders to manually remit taxes quarterly.

When the City adopted its STR ordinance in 2020, it was not standard practice for hosting platforms to collect and remit occupancy taxes on behalf of their users to local municipalities.

Since then, however, the list of jurisdictions with VCAs allowing hosting platforms to facilitate collection and remittance of TOT has increased and now includes several smaller jurisdictions, some with populations under 2,000.

Airbnb - the largest STR online travel agency in North America - will only enter into a voluntary collection agreement with jurisdictions that have an ordinance in place allowing it to do so. At the time of this report, the City is actively monitoring nearly 300 listings with 71% published to Airbnb, and another 16% on VRBO.

Brisbane Municipal Code (BMC) Chapter 3.24 – Uniform Transient Occupancy Tax, establishes regulations related to the collection and remittance of TOT, but it does formally authorize permit hosting platforms – that assist with arranging transient occupancy – to enter into a VCA (or equivalent) with the City for the collection and payment of transient occupancy taxes. 5 E.

Introduce Draft Ordinance – Voluntary TOT Collection Agreement Page 2 of 2 Discussion
Each hosting platform will need a VCA in place to automatically collect and remit TOT to the City, however, in order to enter into a VCA with Airbnb – which, as indicated above, captures a large portion of rentals and listings within the City – the City would need to amend Chapter 3.24 of the BMC to add such language.

The following changes, based on a review of the municipal codes of peninsula cities with a VCA with Airbnb, are proposed:

1. Add a definition for “Hosting Platform” or, generally, an internet-based platform that allows an (STR) operator to advertise and arrange for temporary occupation of a dwelling unit, or portion thereof, through a publicly searchable website.

2. Add a new section which stipulates any hosting platform that assists with arranging transient occupancy may enter into a VCA with the City for the collection and payment of transient occupancy taxes.

Additionally, the proposed amendments clarify that if/when a hosting platform has entered into a VCA with the City, the hosting platform will have the same responsibilities and liabilities of STR operators under BMC Chapter 3.24 with regards to duties, registration, reporting and remitting, penalties, etc.

Fiscal Impact
None. There is no cost to amend the BMC to allow the City to enter into a VCA with hosting platforms. Automatic remittance would reduce staff time involved in administering the STR program and result in more timely remittance of TOT.

Measure of Success
Adoption of a procedure to allow the City to enter into a VCA with hosting platforms for the automatic collection and payment of transient occupancy taxes to simplify the process of tax remittance for both the City and STR operator.

Attachments

1. Draft Ordinance
___________________________________ ___________________________________ John Swiecki, Community Development Director Jeremy Dennis, City Manager 6 E.

ATTACTMENT 1
1 draft
ORDINANCE NO. ______

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BRISBANE
AMENDING CHAPTER 3.24 OF THE BRISBANE MUNICIPAL CODE CONCERNING VOLUNTARY

COLLECTION AGREEMENT WITH HOSTING PLATFORMS FOR THE COLLECTION AND PAYMENT

OF TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAXES
The City Council of the City of Brisbane hereby ordains as follows:

SECTION 1: Section 3.24.020 of the Brisbane Municipal Code is amended to read as follows:

3.24.020 – Definitions.

A. “Hosting Platform” means through which an operator may offer a dwelling unit, or portion thereof, for transient occupancy. A hosting platform includes, but is not limited to, an internet-based platform that allows an operator to advertise and potentially arrange for temporary occupation of the dwelling unit, or portion thereof, through a publicly searchable website, whether the transient user pays rent directly to the operator or to the hosting platform.
(Subsections A though G, no change; re-letter to B through H.) SECTION 2: Section 3.24.075 is added to the Brisbane Municipal Code to read as follows:

3.24.075 - Collection by Hosting Platforms.

Any hosting platform that assists with arranging transient occupancy may enter into a voluntary collection agreement (or equivalent) with the City for the collection and payment of transient occupancy taxes. Where a hosting platform has entered into such an agreement, the hosting platform shall have the same duties and liabilities of the operator under this Chapter. Compliance with the provisions of this Chapter by either the operator or the hosting platform shall be considered to be compliance by both. To comply with Section 3.24.060, a hosting platform shall register in its own name and post its Transient Occupancy Registration Certificate on its website, if applicable. Operators that only use a hosting platform for providing lodging to transients shall not be required to register separately with the tax administrator or post a Transient Occupancy Registration Certificate on-site so long as such hosting platform used by the operator has registered pursuant to Section 3.24.060.

SECTION 3: Adoption of this Ordinance does not require environmental review because it represents general policy making that would not result in a direct or indirect physical change in the environment and therefore it is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act.

CEQA Guidelines, Section 15378 (b)(2).

SECTION 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision 7 E.

Draft Ordinance – TOT VCA ATTACHMENT 1
2 shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council of the City of Brisbane hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause and phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases may be held invalid or unconstitutional.

SECTION 5: This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty days after its passage and adoption.
* * *
The above and foregoing Ordinance was regularly introduced and after the waiting time required by law, was thereafter passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Brisbane held on the ________ day of ____________________, 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
___________________________
Terry O’Connell, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________ _____________________________ Ingrid Padilla, City Clerk Thomas R. McMorrow, City Attorney 8 E.

File Attachments for Item:

F. Authorize the City Manager to Execute a Professional Services Agreement with Good City Co.

For the 70 Old County Road Planning Program
(The proposal includes a budget of $150,000. The $150,000 is the amount budgeted in the 2024-25 budget.)
9 70 Old County Rd. Sole-Source Contract Page 1 of 2

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: September 19, 2024
From: Community Development Director
Subject: 70 Old County Road Planning Program Sole-Source Contract with Good City Co.

Community Goal/Result
Community Building - Brisbane will honor the rich diversity of our city (residents, organizations, businesses) through community engagement and participation Fiscally Prudent - Brisbane's fiscal vitality will reflect sound decisions which also speak to the values of the community
Purpose
To commence the planning process for the 70 Old County Road (former Bank of America) City-owned property.

Recommendation
Authorize the City Manager to execute a professional services agreement with Good City Co. for the 70 Old County Road planning program, including the scope of work, budget, and schedule described in the submitted proposal.

Background
On July 18, 2024 the City Council considered a preliminary scope of work for the community engagement and planning program for 70 Old County Road and authorized staff to negotiate a sole-source contract with Good City Co. The July 18, 2024 agenda report is attached for reference. Based on Council’s authorization, staff released a Request for Proposal (RFP) to Good City Co. in August. Good City Co. submitted a proposal on September 9, 2024.

Discussion
Staff finds the submitted proposal to be responsive to the RFP. The proposed budget of $150,000 addresses Phases 1 and 2 of the project as described in the City’s RFP for community engagement and identification of preferred alternatives for the site. The third phase, implementation, is to be determined based on the outcome of the planning process and is not scoped or budgeted at this time. Good City proposes a 15-month schedule concluding in December 2025, which staff thinks is reasonable considering other planning issues slated for the community and Council’s consideration in 2025.

Optional tasks include Parkside Plan updates, which may not be required and if required may be able to be performed by City staff. The proposal includes budget for 4 10 F.
70 Old County Rd. Sole-Source Contract Page 2 of 2
meetings with City Council and Planning Commission as directed. Additional meetings would be out of scope and would require additional compensation on a time and materials basis.

As noted above the third project phase- implementation- is not scoped or budgeted as staff believes it is too speculative to include at this time. Depending on the outcome of Tasks 1 and 2 staff may be able to address implementation in-house. A key deliverable of the proposal is an Implementation Strategy, which will outline necessary steps to move development of the site forward as envisioned by the community. Staff anticipates using this strategy to evaluate whether consultant services will be necessary for implementation and to inform future budget proposals for Council’s consideration, as appropriate.

Fiscal Impact
As noted the proposal includes a budget of $150,000. The $150,000 is the amount budgeted in the 2024-25 budget.

Measure of Success
Execution of a consultant contract enabling the City to move forward with the community visioning and planning program for the 70 Old County Road site.

Attachments

1. Good City Co. Proposal dated 9/9/2024

2. July 18, 2024 City Council agenda report
_____________________________ ____________________________ John Swiecki, Community Development Director Jeremy Dennis, City Manager 11 F.

Proposal for the Preparation of a
70 Old County Road Planning Program
for the City of Brisbane
September 9, 2024
ATTACHMENT 1
12 F.
13 F.

Good City Company | www.goodcityco.com 3

TABLE OF

CONTENTS

1. Project Approach....................................................................................................6

2. Scope of Work ........................................................................................................7

3. Project Budget......................................................................................................11

4. Project Timeline....................................................................................................13

5. Meet the Team......................................................................................................14 14 F.

Good City Company | www.goodcityco.com 4
Julia Ayres
Principal Planner
City of Brisbane
via email to [email protected]
RE: Proposal for the Preparation of a Planning Program for 70 Old County Road in Brisbane
Dear Ms. Ayres,
Good City Company (Good City) is pleased to submit this proposal to prepare a planning program for the 70 Old County Road site in Brisbane.

Headquartered in Redwood City, Good City's technical expertise in current and advance planning, zoning code updates, objective design standards, and executive management is built upon decades of close collaboration with our local jurisdiction clients across the greater Bay Area. Based on our experience with similar projects, Good City is well qualified to prepare a planning program for the 70 Old County Road site. For this project, we have assembled a staff team skilled in planning, urban design, economic development, and community development. We are confident in our team's ability to deliver high-quality work that meets the unique needs of the City.

Aaron Aknin will serve as the Principal in charge and Kevin Gardiner, AICP will serve as the primary point of contact for this proposal. Lisa Costa Sanders, Good City Principal, will be available to provide additional support as needed. Jacob Garcia, Senior Planner, will support with project management and outreach. Noa Kornbluh, Economic Development Associate, will provide input on economic feasibility. Other team members will provide expertise in analysis and site design.
15 F.

Good City Company | www.goodcityco.com 5
We look forward to the opportunity to work with the City of Brisbane on this interesting and important endeavor. Please contact me if you have any questions or need additional information. I can be reached at (415) 845-8344 or [email protected].

Sincerely,
Aaron Aknin, Partner
Good City Company
16 F.

Good City Company | www.goodcityco.com 6

1. PROJECT APPROACH
Good City has prepared a work plan that responds to the City Council’s objectives for the 70 Old County Road planning effort:
» Community Engagement – The work plan provides a meaningful and robust community engagement process to obtain community input in developing a land use program (or alternative programs) that the City should pursue, as well as important design features /components to be incorporated into subsequent site development plans. Good City proposes a combination of on-site engagement activities, at least one online survey, and at least two “pop-up” events and two open house events.
» Planning – Based on the community input, Good City will develop a schematic development plan (or up to three plans, as applicable) for the site. Each development alternative for the site will be capable of being implemented on a standalone basis, recognizing the physical limitations established by surrounding existing private development.
» Vision for the Surroundings – The work plan will also address the potential future redevelopment of the adjacent shopping center that promotes compatible development across multiple sites. Furthermore, planning will also factor the proposed redesign of Bayshore Boulevard to incorporate traffic calming measures. 17 F.

Good City Company | www.goodcityco.com 7

2. SCOPE OF WORK
The following work plan follows the Scope of Work provided by the City in the RFP, with additional elaboration and detail.

PHASE 1: COMMUNITY VISIONING
1A Community Engagement and Brainstorming
Good City will lead a robust series of community engagement and brainstorming activities using creative and varied means to collect public feedback and ideas. There will be a combination of on-site engagement activities, at least one online survey, and at least two “pop-up” events and two open house events, with both in-person/analog and digital means of participation. Good City will leverage resources provided by Go Vocal (formerly CitizenLab) throughout the engagement process to collect, evaluate, and analyze community feedback through digital means. Good City will prepare a Community Engagement Plan for review and approval by staff. 1B Educational Messaging
In coordination with the Community Engagement and Brainstorming activities, Good City will prepare educational messaging for the public and decision-makers to ensure the community process is informed by market, economic, technical, design and other considerations that will influence the feasibility of future site development and long term viability. Educational materials may include examples of development types, technical information such as building heights and parking standards, and market demand matters. Educational messaging will be nuanced and not perceived as limiting the brainstorming process.
1C Meeting with Decisionmakers and Stakeholders
Meetings with City decision-makers and stakeholders, including:
» At least one interview with individual City Council members (five meetings total) 18 F.

