Agenda packet — Brisbane City Council, December 5, 2024 (part 1 of 2)

- 1 -
CITYof BRISBANE
Thursday, December 5, 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 Councilmember Davis will join via teleconference at 251 Mendocino St. Brisbane, CA.

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 via Zoom Webinar. Aside from commenting personally while in the Zoom Webinar, you can also use the call in number. The public comments received will be noted for the record during Oral Communications 1 and 2 or during an agenda item. We encourage you to email comments on or not on agenda items in advance of the meeting to [email protected].

That email address, however, will not be monitored during the meeting and emails received during the meeting will not be responded to or brought to the attention of the City Council during the meeting.

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 December 5, 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 distributed to the Council and made available for public inspection at the front lobby and on the internet the day after the meeting (brisbaneca.org/meetings).
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
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS NO. 1

AWARDS AND PRESENTATIONS
B. Volunteer of the Year Award
C. Brisbane Library Annual Report
D. Brisbane Village Helping Hands
E. Proposed Oyster Restoration Project Vicinity of Sierra Point

CONSENT CALENDAR
F. Approve Minutes of City Council Meeting of November 21, 2024 G. Approve Minutes of City Council Special Meeting of November 21, 2024 H. Approve Final Determination of Use of Remaining State Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF)
I. Authorize Submission of an Application for Peninsula Clean Energy Member Agency Grant Funds
2 December 5, 2024 - 3 - 7:30 PM
J. Approve Application for Co-sponsorship Event Mothers of Brisbane Shop K. Authorize the Police Department to Enter into a Data Sharing Memorandum of Understanding with the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office for a Data Aggregation Platform
L. Adopt an Ordinance, Waiving a Second Reading, Approving a Zoning Text and Map Amendment 2024-RZ-1, Overlay to R-1 Residential District in its entirety and a portion of the R-BA Brisbane Acres Residential District
(It is being recommended to adopt an ordinance approving a zoning text and map amendment 2024-RZ-1 amending regulations within Title 16 and 17 of the Brisbane Municipal Code to add the R-TUO residential two unit overlay district as new chapter

17.05 and related amendments; and finding that this project is exempt from environmental review under CEQA Guidelines Sections 15061(b)(1) & (3), Section 15183.)

NEW BUSINESS
M. Receive Brisbane Marina Sea Level Rise Memorandums
(Receipt and review of these memorandums is exempt from CEQA because it is not a project (CCR Title 14 §15378 (b) (2))

STAFF REPORTS
N. City Manager’s Report – City Updates and Upcoming Activities

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

ADJOURNMENT
3 File Attachments for Item:

F. Approve Minutes of City Council Meeting of November 21, 2024 4 BRISBANE CITY COUNCIL

ACTION MINUTES

CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA
THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 21, 2024
HYBRID MEETING, 50 PARK PLACE, BRISBANE, CA 94005
7:30 P.M. CALL TO ORDER – PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor O’Connell called the meeting to order at 7:32P.M. and led the 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
No Councilmembers made a request under the Emergency Circumstances of AB 2449. Councilmember Davis joined via teleconference at 251 Mendocino St. Brisbane, CA.

Councilmembers present: Councilmembers Cunningham, Davis, Lentz, Mackin, and Mayor O’Connell Councilmembers absent: None
Staff Present: City Manager Dennis, City Attorney McMorrow, City Clerk Padilla, Finance Director Yuen, Community Development Director Swiecki, Assistant to the City Manager Cheung, Sustainable Manager Etherton, Parks and Recreation Director Leek, and Administrative Management Analyst Ibarra

ADOPTION OF AGENDA
Councilmembers made the request to adjourn in memory of Doug Rider, the City’s former Deputy Building Official, and Carole Nelson, former Community Development Director and to remove Consent Calendar Item M from consent and to discuss at a future City Council meeting.

Councilmember Cunningham made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Cliff Lentz, to adopt the agenda as amended. The motion was carried unanimously by all present.

Ayes: Councilmembers Cunningham, Davis, Lentz, Mackin, and Mayor O’Connell Noes: None

Absent: None
5 F.

City Council Meeting Minutes
November 21, 2024

Page 2 ends

Abstain: None
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS NO. 1
Michele Salmon made a request to extend the Draft Quarry EIR review period for an additional 60 days to provide community members time to review and submit their comments.

AWARDS AND PRESENTATIONS
B. Native American Heritage Month
Mayor O’Connell proclaimed November 2024 as National Native American Heritage Month and encouraged all residents to share the history of the indigenous peoples of California, including the Ohlone of San Mateo County, and to find time to acknowledge and express gratitude toward the original residents of the land on which we reside.

C. Brisbane Building Efficiency Program Awarded a 2024 Helen Putnam Award for Excellence Adrienne Etherton, Sustainability Manager and Caroline Cheung, Assistant to the City Manager welcomed and introduced Montana Cruz, Regional Public Affairs Manager from The League of California Cities. Mr.

Cruz presented the City of Brisbane with the Building Efficiency Program Award, a 2024 Helen Putnam Award for Excellence from The League of California Cities.

CONSENT CALENDAR
D. Approve Minutes of City Council Meeting of October 3, 2024 E. Approve Minutes of City Council Meeting of October 17, 2024 F. Approve Investment Report as of September 2024
G. Approve Award of Contract to Angelina Duckett and McGrath Arts for the Alvarado to San Benito Stairway Public Art Project
(It is being recommended to award contracts to two artists for the Alvarado to San Benito stairway public art project. Award contract to Angelina Duckett in the amount of $80,000. Award contract to McGrath Arts in the amount of $120,150. Funding of this project has no impact to the General Fund.) H. Approve Co-sponsorship of Silverspot Cooperative Nursery Event on January 2025 I. Approve Co-sponsorship of Silverspot Cooperative Nursery Event on February 2025 J. Authorize the City Manager to sign the Peninsula Clean Energy Incentive and Loan Contracts for Pool Electrification
(The total project cost is currently estimated at $1,761,778. The proposed PCE incentive and loan would cover 65% of the total cost.)
6 F.

City Council Meeting Minutes
November 21, 2024

Page 3 ends

K. Approve a Resolution Amending the Franchise Agreement Between the City of Brisbane and Recology Effective December 1, 2024
(The purpose of this item is to extend the franchise agreement for collection of solid waste in Solid Waste Collection Zone 3 for a period of five years.)
L. Approve a Resolution, “Amending the Franchise Agreement Between the City of Brisbane and South San Francisco Scavenger Co., Inc. Effective December 1, 2024” (The purpose of this item is to extend the franchise agreement for collection of solid waste in Solid Waste Collection Zone 2 for a period of five years.)
M. Adopt an Ordinance, Waiving a Second Reading, Approving a Zoning Text and Map Amendment 2024-RZ-1, Overlay to R-1 Residential District and the R-BA Brisbane Acres Residential District in Entirety
(It is being recommended to adopt an ordinance approving a zoning text and map amendment 2024-RZ-1 amending regulations within Title 16 and 17 of the Brisbane Municipal Code to add the R-TUO residential two unit overlay district as new chapter

17.05 and related amendments; and finding that this project is exempt from environmental review under CEQA Guidelines Sections 15061(b)(1) & (3), Section 15183.) Councilmember Mackin made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Cunnigham, to approve Consent Calendar Items D-J. The motion was carried unanimously by all present.

Ayes: Councilmembers Cunningham, Davis, Lentz, Mackin, and Mayor O’Connell Noes: None

Absent: None
Abstain: None
Councilmember Lentz made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Cunnigham, to approve Consent Calendar Items K and L. The motion was carried unanimously by all present. Councilmember Davis left the Zoom Webinar to abstain from the vote.

Ayes: Councilmembers Cunningham, Lentz, Mackin, and Mayor O’Connell Noes: None

Absent: None
Abstain: Councilmember Davis

STAFF REPORTS
N. City Manager’s Report on Upcoming Activities
City Manager Dennis invited the public to attend the Festival of Lights event on December 8, 2024. 7 F.

City Council Meeting Minutes
November 21, 2024

Page 4 ends

MAYOR/COUNCIL MATTERS
O. Ad Hoc Quarry Subcommittee Creation
Council directed staff to create an ad hoc subcommittee to support and inform the Quarry development. Their work could include the creation of a development agreement between the City and the developer and addressing process-related issues. The Council will appoint members at a future meeting. Members will be selected after the City Council reorganization. If needed, discussion about the possible extension of the Draft Quarry EIR review period will be scheduled for the City Council Meeting of December 5, 2024.

P. Countywide Assignments and Subcommittee Reports
Councilmembers reported out on their subcommittee and countywide meetings.

Q. Written Communications
Councilmembers received a letter from Xixiong Wu and Dr. Viola Fan on November 15, 2024 regarding their concerns about the Guadalupe Quarry Project.

ORAL COMMUNICATIONS NO. 2
Michele Salmon commented that she was excited about the safer pathway the Alvarado to San Benito Stairway will now provide. She also added that the Open Space Ecology Committee is in the process of compiling their comments and need to know before the December 5, 2024 City Council Meeting whether the review period deadline for the Draft Quarry Development EIR will be extended.

Cris Florkowksi suggested the Complete Streets and Safety Committee and the Parks and Recreation Commission provide input on and become involved in the Commute.org Strategic Planning Process.

ADJOURNMENT
Mayor O’Connell adjourned the meeting at 8:22 P.M. in memory of Doug Rider, the City’s former Deputy Building Official, and Carole Nelson, former Community Development Director.

_______________________
Ingrid Padilla
City Clerk
8 F.

File Attachments for Item:

G. Approve Minutes of City Council Meeting of November 21, 2024 9 BRISBANE CITY COUNCIL

ACTION MINUTES

CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA
THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 21, 2024
HYBRID MEETING, 50 PARK PLACE, BRISBANE, CA 94005
7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor O’Connell called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.

PUBLIC COMMENT
No member of the public wished to speak.

WORKSHOP
A. Council will discuss process to select Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem which will happen at their Special Meeting on Thursday, December 12, 2024.

City Council proceeded with the workshop and discussed the process to select the Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem.

ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned by Mayor O’Connell at 7:03 p.m. _______________________
Ingrid Padilla
City Clerk
10 G.

File Attachments for Item:

H. Approve Final Determination of Use of Remaining State Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF) 11 Final Determination of Remaining SLFRF Page 1 of 4

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: 12/05/2024
From: Carolina Yuen, Finance Director
Subject: Final Determination of Use of Remaining State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF)
Community Goal/Result
Safe Community; Community Building; Ecological Sustainability; Fiscally Prudent Purpose
To authorize projects to be supported with the remaining State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF)
Recommendation
City Council authorize and direct staff to execute agreements on indicated projects up to $195,000 by December 31, 2024, and use any remaining SLFRF towards revenue replacement in Fiscal Year 2025.

Background
In March 2021, the president signed the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) into law. The Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF) program was established under ARPA and awarded funds to every county, metropolitan city, and non-entitlement units of government, including the City of Brisbane, as an eligible recipient of SLFRF funding as administered by the U.S. Treasury.

The SLFRF program provided governments across the country with resources to fight the pandemic, maintain public services, and build a resilient recovery by making investments in infrastructure. The City of Brisbane was awarded a total amount of $1,117,402, paid in two installments of $558,701 each in 2021 and 2022.

In 2021, City Council decided to use up to $200,000 in grants to assist local small businesses that suffered revenue losses due to the pandemic, but who were not eligible for grants offered through the county programs at the time. After the grants were issued, plus the related costs to administer the program, the City was left with approximately $890,000 of SLFRF program funds. The terms of the SLFRF program allowed agencies to take up to five years to determine how to use the funds.

The five-year deadline is coming to term on December 31, 2024. The City must make a determination how the remaining funds will be used and authorize to obligate accordingly. 12 H.

Final Determination of Remaining SLFRF Page 2 of 4
Therefore, at the October 3, 2024, City Council meeting, staff presented Council with a list of eligible projects to consider for possible application of funds to comply with the deadline.

Discussion
In the initial release of the funds, the Treasury restricted the use of SLFRF to respond to direct impacts of the COVID-19 public health emergency, primarily targeted to public health agencies, through improvements to facilities used for public health services, public health programs, and premium pay to eligible emergency workers. Non-public health agencies could use funds to the extent of the reduction of revenue of such recipient due to the COVID-19 public health emergency; to make necessary investments in water, sewer, or broadband infrastructure; or to provide assistance to households, small businesses and nonprofits impacted by the pandemic.

The US Government expanded the list of eligible uses for granted funds and clarified compliance requirements in January 2022 (2022 Final Rule), in December 2022 (2023 Interim Final Rule) and again in March 2024 (Obligation Interim Final Rule). Upon review of the various rulings, staff interpreted the following areas as eligible uses for the City of Brisbane:

Eligible Use of Funds pertaining to Brisbane:

1. Responding to the public health and negative economic impacts of the pandemic including the following sub-categories:
a. Acquisition of equipment for COVID-19 prevention and treatment, including ventilators, ambulances, and other medical or emergency services equipment; b. Improvements to or construction of emergency operations centers and acquisition of emergency response equipment (e.g., emergency response radio systems);
c. Transportation projects that respond to a public health need or specific negative economic impact.

2. Capital Improvements that are non-COVID related, including the following subcategories a. Installation and improvements of ventilation systems; b. Investments in water, sewer, and broadband infrastructure; c. Capital improvements in facilities and spaces for general public use.

3. Mitigation measures in small businesses, nonprofit, and impacted industries

4. Investment in programs to support racial and economic equity In addition to the uses, the following timeline and other information was considered when making the selection:
• Funds must be committed and obligated towards a project by 12/31/24. 13 H.

Final Determination of Remaining SLFRF Page 3 of 4
• Funds must be expended by 12/31/26. We therefore have two years from commitment to spend and complete the projects.
• The funds do not have to be used for one project alone but can be used for several projects.
• The funds may be used towards a project, even if it does not cover the complete cost of a given project.
• A portion of the funds can be used towards administrative costs for compliance of reporting requirements.

Recommended Projects Identified by Staff and Council Selections City Staff identified seven projects that potentially qualified under the expanded use guidelines and presented to City Council at the October 3, 2024, regular meeting. Out of the seven projects, the following projects were selected by Council to consider eligibility and feasibility to meet the deadline:

1. Crocker trail CEQA - $150,000 - The master plan can’t be implemented (nor grants secured) until this is completed. Using criteria of “Improvements for general public use.”

2. Mission Blue Center Renovations Design - $45,000 - Given that Mission Blue is a Red Cross designated shelter during a disaster, this fits the criteria for “Improvements to or construction of emergency operations centers.” Design would review potential improvements to include kitchen overhaul, door repairs, flooring, rotting exterior beams, etc. Amount designated is for design. Improvement costs to be determined and not part of the SLFRF determination.

Staff is requesting Council make a final determination for staff to move forward with said projects using up to $195,000 of SLFRF, as within the City Manager’s discretion and spending limits. Any remaining SLFRF monies would be designated as revenue replacement for FY25.

Fiscal Impact
The total of $890,00 is already part of the FY25 Budgeted Revenues as a transfer from the ARPA Fund to the General Fund. An amount up to $195,000 to be added to FY25 General Fund expenditures. Depending on the selected project, there may be other related costs in future years.
14 H.

Final Determination of Remaining SLFRF Page 4 of 4
Measure of Success
Staff authorized to proceed on selected projects, and City commits by deadlines allowed through the Final Ruling of the SLFRF program and any remaining funds applied as revenue replacement.

Attachments
Attachment 1 Copy of October 3, 2024, Recommendations of Use of SLFRF Staff Report Carolina Yuen ___________________________________
Carolina Yuen, Finance Director Jeremy Dennis, City Manager 15 H.

Consider Recommendations for Use of Remaining SLFRF Page 1 of 4

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: 10/03/2024
From: Carolina Yuen, Finance Director
Subject: Consider Recommendations of Use of State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF)
Community Goal/Result
Safe Community
Community Building
Ecological Sustainability
Fiscally Prudent
Economic Development
Purpose
To provide a list of recommended projects to review and consider on how to use remaining funds received through the State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds program (SLFRF) Recommendation
City Council consider recommendations on how to use remaining funds from the SLFRF program and, if there is an interest in one or more projects, direct staff to return such projects to Council for further consideration.

Consider Recommendations for Use of Remaining SLFRF Page 2 of 4 extent of the reduction of revenue of such recipient due to the COVID-19 public health emergency; to make necessary investments in water, sewer, or broadband infrastructure; or to provide assistance to households, small businesses and nonprofits impacted by the pandemic.

After the grants were issued, plus the related costs to administer the program, the City was left with approximately $890,000 of SLFRF program funds. The terms of the SLFRF program allowed agencies to take up to five years to determine how to use the funds. At the time, Council decided that the remaining funds would be placed on hold in case of future emergency economic needs, as the duration of the pandemic impact was unknown, and it was uncertain how many years were needed for the City to recover for revenue losses from the health crisis.

We are nearing the five-year deadline of December 31, 2024, where the City must determine and obligate how the remaining funds will be used. With this known deadline, staff included the funds as an incoming transfer in the Fiscal Year 2025 Budget. During Budget discussions, staff was asked to provide a list of projects for consideration at a later 2024 Council meeting.

Since several agencies were having difficulty finding programs that fell within the strict guidelines of program use, the US Government expanded the list of eligible uses for granted funds and clarified compliance requirements in January 2022 (2022 Final Rule), in December 2022 (2023 Interim Final Rule) and again in March 2024 (Obligation Interim Final Rule). Upon review of the various rulings, staff has interpreted the following areas are now eligible uses for the City of Brisbane:

Eligible Use of Funds pertaining to Brisbane:

2. Capital Improvements that are non-COVID related, including the following subcategories 17 H.

Consider Recommendations for Use of Remaining SLFRF Page 3 of 4 a. Installation and improvements of ventilation systems; b. Investments in water, sewer, and broadband infrastructure; c. Capital improvements in facilities and spaces for general public use (this is still being reviewed by agencies and auditor guidance for clearer interpretation).

3. Mitigation measures in small businesses, nonprofit, and impacted industries

4. Investment in programs to support racial and economic equity In addition to the uses, the following timeline and other information should be considered when making a selection:
• Funds must be committed and obligated towards a project by 12/31/24. • Funds must be expended by 12/31/26. We therefore have two years from commitment to spend and complete the projects.
• The funds do not have to be used for one project alone but can be used for several projects.
• The funds may be used towards a project, even if it does not cover the complete cost of a given project.
• A portion of the funds can be used towards administrative costs for compliance of reporting requirements.

Recommended Projects Identified by Staff
City Staff has identified the following projects that potentially qualify under the expanded use guidelines. Several of the projects listed have been reviewed as part of the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) discussion last reviewed January 2024. Attachment A offers more detail on each project listed below:

1. Rollout of an Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI)

2. Install San Bruno/Bayshore Long-Term Improvements (New Traffic Signal System)

3. Update audio/video equipment for the Council Chambers/Community Meeting Room

4. Crocker trail CEQA

5. Mission Blue Center Renovations

6. Cultural Activities Grants for Local Artists

7. City Ambassador Program
18 H.

Consider Recommendations for Use of Remaining SLFRF Page 4 of 4 Staff is requesting the Council review and consider one or several of the listed projects to be funded through SLFRF, and if there is an interest, to direct staff to return such projects to council at a future meeting for further consideration. Council can also direct projects be moved forward if within the City Manager’s discretion and spending limits.

Fiscal Impact
The remaining funds of $890,000 are part of the FY25 Budget. No additional funds are expected to impact the current year’s budget. Depending on the selected project, there may be annual maintenance or other related costs in future years.

Measure of Success
The City Council selects a project, and City commits by appropriate deadlines allowed through the Final Ruling of the SLFRF program.

Attachments
List of Staff-Recommended Projects to Use Remaining SLFRF Carolina Yuen ___________________________________
Carolina Yuen, Finance Director Jeremy Dennis, City Manager 19 H.

ATTACHMENT A
City of Brisbane
List of Staff-Recommended Projects for use of State Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF) No. CIP No. Description Amount City Goal
1 Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) - This
project will replace an aging meter infrastructure
with AMI, smart meters. This project will replace
all water meters and install individual meter
interface units along with an AMI system server
and a meter data management system that will
work together with the City’s billing system and
customer interface. This project was part of the
proposed projects for a utility bond in 2021,
which we could not issue until rates were
increased.

1,500,000
Safe
Community;
Ecological
Sustainability;
Fiscally Prudent
2 DPW
44a
San Bruno/Bayshore Long-Term Improvements
- Design and install new traffic signal system. A
federal grant is being sought to cover this project,
but there will be a requirement for City matching
funds. The timing of when federal funds will be
available may cause delays and should be
considered when evaluating projects.