Good City Company | www.goodcityco.com 8
» Meetings or other means of outreach targeted to advisory bodies, e.g. City Council subcommittees and/or other appointed commissions or committees (to be determined). Five meetings are included in the base budget, and additional meetings shall be provided at a range from $1,245 to $1,660 per meeting (depending on length of meeting and attendance).
1D Community Engagement Summary
Good City will prepare a Community Engagement Summary which will include a broad level analysis of ideas shared by the community.
1E Vision(s)
Identify primary vision (or suite of alternatives) for community review and City Council consideration.

Deliverables
» Draft and Final Community Engagement Plan
» Draft and Final Educational Materials
» Draft and Final Community Engagement Summary
» Draft and Final Vision(s) Summary
PHASE 2: CONSENSUS AND ADOPTION OF VISION
2A Schematic Concept Plan(s)
Good City will develop up to three schematic concept plans reflecting the community vision for City Council consideration. Each concept plan will include a site plan showing building and parking layouts, building section diagrams, and a three-dimensional massing diagram prepared in SketchUp. While the primary detailed focus will be the 70 Old County Road site, some concepts may also include approaches for potential changes to the adjacent shopping center (to the extent that alternatives identified by the community rely on or would have synergy with changes at the shopping center). » The City will contract separately with transportation consultants to refine circulationrelated elements of the plan or alternatives as needed. Good City will coordinate with the transportation consultant as needed.
» Artistic renderings are not included, but can be commissioned as an additional service if desired.
19 F.

Good City Company | www.goodcityco.com 9
2B Feasibility Evaluations
In response to input received from the community, Good City will evaluate various ideas against the market and other considerations at a high level to test feasibility. Evaluation will include interviews or focus groups with sources with knowledge of market feasibility, as well as identification of relevant case studies.
2C Development Plan
Based on City Council direction, Good City will refine a preferred schematic concept plan into a development plan for the site that is sufficient to allow for completion of project level environmental review. This will include refinement of the site plan, floor plans, and massing diagrams. An illustrative site plan will be provided that is comparable in graphic standards to the site plan in the Parkside Plan.
2D Parkside Plan Update (Optional)
As an optional task, Good City will assist in an update of the Parkside Plan to reflect:
» The development plan for the 70 Old County Road site. » The preferred vision for the adjacent shopping center should land use changes at the shopping center factor into the preferred vision for the subject property. 2E California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Clearance For the purposes of this proposal, it is assumed that a project-level CEQA infill exemption clearance of a development plan will be appropriate for the project. Good City will prepare a draft of the infill exemption.
» Should a more substantial environmental review be required such as an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND), Environmental Impact Report (EIR), or EIR Addendum be required, Good City can subcontract with an environmental review consultant as an additional service.
2F Implementation Strategy
Good City will provide a memorandum that established a roadmap/strategy for the 70 Old County Road project implementation, depending on the approved development plan. The strategy will identify components necessary for the City to issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) for development of the site, as well as other relevant technical issues needing to be resolved for the project.
20 F.

Good City Company | www.goodcityco.com 10
2G Planning Commission and City Council Meetings
Good City will attend up to four meetings with the Planning Commission and/or City Council during Phase 2. Additional meetings shall be provided at a range from $1,245 to $1,660 per meeting (depending on length of meeting and attendance).

Deliverables
» Schematic Concept Plans – up to 3
» Draft and Final Feasibility Memorandum
» Development Plan
» Parkside Plan Update (Optional – if applicable)
» CEQA Clearance Document
» Draft and Final Implementation Strategy Memorandum
» Planning Commission/City Council Meetings (4)
PHASE 3: POST-ADOPTION SUPPORT
3A Post Adoption-Support
Good City will provide post-adoption support based on the preferred vision for the project. This may include assistance with preparing a Request for Proposals (RFP) for site development, assistance with Surplus Lands Act requirements should the City opt to transfer fee title to another entity, etc. Accordingly, Good City will submit an updated proposal for the City’s consideration following completion of Phase 2 of the process. 21 F.

Good City Company | www.goodcityco.com 11

3. PROJECT BUDGET
The Good City team proposes a not-to-exceed budget of $150,000 for Phases 1 and 2 of the work scope, including expenses.

For optional services, or services without a defined limit (e.g., advisory body meetings), flat rates per meeting/service have been provided.
22 F.

Good City Company | www.goodcityco.com 12
Good City prides itself on being a cost-effective solution for public sector agencies. Staff retains detailed timesheets and works efficiently to ensure the client is getting the best value for the services.

TITLE HOURLY RATE
» Principal/Partner $260
» Planning Director $230
» Principal Planner/Planning Manager $195
» Economic Development Director $230
» Public Policy Manager $225
» Chief Building Official $170
» Senior Planner/Project Manager $170
» Senior Economic Development Planner $170
» Housing Services Consultant $170
» Public Policy Lead $170
» Associate Planner $140
» Economic Development Associate $140
» Assistant Planner $130
» Planning Technician $100
» Marketing Specialist/Graphic Designer $100
» Administrative Specialist $90
Subconsultant Contracts Direct Billing + 10% oversight fee. Reproduction Costs Direct Billing. Rates subject to adjustment January 1st of each year (typically 3-7% increase).

Mileage is reimbursed at the IRS rate. Travel within 30 miles of Redwood City offices will not be billed. Beyond 30 miles from the Redwood City Office, travel will be billed on an hourly basis at 50% of the above-listed rates.
23 F.

Good City Company | www.goodcityco.com 13

4. PROJECT TIMELINE
Good City proposes a 15-month timeline for the 70 Old County Road planning program, per the timeline shown below.
24 F.

Good City Company | www.goodcityco.com 14

5.MEET THE TEAM
For this project, we have assembled a staff team skilled in planning, architectural and urban design, economic development, and community development. We are confident in our team's ability to deliver high-quality work that meets the unique needs of the City.

Aaron Aknin will serve as the Principal in charge and Kevin Gardiner, AICP will serve as the primary point of contact for this proposal. Lisa Costa Sanders, Good City Principal, will be available to provide additional support as needed. Jacob Garcia, Senior Planner, will support with project management and outreach. Noa Kornbluh, Economic Development Associate, will provide input on economic feasibility. Other team members will provide expertise in analysis and site design.

Team resumes are on the following pages.
25 F.

OUR TEAM
1/2

EDUCATION
B.A., Urban Studies, San
Francisco State University
M.A., Public Policy, Cal State
Northridge

MEMBERSHIPS
American Institute of
Certified Planners
American Planning
Association
International City/ County
Manager Association

AARON AKNIN, AICP
Principal, Owner Good City Company

PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
Aaron Aknin, AICP, is a Principal and Co-Owner of Good City Company. He has nearly two decades of Bay Area municipal experience, including serving in an executive capacity for several different Peninsula cities. He is a member of the American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP) and the American Planning Association. Aaron has frequently spoken at regional events, as well as served on panels at national conferences on topics related to development, downtown planning, transportation, parking, affordable housing, and related issues.

Most recently, Aaron was the Assistant City Manager and Community Development Director with the City of Redwood City. In this capacity, he oversaw a 70+ member department, which included the Planning, Housing, Engineering, Transportation, Front Counter Services, and Code Enforcement divisions. As the Assistant City Manager, he led key Citywide initiatives and also served as Interim City Manager in 2015.

Aaron was in Redwood City during a time of unprecedented growth and community involvement (2014-2019). During his half-decade with the City, the City reviewed and processed over 4,000 new housing units, as well as several million square feet of office space. In addition, Aaron oversaw the implementation of the Redwood City Downtown Precise Plan, including several key amendments to the plan. Aaron helped shape a first of its kind community benefits program (“Partnership Redwood City”), adoption of several key affordable housing initiatives including an inclusionary housing ordinance, an Airbnb affordable housing tax and renter protections, and the adoption the Citywide Transportation Plan.

Aaron was also deeply involved in economic development issues and served on the Redwood City Community Improvement Association (RCIA) Board.

Aaron continues to serve on the RCIA Board and was recently appointed to the Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors. Finally, one of Aaron’s key focuses in Redwood City was improving the process, both for residents participating in policy making, as well as applicants, business owners and developers who chose to invest in the City.

Prior to coming to Redwood City, Aaron was with the City of Palo Alto in 2012- 2014. He served as both the Assistant and Interim Director of Planning and Community Environment. In this capacity, he led the Planning and Transportation Divisions within the City. Key projects included the formation of the first Downtown Residential Permit Program (RPP), leading the downtown 26 F.

OUR TEAM AARON AKNIN, AICP
2/2
development cap process, providing direction related to the Comprehensive Plan (General Plan), being the Planning Commission liaison, and overseeing several Stanford related developments.

Prior to coming to Redwood City, Aaron was with the City of Palo Alto in 2012-2014. He served as both the Assistant and Interim Director of Planning and Community Environment. In this capacity, he led the Planning and Transportation Divisions within the City. Key projects included the formation of the first Downtown Residential Permit Program (RPP), leading the downtown development cap process, providing direction related to the Comprehensive Plan (General Plan), being the Planning Commission liaison, and overseeing several Stanford related developments.

During his time in Palo Alto, Aaron focused much of his efforts on transparency by increasing the amount of available (and understandable) public information and building a connection within the community.

Aaron “grew up” as a local government professional within the City of San Bruno. He began his career in San Bruno in 2002 as an Assistant Planner, and left in 2012, after spending the last 5 years as the Community Development Director. As Community Development Director, he was in charge of the Planning, Building, and the Code Enforcement divisions in the City. He also staffed the Planning Commission and managed their agendas. During his time in San Bruno, the Shops at Tanforan mall was renovated for the first time in generations, and over 1,500 residential units were constructed citywide. This included over 1,000 units at “The Crossing” (former Navy Base) which included 315 affordable units. During Aaron’s tenure as Director, the first General Plan in 25 years was adopted, and the draft Transit Corridor Plan was released.

Most importantly, Aaron served as the Plan Section Chief during the PG&E Pipeline Explosion and worked closely with property owners during the immediate aftermath and in the months and years following the disaster.

Aaron grew up in the Peninsula, spent much of his adult life in San Francisco, and moved back to San Carlos in 2012. He lives there with his wife Cindy, and two kids.

PROJECT EXPERIENCE HIGHLIGHTS
» Caltrain at Diridon, Project Manager/City Laison, Caltrain » Harbor Industrial Area Specific Plan, Principal-in-Charge, Belmont » Scotts Valley Town Center Specific Plan, Principal-in-Charge, Scotts Valley
» North Fair Oaks Community Plan, Principal-in-Charge, County of San Mateo
» Redwood City Precise Plan Implementation, Lead, Redwood City* *Work completed at a previous place of employment
27 F.

OUR TEAM
1/2

EDUCATION
B.S., City and Regional
Planning, California
Polytechnic State University
San Luis Obispo

MEMBERSHIPS
American Planning
Association

LISA COSTA SANDERS
Principal, Owner Good City Company

PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
Ms. Costa Sanders has been with the firm since 1992. Her experience and specialties include interdepartmental project management, current, and long-range planning, solid waste and recycling management, budget preparation, and economic development and housing program implementation. She also has extensive experience in design review, California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Subdivision Map Act and worked on permit streamlining and permit tracking systems. Ms. Costa Sanders manages staff and processes large complex development projects.

Serving as Principal Planner for the City of San Carlos, Ms. Costa Sanders provides staff assistance for larger complex Planning and Economic Development projects. She was the Project Planner for the Wheeler Plaza Development and Landmark Hotel Development. She also assisted with property acquisition for economic development, managed city-owned properties including lease negotiations and managed the City’s affordable housing programs. Ms. Costa Sanders also assists with General Plan and Zoning Code updates and amendments.

Ms. Costa Sanders also served as the Acting Assistant City Manager for the City of San Carlos. In that capacity, she prepared the Mayor’s State of the City presentation, managed the City’s annual Strategic Plan update, reviewed all City Council staff reports and attended several regional meetings on behalf of the City Manager’s office.

As Town Planner for the Town of Atherton, Ms. Costa Sanders manages all current and long-range planning and presents projects to the Planning Commission and City Council. Ms. Costa Sanders also prepares ordinance amendments, General Plan updates and amendments, works on annexations and subdivisions.

Ms. Costa Sanders is currently assisting the City of South San Francisco with its comprehensive General Plan update, preparation of the Environmental Impact Report and Zoning Code Update.

As Contract Principal Planner for the City of Redwood City, Ms. Costa Sanders managed larger complex development applications including the Harbor View Place development, Rocketship Charter School, multi-family development at 150 El Camino Real, mixed-use development at 557 E.

Bayshore and 610 Walnut Street, Sandpiper School expansion and the City’s new water tank project.
28 F.

OUR TEAM LISA COSTA SANDERS
2/2
Previously as the Acting Planning Manager for the City of San Bruno, she was the project planner for the Tanforan Remodel Project, Crossing 350-unit housing development, Pacific Bay Vistas, 308 unit multi-family development, Merimont 70 new home development, Skycrest 24 new home development, and Cedar Mills 14 new home development. She also assisted the Public Services Director with preparing reports to the City Council, managing sustainability projects, managing grant programs and served as the Assistant Project Manager for the San Bruno Grade Separation project.

PROJECT EXPERIENCE HIGHLIGHTS
» Tanforan Shopping Center Redevelopment Project Manager, San Bruno, CA
» Lindenville Specific Plan Project Manager, South San Francisco, CA » San Carlos East Side Innovation District Plan Strategic Advisor, San Carlos, CA
» Northeast Industrial Specific Plan Strategic Advisor, San Carlos, CA » Wheeler Plaza Lead Planner, San Carlos, CA
» Alexandria Campus Development Lead Planner, San Carlos, CA » Concord Passages Shopping Mall Redevelopment Lead Planner, San Mateo, CA
» Bay Meadows Specific Plan Project Manager, San Mateo, CA 29 F.

OUR TEAM

EDUCATION
B.A., Environmental Design,
University of California
Berkeley
M.Arch., University of
California Berkeley Master of
City and Regional Planning,
University of California
Berkeley Degree and
Insititution

MEMBERSHIPS
American Institute of Certified
Planners
American Planning Association
Congress for the New
Urbanism
Urban Land Institute

KEVIN GARDINER, AICP
Director of Advance Planning

PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
Kevin Gardiner, AICP, has a background in planning and architecture, with nearly three decades of experience in both public service and private consulting. He is involved in all aspects of planning, with a specialization in long-range plans and urban design. He understands the complex relationships between planning policy, design, community input and market issues, and can respond with a range of creative approaches to allow informed decision-making.

Kevin is a member of the American Institute of Certified Planners, the American Planning Association, the Congress for the New Urbanism, and the Urban Land Institute. He is a skilled public speaker and regularly speaks at events and conferences on topics related to community planning, zoning regulations, housing, and climate adaptation.

Most recently, Kevin was the Community Development Director for the City of Burlingame. The position included oversight of Planning, Building, Economic Development, and Housing divisions. During his tenure he oversaw the city’s first comprehensive update of its General Plan in 50 years, the complete rewrite of the city’s zoning code, and the update of its Housing Element. He also managed a new transit-oriented specific plan for an emerging mixed-use neighborhood and led a pilot community engagement initiative focused on housing called “Burlingame Talks Together About Housing.” Working with the county flood control and sea level rise district, he also oversaw a sea level rise risk assessment, leading to one of the first examples of zoning regulations focused on sea level rise resilience in the Bay Area.

Prior to coming to Burlingame, Kevin was with a series of planning consulting firms, including his own firm Kevin Gardiner & Associates. His work included downtown plans for the Cities of Burlingame and Napa, as well as Scottsdale, AZ; form-based zoning for the City of Palo Alto; re-use plans for two different high-tech districts in Mountain View, California; a conceptual transit-oriented development plan for Eugene, Oregon; and a comprehensive plan for a small town in Indiana.

PROJECT EXPERIENCE HIGHLIGHTS
» Burlingame General Plan Update, Project Manager, Burlingame » Burlingame Housing Element Update, Project Manager, Burlingame » Site Feasibility Studies, Palo Alto
» South Whisman Precise Plan, Mountain View
30 F.

OUR TEAM
1/1

EDUCATION
B.S., Environmental Science,
Technology and Policy,
California State University,
Monterey Bay
Masters in Urban Planning
with a certificate in Real
Estate Development, San
Jose State University

MEMBERSHIPS
American Planning
Association (APA)

JACOB GARCIA
Senior Planner

PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
Jacob Garcia is a Senior Planner with a background in land use planning, natural resource planning, and Geographic Information Systems (GIS). He has been with Good City Company since 2019 and provides contract planning services to the City of San Carlos, City of Pacifica, City of Belmont and the Town of Portola Valley.

Jacob currently manages development projects throughout the entitlement process. As such his duties include current planning assistance, design review and Zoning conformance review, and preparing and presenting staff reports before various design review boards, planning commissions and city councils.

He assists jurisdictions with zoning amendments and policy research and implementation. He takes pride in providing excellent customer service and serving as a liaison to community groups and residents on behalf of cities and their various committees.

Jacob also has experience supporting the management of sustainability programs, staffing cities’ environmental committees, and facilitating wet weather construction site inspections and annual stormwater reporting.

Before joining Good City, Jacob worked for multiple public and private land management agencies providing natural resource and conservation planning services such as public outreach, data collection, data analysis, and research.

PROJECT EXPERIENCE HIGHLIGHTS
» Stanford University, Belmont Campus, Conceptual Development Plan (CDP), Belmont, CA
» Willow Commons, Supportive Housing and Density Bonus Project, Portola Valley, CA
» Fairmont Shopping Center, Master Use List, Zoning Amendment, Pacifica, CA
» Monitoring Urban Wildlife Corridors in San Diego County, Center for Natural Lands Management (CNLM), CA*
» Ten Mile Canyon ACEC Draft Watershed Management and Monitoring Plan, Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Moab Field Office, UT* 31 F.

OUR TEAM
1/1

EDUCATION
B.A., Political Economy,
University of California
Berkely
M.S., Local Economic
Development, London
School of Economics &
Political Science

NOA KORNBLUH
Economic Development Associate

PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
Noa has spent her career supporting communities in creating sustainable, resilient local economies. She has over eight years in community economic development working for state and local government, as well as non-profits.

Noa has a background in community outreach and engagement, strategic planning, and building entrepreneurial ecosystems.

Most recently, she worked as an assistant field manager in community and economic development at the Rural Community Assistance Corporation (RCAC) providing training and technical assistance to low-income rural and indigenous communities across the Western United States. Prior to RCAC, she worked for local Bay Area governments. She served as a Community Development Analyst for the City of El Cerrito, helping to facilitate business permitting, and as an Economic Development Specialist for the City of Milpitas, developing business retention and attraction programs.

Noa is a Bay Area local. She grew up in the city of Palo Alto and completed a bachelor's degree from the University of California, Berkeley. She then went on to receive a master’s degree in Local Economic Development from the London School of Economics and Political Science, followed by a year as an AmeriCorps Vista working for the State of Delaware’s Main Street Program.

PROJECT EXPERIENCE HIGHLIGHTS
» North Fair Oaks Community Plan Review Project, San Mateo County, CA » Small Business Technical Assistance Program, San Mateo County, CA » Economic Development Strategy and Program Implementation, Campbell, CA
32 F.
33 F.
70 Old County Road Planning Project Page 1 of 2

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: July 18, 2024
From: John Swiecki, Community Development Director
Subject: Authorize City Manager to Solicit Proposal and Negotiate Sole-Source Contract from Good City Co. for
70 Old County Road Community Engagement and
Planning Project
Community Goal/Result
Community Building – Brisbane will honor the rich diversity of our city (residents, organizations, businesses) through community engagement and participation Fiscally Prudent - Brisbane's fiscal vitality will reflect sound decisions which also speak to the values of the community
Purpose
To commence the community engagement and planning process for the 70 Old County Road (former Bank of America) City-owned property by negotiating a sole-source contract with Good City Co.

Recommendation
Authorize the City Manager to solicit a proposal and negotiate a scope of work and budget with Good City Co., urban planning consultants, with the final contract subject to City Council approval in the fall.

Background
On May 2, 2024 the City Council directed staff to move forward with a community engagement and planning effort to establish a land use program for the City owned site at 70 Old County Road. The City Council specified that the planning effort should focus on 70 Old County Road and allow for it be developed on a standalone basis. The Council further noted that consideration also be given to establishing a future vision for the potential redevelopment of the adjacent shopping center site to promote long-term compatibility between adjacent properties.

The Economic Development Subcommittee (Mayor Pro-tem Cunningham, Councilmember Lentz) met on May 30, 2024 to review a preliminary scope of work prepared by staff and provide direction on how to move forward with consulting services for the project. A revised preliminary scope of work is attached (Attachment 1). The Economic Development subcommittee staff report is also attached to this report as Attachment 2.

ATTACHMENT 2
34 F.
70 Old County Road Planning Project Page 2 of 2
Discussion
The Economic Development subcommittee supported the staff recommendation that the City pursue a sole-source contract with Good City Co., an urban planning consulting firm that the City currently contracts with for several current planning projects and previously completed the community engagement and implementing zoning for the Objective Design and Development Standards (ODDS) project. A sole-source contract negotiation would expedite the launch of community engagement for the revisioning project starting in the fall of 2024, compared to a competitive Request for Proposals (RFP) process which would likely delay commencement until early 2025.

Fiscal Impact
The City Council’s adopted FY 24-25 budget included a placeholder budget for this effort of $150,000. This amount was not based on a final scope of work and the agreement to be presented in the fall will include actual cost subject to Council approval.

Measure of Success
A robust community engagement and planning program for 70 Old County Road that identifies the community’s vision for this key site and establishes planning direction to implement the community’s vision.

Attachments

1. Preliminary scope of work

2. May 30, 2024 Economic Development Subcommittee Meeting Agenda Report ____________________________ ____________________________ John Swiecki, Community Development Director Jeremy Dennis, City Manager 35 F.

Draft
CityofBrisbane
70 OldCountyRoadPlanningProgram
Work Scope
Background and Purpose
In 2022, the City of Brisbane purchased an approximately 1.27 acre property at 70 Old County Road, Brisbane, the site of a former Bank of America branch (“subject property”). The subject property is located in the primary gateway to the City at the northwestern corner of the intersection of Bayshore Boulevard with Old County and Tunnel Roads. This strategic purchase allows the community to control and proactively plan for redevelopment of this site at a key entrance to Brisbane. The City Council intends to undertake a robust community dialogue to determine the appropriate community serving use(s) of this site and establish a site development plan based upon this vision. Housing, commercial and/or public uses have preliminarily been identified for consideration as potential land uses for this site.

Relevant Planning Considerations
The subject property is zoned Neighborhood Commercial- Brisbane Village (NCRO-2) and is located within the 25-acre Parkside at Brisbane Village Precise Plan (“Parkside Plan”) area. The Parkside Plan was adopted in 2017, at which time the subject property was owned by Bank of America and operated as a bank branch out of an approximately 40-year old portable trailer. The Parkside Plan envisioned the subject property being redeveloped with two adjacent properties (the Brisbane Village Shopping Center and 125 Valley Drive; together the “Commercial Vision Area”) as a connected retail center and park/plaza. This vision serves as an aspirational illustration, it was not codified through the adoption of land use policies and/or zoning regulations.

Other planning efforts in the vicinity include the Brisbane Baylands Specific Plan easterly of Bayshore Boulevard, which is undergoing environmental review. The City is also considering a redesign of Bayshore Boulevard to incorporate traffic calming measures. Additionally, a Light Maintenance Facility for the CA High Speed Rail project is proposed within the Baylands subarea and contemplates reconfiguring the four-way Bayshore/Old County/Tunnel Ave intersection fronted by the subject property into a three-way intersection (eliminating the easterly leg of the Tunnel Avenue/Bayshore Boulevard intersection). All these potential projects should be considered to the extent they would impact site access, visibility, and land use alternatives on the subject property.

Objectives
The City Council’s objectives in the 70 Old County Road planning effort are:

Community Engagement
- Engage in a meaningful and robust community engagement process to obtain community input in developing a land use program (or alternative programs) that the City should pursue, as well as important design features /components to be incorporated into subsequent site development plans.

ATTACHMENT 1
36 F.
70 Old County Road Preliminary Work Scope

Planning
- Based on the community input, develop schematic development plan or plans for the site.