850,000
Safe
Community
20 H.

No. CIP No. Description Amount City Goal
3 Update audio/video equipment for the Council
Chambers/Community Meeting Room - The
City currently records and broadcasts meetings
for the Council, Commissions, Committees, and
other special events on Comcast Ch. 27 and
livestreams them on YouTube. The A/V
equipment used to record and broadcast was
acquired in 2008. Over the years, parts have been
upgraded to allow for hybrid meetings during the
pandemic, but the underlying system
components are starting to fail. As a result, we
have experienced numerous delays and
disruptions to public meetings. The heavy
reliance and heightened demand for access to
these services leads to this request for a full
replacement of the broadcast, streaming, and
switching equipment in the broadcast booth.

300,000
Safety;
Community
Building;
Ecological
Sustainability
4 Crocker trail CEQA – The master plan can’t be
implemented (nor grants secured) until this is
completed. Using criteria of “Improvements for
general public use” so may be limited dependent
on final guidance.

150,000
Safe
Community;
Community
Building;
Ecological
Sustainability
5 PR-18 Mission Blue Center Renovations - Given that
Mission Blue is a Red Cross designated shelter
during a disaster, this fits the criteria for
“Improvements to or construction of emergency
operations centers.” Improvements would
include kitchen overhaul, door repairs, flooring,
rotting exterior beams, etc. Amount designated
is for design. Improvement costs to be
determined.

45,000
Safe
Community;
Community
Building;
Ecological
Sustainability;
Fiscally Prudent
21 H.

No. CIP No. Description Amount City Goal
6 Cultural Activities Grants for Local Artists
($500- $1,000 cultural grants) -
The Brisbane Cultural Activities Grant Program is
a program to support community organizations
and artists who wish to offer free or low-cost
events and activities that will promote inclusion,
diversity, and equity in the City of Brisbane. To
qualify for these funds, applicants must
demonstrate that they are serving the Brisbane
community. Typical grant awards will range from
$500-$1,000 and will be selected by the
Inclusion, Diversity, Equity and Accountability
Committee.

5,000
Community
Building
7 City Ambassador program (5 ambassador
groups) - The Brisbane Ambassador Program is a
program to empower diverse groups of Brisbane
residents to become community ambassadors
and leaders in local government through an
intensive leadership academy. This program is
working to bridge the racial and social gap in civic
engagement. Targeted participants will include
seniors, young-adults, neighborhoods and
cultural groups.

5,000
Safety;
Community
Building
22 H.

File Attachments for Item:

I. Authorize Submission of an Application for Peninsula Clean Energy Member Agency Grant Funds
23 PCE Member Agency Grant Page 1 of 3

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: December 5, 2024
From: Adrienne Etherton, Sustainability Manager
Subject: Application for Peninsula Clean Energy (PCE) Member Agency Grant Funds
This application for grant funds is exempt from further CEQA review because it is not a project (CEQA Guidelines, §15378 (b) (2))
Community Goal/Result
Ecological Sustainability; Fiscally Prudent
Purpose
Receive council support for proposed PCE Member Agency Grant application.

Recommendation
Authorize city staff to submit the application and, if the grant is awarded, authorize the City Manager to sign PCE grant documents.

Background
In December 2023 the Peninsula Clean Energy Board of Directors authorized a one-time allocation of $11.5 million in surplus funds for member agencies to implement local energy projects. Each agency has been allocated a specific funding level, based on year-end 2023 load share/customer count in each jurisdiction, for its use in a manner consistent with PCE’s mission.

Brisbane’s allocation is $205,664.

The allocations are one-time grants and no repayment is required. Grants are based on proposed project costs as submitted by the agency and approved by PCE. Funds will be made available 50% up front and 50% on the successful completion of the project. Annual and post expenditure completion reports will be required. Proposals are requested by December 31st.

Discussion
Sustainability staff recommends the City utilize this funding for three projects focused on transportation electrification in an effort to reduce the largest source of local emissions.

Proposal 1: Brisbane Village L3 EV Charger Replacement - $70,293 Since June 2022, a first-generation ChargePoint Level 3 EV Charging Station owned by the City at the Brisbane Village Shopping Center has been inoperable. Grant funding for a replacement charger has been investigated since its failure, but replacement chargers are not generally grant eligible, and it has not yet been prioritized through the Capital Improvement Program. The site electrical infrastructure is in place, there are amenities (i.e. restaurants, park) nearby, and when the charger was operable, it received moderate to heavy usage. The cost listed is based on a 1 of 6
24 I.

PCE Member Agency Grant Page 2 of 3
quote from Chargie, the provider used for recent city sites, and includes a 5-year warranty and service level agreement. Additional quotes were sought from ChargePoint, which was higher, and EVgo, who declined as the site did not meet their criteria.

Proposal 2: City Fleet EV Charging at the Corporation Yard - $75,371 CA Advanced Clean Fleets requires new non-emergency vehicles purchased by local agencies to be 50% Zero Emissions Vehicles (ZEV) starting Jan 2024, and 100% ZEV starting Jan 2026. Fleet and sustainability staff have been participating in PCE’s GovEV Fleet Planning to prepare, and identified the Corp Yard as the highest priority site infrastructure to support future EV purchases. The project includes design and installation of a total of six level two (L2) EV charging stations, including four “high-power” ports with up to 19.2 kW capacity, and would supplement the one existing L2 already on site. This would support the 11 EVs expected in the Public Works (PW) fleet by 2030. The vehicle fleet represented 25% of the City’s municipal operations emissions, of which PW vehicles were one-third, in the latest (2015) inventory.

Proposal 3: City Staff Electrification Incentive Program - $60,000 Staff recommends creating a staff transportation electrification incentive program to further address the City’s municipal operations emissions; employee commutes represent ~21% of city operations emissions. Rebates would be provided for electric vehicle (EV) and e-bike purchases.

All current full-time staff of the City of Brisbane except executive management would be eligible, first-come first-served, limit 1 rebate per employee unless excess funds remain with 6 months or less remaining in the 2-year grant term. Incentives would vary by device: $5000 for a new or used EV, $1000 for an e-bike, and $500 for home EV chargers or other micro-mobility devices; and could cover no more than two-thirds of the total cost.

Fiscal Impact
The requested grants in Proposal 1 and 3 fully will fully fund those activities.

The requested grant funding for Proposal 2 is expected to be paired with a PCE EV Charging Grant ($30,000) and IRS Elective Pay (~$44,000) to fully cover the estimated cost of $147,800 for Corp Yard EV infrastructure.

Environmental Review
Submitting an application for grant funds does not need further environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as it is a continuing administrative activity not applied to a specific instance and therefore it is not a “project” (CEQA Guidelines, §15378 (b) (2)). In the event that grant funds are awarded, an initial study will be conducted prior to implementation of any funded proposal to determine if it is a project and whether or not it is subject to further CEQA review.
2 of 6
Measure of Success
Receipt of PCE grant funds and successful implementation of the three proposed projects. 25 I.

PCE Member Agency Grant Page 3 of 3
Attachments

1. PCE Local Agency Grant Proposal
___________________________________
Adrienne Etherton, Sustainability Manager
__________________________________ ___________________________________ Randy Breault, Public Works Director Jeremy Dennis, City Manager 3 of 6
ATTACHMENT 1
26 I.

PCE Member Agency Grant Proposal for City of Brisbane
The City of Brisbane thanks Peninsula Clean Energy for the allocation of $205,664 through the Member Agency Grant program, and requests to allocate it accordingly:
• $70,293 - Brisbane Village L3 EV Charger Replacement
• $75,371 - City Fleet EV Charging at the Corporation Yard • $60,000 – City Staff Electrification Incentive Program All of the proposed projects are focused on transportation electrification in an effort to reduce the largest source of emissions. The City requests the flexibility to make slight shifts in the specific dollar amounts between these projects as they are executed.

Brisbane Village L3 EV Charger Replacement
Overview and description:

Since June 2022, a first-generation ChargePoint 50kW DCFC EV Charging Station owned by the City at the Brisbane Village Shopping Center has been inoperable. Initially city staff tried to work with ChargePoint on repairs, but ChargePoint had discontinued this model and would not provide support to it after March 2023. Grant funding for a replacement charger has been investigated since its failure, but unfortunately replacement chargers are not generally eligible.

The City sought quotes to “remove and replace” from ChargePoint, Chargie and EVgo. EVgo declined to provide a quote, stating that the site did not fit their criteria. Chargie’s quote was the lower of the two received, and desirable as the City has numerous other chargers in the Chargie network and has had a positive experience with the company.

Outcomes and benefits:

The City would be able to replace an EV Charger that has been inoperable for nearly 2.5 years, with repeated calls from the community to have it replaced. This site has unfortunately contributed to the public perception that EV Charging is unreliable, which hinders the transition to EVs.

The electrical infrastructure is already in place, making the project less expensive than the development of a new EV charging site. During the 4+ years that the charger was operable, it received moderate to heavy usage due to its location in a shopping center with numerous restaurants and other services, in central Brisbane just off Bayshore Blvd (a major arterial) and easy access to Highway 101.

On-road transportation is far and away the City’s largest source of greenhouse gas emissions, and the City has limited sites available to provide EV infrastructure to support the transition. We expect the reintroduction of EV charging at this location to result in heavy usage.

Budget: $70, 293
• $49,633 - ABB L3 Charger and installation
• $20,660 - 5-year service level agreement, including 5-year warranty (due upfront) 4 of 6
City Fleet EV Charging at the Corporation Yard
27 I.

Overview and description:

Installation of EV Chargers at the City’s Corporation Yard to support fleet electrification as required by CA Advanced Clean Fleets and recommended through PCE’s GovEV Fleet Planning. The project would include design and installation of a total of six level two EV charging stations, including four “high-power” ports with up to 19.2 kW capacity, and would supplement the one existing L2 already on site. The Corp Yard is believed to have available electrical capacity to support this level of charging.

Outcomes and benefits:

The vehicle fleet represented 25% of the City’s municipal operations emissions in the latest (2015) inventory, with Public Works vehicles representing approximately 1/3 of the total fleet emissions.

The proposed charging stations would support the 11 EVs expected in the Public Works fleet by 2030 and domiciled at the Corp Yard. As the site is not owned by the City and is in an area slated for redevelopment, we are not currently looking to meet the long-term needs.

The ability to complete this infrastructure without reliance on general or Capital Improvement Project funds will support the ability of the City to meet our requirements under Advanced Clean Fleets; city funds can be allocated towards the increased upfront cost of new electric vehicles or infrastructure needs at other sites.

Budget: $75,371
This funding is expected to be paired with PCE EV Charging Grant ($30,000) and IRS Elective Pay (~$44,000) to cover the estimated cost of $147,800.

City Staff Electrification Incentive Program
Overview and description:

The City of Brisbane would dedicate $60,000 for a program to reduce transportation emissions through incentives to City staff. Rebates would be provided for electric vehicle (EV) and bike/e-bike purchases, which will help reduce our municipal operations emissions due to employee commutes. All current full-time staff of the City of Brisbane except executive management would be eligible, while funds last. Incentives would vary by device and could cover no more than twothirds of the total cost (see budget section for additional details).

Outcomes and benefits:

A primary goal of this effort is to reduce the City’s municipal operations emissions; employee commutes represented 21% of city operations emissions in the last inventory (2015). The City has already installed EV charging at multiple city-owned sites, including city hall, and sustainability staff along with the internal Green Team are investigating reduced charging pricing as a further incentive to employees to electrify their commutes. City Hall parking is also impacted, so pushing more employees to EV to utilize available charging spaces, as well as e-bikes that can further 5 of 6
reduce emissions and demand for car parking spaces, will make City Hall a more accessible facility for employees and visitors.
28 I.

Budget: $60,000
Incentive levels:
• $5,000 for an electric vehicle (new or used)
• $1,000 for an electric bike
• $500 for a non-electric road or hybrid bike, electric scooter or similar micro-mobility device • $500 for a home EV charger
With ~95 FTE (including executive management that would not be eligible for the incentives) and employees having varying needs, we expect to accommodate most employees that wish to participate, with the first-come first-served nature encouraging early action.

Additional notes/restrictions:
• Incentives are capped at 2/3 of the total purchase cost or the above incentive level, whichever is lower, and can include installation by licensed contractors where applicable • Purchases must be made after the program goes into effect • Can be stacked with other eligible rebates, but total incentives cannot be more than the total cost
• One incentive per full-time employee; should additional funds remain in the budget after 18 months of the program start, employees may apply for additional incentives • Rebates would be reviewed for approval by the City’s Sustainability Manager • Rebates would be processed by the City’s Finance Department and considered taxable income, with reporting on employee W2
Timeline (all projects):
• October 2024 – proposal review by city staff Green Team • Oct/Nov 2024 – proposal review by PW Dept Director and City Manager • Dec 5, 2024 – City Council consideration
• December 2024 – Application to PCE and creation of application forms/finance processes • Early 2025 / upon PCE approval & contract execution:
o Installation agreement with Chargie for L3 Installation at Brisbane Village o RFP for Design/Build of Corp Yard EV Charging
o Staff incentives available for application
• June 2026 – Budget Review – potential reallocation of funds if needed and/or opening up Staff Incentive Program for second applications from prior employee participants • December 31, 2026 – Program/grant concludes
6 of 6
29 I.

File Attachments for Item:

J. Approve Application for Co-sponsorship Event Mothers of Brisbane Shop 30 MOB Shop Application for event cosponsorship Page 1 of 2

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: 12/5/2024
From: Jeff Franco, Recreation Coordinator
Noreen Leek, Parks & Recreation Director
Subject: Approve the Mothers of Brisbane MOB Shop Application for Event Cosponsorship
Community Goal/Result
Community Building & Fundraising
Purpose
Promote cultural and social events that encourage community engagement and provide assistance to local non-profit organizations.

Recommendation
Approve the Mothers of Brisbane’s MOB Shop as cosponsored event.

Background
The Mothers of Brisbane (MOB) is a, 501 (c)(3), non-profit parents’ club and welcoming community of support for parents of young children in Brisbane, and surrounding communities. Established in the summer of 2005, the MOB is a place where families come together to make friends, learn about community resources, hold family events, arrange playgroups and childcare, share information, and support, and generally have a good time together. The MOB currently consists of single, partnered, married, gay, straight, working, stay-at-home, and self-employed parents. They come from different backgrounds, cultures, and experiences, but through it all, they are families.

The MOB Shop event began in 2000 as a clothing "swap" at the Community Park Gazebo, providing families with an opportunity to repurpose gently used children’s items and clothing to other families in need. Over the years, the MOB Shop served as both a great fundraiser for the Mothers of Brisbane and a service to the community. Offering a tax-deductible way for Brisbane families to donate gently used clothing and baby gear, the event allows other families to purchase those same items for a nominal donation. All leftover items are donated to the San Mateo County Shelter Network or similar organizations that serve families in our area.

Discussion
The MOB Shop will take place at the Mission Blue Center on Friday, January 24th 12:00pm-5:00pm & Saturday, January 25th, 10:00am-3:00pm, 2025. The Mothers of Brisbane meets Group II requirements with the event open to the general public which qualifies them for free use of the facility and waives the deposit requirement.
31 J.

MOB Shop Application for event cosponsorship Page 2 of 2 Fiscal Impact
The Mothers of Brisbane is requesting support from the City as summarized in the table below. They have requested use of the Mission Blue Center for the aforementioned event. Although use of the facility and the deposit are waived as part of their Group II designation, they are also asking the City to waive costs associated event insurance.

FINANCIAL IMPACT SUMMARY BASED ON APPLICATION
Hourly Rental of Mission Blue
Center
Approximately 17 hours @
$371/hour = $6,307
(including set up/clean up)
Waived per City policy for Nonprofit use
Mission Blue Rental Deposit $500
(Typically refundable absent damages)
Waived per City policy for Nonprofit use
Indoor Event Insurance
Approximately $100-$250/event.
(Renters are typically required to
procure insurance on their own and
provide a copy to the city.)
Requesting requirement be
waived
Promotional and Marketing
Support Waived
Attachments

1. Cosponsorship application
_Jeff Franco_________
Jeff Franco, Recreation Coordinator
___________________________________ ___________________________________ Noreen Leek, Parks & Recreation Director Jeremy Dennis, City Manager 32 J.
33 J.
34 J.

File Attachments for Item:

K. Authorize the Police Department to Enter into a Data Sharing Memorandum of Understanding with the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office for a Data Aggregation Platform 35 MOU SMC Sheriff’s Office Page 1 of 2

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: December 5, 2024
From: Lisa Macias, Police Chief
Subject: Authorize the Police Department to enter into a Data Sharing Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office for a Data Aggregation Platform
COMMUNITY GOAL RESULTS:

Safe Community - Residents and visitors will experience a sense of safety RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that City Council approve the attached Memorandum of Understanding authorizing the Police Department to enter a data sharing MOU with the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office. This initiative is funded entirely by the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office, with no cost to the Police Department. This MOU fosters a unified approach to data sharing across all participating agencies.

BACKGROUND:

In 2023, the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office secured grant funding from the California Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC) Organized Retail Theft Grant. Part of these funds supported the development of a data aggregation platform designed to facilitate seamless information-sharing among San Mateo County law enforcement agencies to enhance bidirectional data collaboration.

The Police Department currently participates in a data-sharing MOU with other law enforcement agencies in San Mateo County via Sundridge Systems RIMS which is our records management system. RIMS serves as the records management system for every agency in San Mateo County, as well as the computer aided dispatch software for all agencies not contracted with Public Safety Communications. While RIMS enables data sharing, it requires users to search each agency’s data independently, leading to redundant work and limited efficiency.

Additionally, users may need to log into multiple platforms to retrieve necessary information.

The proposed software aggregation platform allows for centralized data access through a single, user-friendly application, streamlining data retrieval and improving operational efficiency. This platform is meant to enhance and simplify access to existing data, not replace existing records management software.

In January 2021, the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office initiated a proof-of-concept project with C3A1 to develop a consolidated data aggregation platform. The software consolidates data from four core record systems into a single, unified interface, enabling efficient cross-agency 36 K.

MOU SMC Sheriff’s Office Page 2 of 2
data viewing. Daly City Polce Department joined as a pilot agency, helping test the software’s ability to integrate data securely across multiple agencies. In September 2023, grant funding expanded the program to include additional agencies, including the Brisbane Police Department and all law enforcement agencies within San Mateo County.

This platform supports collaboration amongst participating agencies and significantly improves investigative efficiency by simplifying data access. The platform is hosted within a Criminal Justice Information Services (CJIOS) compliant secure government cloud environment managed by the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office. This software solution enhances public safety by efficiently integrating disparate data sources into a single, searchable platform for law enforcement personnel to derive investigative insights in near real time.

DISCUSSION:

The Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) outlines an agreement between County Law enforcement agencies for the purpose of securely sharing data in support of public safety efforts. The MOU establishes a standardized framework for collaboration and data exchange, specifically to enhance public safety using this centralized, A1-powered law enforcement system. Authorized personnel from each agency will have secure, regulated access to shared data for investigative purposes, adhering to federal and state security standards. Member agencies retain control over their data and can restrict access as needed. The agreement emphasizes data security, proper training for users, compliance with legal standards and respect for privacy rights. The MOU will be reviewed every three years, with an option to withdraw or amend. Data Sharing among law enforcement agencies is essential for creating a comprehensive view of criminal activity across jurisdictions. This can enable a faster response, and ultimately improve public safety.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no budgetary impact associated with this action.

ATTACHMENTS:
• Memorandum of Understanding
_____________________ ___________________________________ Lisa Macias, Police Chief Jeremy Dennis, City Manager
37 K.

DATA SHARING

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
This Memorandum of Understanding (hereinafter “MOU” or “Agreement”) is made and entered into this day of , 2024 by and between the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office (“SMCSO”) and the following entities:
• the Town of Atherton, a California municipal corporation on behalf of the Atherton Police Department (“Atherton”),
• the City of Belmont, a California municipal corporation on behalf of the Belmont Police Department (“Belmont”),
• the City of Brisbane, a California municipal corporation on behalf of the Brisbane Police Department (“Brisbane”),
• the Town of Broadmoor a California municipal corporation on behalf of the Broadmoor Police Department, (“Broadmoor”),
• the City of Burlingame a California municipal corporation on behalf of the Burlingame Police Department, (“Burlingame”),
• the City of Colma, a California municipal corporation on behalf of the Colma Police Department (“Colma”)
• the City of Daly City, a California municipal corporation on behalf of the Colma Police Department (“Daly City”),
• the City of East Palo Alto, a California municipal corporation on behalf of the East Palo Alto Police Department (“East Palo Alto”),
• the City of Foster City, a California municipal corporation on behalf of the Foster City Police Department (“Foster City”),
• the City of Menlo Park, a California municipal corporation on behalf of the Menlo Park Police Department (“Menlo Park”),
• the City of Pacifica, a California municipal corporation on behalf of the City of Pacifica Police Department (“Pacifica”),
• the City of Redwood City, a California municipal corporation on behalf of the Redwood City Police Department (“Redwood City”),
• the City of San Bruno, A California municipal corporation on behalf of the San Bruno Department (“San Bruno”),
• the City of San Mateo, a California municipal corporation on behalf of the San Mateo Police Department (“San Mateo”),
• and the City of South San Francisco, a California municipal corporation on behalf of the South San Francisco Police Department (“South San Francisco”).