All development alternatives for the site must be capable of being implemented on a standalone basis recognizing the physical limitations established by surrounding existing private development.
- A secondary objective of the planning effort is to establish a vision for the future redevelopment of the adjacent shopping center that promotes compatible development across multiple sites. This planning effort shall ultimately result in the establishment of final site and development plans for the 70 Old County site.

Work Scope

1. Community Visioning
a. Robust community education, engagement and brainstorming using creative and varied means to collect public feedback and ideas. A combination of on-site engagement activities, surveys, “pop-up” events should be proposed. The City recently contracted with Go Vocal (formerly CitizenLab), which should be leveraged throughout the engagement process to collect, evaluate, and analyze community feedback. The educational component should ensure the community process is informed by market, economic, technical, design and other considerations that will influence the feasibility of future site development and long term viability
b. Evaluating ideas against the market and other considerations at a high level to test feasibility, including interviews with developers, commercial landlords and leasing agents, and/or others sources with knowledge of market feasibility. c. Identify primary vision (or suite of alternatives) for community review and City Council consideration

2. Planning
a. Develop a schematic concept plan (or alternatives) reflecting the community vision for City Council consideration.
b. Based on City Council direction refine the schematic concept plan into a development plan for the site that is refined to a level sufficient to allow for completion of project level environmental re
c. view
d. Update the Parkside Plan as needed to reflect the development plan for 70 Old County Road
e. Update the Parkside Plan as needed to include the preferred vision for the adjacent shopping center should land use changes at the shopping center factor into the preferred vision
f. Obtain project-level CEQA clearance for the Parkside Plan revisions as applicable. g. Establish a Roadmap/strategy for 70 Old County Road project implementation

3. Post-Adoption Support
37 F.
70 Old County Road Preliminary Work Scope

a. TBD depending on vision (e.g., assistance with preparing a Request for Proposals for site development, assistance with Surplus Lands Act requirements should the City opt to transfer fee title to another entity)
38 F.

MEMORANDUM
DATE: 30 May 2024
TO: City Council Economic Development Subcommittee
FROM: John Swiecki
Community Development Director
SUBJECT: 70 Old County Road Planning Update

BACKGROUND
On May 2, 2024 the City Council directed staff to move forward with a community engagement and planning effort to establish a land use program for the City owned site at 70 Old County Road. The City Council further specified that the planning effort should focus on 70 Old County Road and allow for it be developed on a standalone basis. The Council further noted that consideration also be given to establishing a future vision for the potential redevelopment of the adjacent shopping center site to promote long term compatibility between adjacent properties.

DISCUSSION
Staff has prepared the attached preliminary draft scope of work for the subcommittee’s review and comment. The scope of work will be incorporated into a Request for Proposal (RFP) to solicit a proposal from a qualified planning consultant to assist in the City’s planning efforts. It would be staff’s preference to sole source the RFP to Good City, a local planning consulting firm that is currently under contract with the City to provide EIR management for several City EIRs now under preparation. City staff has a good working relationship with Good City and believes they have a solid understanding of land use issues in Brisbane and the technical ability to provide the necessary services in a timely way. Moving forward with Good City is predicated on their response to the RFP being responsive to the City’s needs in a financially responsible manner.

Any agreement with Good City would be subject to the approval of the full City Council. As an alternative the City would send the RFP to a more extensive list of qualified planning consultants and go through a more formal and consultant selection process.

ATTACHMENT
Preliminary Draft Scope of Work -70 Old County Road Planning Program ATTACHMENT 2
39 F.

Preliminary Draft
City of Brisbane
70 Old County Road Planning Program
Work Scope
Background and Purpose
In 2022, the City of Brisbane purchased an approximately 1.27 acre property at 70 Old County Road, Brisbane, the site of a former Bank of America branch (“subject property”). The subject property is located in the primary gateway to the City at the northwestern corner of the intersection of Bayshore Boulevard with Old County and Tunnel Roads. This strategic purchase allows the community to control and proactively plan for redevelopment of this site at a key entrance to Brisbane. The City Council intends to undertake a robust community dialogue to determine the appropriate community serving use(s) of this site and establish a site development plan based upon this vision. Housing, commercial and/or public uses have preliminarily been identified for consideration as potential land uses for this site.

Relevant Planning Considerations
The subject property is zoned Neighborhood Commercial- Brisbane Village (NCRO-2) and is located within the 25-acre Parkside at Brisbane Village Precise Plan (“Parkside Plan”) area. The Parkside Plan was adopted in 2017, at which time the subject property was owned by Bank of America and operated as a bank branch out of an approximately 40-year old portable trailer. The Parkside Plan’s envsioned the subject property being redeveloped with two adjacent properties (the Brisbane Village Shopping Center and 125 Valley Drive; together the “Commercial Vision Area”) as a connected retail center and park/plaza. This vision serves as an aspirational illustration, it was not codified through the adoption of land use policies and/or zoning regulations.

Other planning efforts in the vicinity include the Brisbane Baylands Specific Plan easterly of Bayshore Boulevard , which is undergoing environmental review. The CIty is also considering a redesign of Bayshore Boulevard to incorporate traffic calming measures. Additionally, a Light Maintenance Facility for the CA High Speed Rail project is proposed within the Baylands subarea and contemplates reconfiguring the four-way Bayshore/Old County/Tunnel Ave intersection fronted by the subject property into a three-way intersection (eliminating the easterly leg of the Tunnel Avenue/Bayshore Boulevard intersection). All these potential projects should be considered to the extent they would impact site access, visibility, and land use alternatives on the subject property.

Objectives
The City Council’s objectives in the 70 Old County Road planning effort are:

Community Engagement
- Engage in a meaningful and robust community engagement process to obtain community input in developing a land use program (or alternative programs) that the City should 40 F.
pursue, as well as important design features /components to be incorporated into subsequent site development plans.
- Planning
- Based on the community input develop schematic development plan or plans for the site.

All development alternatives for the site must be capable of being implemented on a standalone basis recognizing the physical limitations established by surrounding existing private development . A secondary objective of the planning effort is to establish a vision for the future redevelopment of the adjacent shopping center that promotes compatible development across multiple sites. This planning effort shall ultimately result in the establishment of final site and development plans for the 70 Old County site. -
Work Scope

1. Community Visioning
a. Robust community education, engagement and brainstorming using creative and varied means to collect public feedback and ideas. A combination of on-site engagement activities, surveys, “pop-up” events should be proposed. The City recently contracted with CitizenLab, which should be leveraged throughout the engagement process to collect, evaluate, and analyze community feedback. The educational component should ensure the community process is informed by market, economic , technical, design and other considerations that will influence the feasibility of future site development and long term viability
b. Evaluating ideas against the market and other considerations at a high level to test feasibility .
c. Identify primary vision (or suite of alternatives) for community review and City Council consideration

2. Planning
a. Develop a schematic concept plan ( or alternatives) reflecting the community vision for CIty council consideration.
b. Based on CIty Council direction refine the schematic concept plan into a development plan for the site that is refined to a level sufficient to allow for completion of project level environmental review
c. Update the Parkside Plan as needed to reflect the development plan for 70 Old County Road and vision for the adjacent shopping centershdhould land use changes at the shopping center factor into the preferred vision, updates to the Parkside Plan and projectlevel CEQA clearance would be required. d. Establish a Roadmap/strategy for 70 Old County Roadc project implementation

3. Post-Adoption Support
a. TBD depending on vision (e.g., assistance with preparing a Request for Proposals for site development, assistance with Surplus Lands Act requirements should the City opt to transfer fee title to another entity)
41 F.

File Attachments for Item:

G. Adopt a Resolution for the Recycling Business License Tax for Fiscal Year 2024/2025 42 Resolution Establishing the Business License Tax on Recycling Establishments for Fiscal Year 2024/25 Page 1 of 2

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: September 19, 2024
From: Carolina Yuen
Subject: Resolution Establishing the Business License Tax on Recycling Establishments for Fiscal Year 2024/25
Community Goal/Result
Fiscally Prudent – Brisbane’s fiscal vitality will reflect sound decisions which also speak to the values of the community
Purpose
To provide for the long-term fiscal stability of the City of Brisbane Recommendation
Adopt a Resolution to establish the Business License Tax on Recycling Establishments for Fiscal Year 2024/25.

Background
In 2011, the voters of the City passed an ordinance which imposed a business license tax on companies which carry out recycling operations within the City limits. For recycling establishments that recycle 100,000 tons or more, the tax authorized by that ordinance established a maximum tax of $3,000,000 per year. In 2017, voters increased the maximum amount of the tax allowed by the ordinance to $4,000,000, phased in over a period of time, with inflationary increases after the business license tax reached $4,000,000.

Council sets the tax each year by resolution and the tax for recycling operations that recycled 100,000 or more tons was set as follows:

Fiscal Year Amount of Tax
2016/17 $2,100,000
2017/18 $2,778,000
2018/19 $2,979,000
2019/20 $3,206,000
2020/21 $3,700,000
2021/22 $4,000,000
2022/23 $4,272,000
2023/24 $4,400,160
This phased in approach was discussed with San Francisco Recology and agreed to in principle. 43 G.

Resolution Establishing the Business License Tax on Recycling Establishments for Fiscal Year 2024/25 Page 2 of 2
Discussion
Since the maximum tax for FY2021/22 was $4 million, starting in FY2022/23 and thereafter, the City Council is to set the tax annually as provided by the voter-approved ordinance that permits an increase to the $4 million dollar tax by an inflation factor each year.

Per the ordinance, the business license tax payable shall be the greater of (1) the tax charged the previous year plus three percent (3%) of such tax , or (2) four million dollars plus an amount determined by a fraction, represented by the numerator of which shall be the Consumer Price Index published by the US Department of Labor Statistics, for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers, All Items, for the San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward Statistical Area (CPI) published nearest to the adjustment date, and the denominator of which shall be the CPI published nearest to the date the business license tax was set at four million dollars per year.

Option 1 would be $4,532,165 (i.e., $4,400,160 + 3% = $4,400,160 + 132,005 = $4,532,165) Option 2 would be:
numerator = CPI from 6/24 (nearest to adj date of 7/1/24) =
351.064
=
denominator = CPI from 6/21 (nearest to adj date when set at $4M) 309.497 1.134 $4,000,000 + ($4,000,000 x .134) = $4,536,000
The greater is $4,536,000.

Fiscal Impact
The City will invoice and collect from Recology the amount of $4,536,000.

Measure of Success
The City is able to continue to provide all of the services which have been budgeted for by the City.

Attachments

1. Resolution No. 2024-___
___________________________________ ___________________________________ Carolina Yuen, Finance Director Jeremy Dennis, City Manager 44 G.

File Attachments for Item:

H. Approve Construction Management and Inspection Services Agreement for Smart Corridors Northern Cities
(It is being recommended to authorize the City Manager to sign the Agreement for Professional Services with MNS Engineers, Inc. and to issue a Task Order to MNS Engineers, Inc. in the amount of $439,762.64 to provide CM services for the Smart Corridors Northern Cities – Brisbane construction contract. This contract is part of an overall project that was subject to CEQA and NEPA review. Caltrans approved a Categorical Exemption under CEQA and a Categorical Exclusion under NEPA for the project in 2020.) 45 Award CM Agreement for Smart Corridors Northern Cities Page 1 of 2

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: September 19, 2024
From: Randy Breault, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Subject: Construction Management and Inspection Services Agreement for Smart Corridors Northern Cities
Community Goal/Result: Fiscally Prudent
Purpose
To provide construction management and inspection services (CM) to oversee the installation of components of an intelligent transportation system (ITS) to guide overflow traffic winding through Brisbane during freeway closures. This project follows on to the installation of fiber optic that has been underway in Bayshore Boulevard, and will include oversight of the installation of an interconnected traffic signal system, closed-circuit television (CCTV) cameras, dynamic message signs, and vehicle detection system.

Recommendation

1. Authorize the City Manager to sign the Agreement for Professional Services with MNS Engineers, Inc. and to issue a Task Order to MNS Engineers, Inc. in the amount of $439,762.64 to provide CM services for the Smart Corridors Northern Cities - Brisbane construction contract.

Environmental Review
This contract is part of an overall project that was subject to CEQA and NEPA review. Caltrans approved a Categorical Exemption and a Categorical Exclusion for the project on August 31, 2020.

Background:

The city has entered into multiple agreements to facilitate the ultimate installation of an ITS system to guide detoured traffic through Brisbane during major incidents on local freeways:

A 10/31/23 Bill of Sale Agreement between the City and Intermountain Infrastructure Group (IIG) to provide for the installation of a fiber optic conduit system and appurtenances in Bayshore Boulevard.

A 10/31/23 Funding Agreement between the City and City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County (C/CAG) to pay for the work to be performed by IIG under the Bill of Sale.

A 3/1/24 Funding Agreement between the City and C/CAG to pay for the “construction phase” of the Smart Corridor; that is, the installation of all the ITS components described above.

The 9/5/24 approval of a construction contract with Bear Electrical Solutions for the construction phase.
1 of 11
46 H.

Award CM Agreement for Smart Corridors Northern Cities Page 2 of 2 The proposed agreement and approval before the Council this evening is the last in a series of agreements to fully complete the ITS project.

The City issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for CM services on 7/18/24. Three proposals were received by the City on the submittal due date of 8/22/24. As this RFP was issued for professional services, staff’s first review was to consider which was the most qualified and the most responsive proposal, without consideration of fee. (This approach is consistent with the qualification based selection requirements found in Government Code §4525 et seq., colloquially referred to as the “Mini Brooks Act”.)
Once MNS was found to be the most qualified and responsive proposer, staff then entered into negotiations as to the final fee.

Fiscal Impact
The 3/1/24 Funding Agreement between C/CAG and the City of Brisbane provided funds for construction as follows:

Construction Capital $2,837,444 Bear Electrical Contract $2,915,935 Construction Support $410,470 MNS Contract $439,762.64
Contingency $374,253
TOTAL $3,622,167 $3,355,697.64
The previous issuance of the construction contract to Bear Electrical and the proposed agreement/task order with MNS leave approximately 10% of those totals available as contingency.

Attachment
Agreement for Professional Services with MNS Engineers, Inc.

Randy Breault, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Jeremy Dennis, City Manager 2 of 11
47 H.

AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT, dated , is made by and between THE CITY OF BRISBANE, a municipal corporation ("City"), and MNS Engineers, Inc., a California corporation ("Consultant").

RECITALS
A. City desires to retain Consultant for the performance of certain professional engineering and design services.

B. Consultant represents that Consultant is specially trained, experienced, and qualified to provide such professional services and is willing to do so pursuant to the terms and conditions of this Agreement.

AGREEMENT

1. Scope of Services. Subject to the direction and approval of City through its staff that City may provide from time to time, Consultant shall perform the services described in written Task Orders. All services shall be performed to the reasonable satisfaction of the City department head in charge of the project. All plans, specifications, estimates, and engineering data furnished by Consultant to City shall be signed by the responsible engineer, with registration number indicated where appropriate.

2. Time of Performance. The services of Consultant shall commence upon the issuance by City of a Task Order and shall be satisfactorily completed in a reasonable timeframe mutually agreed to by City and Consultant.

3. Responsible Personnel. The . personnel acting on behalf of Consultant primarily responsible for performance of the services hereunder shall be .

4. Compensation. As compensation for all services to be performed by Consultant under this Agreement, Consultant shall be paid the amounts set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. The hourly rates set forth in Exhibit A include salary, fringe benefits, overhead, profit, and other expenses to be incurred by Consultant. In no event shall Consultant's total compensation exceed the sum agreed upon in the Task Order without additional written authorization from City.

Payment by City under this Agreement shall not be deemed a waiver of defects, even if such defects were known to City at the time of payment.

5. Method of Payment. Consultant shall submit billings to City describing in detail the work performed for which payment is requested, the date the services were performed, the number of hours spent and by whom, and a description of any reimbursable Expenditures. Billings shall be submitted at such time as agreed upon between City and Consultant. City shall pay Consultant no later than 30 days after approval of the invoice -1- '
James Wilcenski
3 of 11
48 H.
by City staff. If City objects to all or any portion of the billing, City shall notify Consultant of the nature of such objection and the amount in dispute. City shall pay when due the portion of the billing, if any, that is not in dispute. The parties will make a good faith effort to settle the disputed billing through good faith negotiations.

6. Maintenance and Inspection of Records. Consultant shall maintain any and all ledgers, books of account, invoices, vouchers, canceled checks, time cards, and other records or documents relating to charges for services or expenditures charged to City, for a minimum of three (3) years from the date of final payment to Consultant under this Agreement and shall make the same available to City or its authorized representatives for inspection and audit, at any time during regular business hours, upon written request by City. Consultant shall also make such records and documents available for inspection and audit upon request by any representatives of the State or Federal government. The right of inspection shall include the right to make extracts and copies.

7. Assignment and Subcontracts. Consultant acknowledges that Consultant's special skill and expertise is a material consideration for City entering into this Agreement. Consultant shall not assign, subcontract or delegate to any other party the performance of any services to be rendered by Consultant under this Agreement without the prior written approval of City. If City consents · to any subcontracting of work, Consultant shall be fully responsible to City for all acts or omissions of the subcontractor.

Each subcontractor must agree in writing to comply with all of the applicable terms and conditions of this Agreement.

8. Correction of Work. Consultant shall promptly correct any defective, inaccurate or incomplete tasks, deliverables, goods, services, or other work, without additional cost to City. The performance or acceptance of services furnished by Consultant shall not relieve Consultant from the obligation to correct subsequently discovered defective, inaccurate, or incomplete performance of Consultant's services hereunder.

9. Ownership of Documents. Except for Consultants pe-existing intellectual property, including but not limited to, data, materials, concepts and standard details, all final plans, studies, documents and other writings prepared by and for Consultant in the course of performing its services under this Agreement, except working notes and internal documents, shall become the property of City upon payment to Consultant for such work, and City shall have the sole right to use such materials in its discretion without further compensation to Consultant or to any other party. Consultant shall, at Consultant's expense, provide such reports, plans, studies, documents a1id other writings to City upon written request. Consultant shall not be responsible for anyreuse.0£,such documents by City which is unrelated to the Project and City agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold Consultant and its subcontractors harmless against any claims of liability arising from such reuse by City.

10. · Independent Contractor. Consultant is, and at all times shall remain, an independent contractor, and not an agent, officer or employee of City. As an independent ·contractor, neither Consultant nor any of its agents or employees shall be entitled to any salary; fringe benefits, worker's compensation, retirement contributions, sick leave, insurance or other benefit or right connected with employment by City, or any compensation other than as provided in this Agreement. Consultant shall have no power 4 of 11
-2- 49
H.
or authority to bind City to any contract or otherwise to incur any obligation or liability for, or on behalf, or in the name of City.

11. Licenses. Consultant represents and warrants to City that it has all licenses, permits, qualifications, insurance and approvals of whatsoever nature that are legally required of Consultant to practice its profession. Consultant shall, at its sole cost and expense, keep and maintain such licenses, permits, qualifications, insurance and approvals current and in full force and effect at all times during the term of this Agreement.

Consultant shall maintain a current City of Brisbane business license.

12. Compliance with Standards of Care and Laws. Consultant shall adhere to the standard of care in its profession and shall use due professional care to comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws, codes, ordinances and regulations in connection with the performance of its services under this Agreement. Standard of Care shall be defined as skill and care ordinarily used by members of the subject profession practicing under similar circumstances at the same time and locality. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, Consultant shall comply with the Federal Acquisition Regulations as set forth in CFR Title 48, Part 31 and CFR Title 49, Part 18, to the extent the same are applicable to the performance of Consultant's services under this Agreement.

13. Errors and Omissions. (Not Used)

14. Indemnity. To the extent allowed by law, Consultant shall indemnify, defend, and hold City, its officers, officials, agents, employees and volunteers, harmless from and against any and all claims, demands, causes of action, losses, damages, injuries, expenses and liabilities, including reasonable attorney's fees, to the extent caused by the negligent performance by Consultant or any of its subcontractors, agents or employees, of any services under this Agreement or the failure by Consultant or any of its subcontractors, agents or employees to comply with any of their obligations contained in this Agreement, and City shall not be liable for any acts or omissions of Consultant or any of its subcontractors, agents or employees.

15. Insurance. Consultant, at its own expense, shall procure and maintain, for the duration of this Agreement, insurance policies which satisfy the following requirements:
(a) Type of policies and coverage:
(1) General Liability Coverage. Consultant shall maintain commercial general liability insurance in an amount not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage, providing coverage at least as broad as Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability form CG 0001 (Ed. 11/88). If the form of insurance with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to the work to be performed under this Agreement or the general aggregate limit shall be at least twice the required occurrence limit.
(2) Automobile Liability Coverage. Consultant shall maintain automobile liability insurance in an amount not less than $1,000,000 combined single -3-
5 of 11
50 H.
limit for each occurrence, for bodily injury and property damage, providing coverage at least as broad as Insurance Services Office form CA 0001 (Ed. 12/90) Code 1 (any auto).
(3) Workers' Compensation and Employer's Liability Coverage. Consultant shall maintain workers' compensation insurance as required by the State of California and employer's liability insurance in an amount not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence, for any and all persons employed by Consultant in connection with the performance of services under this Agreement. In the alternative, Consultant may rely on a self-insurance program to provide this coverage so long as the program of self-insurance complies fully with the provisions of the California Labor Code. The insurer, if insurance is provided, or Consultant, if a program of selfinsurance is provided, shall waive all rights of subrogation against City for loss arising from work performed by Consultant for City. (4) Professional Liability Coverage. Consultant shall maintain professional errors and omissions liability insurance in an amount not less than $1,000,000 per claim and $2,000,000 annual aggregate, covering negligent acts, errors or omissions which may be committed by Consultant in the performance of its services under this Agreement.
(b) Endorsements: Each general liability and automobile liability insurance policy shall contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:
(1) The City, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers are to be covered as a d d i t i o n a l insureds as respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of Consultant; products and completed operations of Consultant; premises owned, occupied or used by Consultant; or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by Consultant. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to City, its officers, officials, employees, or volunteers.
(2) For any claims related to the Project, Consultant's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by City, its officers, officials, employees, or volunteers shall be excess of Consultant's insurance and shall not contribute with it. (3) Any failure of consultant to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies including breaches of warranties shall not affect coverage provided to City, its officers, officials, employees, or volunteers. (4) Consultant's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability.
-4-
6 of 11
51 H.
(5) Consultant's insurance coverage shall not be canceled except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice has been given to City by the carrier, except for cancellation for non-payment of premium whereby a 10-day notice shall apply. Consultant shall immediately give written notice to City of any suspension or reduction in coverage or limits.
(c) Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions exceeding $50,000 must be declared to and approved by City. At City's option, Consultant shall demonstrate financial capability for payment of such deductibles or self-insured retentions.
(d) Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers having a current AM. Best rating of no less than A:VII, unless otherwise approved by City in writing.
(e) Verification of coverage. Consultant shall provide certificates of insurance with original endorsements to City as evidence of the insurance coverage required by this Agreement. Certificates of such insurance shall be filed with City before commencement of work by Consultant. At the request of City, Consultant shall provide complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements effecting the coverage required by this Agreement.

16. Notices. Any notices required or permitted to be given under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be either personally delivered or sent by certified mail, return receipt requested, addressed to the other party as follows:

To City
To Consultant
City of Brisbane
Attn: Director of Public Works/City Engineer
50 Park Lane
Brisbane, CA 94005

17. Resolution of Disputes; Litigation Expenses and Attorneys' Fees. In the event of any dispute between the parties pertaining to this Agreement, the parties shall endeavor in good faith to resolve such dispute through mediation before the commencement of legal action by one party against the other. In the event of any litigation, including administrative proceedings relating to this Agreement, including but not limited to any action or suit by any party, assignee, or beneficiary, to enforce, interpret, or seek relief from any provision or obligation arising out of this Agreement, the partis and litigants shall bear their own attorney’s fees and costs. No party or litigant shall be entitled to recover any attorney’s fees or costs from any other party or litigant, regardless of which party or litigant might prevail or be deemed a prevailing party.

18. Termination of Agreement. This Agreement may be terminated immediately by either party, effective upon written notice, should the other party commit any material default in the performance of its obligations hereunder. This Agreement may also be terminated by either party, for any reason, upon fifteen ( 15) day's prior written -5-
MNS Engineers, Inc.