SMCO, Atherton, Belmont, Brisbane, Broadmoor, Burlingame, Colma, Daly City, East Palo Alto, Foster City, Menlo Park, Pacifica, Redwood City, San Bruno. San Mateo, and South San Francisco may collectively be referred to as “Parties” and individually referred to as “Party”. 38 K.

RECITALS
WHEREAS, the Parties provide public safety services within their jurisdictions; and WHEREAS, the Parties have found it to be of mutual benefit to provide for the most efficient utilization of their resources and services in the application to public safety efforts within their jurisdictions; and
WHEREAS, the Parties are committed to cooperation and coordination in providing the highest level of safety services to the public, guided by the principle that cooperative efforts are in the public’s best interest; and
WHEREAS, the Parties support the sharing of information contained within its electronic data systems in furtherance of collaboration with other Criminal Justice Information Services (“CJIS”) Compliant public safety entities, through integrated systems of information technology that the Parties have developed, established, and/or licensed; and WHEREAS, the Parties recognize the need to protect each Party’s ownership and control over its shared information, to optimize the means through which shared information is accessed or analyzed, and to protect privacy and civil liberties in accordance with the law; and WHEREAS, the Parties further desire to share information contained within their electronic data systems under the conditions set forth in this MOU.

NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the covenants contained herein, the Parties hereby agree as follows:

AGREEMENT
I. PURPOSE
The purpose of this MOU is to provide a standardized approach and method of collection and sharing of information within their electronic data systems between the Parties and to facilitate bi-directional data collaboration among other CJIS Compliant public safety agencies in a manner that is consistent with the Parties’ obligations, rights and applicable laws and regulations, including the California Values Act.

II. DEFINITIONS AND OTHER TERMINOLOGY
Authorized Users: Personnel from the Member Agency that have the appropriate clearance and authority to utilize and access shared data as a function of their employment, in support of law enforcement or public safety investigatory activity.

Data: Electronic records, analyses, images, and other information associated with incidents, persons, or objects, originally created by Member Agency and existing in a Member Agency system or database.
39 K.

Contributed Data: Records originating from Member Agency that Member Agency has elected to share with other appropriate parties.

C3 AI Law Enforcement System: An integrated, AI-powered intelligence analysis software solution that enhances public safety by efficiently integrating disparate data sources into a single, searchable platform for law enforcement personnel to derive investigative insights in near real-time.

Data Repository: An enterprise data storage entity or entities into which data has been specifically partitioned for an analytical or reporting purpose.

Member Agency: The law enforcement or public safety organization whose appropriate authority has signed this Agreement and actively participates in bi-directional information sharing with other law enforcement or public safety entities through assistance from the SMCSO.

Shared Data: The aggregate pool of shared information from Member Agency and other contributing sources, made available via the SMCSO or facilitated by SMCSO-hosted technology systems, and/or efforts.

III. DATA ACCESS
A. Data contributed by each Party will be shared with all Parties that have entered into this MOU. The Parties agree not to facilitate information sharing between law enforcement entities that have not entered into agreements allowing such sharing.

B. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to require the Parties:

1. To disclose information owned and controlled by the Member Agency, if the Member Agency determines, in its sole discretion, it does not have the ability or authority to disclose;

2. To perform any act that it determines, is contrary to law or public policy;

3. To provide personnel, equipment, or services to the other party; or

4. To modify Data owned by another party or inhibit or restrict any other Party or Parties use of its own information technology system or systems.

IV. DATA SHARING AND SECURITY
A. Requirements
Each Member Agency and SMCSO has sole discretion to share the information it wishes to contribute and place restrictions on the recipient and/or audience to which contributed data may be shared. In gathering, sharing, and storing information, and in all other respects in performing 40 K.
acts related to this Agreement, the parties will comply with all applicable laws, rules, and regulations and agree to enforce and maintain security requirements for the information stored or shared in their respective data repositories as specified in the California Values Act, the Information Practices Act, the Public Records Act, California Attorney General’s Model Standards and Procedures for Maintaining Criminal Intelligence Files and Criminal Intelligence Operational Activities and 28 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 23.

B. Security Standards
Member Agency and SMCSO agree to enforce and maintain security for shared data in compliance with all applicable laws, including but not limited to the California Department of Justice’s California Law Enforcement Telecommunications System Policies, Practices, and Procedures (CLETS PPP), the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Criminal Justice Information System Security Policy (FBI CJIS Security Policy), the California Attorney General’s Model Standards and Procedures for Maintaining Criminal Intelligence Files and Criminal Intelligence Operational Activities and 28 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 23.

Member Agency and SMCSO shall store information, whether electronic or hardcopy, only in a manner that is compliant with all applicable physical security and cyber security requirements.

Data shall be retained, purged, and destroyed in accordance with all applicable standards, inclusive of each Party’s retention policy for their contributing data. Data exchange and user access shall be achieved using encryption, private networks, or other configurations that follow current best practices for information technology.

In compliance with the aforementioned CLETS PPP and FBI CJIS Security Policy, Member Agency grants authority to SMCSO the duties and responsibilities of CLETS security clearances, which includes state and federal level fingerprint-based background checks of all C3 AI employees who have unescorted physical or logical access to CLETS-related hardware, software or unencrypted criminal justice information (CJI) and maintenance of CLETS-related forms and records. Unless already known, Member Agency shall provide SMCSO the names of C3 AI employees who require unescorted physical or logical accessto CLETS-related hardware, software or unencrypted CJI and request fingerprinting services prior to granting unescorted physical or logical access. SMCO agrees to provide fingerprinting services within thirty (30) days of a request.

C. Approved Utilization
The Parties agree to use information residing in the shared data repositories, including but not limited to the C3 AI Law Enforcement platform, as a pointer system for investigative leads or guidance, and not as the sole source of probable cause for law enforcement actions. The Parties further agree that the information hosted in the data repository shall be used for law enforcement purposes only and that only law enforcement agency employees that have been subject to background screening will be allowed access to the system. Background screenings must be fingerprint based including checks of both the state and national criminal history repositories. If a felony conviction of any kind is found, access to the data repositories shall not be granted. 41 K.

D. Authorized Users
Each Party shall be responsible for training its users authorized to access information on the use and dissemination of information obtained from the C3 AI data repository system.

Specifically, users must have a clear understanding of the need to verify the reliability of information with the source agency that contributed the information, when using information for purpose such as obtaining search and arrest warrants, affidavits, subpoenas, etc. Parties must also fully train and credential accessing users regarding the proscriptions for using third party information. SMCSO and each Member Agency is responsible for management of its Authorized User accounts and the activities of its Authorized Users.

E. Contribution of Data into C3 AI Law Enforcement System:

Member Agency grants authority to SMCSO to provide contributed data into the C3 AI Law Enforcement system to optimize law enforcement sharing, search, reporting, or analytic capabilities. Additional connections will require further review or approval by SMCSO and Member Agency.

F. Additional Agencies:

Each Member Agency grants authority to the SMCSO to execute information sharing agreements with other California law enforcement agencies, and to expand, incorporate, and unify additional shared information from other California Law Enforcement agencies, except where explicitly denied by the Member Agency. SMCSO will notify Member Agency in advance of such changes for review and approval.

G. Sharing in Compliance with State and Federal Law
In gathering, sharing, and storing information, and in all other respects in performing acts related to this Agreement, the Parties will comply with all applicable laws, rules, and regulations, both those in existence at the time of execution of this MOU and those enacted subsequent to execution of this MOU, including but not limited to, to the extent applicable, the California Values Act (Government Code Section 7284 et seq.). SMCSO will, consistent with Government Code Section 7284.8(b) ensure that any database is consistent with the Attorney General’s guidance, audit criteria, and training recommendations which require that the databases are governed in a manner that limits the availability of information therein to the fullest extent practicable and consistent with federal and state law, to anyone or any entity for the purpose of immigration enforcement.

H. Ownership of Contributed Data
Member Agency remains the official custodian of its contributed data. Any request for information, including but not limited to inquiries under the California Public Records Act will be directed to the Member Agency that is the originator of the requested data. 42 K.

V. COSTS
A. Operating Costs
Unless otherwise provided herein or in a supplementary writing, each Party shall bear its own costs in relation to this MOU and continued participation in or access to the data contributed by each Party. All obligations of and expenditures by the Parties will be subject to their respective budgetary and fiscal processes and subject to availability of funds pursuant to all laws, regulations, and policies applicable thereto. The Parties expressly acknowledge that this MOU in no way implies that any funds have been or will be appropriate for such expenditures.

VI. TERM OF AGREEMENT
A. TERM
This MOU shall be effective as of the last signature date of all Parties and will remain in effect until and unless it is terminated. This MOU will be reviewed every three (3) years thereafter for updates and consistency with applicable statutes and policies.

B. WITHDRAWAL
Any Party may withdraw from this MOU upon ninety (90) days’ written notice to all other Parties. Upon withdrawal, the Party’s access to data, and contributed data, shall also be terminated.

All rights, obligations, responsibilities, limitations, and other understandings with respect to the disclosure and use of all information received during a Party’s participation in this MOU shall survive any withdrawal.

In the event one Party withdraws their participation from this MOU, this MOU shall survive and continue to be fully effective and binding on the remaining signatories.

VII. TERMINATION
This MOU will terminate automatically if two (2) or more Parties have withdrawn their participation from this MOU.

Upon termination of this MOU, each Party’s access to data, and contributed data, shall also be terminated. All rights, obligations, responsibilities, limitations, and other understandings with respect to the disclosure and use of all information received during each Party’s participation in this MOU shall survive any termination.

VIII. INDEMNIFICATION
Notwithstanding the provisions of Government Code Section 895.2, each Party shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless other Parties (as well as their officers, agents, employees and representatives) from any and all losses, liability, damages, claims,suits actions and administrative proceedings resulting from the indemnifying Party’s own acts or omissions (including those of its officers, agents, employees or representatives) arising out of or incidental to the performance of any of the provisions of this MOU. Parties do not assume liability for the acts or omissions of persons other than their respective officers, its employees, agents, and 43 K.
officers. The Member Agency hereby executes this MOU as of the date of execution by the individual below possessing the authority to sign on behalf of Member Agency:

IX. SIGNATORIES NOT AGENTS
Parties of this MOU shall have no authority, express or implied, to act on behalf of another Party’s signatory in any capacity whatsoever as an agent. The Parties shall have no authority, express or implied, pursuant to this MOU to bind each other to any obligation.

X. ASSIGNMENTS
Parties to this MOU may not assign any right or obligation pursuant to this MOU. Any attempted or purported assignment of any right or obligation pursuant to this MOU shall be void and of no effect.

XI. AMENDMENTS
This MOU may be amended by a written document signed by all Parties.

XII. SEVERABILITY
If any provision of this MOU is found by any court or other legal authority, or is agreed upon by the Parties, to be in conflict with any law or regulation, then the conflicting provision shall be considered null and void. If the effect of nullifying any conflicting provision is such that a material benefit of this MOU to a Party is lost, then the MOU may be terminated at the option of the affected Party, with the notice required in Section VIII. In all other cases, the remainder of this MOU shall be severable and shall continue in full force and effect.

XIII. NO THIRD-PARTY BENEFICIARIES
This MOU is intended solely for the benefit of the Parties to this MOU. Any benefit to any third party is incidental and does not confer on any third party to this MOU any rights whatsoever regarding the performance of this MOU. Any attempt to enforce provisions of this MOU by third parties is specifically prohibited.

XIV. WAIVER
A waiver by a Party of a breach of any of the covenants to be performed by another Party shall not be contrasted as a waiver of any succeeding breach of the same or other covenants, agreements, restrictions, or conditions of this MOU. In addition, the failure of any Party to insist upon strict compliance with any provision of this MOU shall not be considered a waiver of any right to do so, whether for that breach or any subsequent breach. The acceptance by a Party of either performance or paymentshall not be considered a waiver of the performing or paying Party’s preceding breach of this MOU.
44 K.

XV. AUTHORITY OF SIGNATORY TO BIND ENTITY
By signing below, each signatory warrants and represents that he/she/they executed this MOU in his/her/their authorized capacity and has legal authority or has received such authority from the Party, to bind the Party. This MOU may be executed in counterparts.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this MOU by the signatures of the fully authorized representative of each Party.

Signed:

Name:

Title:

Agency:

Signed:

Name:

Title:

Agency:

Signed:

Name:

Title:

Agency:

Signed:

Name:

Title:

Agency:

Signed:

Name:

Title:

Agency:

Signed:

Name:

Title:

Agency:

Signed:

Name:

Title:

Agency:

Signed:

Name:

Title:

Agency:

Signed:

Name:

Title:

Agency:

Signed:

Name:

Title:

Agency:

Signed:

Name:

Title:

Agency:

Signed:

Name:

Title:

Agency:

Signed:

Name:

Title:

Agency:

Signed:

Name:

Title:

Agency:
45 K.

Signed:

Name:

Title:

Agency:

Signed:

Name:

Title:

Agency:

Signed:

Name:

Title:

Agency:

Signed:

Name:

Title:

Agency:

Signed:

Name:

Title:

Agency:

Signed:

Name:

Title:

Agency:

Signed:

Name:

Title:

Agency:
46 K.

File Attachments for Item:

L. Adopt an Ordinance, Waiving a Second Reading, Approving a Zoning Text and Map Amendment 2024-RZ-1, Overlay to R-1 Residential District in its entirety and a portion of the RBA Brisbane Acres Residential District (It is being recommended to adopt an ordinance approving a zoning text and map amendment 2024-RZ-1 amending regulations within Title 16 and 17 of the Brisbane Municipal Code to add the R-TUO residential two unit overlay district as new chapter 17.05 and related amendments; and finding that this project is exempt from environmental review under CEQA Guidelines Sections 15061(b)(1) & (3), Section 15183.)
47 2024-RZ-1 Adoption Page 1 of 1

CITY COUNCIL MEMO
Meeting Date: December 5, 2024
From: Ingrid Padilla, City Clerk
Subject: An Ordinance of the City Of Brisbane Amending
Brisbane Municipal Code Titles 16 And 17 – to Add Chapter 17.05 Residential Overlay to Provide For Urban Lot Splits and Two-Unit Developments In Single Family Residential Zones and to Amend Section 17.02.235 to Add a Definition For “Primary Dwelling Unit” Or “Main Dwelling” and to Modify Sections

17.02.120 and 17.02.220 Defining Carports and Driveways and to Amend The Zoning Map to Add the R-Tuo Residential Two Unit Overlay District The Ordinance listed above was introduced at the City Council Meeting of October 17, 2024. It is on this agenda for consideration of adoption with the revised ordinance and zoning map for the 2024-RZ-1 Zoning Amendment.

Attachment:

1. Revised Ordinance

2. Revised Zoning Map for the 2024-RZ-1 Zoning Amendment

3. Staff Report from the City Council Meeting of October 17, 2024
48 L.

DRAFT ORDINANCE NO.___

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BRISBANE
AMENDING BRISBANE MUNICIPAL CODE TITLES 16 AND 17 – TO ADD CHAPTER 17.05 RESIDENTIAL

OVERLAY TO PROVIDE FOR URBAN LOT SPLITS AND TWO-UNIT DEVELOPMENTS IN SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONES AND TO AMEND SECTION 17.02.235 TO ADD A DEFINITION FOR “PRIMARY DWELLING UNIT” OR “MAIN DWELLING” AND TO MODIFY SECTIONS 17.02.120 AND 17.02.220

DEFINING CARPORTS AND DRIVEWAYS AND TO AMEND THE ZONING MAP TO ADD THE R-TUO

RESIDENTIAL TWO UNIT OVERLAY DISTRICT
Now, the City Council of the City of Brisbane hereby ordains as follows:

SECTION 1. Section 16.12.040 - Tentative and final parcel map—Exceptions to requirements is amended as follows:

16.12.040 - Tentative and final parcel map- Exceptions to requirements A tentative parcel map and final parcel map shall not be required in the following cases:

A. Where the subdivision is created by a short-term lease, terminable by either party on not more than thirty (30) days' written notice, of a portion of the operating right-of-way of a railroad corporation, as defined by Section 230 of the Public Utilities Code;
B. Where land is conveyed to or from a government agency, public entity or public utility, or to a subsidiary of a public utility for rights-of-way, unless a showing is made in individual cases that public policy necessitates a parcel map.

C. Where an urban lot split is proposed, see Chapter 17.05 of Title 17 of this Municipal Code. *****
SECTION 4. Section 17.02.120 - Carport is amended, as follows:

17.02.120 - Carport. "Carport" means an accessory structure or a portion of a main structure designed for the storage of motor vehicles having a roof or other solid covering and enclosed on no more than two (2) sides.
*****
SECTION 5. Section 17.02.220 - Driveway is amended, as follows:

17.02.220 - Driveway. "Driveway" means a private roadway which provides access to off-street parking or loading spaces, and the use of which is limited to persons residing on the site, their invitees, or persons working on the site. A driveway may be shared, to serve two or more lots, by access easement across one or more of the affected lots. This does not include private streets as defined in Section

17.02.750.
*****
SECTION 2: Section 17.02.230 - Duplex is hereby deleted in its entirety.

Attachment 1
49 L.
*****
SECTION 3. Section 17.02.235 - Dwelling is amended to add a definition for “Duplex dwelling” and “Primary dwelling unit” or “Main Dwelling”, as follows:

17.02.235 - Dwelling.
"Dwelling" means a place that is used as the personal residence of the occupants thereof, including transitional housing as defined in California Health and Safety Code Section 50675.2(h) and supportive housing as defined in California Health and Safety Code Sections 50675.14(b)(2) and (3). The term includes factory-built or manufactured housing, such as mobile homes, but excludes trailers, campers, tents, recreational vehicles, hotels, motels, boarding houses and temporary structures.

A. "Duplex dwelling" means a building containing two dwelling units totally separated from each other by a wall, floor or ceiling; provided, however, that a building containing a single-family dwelling and a lawful accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit shall not be deemed a duplex.

B. "Dwelling group" means a group of two (2) or more detached buildings located upon the same site, each of which contains one or more dwelling units.

C. "Dwelling unit" means a room or group of rooms including living, sleeping, eating, cooking and sanitation facilities, constituting a separate and independent housekeeping unit, designed, occupied, or intended for occupancy by one family on a permanent basis. Permanent residency shall mean continuous occupancy of the dwelling unit for a period of thirty (30) days or more.

D. "Multiple-family dwelling" means a building or site containing three (3) or more dwelling units (also see "duplex"). The term includes single-room-occupancy dwelling units, typically comprised of one or two (2) rooms (which may include a kitchen and/or a bathroom, in addition to a bed), that are restricted to occupancy by no more than two (2) persons.

E. "Accessory dwelling unit" means a separate dwelling unit created upon a site that contains a single-family dwelling, duplex, or multiple-family dwelling. Subject to the restrictions of this title, the accessory dwelling unit may be within, attached to, or detached from the single-family dwelling, duplex, or multiple-family dwelling. An accessory dwelling unit shall include permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and sanitation. The term "secondary dwelling unit" shall have the same meaning throughout this title.

F. "Junior accessory dwelling unit" means a dwelling unit that is no more than five hundred (500) square feet in size and contained entirely within a single-family dwelling. A junior accessory dwelling unit may include separate sanitation facilities, or may share sanitation facilities with the single-family dwelling. Junior accessory dwelling units are distinguished from accessory dwelling units in that they: (1) must include the conversion of existing, legally permitted floor area within an existing single-family dwelling; (2) must be owner occupied, or the main dwelling be owner occupied; and (3) are subject to unique standards that are not applicable to accessory dwelling units, as specified in Chapter 17.43 of this Title.

G. “Primary dwelling unit” or “Main Dwelling” means a dwelling unit that is not an accessory dwelling unit or a junior accessory dwelling unit.

H. "Single-family dwelling" means a dwelling unit constituting the only principal structure upon a single site (excluding any lawfully established accessory dwelling unit that may be located within 50 L.
the same structure on upon the same site). The term includes employee housing for six (6) or fewer persons, residential care facilities, licensed by the state to provide twenty-four-hour nonmedical care, serving six (6) or fewer persons (not including the operator, the operator's family or persons employed as staff) in need of supervision, personal services, or assistance essential for sustaining the activities of daily living or for the protection of the individual. Also see "Group care home" for seven (7) or more persons.
*****
SECTION 6. Section 17.04.010 - Establishment of Districts is amended to add the “R-TUO Residential two unit overlay district” as follows:

The districts into which the city is divided are hereby established and designated as follows:

A. R-1 Residential district.

B. R-2 Residential district.

C. R-3 Residential district.

D. R-BA: Brisbane acres residential district.

E. R-TUO Residential two unit overlay district.

F. C-1: Commercial mixed use district.

G. NCRO: Central Brisbane commercial district.

H. HC: Beatty heavy commercial district.

I. SCRO-1: Southwest Bayshore commercial district.

J. SP-CRO: Sierra Point commercial district.

K. TC-1: Crocker Park trade commercial district.

L. TC-2: Southeast Bayshore trade commercial district.

M. MLB: Marsh Lagoon Bayfront district.

N. O-S: Open space district.

O. P-D: Planned development district.

P. PAOZ: Parkside overlay district.

Q. R-MHP: Residential mobile home park district.
*****
Section 7. Chapter 17.05 Residential Two Unit Overlay District is added to Title 17 as follows:

17.05 Residential Two Unit Development Overlay District.

17.05.010 Purpose. The purpose of this Chapter is to allow no more than two detached or attached primary dwelling units on one lot of record, establish objective standards for the District, and regulate certain subdivisions of a lot of record in single-family zoning districts, in accordance with State law. This Chapter shall be implemented and interpreted in conjunction with California Government Code Sections 65852.21 and 66411.7, as may be amended, and applicable objective standards and procedures set forth in Chapters 17.06, 17.12, 17.43, 16.12, 16.16, and 16.20 of the Brisbane Municipal Code. 51 L.

17.05.020 Applicability and Relation to Other Sections. This Chapter is provided as an overlay district to the R-1 and portions of the R-BA residential districts as noted below, to comply with State law, and to carry out the purpose of Section 17.05.010, and, unless specifically addressed within this Chapter, the R1 and R-BA district standards shall apply, as applicable. The provisions of this chapter do not apply to those areas of the R-BA district that have been obtained by the City, or other public agency or trust, for the purposes of protecting endangered species habitat or providing open space for the continuation of such species. Such areas are excluded from the mapped overlay R-TUO district. For the purposes of this ordinance, references to the R-BA district shall include only the area included in the mapped R-TUO district.

This Chapter also allows for ministerial approval of urban lot splits in conjunction with Chapter 16.16 and 16.20 of this Code.

This chapter shall not supersede the provisions of Section 17.01.060 - Requirement For Lot of Record and Infrastructure Improvements-- but applications shall be considered in concert with the provisions of that Section.

This chapter may be applied to a substandard lot, as further described in Section 17.47.030- Exceptions – Lot Area, Lot Dimensions and Lot Lines, if the substandard lot is a lot of record, as defined in Section

17.02.490.

17.05.030 Definitions
For the purposes of this Chapter, the following definitions apply. Terms not defined herein shall be based upon the definitions in Chapter 17.02.

A. “Access Corridor” means an access easement or the “pole” of a flag lot that provides vehicular access to the public right-of-way, that is free of features that obstruct ingress/egress to a lot.

B. “Acting in Concert” means the property owner, or a person as an agent or representative of the property owner, knowingly participating with another person in joint activity or parallel action toward a common goal of subdividing an adjacent parcel.

C. “Car Share Facility” means one or more parking space(s) that have been designated permanently for car share vehicles, where the vehicles are leased for short periods of time, often by the hour.

D. “Department” means the Community Development Department.

E. “Existing Exterior Structural Wall” means and constitutes the original bottom plate and original top plate in its existing position, original studs (with the exception for new window framing), and capable of standing without support
F. “Flag or Panhandle Lot” means a parcel which includes a strip of land that is owned in fee that is used primarily for vehicular access from a public or private street to the major portion of the parcel.

G. “High Quality Transit Corridor” means a corridor with fixed bus route service with service intervals no longer than 15 minutes during peak commute hours, or as defined in State law.

H. “Major Transit Stop” means a site containing any of the following: (i) an existing rail or bus rapid transit station; (ii) a ferry terminal served by either a bus or rail transit service; or (iii) the intersection of two or more major bus routes with a frequency of service intervals of 15 minutes or less during the morning and afternoon peak commute periods, or as defined in state law. 52 L.

I. “Primary Dwelling Unit” or “Primary Unit” means the same as defined in section 17.02.235.G.

J. “Specific, adverse impact” means a significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable impact, based on objective, identified written public health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as they existed on the date an application was deemed complete.

K. “Two-unit Development” means a proposed housing development that contains two primary dwelling units on a single lot.

L. “Urban Lot Split” means a subdivision of an existing lot of record in a single-family zoning district into no more than two separate legal lots, which subdivision satisfies all of the criteria and standards set forth in this Chapter and Government Code Section 66411.7.

17.05.040 Eligibility.

A. To be eligible for a two-unit development or urban lot split as specified in this Chapter, the application shall meet all of the following criteria:

1. The lot is a lot of record and is located within the R-1 Residential zoning district or the R-BA Brisbane Acres Residential zoning district.

2. The owner(s) of the lot has not exercised the owner’s rights under Government Code Chapter 12.75 (commencing with Section 7060) of Division 7 of Title 1 to withdraw accommodations from rent or lease within 15 years before the date that the application has been submitted.

3. The lot is not within a historic district or property included on the State Historic Resources Inventory, as defined in Section 5020.1 of the Public Resources Code, or within a site that is designated or listed as a city or county landmark or historic property or district pursuant to a city or county ordinance.

4. The lot does not contain any of the site conditions listed in Government Code section 65913.4, subdivision (a)(6)(B-K), or successor provisions or as amended, which includes, but is not limited to, lands within wetlands, a very high fire hazard severity zone, a special flood hazard area subject to inundation by the 1 percent annual chance flood (100-year flood), habitat for protected species, and lands under a conservation easement.

5. The lot has not previously been subdivided under this Chapter, or under Government Code section 66411.7.

6. For urban lot splits, Prior to a lot split being recorded, the property owner(s) shall sign an affidavit stating that the owner, or a member or members of the owner’s immediate family, intends to occupy one of the dwelling units as the person’s principal residence for a minimum of three years. This requirement shall not apply to an applicant that is a “community land trust,” as defined in clause (ii) of subparagraph (C) of paragraph (11) of subdivision (a) of Section 402.1 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, or is a “qualified nonprofit corporation” as described in Section 214.15 of the Revenue and Taxation Code.

17.05.050 Anti-displacement/Eligibility Criteria.

A. Development under this Chapter shall not result in displacement of tenants from:

1. A lot that is subject to a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that restricts rents to levels affordable to persons and families of moderate, low, or very low income.

2. A lot that is subject to any form of rent or price control through the City’s valid exercise of its police power.
53 L.

B. Development under this Chapter shall not result in:

1. Demolition or alteration as defined in Section 15.10.040.A or B of a dwelling unit that has been occupied by a tenant in the last three years.

2. Demolition of a building, or alteration as defined in Section 15.10.040.A or B, when the building is occupied by a tenant.

17.05.060 Permitted Uses. The following uses, defined in Chapter 17.02 - Definitions, are permitted in this overlay zoning district in accordance with the development standards and are added to the permitted uses provided in Chapters 17.06 - R-1 Residential District and 17.12 - R-BA Brisbane Acres Residential District of this title:

A. Duplex dwellings.

B. Dwelling groups of two primary dwelling units per lot.

17.05.070 Two Unit Developments without an Urban Lot Split. A Two Unit Development on a lot of record that has not been split under the urban lot split provisions of this Chapter shall comply with the development standards provided in this section.

A. Development Standards. Where not expressly stated, the R-1 and R-BA zoning district development standards, set forth in Chapters 17.06 and 17.12, and ADU and JADU development standards set forth in Chapter 17.43, shall apply. For urban lot split development standards see Section 17.05.080.C.

1. Number of dwelling units. Development of up to four dwelling units may be built in the same lot area typically used for a single-family residence, without an urban lot split, as follows:

Development
Scenario Options
on a Single Lot
without Urban
Lot Split
Single Family
Dwelling
Duplex
Dwelling
(two
attached
primary
units”)
Two-unit
Dwelling
Group
(two
detached
primary
units”)
ADU JADU Total
Dwelling
Units
Type A. NA 2 2
Type B. NA 2 2
Type C. NA 2 1 3
Type D. NA 2 1 3
Type E. NA 2 2 4
Type F. NA 2 2 4
Type G. NA 2 1 1 4
Notes:

1. NA: Not applicable. Development of a single-family dwelling on a lot of record may be permitted per the zoning district standards, provided in Chapter 17.06 and 17.12, without invoking the two unit overlay provisions.

2. See Chapter 17.43 for applicable development regulations for ADU’s or JADU’s..

3. Four units are the maximum that may be permitted on a lot.

4. If Types A through D are initially developed, one or two ADUs may later be added up to the maximum allowed, Types E or F, subject to the provisions of this Chapter.

2. Primary Dwelling Unit Size. Each of the primary dwelling units shall be permitted to be at least 800 square feet in floor area, regardless of the zoning district’s lot coverage and floor area 54 L.
ratio (FAR) limits. For primary dwelling units over 800 square feet, the zoning district floor area standards shall apply; provided, however, this shall not preclude the option to construct smaller primary dwelling units in compliance with the state building code. The minimum floor area for each unit shall be as permitted by the state building code.

3. Lot coverage. The R-1 or R-BA district lot coverage limit shall apply except where it would preclude development of new primary units of 800 square feet, or retention of the lot coverage of an existing primary unit or addition of accessory dwelling unit, in compliance with the provisions of this Chapter and Chapter 17.43 of this Title.

4. Side and Rear Setbacks. Minimum side and rear setbacks for the primary dwelling units shall be 4 feet, except for the following:
(a) Where the underlying district development standards allow for a lesser setback, the district standards shall apply.
(b) No setback shall be required for an existing legal non-conforming structure, or a replacement structure constructed in the same location and to the same dimensions as an existing legal non-conforming structure.

5. Height of Primary Dwelling Units.
(a) Where a primary dwelling unit utilizes the 4-foot side or rear setback allowance, for a reduced setback versus the district’s setback, no portion of the building that is located in the area between the 4-foot setback and the district’s setback minimum shall exceed 25 feet in height.
(b) The maximum height of any primary dwelling unit on a ridgeline lot within the R-BA district, as defined in Section 17.02.695, shall be 25 feet, except for (i) an existing legal non-conforming structure, (ii) a replacement structure constructed in the same location and to the same dimensions as an existing legal non-conforming structure, or(iii) as approved by design review permit per Section 17.12.040.L.

6. Off-Street Parking.
(a) A minimum of one standard size, off-street parking space (uncovered or carport) for each primary dwelling unit shall be required (refer to Chapter 17.34 for parking space design standards). Garage parking space(s) shall not count towards meeting the minimum parking requirements.
(b) Shared driveways may be permitted to serve more than one dwelling unit, subject to approval by the City Engineer, based on finding that a shared driveway will not pose a hazard to public safety. See the definition of driveway in Section 17.02.220 of this title. (c) Notwithstanding the parking requirements indicated above, no off-street parking shall be required if:
(i) The lot is located within one-half mile walking distance of either a transit stop located in a high-quality transit corridor, as defined in Public Resources Code Section 21155(b), or a major transit stop, as defined in Public Resources Code Section 21064.3; or 55 L.
(ii) There is a designated parking area for one or more car-share facilities within one block of the lot.

17.05.080 Urban Lot Splits. The City may approve a parcel map for an urban lot split ministerially, subject to the procedures, requirements and development standards provided in this section.

A. Ministerial Parcel Map Procedures. The parcel map shall be prepared following the tentative map form and procedures provided in Chapter 16.16 - Tentative Map Procedures and Chapter 16.20- Final Map Procedures, except that the parcel map shall be approved by the City Engineer. The City Engineer shall have authority to waive specific requirements provided in Chapter 16.16 and Chapter 16.20, if the City Engineer deems the requirements inapplicable, given the site location or other characteristics.

B. Ministerial Parcel Map Requirements. A parcel map for an urban lot split shall meet the requirements of Chapter 16.16 and 16.20 of the Municipal Code, as deemed applicable by the City Engineer, and all of the following requirements:

1. The parcel map subdivides an existing lot of record to create no more than two legal lots of record of approximately equal lot area provided that one lot shall not be smaller than 40 percent of the lot area of the original lot of record proposed for subdivision.

2. Both newly created lots of record shall be no smaller than 1,200 square feet.

3. The zoning district lot width and depth dimension minimums shall not apply.

4. Flag lots may be approved. The flagpole portion, whether part of the flag lot or an easement on the flag lot, shall have a minimum width of 12 feet to accommodate a driveway, unless a lesser width is approved by the City Engineer. The location and dimensions of driveways are subject to approval by the City Engineer as set forth in Section 12.24.015.

5. Both parcels resulting from the urban lot split shall have access to, provide access to, or adjoin the public right-of-way through right-of-way frontage or recorded access easements.

6. The approved parcel map shall include a notation that the parcels were created using the Urban Lot Split provisions of this Chapter and the resulting parcels cannot be further subdivided under this Chapter.

7. The urban lot split conforms to all applicable objective requirements of the Subdivision Map Act, except as otherwise expressly provided in this Chapter.

8. The parcel being subdivided was not established through prior exercise of an urban lot split as provided for in this Chapter.

9. Neither the property owner of the parcel being subdivided nor any person acting in concert with the property owner has previously subdivided an adjacent parcel using an urban lot split as provided for in this Chapter.

C. Development Standards for Urban Lot Splits. Development on lots that have been split under this Chapter shall comply with the development standards provided in this section. Where not expressly stated, the R-1 and R-BA zoning district development standards, set forth in Chapters 17.06 and 17.12, and ADU and JADU development standards set forth in Chapter 17.43, shall apply.

1. Number of dwelling units. With an urban lot split, development of no more than four dwelling units may be built in the same lot area that would otherwise be used for a single-family residence, as shown in Tables a and b provided below. Note that Tables a and b are to be used together to detail possible development scenarios following an urban lot split. Table a provides various development scenarios that are possible on a single lot, following a lot split, as Types A through I. Table b shows how the scenario types may then be combined for the two resultant 56 L.
lots. For example, if one resultant lot is developed with three units (Types F, G, H or I), the second resultant lot may only be developed with a single family dwelling (Type A), for a maximum of four units on the two resultant lots.
a. Number and Types of Units- With Urban Lot Split
Development
Scenario Options
for Each
Resultant Lot
Following Split
Single
Family
Residence
Duplex Two-unit
Dwelling
Group
ADU JADU(2) Total
Units per
lot
Type A 1 1
Type B 1 1 2
Type C 1 1 2
Type D 2 2
Type E 2 2
Type F 1 1 1 3
Type G 2 1 3
Type H 2 1 3
Type I 2 1 3
Notes:

1. Urban lot splits may utilize a combination of buildout types A – H, provided that all of the following conditions are met: a) the total number of units does not exceed four across the two lots, b) each of the two lots is to be developed with at least one primary dwelling unit, and c) development of ADUs and JADUs shall comply with Chapter 17.43.

2. JADU’s are not permitted as a part of building that contains 2 or more units (i.e. duplex). b. Lot Split - Resulting Lot Buildout Scenarios. The following table shows the total units that may be achieved by applying the development scenario options from Table 17.05.080.C.1.a to the two resultant lots.

RESULTANT LOT 1 (Housing Unit Totals)

RESULTANT
LOT 2
(Housing
Unit Totals)
Buildout
Type
(units)
Type A
(1)
Type
B
(2)
Type
C
(2)
Type
D
(2)
Type
E
(2)
Type F
(3)
Type G
(3)
Type H
(3)
Type
I
(3)
Type A (1) 2 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4
Type B (2) 3 4 4 4 4 NP NP NP NP
Type C (2) 3 4 4 4 4 NP NP NP NP
Type D (2) 3 4 4 4 4 NP NP NP NP
Type E (2) 3 4 4 4 4 NP NP NP NP
Type F (3) 4 NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP
Type G (3) 4 NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP
Type H (3) 4 NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP
Type I (3) 4 NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP
Note: NP: Not Permitted for the buildout scenario. Buildout scenario may not exceed four units. 57 L.

2. Primary Dwelling Unit Size. Each of the primary dwelling units shall be permitted to be at least 800 square feet in floor area, regardless of the zoning district’s lot coverage and floor area ratio (FAR) limits. For primary dwelling units over 800 square feet, the zoning district floor area standards shall apply; provided, however, this shall not preclude the option to construct smaller primary dwelling units in compliance with the state building code. The minimum floor area for each unit shall be as permitted by the state building code.

3. Lot coverage. The zoning district’s lot coverage limit shall not apply where it would preclude development of new primary units of at least 800 square feet, retention of the lot coverage of an existing primary unit or addition of accessory dwelling unit, in compliance with the provisions of this Chapter and Chapter 17.43 of this Title.

4. Side and Rear Setbacks. Minimum side and rear setbacks for the primary dwelling units shall be four feet, except for the following:
(a) Where the underlying zoning district development standards allow for a lesser setback, the district standards shall prevail.
(b) No setback shall be required for an existing legal non-conforming structure, or a replacement structure constructed in the same location and to the same dimensions as an existing legal non-conforming structure.

5. Height of Primary Units.
(a) Where a primary dwelling unit utilizes the 4-foot side or rear setback allowance, for a reduced setback versus the district’s setback, no portion of the building that is located in the area between the four 4-foot setback and the district’s setback minimum shall exceed 25 feet in height.
(b) The maximum height of any primary dwelling unit on a ridgeline lot within the R-BA district, as defined in Section 17.02.695, shall be 25 feet, except for (i) an existing legal non-conforming structure, (ii) a replacement structure constructed in the same location and to the same dimensions as an existing legal non-conforming structure, or(iii) as approved by design permit per Section 17.12.040.L.

6. Off-Street Parking.
(a) A minimum of one standard size, off-street parking space (uncovered or carport) for each primary dwelling unit shall be required (refer to Chapter 17.34 for parking space design standards). Garage parking space(s) shall not count towards meeting the minimum parking requirements.
(b) Shared driveways may be permitted to serve more than one lot, subject to approval by the City Engineer, based on finding that the driveway will not pose a hazard to public safety. See the definition of driveway in Section 17.02.220 of this title. (c) Notwithstanding the parking requirements indicated above, no off-street parking shall be required if:
58 L.
(iii) The lot is located within one-half mile walking distance of either a transit stop located in a high-quality transit corridor, as defined in Public Resources Code Section 21155(b), or a major transit stop, as defined in Public Resources Code Section 21064.3; or (iv) There is a designated parking area for one or more car-share facilities within one block of the parcel.

7. Deed Restriction. A property owner utilizing the provisions of this Chapter shall record a deed restriction, in a form acceptable to the City, that does the following:
(a) Where applicable, documents that the lot split complies with the provisions of this Chapter and restrictions provided in Government Code section 66411.7. (b) Expressly prohibits any rental of any dwelling unit on the property or properties for a term of 30 days or less.

17.05.090 Requirement for a Building Permit
Demolition, alteration or construction of any building shall require building permit(s). All construction shall be in conformance with the most recent edition of the California Model Codes with any applicable Brisbane amendments.

17.05.100 Notices
Upon issuance of a building permit for a two unit development under Section 17.05.070 or a building permit following an urban lot split under Section 17.05.080, the City shall provide an informational notice to the property owners adjacent to and directly across the street from the subject site(s). The notice shall provide a brief description of the project and information on how to view approved plans.

17.05.110 Condominiums
Condominiums may be established for primary dwelling units in accordance with Chapter 17.30 - Condominiums. Establishment of condominiums shall be subject to ministerial approval by the Community Development Director, based on conformance with the applicable provisions of this chapter and Chapter 17.30.

17.05.120 Findings of Denial. The City may deny a two-unit housing development or urban lot split, based upon a preponderance of the evidence, that the proposed housing development would have a specific, adverse impact, as defined in Section 17.05.030.J. *****
SECTION 8: 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 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, 59 L.
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 9: This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty days after its passage and adoption.
_____________________________
Terry O’Connell, Mayor
* * *
The above and foregoing Ordinance was adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Brisbane held on the _________ day of ________________, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
_____________________________
Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________ _____________________________ City Clerk City Attorney
60 L.