Attn: Greg Chelini, Vice President
201 N. Calle Cesar Chavez, Ste 300
Santa Barbara, CA 93013
7 of 11
52 H.
notice to the other party. In the event this Agreement is terminated by City through no fault of Consultant, Consultant shall be compensated for all services performed to the date of termination.

19. Equal Opportunity Employment. Consultant warrants that it is an Equal Opportunity Employer and shall comply with applicable regulations governing equal opportunity employment.

20. Miscellaneous Provisions.
(a) Severabilitv. Should any portion of this Agreement be declared void or unenforceable in a final decision by a court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this Agreement, which shall continue in full force and effect, provided that the remainder of this Agreement can be reasonably interpreted to implement the intention of the parties.
(b) Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties and supersedes and cancels all prior agreements or understandings, whether written or verbal.
(c) Amendments. This Agreement may be modified or amended only by a written document duly executed by both City and Consultant.
(d) Waiver. The waiver of any breach or default under this Agreement shall not constitute a continuing waiver of a subsequent breach of the same provision or any other provision of this Agreement.
(e) Execution. Each party warrants that the individuals signing this Agreement on its behalf have the legal power and authority to do so and to bind the party to this Agreement.
(f) Successors and Assigns. Subject to the restriction against assignment and subcontracting, this Agreement shall be inure to the benefit of and shall be binding upon the heirs, personal representatives, successors and assigns of the parties hereto.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement the day and year first above written.

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-6-
8 of 11
53 H.

THE CITY OF BRISBANE
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Michael Roush, Legal Counsel
Jeremy Dennis, City Manager
CONSULTANT:
.7.

MNS Engineers, Inc.

Greg Chelini, Vice President
9 of 11
54 H.

EXHIBIT A
Attach MNS Cost Proposal of August 28, 2024 here.
10 of 11
55 H.

Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Pre-ConstructionStage 1 - Limited NTP - Submittal Review (60 Days)Stage 3 - Construction (220 Days) Role Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Sr.Construction Manager/Constructability 2 2 325.00 338.00 650.00 $ Construction Manager/Resident Engineer 12 12 287.00 298.48 3,444.00 $ Inspector/Utilities Coordinator 8 8 230.00 239.20 1,840.00 $ Inspector (Electrical/Traffic Signal) 0 200.00 208.00 - $ Office Engineer 12 12 165.00 171.60 1,980.00 $
Scheduler/Estimator/Constructability 0 270.00 280.80 - $ Inspector (Systems Integration) 0 200.00 208.00 - $
0 0 0 0 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 34 7,914.00 $ Principal -In-Charge 0 325.00 338.00 - $
Construction Manager/Resident Engineer 40 40 8 8 8 8 8 40 76 76 76 60 448 287.00 298.48 132,800.64 $ Inspector/Utilities Coordinator 40 168 164 164 150 686 230.00 239.20 164,091.20 $ Inspector (Electrical/Traffic Signal) 24 24 24 12 84 200.00 208.00 17,472.00 $ Office Engineer 20 20 8 4 4 4 4 20 20 20 20 20 164 165.00 171.60 27,878.40 $ Scheduler/Estimator/Constructability 400 4222 14 270.00 280.80 3,888.00 $ Inspector (Systems Integration) 0 200.00 208.00 - $
0 0 0 0 0 64 60 16 12 12 12 12 100 292 286 286 244 0 0 0 0 1396 346,130.24 $ Principal-In-Charge 0 325.00 338.00 - $
Construction Manager/Resident Engineer 40 20 60 287.00 298.48 17,908.80 $ Inspector/Utilities Coordinator 8 8 230.00 239.20 1,913.60 $ Inspector (Electrical/Traffic Signal) 0 200.00 208.00 - $ Office Engineer 40 20 60 165.00 171.60 10,296.00 $
Scheduler/Estimator/Constructability 0 270.00 280.80 - $ Inspector (Systems Integration) 0 200.00 208.00 - $
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 88 40 0 0 128 30,118.40 $ 0000 34 64 60 16 12 12 12 12 100 292 286 286 244 88 40 0 0 1558 384,162.64 $ 384,162.64
1,000.00 $1,000.00 $
Materials Testing/Source Inspection 54,600.00 $
SUB CONSULTANTS SUBTOTAL 54,600.00 $
439,762.64 $
Notes:8. Field office not included.
2025
Project Closeout
Construction Management Services for
Smart Corridor - Northern Cities
City of Brisbane
Project Schedule

PRE-CONSTRUCTION

TOTAL COST
2026
PHASE
2024
Staff
PHASE
2026
Stage 2 - Material Procurement (100 Working Days)
2024
HOURLY
RATE
2025
HOURLY
RATE
PRE-CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL1. Monthly hours for construction inspectors are based upon eight-hour working days times the number of working days that month, with no overtime (OT).

Martin Castillo, Jr
Marie Dunne
2025
Paul Goryl, PE
Jeff Mitchum
TOTAL
HOURS
2024

6. Lodging and meal allowance are based on the current GSA per deim rates.7. Subconsultants and Direct Costs will be billed at cost plus 10% Markup Jeff Mitchum

CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SUBTOTAL

PROJECT TOTAL
James Wilcenski, PE
TOTAL Direct ExpensesDirect Costs2. Construction Management hours for the construction phases are based on the preliminary schedule submitted with RFP. Stage 2 estimated at 100 days only. Stage 3 Construction estimated at 4 Months starting end of June 2025.3. Prevailing Wage rates subject to PW adjustments.4. The above estimate doesn't include any OT hours. However, should OT hours be required due to contractor's schedule, non-exempt employees are subject to OT regulations (Time and half & double time).

Smith Emery
Marie Dunne

5. No consideration for delays due to weather, CCO, R/W, and claims filed by contractor in response to the Proposed Final Estimate.PROJECT CLOSEOUT SUBTOTAL

DIRECT EXPENSES SUB-TOTAL
James Wilcenski, PE
Pat McCard
Said Najafi
Martin Castillo, JrMartin Castillo, Jr
Said Najafi
Marie Dunne
Said Najafi
James Wilcenski, PE
Paul Goryl
Pat McCard
Paul Goryl

PROJECT CLOSEOUT
Pat McCard

CONSTRUCTION
Jeff Mitchum
11 of 11
56 H.

File Attachments for Item:

I. Consider Adoption of Resolution Approving an Agreement for the Purchase and Sale of Vacant City Property in Crocker Park, located generally south of West Hill Road, west of South Hill Place and west of 151 South Hill Place (28,000 +/- square feet, no APN—see map attached to agenda report for location) and Authorizing the City Manager to Sign the Agreement and All Other Documents Necessary to Carry Out the Sale
(This action is not subject to further environmental review as it is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act. CEQA Guidelines, Section 15378 (b) (4). This item was not discussed and was continued from the July 18, 2024 City Council Meeting.) 57 MEMO
Meeting Date: 9/19/24
From: Ingrid Padilla, City Clerk
Subject: Consider Adoption of Resolution Approving an Agreement for the Purchase and Sale of Vacant City Property in Crocker Park
The following old business item will be considered by council:

Adoption of Resolution Approving an Agreement for the Purchase and Sale of Vacant City Property in Crocker Park, located generally south of West Hill Road, west of South Hill Place and west of 151 South Hill Place (28,000 +/- square feet, no APN—see map attached to agenda report for location) and Authorizing the City Manager to Sign the Agreement and All Other Documents Necessary to Carry Out the Sale
(This action is not subject to further environmental review as it is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act. CEQA Guidelines, Section 15378 (b) (4). This item was not discussed and was continued from the July 18, 2024 City Council Meeting.) Attachments: 1. Staff Report from the City Council Meeting of July 18, 2024 58 I.

Purchase and Sale of Vacant City Property in Crocker Park Page 1 of 3

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: July 18, 2024
From: Michael Roush, Legal Counsel & Jeremy Dennis, City Manager
Subject: Resolution Approving an Agreement for the Purchase and Sale of Vacant City Property in Crocker Park (28,000 square feet +/-) and Authorizing the City Manager to Sign the Agreement and All Other Documents Necessary to Carry Out the Sale This ac�on is not subject to further environmental review as it is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act. CEQA Guidelines, Sec�on 15378 (b) (4).

RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt a Resolu�on “Approving an Agreement for the Purchase and Sale of Vacant City Property in Crocker Park (28,000 square feet +/-) and Authorizing the City Manager to Sign the Agreement and All Other Documents Necessary to Carry Out the Sale” and provide any direc�on as to how the funds from this sale should be allocated.

BACKGROUND
The City of Brisbane owns a vacant, landlocked parcel located in Crocker Park. The parcel is approximately 28,000 square feet and adjoins property owned jointly by several en��es (Central Los Angeles Transfer, a California Corpora�on, 501 Spectrum Circle, LLC, and S&S Chambers, LLC, [herea�er, collec�vely, “Buyers”]). That property, located at 151 West Hill Place is developed and is leased to Pepsi/Frito Lay for distribu�on vehicle storage. The vacant parcel is part of a former rail spur that the Southern Pacific Railroad sold to the McKesson Corpora�on.

The City acquired the vacant parcel from the McKesson Corpora�on in 1995 as part of a series of real estate transac�ons between McKesson and the City that led to the development of Crocker Park.

On February 15, 2024, City Council received an agenda report concerning the poten�al sale of this parcel. That agenda report is atached. A�er discussion, Council adopted a resolu�on declaring the property as surplus land and direc�ng staff to the return the item to the Council when and if there is a poten�al purchaser of the property.

Staff sent the required no�ces under the Surplus Lands Act that the property was available to school districts, recrea�on districts, and affordable housing providers. The City received no interest from any of those districts or housing providers. Staff then contacted representa�ves of the Buyers to determine if the Buyers s�ll had an interest in acquiring the property. The Buyers were s�ll interested in acquiring the property for the price--$718,250—that the Buyers had 59 I.

Purchase and Sale of Vacant City Property in Crocker Park Page 2 of 3 discussed earlier with staff. To that end, the Buyers have signed the atached Agreement for the Purchase and Sale of Real Property (“PSA”).

On June 28, 2024, the Planning Commission made findings (resolu�on atached) that the sale of this property is in conformity with the policies of the General Plan.

Staff recommends City Council adopt the atached resolu�on approving the sale of the property to the Buyers and authorizing the City Manager to sign the PSA and all other documents necessary to carry out the sale.

DISCUSSION
The salient terms of the PSA are as follows:

The purchase price for the property is $718,250, with $50,000 as a deposit and the remainder paid at close of escrow. The property is sold “AS IS”.

Buyers will submit to the Community Development Department an applica�on to improve the property with paving, fencing and ligh�ng. The City’s approval of such improvements is a condi�on of Buyer’s purchase.

Other than the property being used as a hiking path and a drainage canal (discussed below), the Grant Deed will restrict the use of the property exclusively for the parking of motor vehicles for the employees at 151 West Hill Place, green space, and access to the building at 151 West Hill Place
Promptly a�er close of escrow, Buyers will construct on the property a 5-foot-wide hiking path and a 5-foot-wide hiking access path on the property at 151 West Hill Place. Buyers will grant the City easements for these purposes. The City must approve the details of the hiking paths.

City will have the responsibility to maintain and repair the hiking paths.

A drainage canal currently exists on the property. Buyers shall grant the City an easement concerning the drainage canal but the Buyers shall be responsible for the regular cleaning, maintenance and repair of the drainage canal.

FISCAL IMPACT
The sale of this property will net the City about $718,000. Council has the discre�on to direct how those funds are to be allocated.
60 I.

Purchase and Sale of Vacant City Property in Crocker Park Page 3 of 3

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Adop�on of this resolu�on and the sale of the property do not require further environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act. The sale represents a government fiscal ac�vity which does not involve any commitment to any specific project which may result in a poten�ally significant physical impact on the environment and hence it is not a project. CEQA Guidelines, Sec�on 15378 (b) (4).

Atachments:

1. February 15, 2024 Agenda Report

2. Agreement for Purchase and Sale of Real Property

3. Planning Commission Resolu�on

4. Resolu�on 2024-XX approving a PSA and authorizing the City Manager to sign the PSA ___________________________________ ___________________________________ Michael Roush, Legal Counsel Jeremy Dennis, City Manager 61 I.

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Potential Sale of Parcel APN 005-300-999 Page 1 of 4
Meeting Date: February 15, 2024
From: Director of Public Works/City Engineer
Subject: Potential Sale of City Parcel APN 005-300-999 (formerly, S.P.R.R. SBE 872-41-23R);
Resolution Declaring that City Parcel is Surplus Land
Community Goal/Result: Economic Development
Purpose
To determine whether there is City Council support to sell vacant and landlocked property in Crocker Park and, if so, to discuss the next steps Council must take concerning the sale of this property.

Recommendation

1. If Council elects to continue with the potential sale of APN 005-300-999; Adopt Resolution No. 2024-XX declaring that the property owned by the City, a landlocked, vacant site of approximately 28,000 square feet located in Crocker Park, encumbered by a drainage canal, is surplus land, i.e., not necessary for the City’s use, and if there is no interest in any school district, recreation agencies, or affordable housing developers to purchase the property, authorize the City Manager to (a) sell the property at fair market value, including the potential sale to the adjacent property owner, BLT Enterprises, and (b) sign a purchase and sale agreement, in a form as approved by the City Attorney, and authorize the City Clerk to record the necessary documents to effectuate the sale.

These actions are not subject to further environmental review as they involve general policy making activities of the City Council and hence they are not projects under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). CEQA Guidelines, Section 15378 (b) (2).

2. If Council elects not to proceed with selling the property, provide direction to staff deemed necessary and appropriate
Background
The property that is the subject of this agenda report is located in Crocker Park and is part of a former rail spur that was owned by the Southern Pacific Railroad. The Railroad sold the property to the McKesson Corporation and, in 1995, the McKesson Corporation transferred this property and numerous other properties in the area to the City. The particular parcel that is the subject of this agenda report is highlighted in blue on the included 1 of 11
$WWDFKPHQW 
62 I.

Potential Sale of Parcel APN 005-300-999 Page 2 of 4
screenshot from San Mateo County Property Information Portal (pg. 5 of this report).

The next screenshot (pg. 6 of 11) shows the portion of the property that was sold to South Hill Properties (Sheng Kee), as well as the discontinuity in the former rail spur immediately to the west of the land sold. The third screenshot (pg. 7 of 11) shows a wider view of the area in question, and also highlights the parcel that is now under discussion for potential sale.

Recently, BLT Enterprises, which owns property at 151 West Hill Place, which property is immediately adjacent to the parcel under discussion, made inquiry of City staff about its purchasing this parcel. Several issues dominated staff’s review of this request and subsequent conversations with Council; first, was the examination of any future “best” uses for this parcel, e.g., use of the property for access to San Bruno Mountain; second, the presence of existing city storm drain facilities on the parcel; and third, what level of development would be permitted on the parcel were it sold.

Discussion
The question on future best uses for this parcel was focused primarily on its potential use for access to San Bruno Mountain. As seen in the attached “Vicinity 201 South Hill” photo (pg. 6 of 11), this parcel dead-ends at 201 South Hill, and currently does not provide any potential for future access to the Mountain. In its letter of intent to purchase this property, the adjacent property owner states that it will provide an easement on the property for the purpose of providing public access.

The second issue considered during review of this request was the City’s storm drain facilities.

This matter would be resolved by requiring any purchaser to grant the City an easement for its storm drain facilities on the property, and the owner’s agreement to maintain the storm drain facilities, including providing permission for the city to inspect the owner’s compliance with the agreed upon duty to maintain the vee ditch. Those commitments are also set forth in the letter of intent.

Third was the City Council’s concern about future development of the property. The property owner’s letter of intent states that a covenant would be recorded to restrict the use of the property (other than for the public trail and the storm drain facilities) to parking for and access to the building on the adjacent property (which now houses a Frito-Lay facility).

Given these commitments from BLT Enterprises—which commitments would be embodied in a written purchase agreement—if Council wishes to proceed with the potential sale of the property, set forth below are the next steps, with the understanding, explained below, that the Council’s agreeing to proceed with the sale does not necessarily mean the property will be sold to BLT Enterprises.
2 of 11
63 I.

Potential Sale of Parcel APN 005-300-999 Page 3 of 4
Next Steps
Compliance with the Surplus Land Act.

The Surplus Land Act (Government Code, section 54220 and following) increases the availability of land held by public agencies for use in creating housing for low/moderate income families, for recreational or school district purposes, and for clustered housing/commercial development near transit stations. The parcel under discussion is not near a transit station, and its 44-foot width is encumbered by a 15’ vee ditch easement that makes it likely unsuitable for any housing. Both its small size and its inaccessibility due to being surrounded on all four sides by lands of others also makes it likely unsuitable for recreation or school district purposes.

Notwithstanding its inapplicability to the intent of the Act, there is no express exemption that the Act does not apply and, therefore, prior to selling the land, the City is required to make a finding at a regular public meeting that the land is not necessary for the City’s use, which the Act defines as “surplus land.” Then the City must provide notice of the availability of the parcel to school districts, recreation agencies and affordable housing developers. (The State maintains a list of such developers.)
Approval of Resolution No. 2024-xx will satisfy the requirements of the Act Final negotiations with a purchasing party
If there is no interest in any of the public agencies or affordable housing developers in purchasing the property at a price that the City Council deems fair, the City may then enter into negotiations to determine a mutually satisfactory sales price with a third party, such as BLT Enterprises. (BLT’s letter of intent includes a purchase price of $718,250.) Based on the unsuitability of the parcel for housing or school purposes, and with no existing/planned trail on the San Bruno Mountain State and County Park trail map within 1/4- 1/2 mile of the western terminus of the parcel, staff does not anticipate receiving offers from affordable housing developers, the County of San Mateo, or school districts. Assuming that is the case, Council action tonight includes authority for the City Manager to enter into a purchase agreement and any other documents necessary to carry out the sale. If a purchase agreement and related documents are entered into with BLT, such agreement must be consistent with BLT’s letter of intent, and in a final form as approved by the City Attorney.

Conformity with the City’s General Plan and Sale of the Property If there is a purchase agreement, before the property may be sold, the Planning Commission must find that the sale is consistent with the City’s General Plan. Any decision of the Planning Commission could be appealed to the City Council. Such an item would not be presented either to the Planning Commission or to the City Council (on appeal) until there is a signed purchase agreement and, of course, the sale would be contingent on the finding of the sale’s conformity 3 of 11
64 I.

Potential Sale of Parcel APN 005-300-999 Page 4 of 4
with the General Plan.

Fiscal Impact
If the property is eventually sold as provided in the letter of intent, there would be one time revenue of approximately $718,000. Council will have the discretion to direct this money’s placement into whatever account or accounts it deems appropriate. If the City were to receive offers from a school district, recreation agency or an affordable housing developer, the item would be returned to Council for further consideration of such offer.

Environmental Review
These actions are not subject to further environmental review because the actions are general policy making activities and hence they are not projects under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). CEQA Guidelines, section 15378 (b) (2).

Measure of Success
If Council directs staff to move forward with the sale, in the future, City Council has directed that proceeds will be used for open space acquisition and open space habitat management.

Attachments

1. Screenshot from San Mateo County Property Information Portal [pg. 5 of 11]

2. Orthodigital view from 201 South Hill sale [pg. 6 of 11]

3. Orthodigital view highlighting requested sale to 151 West Hill Place [pg. 7 of 11]

4. Resolution declaring property surplus land and providing authority to the City Manager to carry out the sale
___________________________________ ___________________________________ Randy Breault, Public Works Director Clay Holstine, City Manager 4 of 11
65 I.
• City owned parcel shown in blue
• BLT parcel at 151 West Hill Place
• Discontinuity in trail spur shown at 211 South Hill Drive • Sheng Kee (now owning former city railroad spur) at 201 South Hill 5 of 11 66
I.
67 I.
68 I.

BRISBANE CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2024-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BRISBANE

DECLARING CERTAIN PROPERTY IT OWNS AS SURPLUS LAND AND

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO TAKE ALL NECESSARY STEPS TO

DISPOSE OF THE PROPERTY CONSISTENT WITH THIS RESOLUTION Whereas, State law, the Surplus Lands Act (“SLA”) requires that before a local agency, including a City, takes any action to sell or lease its property, it must declare the property to be either “surplus land” or “exempt surplus land”; and Whereas, “surplus land” means land owned in fee simple by any local agency for which the local agency’s governing body takes formal action in a regular meeting declaring that such land is surplus and is not necessary for the agency’s use; and Whereas, unless the surplus land is exempt, the agency must give written notice of its availability to any local public entity, including schools and park districts, within whose jurisdiction the property is located, as well as to housing sponsors that have notified the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) of their interest in surplus property; and
Whereas, the City of Brisbane owns vacant, landlocked, property in Crocker Park, and Whereas, BLT Enterprises also owns property within Crocker Park and approximately 28,000 square feet of City owned property lies immediately adjacent to the BLT Enterprises property; and
Whereas, BLT Enterprises has asked the City whether it would sell to it the approximate 28,000 square feet of City property, as depicted on the attached Exhibit 1, to be used by BLT Enterprises solely for the parking of vehicles for, and access to the building for, employees of the business located on the BLT Enterprises property; and Whereas, there is a drainage canal on the property and BLT Enterprises has indicated that if the City sells the property to it, it would grant the City an easement for such canal, and maintain the drainage canal in perpetuity; and Whereas, BLT Enterprises has also indicated that it will grant the City an easement on the property to be sold for the purpose of providing a public access that would connect to the eastern boundary of San Bruno Mountain State and County Park; and Whereas, BLT Enterprises has also indicated that by written and recorded instrument it would restrict the use of the property sold to it for parking for, and access to, the building on the property that BLT owns; and
Whereas, the City Council finds and determines that the City has no need of this property for public purposes because of its odd shape and location and that BLT Enterprises, should the property be sold to it, would grant the City an easement for the drainage canal on the property, maintain the drainage canal on the property in perpetuity, grant the City an easement for the purpose of providing a public hiking trail that would connect to the eastern boundary of San Bruno Mountain State and County Park, and would restrict the use of the property sold to it for the parking of vehicles by persons using the 8 of 11
69 I.
building on adjacent property owned by BLT Enterprises; and Whereas, the City Council further finds, based upon the foregoing recitals, that the approximate 28,000 square feet of City owned property is surplus land.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BRISBANE RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. The vacant, approximately 28,000 square foot site in Crocker Park, as depicted on the attached Exhibit 1, is declared surplus land and the City Manager shall, on behalf of the City, (a) send the appropriate notices under Government Code, section 54222, (b) negotiate in good faith for the disposition of the property should there be any interest in the property by those districts, recreation agencies and affordable housing developers who receive such notice, and (c) participate in negotiations to dispose of the property should there be no interest by those school districts, recreation agencies or affordable housing developers or, if there is such interest, no agreement as to the property’s disposition is reached.

Section 2. If the surplus land is not sold to a school district, a recreation agency or an affordable housing developer, the City Manager is authorized to take all necessary steps and to sign all necessary documents to sell the property at fair market value, including entering into a purchase agreement to dispose of the surplus land consistent with the terms and conditions of the letter of intent dated January 23, 2024 submitted by BLT Enterprises, when the purchase agreement and any documents required by the purchase agreement are approved in final form by the City Attorney.

Section 3. Should a purchase agreement be executed, once all its conditions have been satisfied, the City Clerk is authorized to record all documents to carry out the purpose of the purchase agreement.

Section 4. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its adoption. ________________________________
Terry O’Connell, Mayor
* * * *
I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2024-XX was duly and regularly adopted at a regular meeting of the Brisbane City Council on February 15, 2024 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
9 of 11
70 I.

ATTEST:
________________________________
Ingrid Padilla, City Clerk
Approved as to form:
________________________________
Thomas R. McMorrow, City Attorney
10 of 11
71 I.
20 of 20 EXHIBIT 1 11 of 11
72 I.

Attachment 2
73 I.
74 I.
75 I.
76 I.
77 I.
78 I.
79 I.
80 I.
81 I.
82 I.
83 I.
84 I.
85 I.
86 I.
87 I.
88 I.
89 I.
90 I.
91 I.
92 I.
93 I.
94 I.
95 I.
96 I.
97 I.
98 I.
99 I.
100
I.
101
I.
102
I.
103
I.
104
I.
105
I.
106
I.
107
I.
108
I.
109
I.
110
I.
111
I.
112
I.
113
I.
114
I.
115
I.