T C- 2
T C- 1

S P- C R O
S C RO- 1
R- B A
R - 3
R- 2
R- 1
R- 1
P D
P D
O-S
O- S
O- S
NCRO-2
MLB
M L B
M- 1
H C

C / P- U
C- 1

R - T U O
T C- 2
S C R O- 1
R- B A
R- 1
O- S
Airbus,USGS,NGA,NASA,CGIAR,NCEAS,NLS,OS,NMA,Geodatastyrelsen,GSA,GSI and the GIS User Community C-1
C/P-U
HC
M-1
MLB
NCRO-1
NCRO-2
O-S
PAOZ-1
PAOZ-2
PD
R-1
R-2
R-3
R-BA
R-MHP
SCRO-1
SP-CRO
TC-1
TC-2
City Owned Parcels
P r o p o s e d R - T U O
Z o n i n g M a p w i t h P r o p o s e d R - T U O D i s t r i c t 10/23/2024
U p p e r A c r e s D e t a i l M a p
P r o p o s e d R - T U O
Z o n i n g D i s t r i c t
61 L.

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: October 17, 2024
From: John Swiecki, Community Development Director

SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT
This matter has been continued from the City Council meetings of June 6, July 18 and September 5, 2024. City Council continued the matter from September 5 for staff to address the questions of timing on noticing as provided in the draft ordinance, along with several Brisbane Acres (RBA) related issues which are unrelated to the draft ordinance. These RBA issues have been moved to a separate discussion item on tonight’s agenda so they can be considered independently of 2024-RZ-1. The September 5 City Council draft meeting minutes and report are attached for reference (Attachments 2 and 3), which includes weblinks to the previous reports.

RECOMMENDATION
Introduce the ordinance amending the zoning text and zoning map to establish the R-TUO Residential Two Unit Overlay district and related code amendments. The draft ordinance, text and map, are provided as Attachment 1.

DISCUSSION
As noted above, at the September 5 meeting it was suggested that notice to neighboring property owners be provided earlier in the process for SB 9 projects. The procedures for notices to neighboring property owners of SB 9 projects are provided in Section

17.05.100 - Noticing of the draft ordinance (see Attachment 1). The recommended procedures include a provision for the City to provide a courtesy notice to the property owners located adjacent and directly across the street from an SB 9 project upon approval of a building permit for either a two unit development or and unit constructed pursuant to an urban lot split. Since state law requires that SB 9 applications are ministerial, a project that complies with the law does not require public notice or a hearing. As such, the notice was intended as a courtesy communication informing neighbors of forthcoming construction.

Subject: Zoning Map and Text Amendment 2024-RZ-1 – Zoning text and map amendment 2024-RZ-1 amending regulations within Title 16 and 17 of the Brisbane Municipal Code to add the R-TUO residential two unit overlay district as new chapter 17.05 and related amendments; and finding that this project is exempt from environmental review under CEQA Guidelines Sections 15061(b)(1) & (3), Section 15183; City of Brisbane, applicant.
62 L.

In evaluating the timing of the courtesy notice, City Legal Counsel notes the following:
“...Typically applications that are deemed ministerial, such as building permit applications, do not require notice of the City’s receipt or approval thereof to the public. A question has been raised whether such notice could be provided for SB 9 applications and, if so, at what point in the application process.

First, providing notice of SB applications to members of the public may prove frustrating because, even if there were concerns about the application, there is no discretionary review process for such applications and the public may perceive that, if an application is not revised, its comments are falling on deaf ears and its concerns not being addressed.

Second, if such notice is to be provided, when should it be sent out? It might be premature to send out such notice when the City first receives the application because it is usually the case that staff will need additional information from the applicant before the application is deemed complete. If notice were sent out upon the initial receipt the application, then would an additional notice not be required each time the application were revised? This would seem to be a burdensome obligation to place on staff.

Notice could be provided when the application was deemed complete but for what purpose since, as set forth above, review is ministerial. Similarly, notice could be provided when the application was approved but, again, what purpose would that serve other than letting the public know that some development activity on a particular site would likely occur in the future.

If notice is to be provided, it should be only one time and that would be when the application is first received. That would enable members of the public to be aware of the application, provide an opportunity to ask questions and/or voice concerns, but the obligation to monitor the progress of the application would be on the public. This strikes a fair balance.” While staff believes notification as recommended by the Planning Commission is appropriate, it is within the Council’s discretion to modify this provision as it sees fit. Given the ministerial nature of SB 9 applications, regardless of the timing, any notice will clearly specify the nature of the application and that the notice is for informational purposes only.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Draft Ordinance (text and map)

2. City Council September 5, 2024 Draft Minutes
63 L.

3. September 5, 2024 City Council Report (with links to other Council and Planning Commission Reports)
______________________________ ___________________________________ John Swiecki, Community Development Director Jeremy Dennis, City Manager 64 L.

ATTACHMENT 4
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO.___

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BRISBANE
AMENDING BRISBANE MUNICIPAL CODE TITLES 16 AND 17 – TO ADD CHAPTER 17.05 RESIDENTIAL

DEFINING CARPORTS AND DRIVEWAYS AND TO AMEND THE ZONING MAP TO ADD THE R-TUO

RESIDENTIAL TWO UNIT OVERLAY DISTRICT
Now, the City Council of the City of Brisbane hereby ordains as follows:

SECTION 1. Section 16.12.040 - Tentative and final parcel map—Exceptions to requirements is amended as follows:

16.12.040 - Tentative and final parcel map- Exceptions to requirements A tentative parcel map and final parcel map shall not be required in the following cases:

C. Where an urban lot split is proposed, see Chapter 17.05 of Title 17 of this Municipal Code. *****
SECTION 4. Section 17.02.120 - Carport is amended, as follows:

17.02.750.
*****
65 L.

SECTION 2: Section 17.02.230 - Duplex is hereby deleted in its entirety. *****
SECTION 3. Section 17.02.235 - Dwelling is amended to add a definition for “Duplex dwelling” and “Primary dwelling unit” or “Main Dwelling”, as follows:

B. "Dwelling group" means a group of two (2) or more detached buildings located upon the same site, each of which contains one or more dwelling units.

G. “Primary dwelling unit” or “Main Dwelling” means a dwelling unit that is not an accessory dwelling unit or a junior accessory dwelling unit.
66 L.

H. "Single-family dwelling" means a dwelling unit constituting the only principal structure upon a single site (excluding any lawfully established accessory dwelling unit that may be located within the same structure on upon the same site). The term includes employee housing for six (6) or fewer persons, residential care facilities, licensed by the state to provide twenty-four-hour nonmedical care, serving six (6) or fewer persons (not including the operator, the operator's family or persons employed as staff) in need of supervision, personal services, or assistance essential for sustaining the activities of daily living or for the protection of the individual. Also see "Group care home" for seven (7) or more persons.
*****
SECTION 6. Section 17.04.010 - Establishment of Districts is amended to add the “R-TUO Residential two unit overlay district” as follows:

The districts into which the city is divided are hereby established and designated as follows:

A. R-1 Residential district.

B. R-2 Residential district.

C. R-3 Residential district.

D. R-BA: Brisbane acres residential district.

E. R-TUO Residential two unit overlay district.

F. C-1: Commercial mixed use district.

G. NCRO: Central Brisbane commercial district.

H. HC: Beatty heavy commercial district.

I. SCRO-1: Southwest Bayshore commercial district.

J. SP-CRO: Sierra Point commercial district.

K. TC-1: Crocker Park trade commercial district.

L. TC-2: Southeast Bayshore trade commercial district.

M. MLB: Marsh Lagoon Bayfront district.

N. O-S: Open space district.

O. P-D: Planned development district.

P. PAOZ: Parkside overlay district.

Q. R-MHP: Residential mobile home park district.
*****
Section 7. Chapter 17.05 Residential Two Unit Overlay District is added to Title 17 as follows:

17.05 Residential Two Unit Development Overlay District.

17.05.020 Applicability and Relation to Other Sections. This Chapter is provided as an overlay district to the R-1 and R-BA residential districts, to comply with State law, and to carry out the purpose of Section 17.05.010, and, unless specifically addressed within this Chapter, the R-1 and R-BA district standards shall apply, as applicable. This Chapter also allows for ministerial approval of urban lot splits in conjunction with Chapter 16.16 and 16.20 of this Code.

17.02.490.

17.05.030 Definitions
For the purposes of this Chapter, the following definitions apply. Terms not defined herein shall be based upon the definitions in Chapter 17.02.

D. “Department” means the Community Development Department.

G. “High Quality Transit Corridor” means a corridor with fixed bus route service with service intervals no longer than 15 minutes during peak commute hours, or as defined in State law.

I. “Primary Dwelling Unit” or “Primary Unit” means the same as defined in section 17.02.235.G.

K. “Two-unit Development” means a proposed housing development that contains two primary dwelling units on a single lot.
68 L.

17.05.040 Eligibility.

A. To be eligible for a two-unit development or urban lot split as specified in this Chapter, the application shall meet all of the following criteria:

1. The lot is a lot of record and is located within the R-1 Residential zoning district or the R-BA Brisbane Acres Residential zoning district.

5. The lot has not previously been subdivided under this Chapter, or under Government Code section 66411.7.

17.05.050 Anti-displacement/Eligibility Criteria.

A. Development under this Chapter shall not result in displacement of tenants from:

1. A lot that is subject to a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that restricts rents to levels affordable to persons and families of moderate, low, or very low income.

2. A lot that is subject to any form of rent or price control through the City’s valid exercise of its police power.

B. Development under this Chapter shall not result in:

1. Demolition or alteration as defined in Section 15.10.040.A or B of a dwelling unit that has been occupied by a tenant in the last three years.

2. Demolition of a building, or alteration as defined in Section 15.10.040.A or B, when the building is occupied by a tenant.
69 L.

A. Duplex dwellings.

B. Dwelling groups of two primary dwelling units per lot.

1. Number of dwelling units. Development of up to four dwelling units may be built in the same lot area typically used for a single-family residence, without an urban lot split, as follows:

2. See Chapter 17.43 for applicable development regulations for ADU’s or JADU’s..

3. Four units are the maximum that may be permitted on a lot.

4. If Types A through D are initially developed, one or two ADUs may later be added up to the maximum allowed, Types E or F, subject to the provisions of this Chapter.

2. Primary Dwelling Unit Size. Each of the primary dwelling units shall be permitted to be at least 800 square feet in floor area, regardless of the zoning district’s lot coverage and floor area ratio (FAR) limits. For primary dwelling units over 800 square feet, the zoning district floor area standards shall apply; provided, however, this shall not preclude the option to construct smaller primary dwelling units in compliance with the state building code. The minimum floor area for each unit shall be as permitted by the state building code. 70 L.

6. Off-Street Parking.
(a) A minimum of one standard size, off-street parking space (uncovered or carport) for each primary dwelling unit shall be required (refer to Chapter 17.34 for parking space design standards). Garage parking space(s) shall not count towards meeting the minimum parking requirements.
(b) Shared driveways may be permitted to serve more than one dwelling unit, subject to approval by the City Engineer, based on finding that a shared driveway will not pose a hazard to public safety. See the definition of driveway in Section 17.02.220 of this title. (c) Notwithstanding the parking requirements indicated above, no off-street parking shall be required if:
(i) The lot is located within one-half mile walking distance of either a transit stop located in a high-quality transit corridor, as defined in Public Resources Code Section 21155(b), or a major transit stop, as defined in Public Resources Code Section 21064.3; or (ii) There is a designated parking area for one or more car-share facilities within one block of the lot.

17.05.080 Urban Lot Splits. The City may approve a parcel map for an urban lot split ministerially, subject to the procedures, requirements and development standards provided in this section. 71 L.

2. Both newly created lots of record shall be no smaller than 1,200 square feet.

3. The zoning district lot width and depth dimension minimums shall not apply.

5. Both parcels resulting from the urban lot split shall have access to, provide access to, or adjoin the public right-of-way through right-of-way frontage or recorded access easements.

7. The urban lot split conforms to all applicable objective requirements of the Subdivision Map Act, except as otherwise expressly provided in this Chapter.

8. The parcel being subdivided was not established through prior exercise of an urban lot split as provided for in this Chapter.

1. Number of dwelling units. With an urban lot split, development of no more than four dwelling units may be built in the same lot area that would otherwise be used for a single-family residence, as shown in Tables a and b provided below. Note that Tables a and b are to be used together to detail possible development scenarios following an urban lot split. Table a provides various development scenarios that are possible on a single lot, following a lot split, as Types A through I. Table b shows how the scenario types may then be combined for the two resultant lots. For example, if one resultant lot is developed with three units (Types F, G, H or I), the second resultant lot may only be developed with a single family dwelling (Type A), for a maximum of four units on the two resultant lots.
72 L.
a. Number and Types of Units- With Urban Lot Split
Development
Scenario Options
for Each
Resultant Lot
Following Split
Single
Family
Residence
Duplex Two-unit
Dwelling
Group
ADU JADU(2) Total
Units per
lot
Type A 1 1
Type B 1 1 2
Type C 1 1 2
Type D 2 2
Type E 2 2
Type F 1 1 1 3
Type G 2 1 3
Type H 2 1 3
Type I 2 1 3
Notes:

RESULTANT LOT 1 (Housing Unit Totals)

2. Primary Dwelling Unit Size. Each of the primary dwelling units shall be permitted to be at least 800 square feet in floor area, regardless of the zoning district’s lot coverage and floor area ratio (FAR) limits. For primary dwelling units over 800 square feet, the zoning district floor area standards shall apply; provided, however, this shall not preclude the option to construct smaller primary dwelling units in compliance with the state building code. The minimum floor area for each unit shall be as permitted by the state building code.

6. Off-Street Parking.
(a) A minimum of one standard size, off-street parking space (uncovered or carport) for each primary dwelling unit shall be required (refer to Chapter 17.34 for parking space design standards). Garage parking space(s) shall not count towards meeting the minimum parking requirements.
(b) Shared driveways may be permitted to serve more than one lot, subject to approval by the City Engineer, based on finding that the driveway will not pose a hazard to public safety. See the definition of driveway in Section 17.02.220 of this title. (c) Notwithstanding the parking requirements indicated above, no off-street parking shall be required if:
74 L.
(iii) The lot is located within one-half mile walking distance of either a transit stop located in a high-quality transit corridor, as defined in Public Resources Code Section 21155(b), or a major transit stop, as defined in Public Resources Code Section 21064.3; or (iv) There is a designated parking area for one or more car-share facilities within one block of the parcel.

17.05.120 Findings of Denial. The City may deny a two-unit housing development or urban lot split, based upon a preponderance of the evidence, that the proposed housing development would have a specific, adverse impact, as defined in Section 17.05.030.J. *****
SECTION 8: 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 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, 75 L.
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 9: This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty days after its passage and adoption.
_____________________________
Terry O’Connell, Mayor
* * *
The above and foregoing Ordinance was adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Brisbane held on the _________ day of ________________, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
_____________________________
Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________ _____________________________ City Clerk City Attorney
76 L.

TC-2
TC-1
SP-CRO
SCRO-1
R-MHP
R-BA
R-3
R-2
R-1
PD
PAOZ-2
PAOZ-1
O-S
NCRO-2
NCRO-1
MLB
M-1
HC
C/P-U
C-1
R-TUO
0 0.25 0.51 1.52
Miles
P r o p o s e d N e w Z o n i n g D i s t r i c t

C I T Y O F B R I S B A N E C A L I F O R N I A
Parcel and HCP GIS data provided by San Mateo County
Zoning GIS data provided by City of Brisbane
04/25/2024
Baylands San Francisco Bay HWY 101
Northeast Ridge
Crocker Park
Brisbane
Lagoon
Sierra Point
Marina
Quarry
Central Brisbane
Brisbane Acres
NE Bayshore
Southeast Bayshore

VALLEY DR

BAYSHORE BLVD

VISITACION AVE

TUNNEL AVE

LAGOON WAY

SAN BRUNO AVE

GUADALUPE CANYON PKWY
HWY 101
HWY 101
Beatty
Brisbane Parcels
TC-2
TC-1
SP-CRO
SCRO-1
R-MHP
R-BA
R-3
R-2
R-1
PD
PAOZ-2
PAOZ-1
O-S
NCRO-2
NCRO-1
MLB
M-1
HC
C/P-U
C-1
Commercial/Public Utilities District
Heavy Commercial District
Manufacturing District
Marsh Lagoon Bayfront District
Brisbane Village Neighborhood Commercial District
Downtown Brisbane Neighborhood Commercial District
Open Space
Parkside Overlay District - Clustered Housing
Parkside Overlay District - Multi-Family Housing
Sierra Point Commercial District
Commercial Mixed-Use District
Planned Development District
Residential District
Residential District
Residential District
Brisbane Acres Residential District
Residential Mobile Home Park District
Southwest Bayshore Commercial District
Crocker Park Trade Commercial District
Southeast Bayshore Commercial District
HCP Habitat Conservation Plan Area
Airbus,USGS,NGA,NASA,CGIAR,NCEAS,NLS,OS,NMA,Geodatastyrelsen,GSA,GSI and the GIS User Community E x i s t i n g L a y e r s / Z o n i n g D i s t r i c t s P r o p o s e d N e w Z o n i n g D i s t r i c t
R-TUO Residential Two Unit Overlay District
77 L.

City Council Meeting Minutes
September 5, 2024

Page 4 ends

Q. Proclaiming September as National Preparedness Month Mayor O’Connell proclaimed September 2024 as National Preparedness Month and encouraged all Brisbane residents to increase their knowledge and awareness of proper safety measures to follow before, during, and after a disaster.

Deputy Fire Chief Abelson accepted the proclamation on behalf of North County Fire Authority.

CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING
R. Consider Introducing an Ordinance Approving a Zoning Text and Map Amendment 2024-RZ-1, Overlay to R-1 Residential District and the R-BA Brisbane Acres Residential District in Entirety (It is being recommended to introduce an ordinance approving a zoning text and map amendment 2024-RZ1 amending regulations within Title 16 and 17 of the Brisbane Municipal Code to add the R-TUO residential two unit overlay district as new chapter 17.05 and related amendments; and finding that this project is exempt from environmental review under CEQA Guidelines Sections 15061(b)(1) & (3), Section 15183. This item was continued from the City Council Meeting of June 6, 2024 and July 18, 2024.) Community Development Director Swiecki presented a graphic to explain what happens in Brisbane with the proposed ordinance and without the proposed ordinance.

After Council questions, Mayor O’Connell opened the public hearing.

Peter Sutherland shared his concerns about road safety and the quality of soil in the acres.

Stephen Goodwin shared his public health and safety concerns about the proposed Ordinance.

Rachel asked what the federal protections for the trees are.

Tom Heinz commented there is strength in numbers to join the other cities against SB 9.

Sherry Goodwin submitted petitions signed by 224 members of the public not to approve the Ordinance and have the public decide on the issue through an election.

Linda Salmon commented that the residents need protection from earthquakes, mudslides and fires.

DeeDee Porter commented that she signed the petition to prevent overdevelopment in the area above Kings Road and that she should have read up more on the proposed ordinance, SB 9 and SB 1037. She added that the ordinance does not mandate that we develop the Acres and that SB 9 cannot be implemented in areas that do not have infrastructure. The ordinance will also help protect the City more and not lessen restrictions. All of this is public opposition is to SB 9 and not the council's proposed ordinance.

Michele Salmon asked the Council to read the Open Space Ecology Committee letter regarding this issue and delay the vote for two more weeks.

Prem Lall asked for more information about the trust-like option for Open Space.

Paul Bouscal agrees with developing plans to protect the Acres.

Leesa Greenlee agrees with developing plans to protect the Acres if it is just a matter of semantics. She also shared her concerns about Margaret Road.

Ron Coloma commented that Council should preserve the property rights of property owners in the lower acres.

Michele Salmon, Peter Sutherland, Dana Dillworth and Paul Bouscal added follow up comments.

Councilmember Cunningham made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Davis, to close the public hearing.

The motion passed unanimously by all present.

Ayes: Councilmembers Cunningham, Davis, Lentz, Mackin, and Mayor O’Connell. 78 L.

City Council Meeting Minutes
September 5, 2024

Page 5 ends

Noes: None

Absent: None
Abstain: None
After a brief break, Council continued the public hearing Item R to a future City Council meeting in order for staff to provide more information to Council on zoning district issues including protection of Cityowned open space, public street standards and related development standards, ownership of non-public roadways, and solar shading.

S. Consider Introducing an Ordinance Approving a Zoning Text Amendment 2024-RZ-2, City-wide (It is being recommended to introduce an ordinance approving omnibus zoning amendments to modify the development standards for multifamily and residential mixed use zoning districts consistent with California Senate Bill SB 478 (“housing opportunity act”) and as provided in the 2023-2031 Housing Element; and finding that this project is exempt from environmental review under CEQA Guidelines Sections 15061(b)(3), Section 15183. This item was continued from the City Council Meeting of June 6, 2024 and July 18, 2024.) Due to the late hour, Continued Public Hearing Item S was not discussed and will be continued to a future meeting.

STAFF REPORTS
T. City Manager’s Report on Upcoming Activities
City Manager Dennis reported on an upcoming event.

MAYOR/COUNCIL MATTERS
U. Update on Vacancy on the Open Space Ecology Committee and IDEA Committee City Clerk Padilla reported that Committee Member Glenn Fieldman from OSEC and Miyoko Nida from the IDEA Committee had resigned from their committees. Councilmembers directed Clerk Padilla to begin recruitment to fill these two seats and other expiring seats in 2025. Interviews will be scheduled January of 2025.

V. Update on the City Council Meeting 2024 Schedule
Councilmembers approved the remaining schedule for the City Council Meetings of 2024, which includes the following:

October 3, 2024 Proposed Special Meeting Best Practices/Code of Conduct Workshop October 17, 2024 Regular Meeting
November 7, 2024 Regular Meeting
November 21, 2024 Special Meeting (Mayoral Rotation) & Regular Meeting December 5, 2024 Regular Meeting
December 12, 2024 Special Meeting for the City Council Reorganization December 19, 2024 Meeting Cancellation
79 L.

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: September 5, 2024
From: John Swiecki, Community Development Director
Subject: Zoning Map and Text Amendment 2024-RZ-1 – zoning text and map amendment 2024- RZ-1 amending regulations within Title 16 and 17 of the Brisbane Municipal Code to add the RTUO residential two unit overlay district as new chapter 17.05 and related amendments; and finding that this project is exempt from environmental review under CEQA Guidelines Sections 15061(b)(1) & (3), Section 15183; City of Brisbane, applicant.

SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT
This matter has been continued from the City Council meetings of June 6 and July 18 2024. To further explain the requirements of SB 9 (which is currently in effect and will remain in effect whether or not 2024-RZ-1 is adopted) city-prepared Frequently Asked Questions (FAQS ) have been updated and are available at 2024-RZ-1 | Brisbane, CA (brisbaneca.org) The previous City Council report and related Planning Commission reports are attached for reference and contain a detailed analysis of the proposed amendment.

RECOMMENDATION
Introduce the ordinance amending the zoning text and zoning map to establish the R-TUO Residential Two Unit Overlay district and related code amendments, as provided in Attachment 4 of the July 18 2024 City Council report.

ATTACHMENTS

1. July 18 2024 City Council Report
______________________________ ___________________________________ John Swiecki, Community Development Director Jeremy Dennis, City Manager John Swiecki
80 L.

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: July 18, 2024
From: John Swiecki, Community Development Director
Subject: Zoning Map and Text Amendment 2024-RZ-1 – zoning text and map amendment 2024- RZ-1 amending regulations within Title 16 and 17 of the Brisbane Municipal Code to add the RTUO residential two unit overlay district as new chapter 17.05 and related amendments; and finding that this project is exempt from environmental review under CEQA Guidelines Sections 15061(b)(1) & (3), Section 15183; City of Brisbane, applicant.

SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT

COMMUNITY GOAL/RESULT
Safe Community - Residents and visitors will experience a sense of safety.

PURPOSE
To amend the zoning ordinance to establish regulations for urban lot splits and two-unit developments consistent with the requirements of Senate Bill SB 9.

RECOMMENDATION
Introduce the ordinance amending the zoning text and zoning map to establish the R-TUO Residential Two Unit Overlay district and related code amendments, as provided in Attachment

4. BACKGROUND
On June 6, 2024, City Council continued the public hearing on this matter to allow for additional time for the public review. The City Council further directed staff to provide additional background information and explanation of the proposed amendment, and to increase the level of public awareness and engagement.

The June 6, 2024 agenda report and previous Planning Commission workshops and hearing reports are provided in Attachment 5 for reference and include detailed information regarding the proposed ordinance.
81 L.

July 18, 2024 Meeting
DISCUSSION:

As directed by City Council, staff has prepared informational webpages for SB 9, including graphics which illustrate buildout examples. The July Star included a front-page article summarizing the proposed amendment as well as a hyperlink to the new web pages. See the hyperlink to a new draft ordinances webpage, Draft Ordinances | City of Brisbane, CA (brisbaneca.org) , and the SB 9 specific webpage, 2024-RZ-1 | City of Brisbane, CA (brisbaneca.org) Information regarding the proposed amendment was also included in the July 3 Brisbane Blast and on the City’s social media platforms. As part of the Blast, the City included a link to a new community outreach platform “Engage Brisbane”, which allows community members to provide responses to questions on the objective standards that are included in the ordinance. Also, although this item was continued to tonight’s date specific, new public notices were posted on July 5th. The City’s electronic sign boards at the Community Park and the Northeast Ridge have also been utilized to advertise tonight’s public hearing. Since the June 6th public hearing to the time of this writing, no written comments have been received. If any comments are received prior to the July 18th meeting, they will be provided separately to City Council.

The new webpages include substantial information on a number of issues associated with the requirements and implications of SB 9 and answers some key questions that have been raised.

These are addressed through frequently asked questions (FAQs) on the webpage referenced above. The FAQs also contain the graphic illustrations requested by Council. See weblink 2024- RZ-1 | City of Brisbane, CA (brisbaneca.org) for additional information.

Key considerations include:
• SB 9 became effective statewide in January 2022, including Brisbane. The City is obligated under state law to process applications that demonstrate compliance with SB 9, whether or not the City adopts an ordinance. Since SB 9 took effect in 2022, owners on a total of 4 lots within Brisbane have applied for SB 9 developments, although no development permits have been approved.
• Development under SB 9 allows for property owners to either add an additional unit on their lot (two-unit development) or subdivide their lot into 2 lots (urban lot split), subject to certain restrictions. This is applicable to the R-1 Residential District (R-1) and the R-BA Brisbane Acres Residential District (R-BA). Currently, without using SB 9, lots within these districts may be developed with a single family dwelling, an accessory dwelling unit (ADU) and a junior accessory dwelling unit (JADU), for a maximum of (3) units total. Although many variations on development under SB 9 can be achieved, it allows for no more than a total of four (4) units within the original lot area. This represents one more unit than 82 L.

July 18, 2024 Meeting
allowed under current zoning regulations. Attachments 1 and 2 illustrate several theoretical SB 9 development scenarios.
• Concerns have been raised about the applicability of SB 9 to the R-BA zoning district.

While SB 9 theoretically applies to the R-BA district as a whole, there are several SB-9 eligibility criteria that could limit its applicability to any given lot within the district.

Specifically, lots containing endangered butterfly habitat are not eligible for SB 9 development. Additionally, SB 9 allows that a public agency may deny a project that would have a specific adverse impact upon public health and safety that cannot be mitigated. Consistent with that provision, to promote public safety, Brisbane Municipal Code Section 17.01.060 does not allow for development of new dwelling units on lots that do not have public infrastructure. Therefore, lots within the R-BA district which lack access to public roadways and infrastructure would be ineligible for SB 9 development.

As a result of these criteria, it is likely that many existing R-BA zoned lots would not be eligible for SB 9 development. Any lot in the R-BA zone applying for an SB 9 development would need to demonstrate that all criteria for SB 9 eligibility have been met. Lastly, many lots within the upper Acres have been acquired by the City for open space purposes (see Attachment 3), further reducing the number of lots in the R-BA District with development potential.
• Adoption of the proposed ordinance allows the City to impose objective standards on SB 9 developments. The draft ordinance includes objective standards restricting the height of buildings within the state’s allowable setback areas and on R-BA ridgeline lots. The draft ordinance also requires that the minimum of one off-street parking space per primary unit be uncovered or within a carport, to help ensure these spaces are used for parking. Garage spaces may be provided in addition to the minimum uncovered or carport spaces. It also allows for shared driveways to help preserve on-street parking. • If the draft ordinance is not approved, property owners will still have the right to proceed with SB 9 developments subject to state regulations. The City will be unable to apply any other development standards.

FISCAL IMPACT
None.

MEASURE OF SUCCESS
To provide clear provisions in the BMC in compliance with SB 9 (2021). 83 L.

July 18, 2024 Meeting

ATTACHMENTS

1. Webpage excerpts - Selected graphic illustrations and FAQs

2. Website hyperlinks (including additional illustrations):
a) Draft Ordinances | City of Brisbane, CA (brisbaneca.org) b) 2024-RZ-1 | City of Brisbane, CA (brisbaneca.org)

3. R-BA City Ownership Map

4. Draft Ordinance - Text and Map Amendment

5. City Council Agenda Report, June 6, 2024
(includes links to Planning Commission reports and minutes) ______________________________ ___________________________________ John Swiecki, Community Development Director Jeremy Dennis, City Manager 84 L.

ATTACHMENT 1
Website Excerpts
Selected Graphic Illustrations & FAQs
For FAQs and additional illustrations, see 2024-RZ-1 | City of Brisbane, CA (brisbaneca.org) Selected R-1 Buildout Scenarios
From left to right:

1. Single family dwelling (blue) on standard R-1 lot, per district regulations

2. Single family dwelling, accessory dwelling (yellow) and junior accessory dwelling (red), per district regulations.

3. SB 9 two unit development with second primary dwelling unit (purple)

4. SB 9 urban lot split with second primary dwelling unit (purple).

R-1 District Site Plan Views:
85 L.

ATTACHMENT 1
R-1 District Axonometric Views
Frequently Asked Questions
86 L.

ATTACHMENT 1
2024-RZ-1 | City of Brisbane, CA (brisbaneca.org)
Why should the City adopt a local ordinance to address SB 9? In 2021 the Governor signed SB 9, which became effective for jurisdictions state-wide in January 2022 and the City is currently processing applications pursuant to SB 9.

Through adoption of a local ordinance the City may include objective development standards, as long as those standards wouldn’t preclude development that would otherwise be compliant with the provisions of SB 9. Objective standards are including in the draft ordinance for 1) parking and 2) building heights within setbacks and on ridgeline lots, as further described below. A local ordinance would provide for clarity in the City’s implementation of SB 9 provisions. The draft ordinance would also commit the City to providing an informational notice to the owners of neighboring properties upon approval of a development project under SB 9.

SB 9 refers to urban lot splits and two unit developments. What’s the difference between the two?
“Two unit developments” generally refers to the development of two primary dwelling units on a an existing lot, or on a lot created through an urban lot split.

An "urban lot split" is a ministerial split of one single family residential lot into two lots pursuant to the provisions of SB 9. Each resultant lot may have a two unit development or a combination of primary dwelling units and JADUs or ADUs. In any case, the maximum development that may occur over the original lot area is 4 dwelling units. That’s one more than may otherwise be permitted.

The draft ordinance is proposed as an overlay district. What does this mean? An overlay district does not alter the underlying district standards. The overlay district (RTUO Residential Two Unit zoning district) standards would only apply to those properties that apply for a permit pursuant to the provisions of SB 9 and are approved for development consistent with SB 9.

Which properties in Brisbane are subject to SB 9?
SB 9 only applies to single family zoning districts, which in Brisbane are the R-1 and R-BA zoning districts. These districts are shown in yellow on the zoning map excerpt (see also our Interactive Zoning Map):
87 L.

ATTACHMENT 1
What development is currently allowed within the R-1 zoning district and what does SB 9 allow?
The current lot size standard in the R-1 zone is 5,000 sq ft, although a number of smaller lots are recognized as legal lots, generally in the range of 2,500 sq ft to 5,000 sq ft based on older lot size standards. The R-1 zoning allows for one single family dwelling unit, one attached junior accessory dwelling unit (JADU) and one accessory dwelling unit (ADU) on a lot, irrespective of size, assuming the applicable development standards are met.

SB 9 allows for one additional dwelling unit on that same lot area, either following an “urban lot split” or as a “two unit development” on the existing lot, subject to a number of qualifying criteria and restrictions. An urban lot split is a ministerial division of one legal lot into two lots and a two unit development allows for two primary dwelling units, such as two single family dwellings or a duplex on a lot. Regardless of whether SB 9 is implemented by an urban lot split or by a two unit development on the existing lot, the total dwelling unit count for the original lot area may not exceed four units, including accessory dwelling units, versus three units under the current zoning for both districts. There are various potential buildout configurations and comparison examples for:

1. what may be developed under the R-1 zoning without SB 9;

2. a two unit development; and

3. an urban lot split.

These are theoretical examples based on a maximum buildout. Additional examples based on a maximum buildout are available at this link.

What development is currently permitted in the R-BA zone and what will SB 9 allow? 88 L.

ATTACHMENT 1
The lot size standard in the R-BA zone is 20,000 sq ft. The R-BA zoning currently allows for one single family dwelling unit, one attached junior accessory dwelling unit (JADU) and one accessory dwelling unit (ADUs) on a lot. SB 9 allows for one additional dwelling unit on that same lot area, either following an “urban lot split” or as a “two unit development” on the existing lot, subject to a number of qualifying criteria and restrictions.

One such qualifying criteria is that the lot may not have endangered species habitat. The R-BA district as a whole is within the San Bruno Mountain Habitat Conservation Plan area and a number of the properties, especially in the upper reaches of the district are likely to contain habitat for endangered butterfly species and would therefore be excluded. Another is that the lot must have infrastructure access for safety and utilities. Many of the lots do not currently have such access or utilities. Since this cost is borne by the property owner for development, this will likely continue to prove to be cost prohibitive, especially for those properties that are distant from existing infrastructure and on steep terrain.

Are there any other limitations on when SB 9 applies?
The endangered species and infrastructure restrictions are applicable to much of the R-BA district, but there are a number of other requirements and restrictions that may apply to either the R-1 and R-BA. Some of these are as follows:
• The lot does not contain wetlands;
• The lot may not be in a very high fire hazard severity zone; • The lot may not contain habitat for protected species; • The lot may not be on lands under a conservation easement; • The lot has not previously been subdivided via urban lot split; • For urban lot splits, prior to a lot split being recorded, the property owner(s) shall sign an affidavit stating that the owner, or a member or members of the owner’s immediate family, intends to occupy one of the dwelling units as the person’s principal residence for a minimum of three years; and
• Development may not result in demolition of a dwelling unit that has been occupied by a tenant in the last three years and other tenant displacement protections.

What is the net increase in the number of housing units that may be developed on a given lot using the SB 9 provisions versus what may currently be developed without using SB 9? The net increase in dwelling units on a given lot is one (1) unit. Currently a lot of record in either the R-BA or the R-1 district maybe developed with a single family dwelling (SFD), an accessory dwelling unit (ADU) and a junior accessory dwelling unit (JADU) without invoking SB 9 provisions. SB 9 provides for one more unit as a primary dwelling unit. That may be as a detached unit (resulting in a two unit dwelling group) or as a duplex. If the lot is split, as an urban lot split under the SB 9, the mix of units between the two resultant lots may range from 1 to 3 units, but the total across both resultant lots may not exceed 4 units.

How many units might be developed city-wide as a result of SB 9? 89 L.

ATTACHMENT 1
This is unknown. Since SB 9 took effect in 2022, owners on a total of 4 lots have applied for SB 9 development via two unit development or an urban lot split, although no development permits have yet been approved. For reference, case studies on three of these projects as provided on the City's website. Also, while there are approximately 880 lots in the R-1 district, lot size, topography, existing construction and other constraints could make SB 9 developments impractical or infeasible. Access and habitat constraints would also likely reduce the feasibility of SB-9 development throughout the R-BA zone.

What permits would be required for a two unit development or urban lot split? For a two unit development without a lot split, a property owner would need to obtain a building permit, which would include documentation on eligibility.

For an urban lot split, prior to obtaining the building a lot split would be required, via separate planning application.

As part of the above referenced permits, a deed restriction would be recorded on the property, identifying the property as being developed through SB 9 and subjecting it to certain development and use restrictions, as provided in the ordinance.

Whether the development under SB 9 is a two unit development on the existing lot, or the owner chooses to apply for an urban lot split, prior to submitting for a building permit, the applications require ministerial approval by the City, as long as they meet all of the requirements of SB 9.

Additional information related to the process in Brisbane for Urban Lot Splits & Two-Unit Developments is available on the City's website. Urban Lot Splits & Two-Unit Developments in Single-Family Zones | City of Brisbane, CA (brisbaneca.org) In an urban lot split, do the two resultant lots need to be the same size? No, but they must be close in size. Pursuant to state law, the allowable size ratio between two resultant lots must be in the range of 40:60 to 50:50. For a 5,000 SF lot, that would be resultant lots in the range of 2,000 SF and 3,000 SF, to 2,500 SF and 2,500 SF, respectively.

Is there a maximum size of the dwelling units that may be permitted under SB 9? The underlying district floor area limits would apply. For the R-1 district that floor area ratio is

0.72, or 3,600 sq ft on a 5,000 sq ft lot, except that the City must allow for primary dwelling units of at least 800 sq ft. An owner may voluntarily develop a smaller unit subject to California Building Code requirements. For the R-BA district, the maximum FAR is also 0.72, except that the total floor area may not exceed 5,500 sq ft.

What development standards apply to units developed under SB 9 provisions? 90 L.

ATTACHMENT 1
SB 9 provides that a jurisdiction may not require more than a 4 foot building setback from the side or rear lot lines. Comparing this to the current R-1 district standards, the minimum side setbacks range from 3 to 5 feet, depending on the lot width, and the rear setback requirement is 10 feet. In the R-BA district, the minimum rear setback is also 10 feet and the side setbacks range from 5 to 15 feet, depending on the lot width.

Following the Planning Commission’s workshops and public hearing on the draft ordinance, the Commission recommended an objective standard, that the area between the zoning district’s standard setback area and the state’s 4 foot allowance, the building height may not exceed 25 feet. The current standard in the R-1 district is 28 to 30 feet depending on the slope.

Additionally, the 25 foot limit would apply to ridgeline lots within the R-BA district. The current height limit for buildings in the R-BA district is 35 feet. (Note, under the draft ordinance 2024-RZ-2 a height limit of 36 feet has been proposed for both the R-1 and R-BA districts.)
Also, per SB 9 provisions, the City may not require more than one parking space for each primary dwelling unit. Following the Planning Commission’s workshops and public hearing on the draft ordinance, the Commission has recommended an objective standard, that the parking requirement may only be met by off-street uncovered parking or by parking covered by a carport. While garage spaces may be provided, as an owner’s option, they would not count towards the minimum requirement. This proposed standard stemmed from a concern over the common practice of use of garages for storage other than parking.

It has also been proposed that shared driveways should be permitted. This would be to allow for fewer driveway curb-cuts, to help minimize impacts to existing street parking.

Note that, where the R-1 or R-BA zoning district standards are not specifically superseded by the standards provided through SB 9, the underlying zoning district standards would apply.

How are accessory dwelling units or junior accessory dwelling units affected by SB 9? The development provisions for ADUs and JADUs are contained in BMC Chapter 17.43. These provisions would not be changed by the ordinance. That is with the exception that, the use of a property for an ADU or JADU might be superseded by development of a primary dwelling unit through SB 9, but where an ADU or JADU is allowed, the provisions of Chapter 17.43 would still apply.

Since there was a lawsuit over SB 9 in southern California, how will this affect Brisbane? A recent ruling by a Los Angeles Superior Court judge’s overturning SB 9 applied to five charter cities in Southern California. The City’s Legal Counsel indicated that the decision has no effect on other trial courts or other cities. Also, the cities in question are charter cities, not general law cities, such as Brisbane, and the decision hinged on SB 9 conflicting with the land use authority of those cities under their charters. As such, the decision is not relevant to SB 9 as it applies to the City of Brisbane.

Are there some buildout examples?
91 L.

ATTACHMENT 1
Subject to certain restrictions, SB 9 allows for two-unit developments and urban lot splits in the R-1 Residential District and R-BA Brisbane Acres Residential District. No more than two primary units may be built on a single lot, whether before or after a lot split, and no more than 4 units (including ADUs and JADUs) may be built across the original lot area.

Consistent with SB 9, the draft ordinance provides tables showing the possible scenarios. A few of the many possibilities have been illustrated on the City's website, based on a 5,000 sq ft lot in the R-1 district and a 20,000 sq ft lot in the R-BA district.