RESOLUTION 2024-GPC-1

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF BRISBANE

FINDING THE DISPOSITION OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY
FROM THE CITY OF BRISBANE TO CENTRAL LOS ANGELES TRANSFER (CLAT), 501 SPECTRUM CIRCLE, LLC (501 SPECTRUM), AND S&S CHAMBERS LLC (S&S CHAMBERS) CONFORMS TO THE CITY’S GENERAL PLAN
WHEREAS, City is the fee simple owner of the real property bearing Assessor’s Parcel Number 005-300-999 (“City Parcel”); and
WHEREAS, Central Los Angeles Transfer (CLAT), 501 Spectrum Circle, LLC (501 Spectrum), and S&S Chambers LLC (S&S Chambers) are the fee simple owner of the real property bearing Assessor’s Parcel Number 005-300-140 (“Subject Parcel”); and WHEREAS, City and CLAT, 501 Spectrum, and S&S Chambers have entered into a Purchase and Sale Agreement (“PSA”) concerning the above-mentioned properties owned by the City and CLAT, 501 Spectrum, and S&S Chambers; and
WHEREAS, the PSA provides that the City will convey to CLAT, 501 Spectrum, and S&S Chambers the City’s fee interest in all of City Parcel, as shown on the schematic Exhibit A to this Resolution; and
WHEREAS, the PSA provides that CLAT, 501 Spectrum, and S&S Chambers will deed to the City an access easement in a portion of both City Parcel and Subject Parcel, as shown on the schematic Exhibit A to this Resolution; and
WHEREAS, California Government Code, Section 65402(a) requires that before the City disposes of real property such disposition is to be submitted to, and reported on by, the Planning Commission as to conformity with the City’s General Plan; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered the agenda report and supporting documents concerning the proposed disposition of City property; and WHEREAS, such disposition is consistent with the City of Brisbane’s General Plan, specifically with the land use element which designates this property for trade commercial development and with Local Economic Development Policy 8 and Crocker Park Subarea Policy CP.3 in that these policies refer to maintaining a diverse tax base and uses in the Crocker Park subarea that provide jobs, city revenues, and benefits to the community.

WHEREAS, such disposition is furthermore consistent with Land Use Policy LU.4, Circulation Policy C.34, Open Space Policy 86, and Crocker Park Subarea Policy CP.10 in that these policies refer to providing pedestrian access to natural areas such as San Bruno Mountain State and County Park; and
Attachment 3
116
I.

Reso. 2024-GPC-1
WHEREAS, the proposed resolution is exempt from California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), pursuant to Section 15312 of the CEQA Guidelines, Surplus Government Property Sales.

The exceptions to this categorical exemption referenced in Section 15300.2 do not apply.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission finds, in accordance with Government Code section 65402(a), that the location, purpose, and extent of the abovedescribed disposition of real property between the City of Brisbane and CLAT, 501 Spectrum, and S&S Chambers conforms to the Brisbane General Plan.

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly adopted and passed by the Planning Commission of the City of Brisbane during the Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission on the twenty-seventh day of June 2024, by the following vote:

AYES: Funke, Gooding, Lau, Patel, Sayasane
NOES:

ABSENT: ________________________
Alex Lau
Chairperson
ATTEST:
__________________________________________
JOHN A SWIECKI, Community Development Director
117
I.
118
I.
1 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-XX
WHEREAS, the City of Brisbane owns a vacant, landlocked parcel located in Crocker Park, which parcel is approximately 28,000 square feet and adjoins property owned jointly by, several entities (Central Los Angeles Transfer, a California Corporation, 501 Spectrum Circle, LLC, and S&S Chambers, LLC, [hereafter, collectively, “Buyers”]); and WHEREAS, the Buyers’ adjoining property is located at _______, is developed and houses ________; and
WHERAS, the City acquired the vacant parcel from the McKesson Corporation in 1995 as part of a series of transactions between McKesson and the City that led to the development of Crocker Park; and
WHEREAS, on February 15, 2024, City Council received an agenda report concerning the potential sale of this parcel and, after discussion, Council adopted a resolution declaring the property as surplus land and directing staff to the return the item to the Council when and if there is a potential purchaser of the property; and WHEREAS, Staff sent the required notices under the Surplus Lands Act that the property was available to school districts, recreation districts, and affordable housing providers but within the time frame provided by the Surplus Land Act, the City received no interest from any of those districts or housing providers; and
WHEREAS, staff then contacted representatives of the Buyers to determine if the Buyers still had an interest in acquiring the property; and
WHEREAS, the Buyers were still interested in acquiring the property for the price-- $718,250—that the Buyers had discussed earlier with staff and, to that end, the Buyers have signed an Agreement for the Purchase and Sale of Real Property (“PSA”); and WHEREAS, on June 28, 2024, the Planning Commission made findings that the sale of this property is in conformity with the policies of the General Plan; and WHEREAS, City Council at its regular meeting on July 18, 2024 considered the proposed PSA, the agenda report and recommendation of City staff, and all comments and concerns of the public.

NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Brisbane resolves as follows:

Section 1. City Council approves the sale of the property to the Buyers and authorizes the City Manager to sign the Agreement for the Purchase and Sale of Real Property and all other documents necessary to carry out the sale.

Attachment 4
119
I.
2 Section 2. The City Clerk is directed to record the Grant Deed and all related Easements when the City Attorney has approved as to form all such documents and advises that all conditions precedent to closing escrow have been satisfied.

Section 3. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption.

The above resolution was adopted at a regular meeting of the Brisbane City Council on July 18, 2024 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

Ingrid Padilla, City Clerk
Approved as to form:

Thomas R. McMorrow, City Attorney
120
I.

File Attachments for Item:

J. Consider Adopting a Resolution Supporting the Bayshore Blvd/Van Waters and Rodgers Bus Stop Relocation Design Project and Submitting an Application to the San Mateo County Transportation Authority for Cycle 2 ACR/TDM Grant Program 121
FY 2024-25 ACR/TDM Application Support Page 1 of 2

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: September 19, 2024
From: Karen Kinser, Deputy Director of Public Works
Subject: Council Support for the FY 2024-25 ACR/TDM Grant Application
Community Goal/Result
Safe Community
Purpose
To obtain Council’s approval and adopt the resolution supporting the Bayshore Boulevard / Van Waters and Rodgers Road Bus Improvements Project Application as required by the San Mateo County Transportation Authority (TA) as a condition to apply for Cycle 2 Alternative Congestion Relief and Transportation Demand Management (ACR/TDM) Measure A and Measure W funds.

Recommendation
Adopt a resolution supporting the proposed project and committing to the TA’s ACR/TDM grant program requirements and approve the local project match.

Background
The San Mateo County TA (TA)’s Measure A half-cent sales tax for transportation programs and projects was reauthorized in 2004 for a period of 25 years by the voters of San Mateo County. Measure A took effect on January 1, 2009 and expires on December 31, 2033. Contained within the Measure A Transportation Expenditure Plan is a program category that allocates one percent of the generated funds to Alternative Congestion Relief, which is aimed at commute alternatives and planning work to support Intelligent Transportation System.

In January 2022, the TA adopted its first ACR/TDM Plan that was developed to guide investment decisions and funding allocations for a combined Measure A ACR and Measure W TDM Program. The ACR/TDM Plan provides a vision for the ACR/TDM program, program guidelines, example eligible projects/programs, and evaluation criteria for selection of projects. The Cycle 2 Call for Projects issued on June 10th, 2024, combines funding dedicated to ACR/TDM competitive programs from Measures A & W to streamline the application, evaluation, and grant administration process.

City staff has worked with the TA to develop a project submittal that will meet the requirements to be considered for ACR/TDM funding.
1 of 4
122
J.

FY 2024-25 ACR/TDM Application Support Page 2 of 2
Fiscal Impact
The engineer’s estimate for the proposed project $600,000. Staff is applying for the maximum $200,000 in grant funds. Staff requests a supplemental appropriation of $20,000 from the General Fund for the local match, for which 10% is the required minimum.

If $200,000 in grant funds is received, design of the improvements by a consultant and purchase of a bus shelter will be completed while further funds are sought.

City staff was informed by the SMCTA that the Cycle 2 ACR/TDM grant is expected to be undersubscribed and were advised to request additional funding for a total of $450,000 in grant funds for consideration. In the event that the request for additional funds is approved, staff requests an increased supplemental appropriation for a total of $150,000 from the General Fund for the local match.

Measure of Success
Compliance with ACR/TDM grant application requirements by the TA’s October 1st due dates, allowing the City to pursue FY 2024-25 ACR/TDM funds.

Attachments

1. Proposed Resolution
___________________________________
Karen Kinser, Deputy Director of Public Works
___________________________________ ___________________________ Randy Breault, Director of Public Works Jeremy Dennis, City Manager 2 of 4
123
J.

RESOLUTION No.

A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE BAYSHORE BOULEVARD/VAN WATERS AND RODGERS ROAD BUS STOP IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT AND SUBMITTING AN APPLICATION TO THE CYCLE 2 SAN MATEO

COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY FOR MEASURE A ALTERNATIVE CONGESTION RELIEF AND

MEASURE W TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT PROGRAM FUNDING WHEREAS, the City of Brisbane has identified a need for promoting the use of existing public transportation facilities, and
WHEREAS, the Sponsor has developed the Bayshore Boulevard/Van Waters and Rodgers Road Bus Stop Improvements Project to increase SamTrans ridership through the addition of safety improvements to enhance the overall rider experience, and WHEREAS, it will cost $600,000 to implement the Project scope, and WHEREAS, the Sponsor seeks the maximum $200,000 grant amount for the Project, and WHEREAS, the Sponsor has requested additional funding exceeding the maximum grant amount request for a total of $450,000 in grant funding
WHEREAS, the San Mateo County Transportation Authority (TA) issued a Call for Projects for the Measure A Alternative Congestion Relief & Measure W Transportation Demand Management (ACR/TDM) Program on June 10, 2024, and
WHEREAS, the TA requires a resolution from the Sponsor's governing body:

1. Supporting the Project and application for $200,000 in TA ACR/TDM Program funds for Project, and

2. Committing the Sponsor to the completion of the Project, including the commitment of matching funds in the amount of $20,000 needed for implementation, and

3. Certifying that any funds awarded by the San Mateo County Transportation Authority will be used to supplement existing funds for program activities, and will not replace existing funds or resources, and

4. Authorizing the chief executive of the Sponsor, or his/her designee, to sign a funding agreement with the TA, if funds are awarded, for TA ACR/TDM Program funding for the Project and to take any other actions necessary to give effect to this resolution, and 3 of 4
124
J.

5. Committing to commence work on the Project, if awarded, within one year of the TA Board of Directors allocating 2024 Cycle 2 ACR/TDM Program funding.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Brisbane

1. Directs staff to submit an application for the TA ACR/TDM Program funds for $200,000 for the Bayshore Boulevard/Van Waters and Rodgers Road Bus Stop Improvements Project

2. Authorizes the Director of Public Works, or his/her designee, to execute a funding agreement with the TA to encumber any ACR/TDM Program funds awarded.

3. Commits to the completion of the Project, including the commitment of $20,000 of matching funds needed for implementation, if awarded the requested TA funds.

4. Commits to increasing the commitment of matching funds amount to $150,000 in the event that the additional funding request in the amount of $450,000 is granted.

5. Certifies that any funds awarded by the TA will be used to supplement existing funds for the Project, and will not replace existing funds or resources.

6. Commits to commencing work on the Project, if awarded, within one year of the TA Board of Directors allocating the 2024 Cycle 2 ACR/TDM Program funds.

7. Authorizes the Director of Public Works to take any other actions necessary to give effect to this resolution.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City of Brisbane, held on the 19th day of September, 2024 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
By:
_________________________________
Terry O’Connell, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Ingrid Padilla, City Clerk
4 of 4
125
J.

File Attachments for Item:

L. Countywide Assignments and Subcommittee Reports
126
CITY of BRISBANE
Council Subcommittee Update
From September 1st, 2024, to September 13, 2024
None to report during this timeframe.
127
L.