Click here for sample scenarios of Two Unit Developments and Urban Lot Splits and three Brisbane case studies.
92 L.

ATTACHMENT 2
Website hyperlinks:
a) Draft Ordinances | City of Brisbane, CA (brisbaneca.org) b) 2024-RZ-1 | City of Brisbane, CA (brisbaneca.org)
93 L.

San Benito Rd
King
s
Rd
Humbo
Margaret Ave
Ma
rg
aret
Ave
Radio Rd
San Benito Rd
Sierra Point Rd
Sierra Point Rd

BRISBANE

ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL
Kings Rd
Humboldt Rd
Humboldt Rd
Humboldt Rd
S
ierra
P
oint Rd
Arthur D
r

FIRTH PARK
Radio Rd
Radio Rd
San Bruno Ave
Thoma
s Av
e
Southeast
Bayshore
San Bruno Ave
Humboldt Rd
Lake St
Annis
R
d
McLain
Rd
Gladys
Ave
Ha rold Rd
Bayshore
Blvd
Southwest
Bayshore
Radio Rd
Van Waters&Rogers Rd
Bayshore Blvd
Radio Rd
Bayshore
Blvd
26 83
79 77
78 82
85 84 A
87 86
66 67
65 64
63 68
70 71 &
71 A
72 73 74
75 75 A
76 89
90 91
94 96
97 98
55 56
57 58
59 60
69 61
62 35
36 37
100
30 38
51 52
54 53
25 101
27 105
104
103
103
102
39 40
41 42
43 44
45 46
50 49
48 47
29 29
28 City Owned Parcels Acquired for Open Space Purposes in the R-BA District and Funding Sources ¯
07/09/2024
Esri Community Maps Contributors, County of San Mateo, California, California State Parks, © OpenStreetMap, Microsoft, Esri, TomTom, Garmin, SafeGraph, GeoTechnologies, Inc, METI/NASA, USGS, Bureau of Land Management, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA, USFWS, Sources: Esri, Airbus DS, USGS, NGA, NASA, CGIAR, N Robinson, NCEAS, NLS, OS, NMA, Geodatastyrelsen, Rijkswaterstaat, GSA, Geoland, FEMA, Intermap, and the GIS user community Other Means -
Donations, Lawsuit, Density Transfer
US Fish & Wildlife Funded
Coastal Conservancy Funded
Water Tank Sites
City Funded
City Owned Properties
& Funding Sources
Parcels
Priority Preservation Area 2023
Other Layers
R-BA
R-1
Zoning Layers
ATTACHMENT 3
94 L.

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date: June 6, 2024
From: John Swiecki, Community Development Director
Subject: Zoning Map and Text Amendment 2024-RZ-1 – zoning text and map amendment 2024- RZ-1 amending regulations within Title 16 and 17 of the Brisbane Municipal Code to add the RTUO residential two unit overlay district as new chapter 17.05 and related amendments; and finding that this project is exempt from environmental review under CEQA Guidelines Sections 15061(b)(1) & (3), Section 15183; City of Brisbane, applicant.

COMMUNITY GOAL/RESULT
Safe Community - Residents and visitors will experience a sense of safety.

PURPOSE
To amend the zoning ordinance to establish regulations for urban lot splits and two-unit developments consistent with the requirements of Senate Bill SB 9.

BACKGROUND
California Senate Bill SB 9 (2021) was codified as Gov’t Code Sections 65852.21(j) and 66411.7(n).

These regulations became effective on January 1, 2022 and require jurisdictions statewide to permit two-unit primary dwellings in the single-family residential zoning districts on lots where one single-family dwelling would normally be permitted, or for single-family lots to be split into two lots, subject to certain restrictions. For Brisbane, this is applicable to the R-1 Residential District and the R-BA Brisbane Acres Residential District. It does not apply to multifamily zoning districts.

Property owners may invoke the provisions of SB 9, absent a City ordinance. Since January 2022, the City has had four such applications submitted, two for urban lot splits and two for two unit 1 110
Q.
95 L.

June 6, 2024 Meeting
developments. Although SB 9 may be invoked without City regulations, the revised 2023-2031 Housing Element (Housing Element) includes a program for Brisbane to update its zoning ordinance to implement SB 9. That is:
“Program 2.A.6: Adopt implementing ordinance for ministerial duplex conversions and single-family lot splits as provided by Government Code Sections 65852.21 and 66411.7.” State law also allows jurisdictions to adopt objective standards through local ordinance, so long as they would not preclude two unit developments that would otherwise comply with the law.

The Planning Commission held workshops in 2023 to early 2024 on the proposed regulations, then a held a public hearing on May 9, 2024. The Planning Commission, by a vote of 4-0, recommended that City Council adopt the proposed ordinance. The Planning Commission resolution, draft minutes and agenda report are provided in Attachments 4, 5 and 6. Public correspondence is provided in Attachment 7.

Correspondence and the Planning Commission’s discussion referenced a recent ruling by a Los Angeles Superior Court judge’s overturning SB 9 as it applies to five charter cities in Southern California and its potential applicability to Brisbane. The City’s Legal Counsel indicated that the decision has no effect on other trial courts or other cities. Also, the cities in question are charter cities, not general law cities, such as Brisbane, and the decision hinged on SB 9 conflicting with the land use authority of those cities under their charters. As such, the decision is not relevant to SB 9 as it applies to the City of Brisbane.

DISCUSSION:

SB 9 allows for owners of certain eligible lots within the single-family zoning districts to either split an existing lot of record to two lots, or to keep the lot as-is and develop it with two primary units where one single family dwelling would otherwise be permitted. Note that a primary dwelling unit is a housing unit that is not a junior accessory dwelling unit (JADU) or accessory dwelling unit (ADU). Primary dwelling unit is a broad term that, for the purposes of the proposed overlay district, may include single family dwellings, duplex dwelling units and two-unit dwelling groups. In multifamily zoning districts a primary unit may also refer to units within a multifamily development.

State law and Brisbane code also allows for JADUs and ADUs, both on lots with single family dwellings and those established through SB 9. There are various ways that development under SB 9 could be accomplished, but in essence the maximum number of units that could be permitted by invoking SB 9 is four units and the maximum without SB 9 is three units. Note that per SB 9, the permitting process would be ministerial, whether the development is as a two unit development on an existing lot, or by urban lot split.
2 111
Q.
96 L.

June 6, 2024 Meeting
Specific provisions, as required by SB 9, allow for the following:
• Primary dwelling units of 800 square feet in floor area must be allowed, regardless of the underlying district’s floor area ratio (FAR) maximums. Note that JADU and ADU sizes are provided in BMC Chapter 17.43, consistent with state law, and these would not change. • The district’s lot coverage limits may not be used to prevent development that would otherwise comply with the development standards.
• Required side and rear setbacks shall not exceed 4 feet. • No more than 1 off-street parking space per primary dwelling unit may be required by the City.
• For urban lot splits, the two resultant lots must each be at least 1,200 square feet and the size difference between the lot must be in the proportion range of 50:50 to 40:60, so they would be near the same size.

Additional provisions proposed in the draft ordinance are outlined below, with further discussion on the next page:
• In cases where the 4 foot setback would be less than the underlying district setback, a height limit of 25 feet is proposed as discussed below. The existing district setback standards range from 3 to 5 feet for the side and 10 feet in the rear in the R-1 district and 5 to 15 feet for the side and 10 feet in the rear in the R-BA district. • Each primary dwelling unit would be required to have a minimum of one standard size off-street parking space, as indicated above, and that parking may be either uncovered or covered by a carport. Garage parking may also be provided, as an owner’s option in addition to the minimum parking, but it may not count toward meeting the required parking.
• Shared driveways may be permitted.

Height Limit: The 25 foot height limit is proposed for that portion of a primary dwelling that is located between the underlying district setback and the 4 foot setback allowed by SB 9. For example, the rear setback for structures in the R-1 district is 10 feet minimum from the rear lot line, whereas SB 9 reduces that setback to a 4 feet minimum. The 25 foot height limit would apply to that portion of a structure located between the 10 foot and 4 foot setbacks.

The height of 25 feet is proposed as it is the same as recently adopted state law for ADU heights, which may also have 4 foot setbacks. This same objective standard would apply to any primary 3 112
Q.
97 L.

June 6, 2024 Meeting
unit on an R-BA ridgeline lot, since the design permit provisions for ridgeline lots would not apply in the case of a two unit development using the overlay standards. This would be a reduction from the current district height limit of 35 feet in the R-BA district and the 30 height limit in the R-1. (Note that the draft ordinance 2024-RZ-2, which is also on the agenda for tonight, would raise the underlying district heights to 36 feet, but the 25 foot limit would apply to that portion of a structure that’s within the normal setback area.)
Parking & Shared Driveways: As noted above, each primary dwelling unit would be required to have a minimum of one standard size off-street parking space. That may be uncovered or covered by a carport. Garage parking may also be provided, as an owner’s option in addition to the minimum parking, but it may not count toward meeting the required parking. The provision of not counting garage parking toward the minimum requirement is proposed as a result of Planning Commission concerns raised about the use of garage spaces for other uses besides parking, such as storage, and the limited number of on-street parking spaces in many of the R-1 residential neighborhoods. Note that JADU or ADU off-street parking generally is not required, with some exceptions depending on distance to public transportation, and this would not be changed through this ordinance.

Shared driveways may also be permitted, given the proposed amendment to the driveway definition, but where parking is required for the different units, they must be independently accessible (i.e. not in tandem with another unit). Note that the amendment to allow for shared driveways would be within Chapter 17.02 - Definitions, so it would extend beyond the overlay zoning district.

The Planning Commission recommended an additional provision following the public hearing, that an informational notice to be sent to adjacent property owners upon issuance of a building permit approval, for projects approved utilizing the overlay provisions. That has been included in the draft ordinance as Section 17.05.100 - Notices.

Correspondence received prior to the Planning Commission hearing was duly considered by the Commission and is provided for reference in Attachment 7.

FISCAL IMPACT
None.

MEASURE OF SUCCESS
To provide clear provisions in the BMC in compliance with SB 9 (2021). 4 113
Q.
98 L.

June 6, 2024 Meeting

ATTACHMENTS

1. Draft Ordinance Establishing the R-TUO Zoning District

2. Draft Zoning Map Amendment Showing the Proposed R-TUO District

3. Redlined Draft Ordinance

4. Planning Commission Resolution 2024-RZ-1

5. Draft Planning Commission Meeting Minutes, May 9, 2024

6. Planning Commission Agenda Report, May 9, 2024

7. Correspondence
______________________________ ___________________________________ John Swiecki, Community Development Director Clay Holstine, City Manager 5 114
Q.
99 L.

ATTACHMENT 3

REDLINED DRAFT ORDINANCE
Note: Red text indicates proposed as new or strikeout amendments to the Brisbane Municipal Code (BMC).

Section 16.12.040 - Tentative and final parcel map—Exceptions to requirements is amended as follows:

16.12.040 - Tentative and final parcel map- Exceptions to requirements A tentative parcel map and final parcel map shall not be required in the following cases:

C. Where an urban lot split is proposed, see Chapter 17.05 of Title 17 of this Municipal Code.

Section 17.02.120 - Carport is amended, as follows:

17.02.120 - Carport. "Carport" means an accessory structure or a portion of a main structure designed for the storage of motor vehicles having a roof or other solid covering and enclosed on no more than two (2) sides.
"Carport" means an accessory structure or a portion of a main structure designed for the storage of motor vehicles having a permanent roof and not enclosed on two (2) or more sides.

Section 17.02.220 - Driveway is amended, as follows:

17.02.750.
on a single site, the use of which is limited to persons residing or working on the site and their invitees, licensees and business visitors.

Section 17.02.230 - Duplex is hereby deleted in its entirety. 19 128
Q.
100
L.

Section 17.02.235 - Dwelling is amended to add a definition for “Duplex dwelling” and “Primary dwelling unit” or “Main Dwelling”, as follows:

B. A. "Dwelling group" means a group of two (2) or more detached buildings located upon the same site, each of which contains one or more dwelling units.

C. B. "Dwelling unit" means a room or group of rooms including living, sleeping, eating, cooking and sanitation facilities, constituting a separate and independent housekeeping unit, designed, occupied, or intended for occupancy by one family on a permanent basis. Permanent residency shall mean continuous occupancy of the dwelling unit for a period of thirty (30) days or more.

D. C. "Multiple-family dwelling" means a building or site containing three (3) or more dwelling units (also see "duplex"). The term includes single-room-occupancy dwelling units, typically comprised of one or two (2) rooms (which may include a kitchen and/or a bathroom, in addition to a bed), that are restricted to occupancy by no more than two (2) persons.

E. D. "Accessory dwelling unit" means a separate dwelling unit created upon a site that contains a single-family dwelling, duplex, or multiple-family dwelling. Subject to the restrictions of this title, the accessory dwelling unit may be within, attached to, or detached from the single-family dwelling, duplex, or multiple-family dwelling. An accessory dwelling unit shall include permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and sanitation. The term "secondary dwelling unit" shall have the same meaning throughout this title.

F. E. "Junior accessory dwelling unit" means a dwelling unit that is no more than five hundred (500) square feet in size and contained entirely within a single-family dwelling. A junior accessory dwelling unit may include separate sanitation facilities, or may share sanitation facilities with the single-family dwelling. Junior accessory dwelling units are distinguished from accessory dwelling units in that they: (1) must include the conversion of existing, legally permitted floor area within an existing single-family dwelling; (2) must be owner occupied, or the main dwelling be owner occupied; and (3) are subject to unique standards that are not applicable to accessory dwelling units, as specified in Chapter 17.43 of this Title.

G. “Primary dwelling unit” or “Main Dwelling” means a dwelling unit that is not an accessory dwelling unit or a junior accessory dwelling unit.

H. F. "Single-family dwelling" means a dwelling unit constituting the only principal structure upon a single site (excluding any lawfully established accessory dwelling unit that may be located within the same structure on upon the same site). The term includes employee housing for six (6) or fewer persons, residential care facilities, licensed by the state to provide twenty-four-hour nonmedical care, serving six (6) or fewer persons (not including the operator, the operator's 20 129
Q.
101
L.
family or persons employed as staff) in need of supervision, personal services, or assistance essential for sustaining the activities of daily living or for the protection of the individual. Also see "Group care home" for seven (7) or more persons.

Section 17.04.010 - Establishment of Districts is amended to add the “R-TUO Residential two unit overlay district” as follows:

The districts into which the city is divided are hereby established and designated as follows:

A. R-1 Residential district.

B. R-2 Residential district.

C. R-3 Residential district.

D. R-BA: Brisbane acres residential district.

E. R-TUO Residential two unit overlay district.

F. E. C-1: Commercial mixed use district.

G. F. NCRO: Central Brisbane commercial district.

H. G. HC: Beatty heavy commercial district.

I. H. SCRO-1: Southwest Bayshore commercial district.

J. I. SP-CRO: Sierra Point commercial district.

K. J. TC-1: Crocker Park trade commercial district.

L. K. TC-2: Southeast Bayshore trade commercial district.

M. L. MLB: Marsh Lagoon Bayfront district.

N. M. O-S: Open space district.

O. N. P-D: Planned development district.

P. O. PAOZ: Parkside overlay district.

Q. P. R-MHP: Residential mobile home park district.

Chapter 17.05 Residential Two Unit Overlay District is added to Title 17 as follows:

17.05 Residential Two Unit Development Overlay District.

17.02.490.

17.05.030 Definitions
For the purposes of this Chapter, the following definitions apply. Terms not defined herein shall be based upon the definitions in Chapter 17.02.

D. “Department” means the Community Development Department.

G. “High Quality Transit Corridor” means a corridor with fixed bus route service with service intervals no longer than 15 minutes during peak commute hours, or as defined in State law.

I. “Primary Dwelling Unit” or “Primary Unit” means the same as defined in section 17.02.235.G.

K. “Two-unit Development” means a proposed housing development that contains two primary dwelling units on a single lot.

17.05.040 Eligibility.
22 131
Q.
103
L.

A. To be eligible for a two-unit development or urban lot split as specified in this Chapter, the application shall meet all of the following criteria:

1. The lot is a lot of record and is located within the R-1 Residential zoning district or the R-BA Brisbane Acres Residential zoning district.

5. The lot has not previously been subdivided under this Chapter, or under Government Code section 66411.7.

17.05.050 Anti-displacement/Eligibility Criteria.

A. Development under this Chapter shall not result in displacement of tenants from:

1. A lot that is subject to a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that restricts rents to levels affordable to persons and families of moderate, low, or very low income.

2. A lot that is subject to any form of rent or price control through the City’s valid exercise of its police power.

B. Development under this Chapter shall not result in:

1. Demolition or alteration as defined in Section 15.10.040.A or B of a dwelling unit that has been occupied by a tenant in the last three years.

2. Demolition of a building, or alteration as defined in Section 15.10.040.A or B, when the building is occupied by a tenant.

A. Duplex dwellings.
23 132
Q.
104
L.

B. Dwelling groups of two primary dwelling units per lot.

1. Number of dwelling units. Development of up to four dwelling units may be built in the same lot area typically used for a single-family residence, without an urban lot split, as follows:

2. See Chapter 17.43 for applicable development regulations for ADU’s or JADU’s..

3. Four units are the maximum that may be permitted on a lot.

4. If Types A through D are initially developed, one or two ADUs may later be added up to the maximum allowed, Types E or F, subject to the provisions of this Chapter.

2. Primary Dwelling Unit Size. Each of the primary dwelling units shall be permitted to be at least 800 square feet in floor area, regardless of the zoning district’s lot coverage and floor area ratio (FAR) limits. For primary dwelling units over 800 square feet, the zoning district floor area standards shall apply; provided, however, this shall not preclude the option to construct smaller primary dwelling units in compliance with the state building code. The minimum floor area for each unit shall be as permitted by the state building code.

4. Side and Rear Setbacks. Minimum side and rear setbacks for the primary dwelling units shall be 4 feet, except for the following:
24 133
Q.
105
L.
(a) Where the underlying district development standards allow for a lesser setback, the district standards shall apply.
(b) No setback shall be required for an existing legal non-conforming structure, or a replacement structure constructed in the same location and to the same dimensions as an existing legal non-conforming structure.

6. Off-Street Parking.
(a) A minimum of one standard size, off-street parking space (uncovered or carport) for each primary dwelling unit shall be required (refer to Chapter 17.34 for parking space design standards). Garage parking space(s) shall not count towards meeting the minimum parking requirements.
(b) Shared driveways may be permitted to serve more than one dwelling unit, subject to approval by the City Engineer, based on finding that a shared driveway will not pose a hazard to public safety. See the definition of driveway in Section 17.02.220 of this title. (c) Notwithstanding the parking requirements indicated above, no off-street parking shall be required if:
(i) The lot is located within one-half mile walking distance of either a transit stop located in a high-quality transit corridor, as defined in Public Resources Code Section 21155(b), or a major transit stop, as defined in Public Resources Code Section 21064.3; or (ii) There is a designated parking area for one or more car-share facilities within one block of the lot.

17.05.080 Urban Lot Splits. The City may approve a parcel map for an urban lot split ministerially, subject to the procedures, requirements and development standards provided in this section.

2. Both newly created lots of record shall be no smaller than 1,200 square feet.

3. The zoning district lot width and depth dimension minimums shall not apply.

5. Both parcels resulting from the urban lot split shall have access to, provide access to, or adjoin the public right-of-way through right-of-way frontage or recorded access easements.

7. The urban lot split conforms to all applicable objective requirements of the Subdivision Map Act, except as otherwise expressly provided in this Chapter.

8. The parcel being subdivided was not established through prior exercise of an urban lot split as provided for in this Chapter.

1. Number of dwelling units. With an urban lot split, development of no more than four dwelling units may be built in the same lot area that would otherwise be used for a single-family residence, as shown in Tables a and b provided below. Note that Tables a and b are to be used together to detail possible development scenarios following an urban lot split. Table a provides various development scenarios that are possible on a single lot, following a lot split, as Types A through I. Table b shows how the scenario types may then be combined for the two resultant lots. For example, if one resultant lot is developed with three units (Types F, G, H or I), the second resultant lot may only be developed with a single family dwelling (Type A), for a maximum of four units on the two resultant lots.
26 135
Q.
107
L.
a. Number and Types of Units- With Urban Lot Split
Development
Scenario Options
for Each
Resultant Lot
Following Split
Single
Family
Residence
Duplex Two-unit
Dwelling
Group
ADU JADU(2) Total
Units per
lot
Type A 1 1
Type B 1 1 2
Type C 1 1 2
Type D 2 2
Type E 2 2
Type F 1 1 1 3
Type G 2 1 3
Type H 2 1 3
Type I 2 1 3
Notes:

RESULTANT LOT 1 (Housing Unit Totals)

2. Primary Dwelling Unit Size. Each of the primary dwelling units shall be permitted to be at least 800 square feet in floor area, regardless of the zoning district’s lot coverage and floor area ratio (FAR) limits. For primary dwelling units over 800 square feet, the zoning district floor area standards shall apply; provided, however, this shall not preclude the option to construct smaller primary dwelling units in compliance with the state building code. The minimum floor area for each unit shall be as permitted by the state building code.

6. Off-Street Parking.
(a) A minimum of one standard size, off-street parking space (uncovered or carport) for each primary dwelling unit shall be required (refer to Chapter 17.34 for parking space design standards). Garage parking space(s) shall not count towards meeting the minimum parking requirements.
(b) Shared driveways may be permitted to serve more than one lot, subject to approval by the City Engineer, based on finding that the driveway will not pose a hazard to public safety. See the definition of driveway in Section 17.02.220 of this title. (c) Notwithstanding the parking requirements indicated above, no off-street parking shall be required if:
28 137
Q.
109
L.
(iii) The lot is located within one-half mile walking distance of either a transit stop located in a high-quality transit corridor, as defined in Public Resources Code Section 21155(b), or a major transit stop, as defined in Public Resources Code Section 21064.3; or (iv) There is a designated parking area for one or more car-share facilities within one block of the parcel.

RESOLUTION 2024-RZ-1

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BRISBANE RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF ZONING TEXT AND MAP AMENDMENT 2024-RZ-1 AMENDING BRISBANE MUNICIPAL CODE TITLES 16 AND 17, TO AMEND SECTION 16.12.040 - TENTATIVE AND FINAL PARCEL MAP- EXCEPTIONS TO REQUIREMENTS, ADD CHAPTER 17.05

RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY, TO PROVIDE FOR URBAN LOT SPLITS AND TWO-UNIT DEVELOPMENTS IN SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONES, AND TO AMEND SECTION 17.02.235, TO ADD A DEFINITION FOR “PRIMARY DWELLING UNIT” OR “MAIN DWELLING”, AND TO AMEND SECTIONS 17.02.120 AND

17.02.220 DEFINING CARPORTS AND DRIVEWAYS
WHEREAS, Senate Bill 9 (“SB 9”), which amended Section 66452.6 of the Government Code and added Sections 65852.21 and 66411.7 to the Government Code, to allow for streamlined ministerial approval of two-unit development and urban lot splits within single-family zoned areas, was signed by the Governor of California on September 16, 2021; and
WHEREAS, these changes to the Government Code became effective on January 1, 2022; and WHEREAS, SB 9 requires cities and counties, including the City of Brisbane, to ministerially approve a parcel map for an urban lot split and/or a proposed housing development containing a maximum of two primary residential units within a single-family residential zone, if the proposal meets certain statutory criteria; and
WHEREAS, SB 9 specifies that proposed projects and subdivisions cannot be proposed in prohibited locations under Government Code Section 65913.4(a)(6)(B)-(K) such as lands within an earthquake fault zone, federally designated flood plan, historic district or property, and high fire hazard severity zone as defined under state law; and
WHEREAS, SB 9 further restricts the standards and regulations that local agencies, including the City of Brisbane, may impose to only objective zoning, subdivision, and design standards that do not conflict with the statue and where those standards must not physically preclude a unit size of at least 800 square feet or qualifying urban lot split; and
Whereas, no parcel within the overlay district is located within one-half mile walking distance of either a high-quality transit corridor, as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 21155 of the Public Resources Code, or a major transit stop, as defined in Section 21064.3 of the Public Resources Code, or within one block of a car share facility.

WHEREAS, the City seeks to regulate development pursuant to SB 9 through the implementation of regulations concerning duplex residential developments and urban lot splits; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 65852.21(j) and 66411.7(n) of the Government Code, a local agency may adopt an ordinance to implement SB 9; and
WHEREAS, City Council adopted the revised 2023-2031 Housing Element (Housing Element) on May 18, 2023, which was subsequently certified by the California Department of Housing and Community Development; and
30 139
Q.
111
L.

WHEREAS, the Housing Element includes Program 2.A.6, “Adopt implementing ordinance for ministerial duplex conversions and single-family lot splits as provided by Government Code Sections 65852.21 and 66411.7”, and
WHEREAS, the draft ordinance attached as Exhibit A to this resolution proposes amendments to Title 16 and Title 17; and
WHERAS, Exhibit B to this resolution proposes amendment to the zoning map to establish a new R-TUO Residential Two Unit Overlay District, to overlay the R-1 Residential District and the R-BA Residential Brisbane Acres District; and
WHEREAS, on May 9, 2024, the Planning Commission conducted a hearing of the application, publicly noticed in compliance with Brisbane Municipal Code Chapters 1.12 and 17.54, at which time any person interested in the matter was given an opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed and considered the staff memorandum relating to said application, and the written and oral evidence presented to the Planning Commission in support of and in opposition to the application; and WHEREAS, adoption of this ordinance is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to California Government Code Section 15061(b)(1) & (3), Section 15183 relating to the implementation of the Housing Element, and because it involves code amendments pursuant to California Government Code Section 65852.21(j) and Section 66411.7(n) relating to the implementation of SB 9; and
NOW, THEREFORE, based upon the evidence presented, both written and oral, the Planning Commission of the City of Brisbane hereby RECOMMENDS that the City Council adopt the attached ordinance.

ADOPTED this ninth day of May, 2024, by the following vote:

AYES: Funke, Lau, Patel, and Sayasane
NOES: NA
ABSENT:Gooding
_____________________
PAMALA SAYASANE, Vice Chairperson
for ALEX LAU, Chairperson
ATTEST:
________________________________________
JOHN SWIECKI, Community Development Director
31 140
Q.
112
L.

DRAFT

BRISBANE PLANNING COMMISSION
Action Minutes of May 9, 2024
Hybrid Meeting

ROLL CALL

Present: Commissioners Funke, Lau, Patel, and Sayasane

Absent: Gooding
Staff Present: Director Swiecki, Senior Planner Johnson, Associate Planner Robbins

CALL TO ORDER
Chairperson Lau called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.

ADOPTION OF AGENDA
A motion by Commissioner Sayasane, seconded by Commissioner Funke to adopt the agenda.

Motion approved 4-0.

CONSENT CALENDAR
A motion by Commissioner Funke, seconded by Commissioner Sayasane to adopt the consent calendar. Motion approved 4-0.

ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
There were none.

WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
Chairperson Lau acknowledged written correspondence pertaining to New Business Items A and B

NEW BUSINESS
A. PUBLIC HEARING: Zoning Text and Map Amendment 2024-RZ-1, R-1 Residential District and the R-BA Brisbane Acres Residential District in entirety; recommendation to City Council on zoning text and map amendment 2024-RZ-1 amending regulations within Title 16 and 17 of the Brisbane Municipal Code to add the R-TUO residential two unit overlay district as new chapter 17.05 and related amendments; and finding that this project is exempt from environment review under CEQA Guidelines Sections 15061(b)(1) & (3), Section 15183; City of Brisbane, applicant.

Senior Planner Johnson presented staff report to the Commission. 32 141
Q.
113
L.

DRAFT
Brisbane Planning Commission Minutes
May 9, 2024

Page 2 ends

Commissioner Sayasane asked about the pending court decision on SB 9 in the Los Angeles Superior Court and whether the City’s decision on the ordinance should be postponed until after that ruling has further played out. Director Swiecki responded, noting that Brisbane’s legal counsel had reviewed this matter and indicated that the decision is from a trial court in southern California and is only applicable to those specific charter cities. It would not be applicable to Brisbane which is a general law city. In response to an inquiry as to what would happen if SB9 was repealed or invalidated, Mr. Swiecki responded the City could amend its zoning regulations accordingly.

Commissioner Patel asked about whether there were notification procedures included in the draft ordinance. Staff responded that there were not, since lot splits and two-unit developments are to be ministerial, per SB 9. Mr Swiecki noted an informational notification could be provided.

Chairperson Lau opened the public hearing.

With no one wishing to address the Commission, a motion was made by Commissioner Patel and seconded by Commissioner Funke to close the public hearing. The motion was approved 4-0.

After discussion, a motion was made by Commissioner Patel and seconded by Commissioner Funke to approve the application, including an informational notification provision to adjacent property owners, via adoption of Resolution 2024-RZ-1. The motion was approved 4-0.

Chairperson Lau read the appeal procedure.

B. PUBLIC HEARING: Zoning Text Amendment 2024-RZ-2, City-wide; recommendation to City Council on omnibus zoning amendments to modify the development standards for multifamily and residential mixed use zoning districts consistent with California Senate Bill SB 478 (“housing opportunity act”) and as provided in the 2023-2031 Housing Element for building heights, lot coverage and floor area ratios, and related amendments, including, but not limited to, organizational amendments and amendments to development regulation exceptions and Zoning Administrator procedures; and finding that this project is exempt from environment review under CEQA Guidelines Sections 15061(b)(3), Section 15183; City of Brisbane, applicant.

Senior Planner Johnson presented staff report to the Commission.

Senior Planner Johnson responded to the Commission’s questions regarding the balance between lot coverage and the floor area ratio for multifamily developments that would have a 1.25 floor area ratio maximum, the process for Planning Commission appeals on Zoning Administrator items, the rationale for increasing the height limit to 36 feet, the difference between minor versus and major modifications, and the neighbor notification process for Zoning Administrator applications.

Chairperson Lau opened the public hearing.
33 142
Q.
114
L.

DRAFT
Brisbane Planning Commission Minutes
May 9, 2024

Page 3 ends

With no one wishing to address the Commission, a motion was made by Commissioner Patel and seconded by Commissioner Funke to close the public hearing. The motion was approved 4-0.

A motion was made by Commissioner Patel and seconded by Commissioner Sayasane to approve the application via adoption of Resolution 2024-RZ-2. The motion was approved 4-0.

Chairperson Lau read the appeal procedure.

ITEMS INITIATED BY STAFF
Director Swiecki noted the following:

1. County-wide planning commissioner training will be held at the end of May,

2. The City Council authorized staff to initiate the Bank of America planning process.

3. Jeremy Dennis was hired as the new City Manager.

ITEMS INITIATED BY THE COMMISSION
Commissioner Sayasane announced she registered for the commissioner training and invited the other members to join.

ADJOURNMENT
Chairperson Lau adjourned the meeting at approximately 8:44 p.m. to the next regular meeting of May 23, 2024.

Attest:
___________________________________
John A. Swiecki, Community Development Director
NOTE: A full video record of this meeting can be found on the City’s YouTube channel at www.youtube.com/BrisbaneCA, on the City’s website at http://www.brisbaneca.org/meetings, or on DVD (by request only) at City Hall.
34 143
Q.
115
L.

File Attachments for Item:

M. Receive Brisbane Marina Sea Level Rise Memorandums
(Receipt and review of these memorandums is exempt from CEQA because it is not a project (CCR Title 14 §15378 (b) (2))
116

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Brisbane Marina Sea Level Rise Memorandums Page 1 of 3
Meeting Date: December 5, 2024
From: Director of Public Works/City Engineer
Subject: Brisbane Marina Sea Level Rise Memorandums
Receipt and review of these memorandums is exempt from CEQA because it is not a project (CCR Title 14 §15378 (b) (2)).

Community Goal/Result Safe Community
Purpose
Staff will present the findings of two studies on sea level rise that are focused on the impact to the city’s marina and its adjacent utilities.

Recommendation
Receive the memorandums and provide direction to staff as deemed necessary and appropriate.

Background
During Council’s earlier review of a proposed Siera Point Open Space and Parks Master Plan, Council directed staff to complete studies on the direct impact of sea level rise on marina facilities, to better understand the future relationships between possibly relocated marina facilities and any new open space/park concepts. Those studies, a review of impacts to near shore utilities by EKI and a review of onshore and offshore marina infrastructure by Anchor QEA are complete and will be discussed below.

Also, in July of this year, staff received a conditional award letter for a planning study to address the impact of sea level rise on the Brisbane Lagoon, Sierra Point Parkway, and U.S. Highway 101. Questions and revisions from Caltrans were finalized at the end of October, and the City is awaiting final notice of award and obligation of funds.

The City has attempted to secure additional finding to further understand and plan for sea level rise impacts. In August of 2023 the city’s grant writing consultant applied for a federal grant (Promoting Resilient Operations for Transformative, Efficient and Cost Saving Transportation - PROTECT) to study the impact of bayside sea level rise from our north to south city limits, and to develop a resilience improvement plan. This effort received a significant amount of support from OneShoreline staff, and received letters of support from Caltrain, California High Speed Rail, Supervisor Canepa and Senator Becker. Unfortunately, this effort was not awarded. Staff is continuing to work closely with OneShoreline in hopes of participating in a holistic approach to sea level rise with participation from Caltrans and adjoining municipalities. 1 of 46
117
M.

Brisbane Marina Sea Level Rise Memorandums Page 2 of 3
Discussion
Both attached studies analyzed likely effects of projected sea level rise (SLR) in the years 2030, 2050, 2070 and 2100.

Utilities
The City’s water, sewer and storm drain facilities will all be impacted by a 2030 100-year storm surge because of the elevation of their present location (generally under or adjacent to the east shoreline walkway). By 2050, both the storm surge and king tides will cause additional nuisance flooding that will disallow access to the utilities for the duration of the storm surge and during the king tide periods. By 2070, the studies indicate these utilities will most likely be flooded daily.

To continue providing reliable public services to Sierra Point, the water and storm drain lines should be raised to an appropriate elevation well before 2070. Staff recommends planning to relocate the storm drain facilities by 2030, and the water facilities by 2040. A decision on relocating the sewer lines should be made consistent with planning for the marina itself, which is the only user of sewer lines on the south shoreline.

Opinions of probable cost (contingencies included):

Project Cost
Waterline relocation $3.4M
Storm drain modification (gravity flow) or Storm drain modification (pump stations) $6.9M - $4.9M Sewer system relocation $4.0M
Marina
Key components of the marina evaluated are the breakwater (the north-south running sea wall), the fishing pier, navigational piles, the piles, floats, gangways and gangway platforms that make up the marina, and the three bathrooms and harbormaster’s office that make up the landside structures.

The Anchor QEA memo does not find a need to raise or relocate facilities due to SLR in 2030; however, they note that by this time the facility will be 50 years old and should be replaced.

This is a significant “early” cost. (Note that even if these components were not replaced due to age in 2030, they will require replacement in 2050 due to SLR impacts.) Rather than providing a detailed SLR-associated rationale for each of the recommended upgrades, the table below simply provides a chronological outlay of funds needed to keep the marina fully functional. 2 of 46
118
M.

Brisbane Marina Sea Level Rise Memorandums Page 3 of 3
Opinions of probable cost (contingencies excluded):
“Replace by” Year Project Cost
2030 Replace seaside marina components $46.0M
2050 Raise breakwater or New breakwater $6.4M - $60.0M
2050 Raise navigational piles $0.3M
2050 Relocate landside structures $5.8M
2070 Modify fishing pier or $1.2M
2070 Replace fishing pier $4.0M
2070 Raise gangways to elev. 17’ MSL and begin replacement of components that are now 40-years old
$33.0M
2070 Relocate/raise existing landside structures $2.0M
2100 Relocate yacht club $3.6M
Suggested Direction for Council to Provide Staff:
• Develop a CIP to modify the existing storm drain infrastructure no later than 2030. • Develop a plan to relocate the waterline no later than 2050. • Develop an RFP to create a funding plan for the 2030/2050 anticipated Marina replacements.

Measure of Success
A continuing early planning effort to respond to sea level rise by protecting public infrastructure in the most responsible manner.

Environmental Review
Receipt and review of these memorandums does not need further environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as it is general policy and procedure making not applied to a specific instance and therefore it is not a “project” (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3, Article 20, §15378 (b) (2)).

Attachments

1. EKI 8/27/24 memo, Sea Level Rise Assessment of Impacts on Wet Utilities at the Brisbane Marina

2. Anchor QEA memo Assessment of Sea Level Rise at Brisbane Marina ___________________________________ ___________________________________ Randy Breault, Public Works Director Jeremy Dennis, City Manager 3 of 46
119
M.
27 August 2024

MEMORANDUM
To: Randy Breault, P.E. (City of Brisbane)
From: Jonathan Sutter, P.E., Yuqing Gao, and Colin Dixon (EKI) Subject: Sea Level Rise Assessment of Impacts on Wet Utilities at the Brisbane Marina (EKI C40021.00)
EKI Environment and Water, Inc. (EKI) has prepared this memorandum for the City of Brisbane (City) to analyze projected future sea level rise (SLR) impacts on the City’s potable water, wastewater, and storm drain infrastructure at the Brisbane Marina (Project Site). To analyze these issues, EKI assessed the marina landside utilities in terms of direct SLR risks (i.e., flooding) and impacts from other infrastructure adaptations as described in the technical memorandum prepared by Anchor QEA (Anchor QEA, 2024). As part of this assessment, EKI identified future wet utility infrastructure improvements and developed corresponding opinions of probable cost (OPCs). For the storm drain system there were two alternatives considered: (1) installing a new raised gravity-based drainage system and (2) installing three new, low-head pump stations to create a partially pressurized system. The corresponding total OPCs for necessary improvements for all utility improvements are estimated to range from $13.3 to $14.3 million in 2024 dollars, depending on the storm drain system alternative.

EKI followed the framework established by Anchor QEA and analyzed the likely effects of projected SLR on each utility in the years 2030, 2050, 2070, and 2100. The landside adaptations recommended by Anchor QEA are described on an incremental basis for each projection horizon. In accordance with that approach, EKI assessed the impacts to the landside utilities and identified to what extent each system would need to be upgraded and replaced for the corresponding SLR planning horizon. However, EKI assumes that the utility improvements would be performed only once and would be constructed at the same time as the improvements identified by Anchor QEA. Therefore, the OPC is based on replacing and upgrading the utilities while planning for the projected SLR in the year 2100.

CURRENT WET UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURE CONDITIONS
Landside utilities within the Project Site include a potable water system, sanitary sewer system, and storm drain system. EKI relied on the City’s infrastructure geodatabase and a site inspection to inventory each utility within the Project Site. When describing the location of the utility components, EKI will reference the two critical landside elevations described in the Anchor QEA memorandum: the revetment and the top of slope elevation.

The revetment is an armored slope along the waterfront. On top of the revetment is the shoreline path that runs along the perimeter of the marina, and Anchor QEA estimates this elevation at +9.6 feet (Anchor QEA, 2024). There are four structures on top of the revetment including three bathrooms and the Harbor Master’s office. The parking lot servicing the Harbor Master’s office is also at this level. The revetment, one bathroom and the parking lot can be seen in Photo 1. There is another slope inland of the revetment, and on top of that slope are two more structures and additional parking lots. This is the top of slope 4 of 46
120
M.

Randy Breault, P.E.

City of Brisbane
27 August 2024

Page 2 of 27 ends

elevation, and it is estimated to be +15.5 feet (Anchor QEA, 2024). One of the top of slope structures can be seen in the background of Photo 1.

Photo 1: Bathroom on Shoreline Revetment
Potable Water System
As shown on Figure 1, the potable water (PW) system within the Project Site includes a 16-inch diameter high density polyethylene (HDPE) water main running along the revetment. Outside of the Project Site, this water main extends along the north and south revetments and forms the main transmission loop in Sierra Point. A 10-inch diameter HDPE pipe runs through the Marina parking lot and connects to the 16- inch diameter main near the Harbor Master’s Office near Dock 2. The system supplies potable water to the four structures along the revetment and to the Sierra Point Yacht Club at the top of slope level. Within the Project Site, in addition to the water service connections and related appurtenances, there are six fire hydrants and two blow-offs.

Sanitary Sewer System
As shown on Figure 2, the sanitary sewer (SS) system within the Project Site includes an 8-inch diameter HDPE gravity sewer and five manholes that collect wastewater from the four structures along the 5 of 46
121
M.

Randy Breault, P.E.

City of Brisbane
27 August 2024

Page 3 of 27 ends

revetment. The gravity main conveys wastewater to Lift Station #1 (also known as the Harbormaster Lift Station), which is located south of the Dock 3 restrooms (see Photo 2). Lift Station #1 pumps the wastewater through a 6-inch asbestos cement pipe (ACP) force main north along the revetment within the Project Site. Outside of the Project Site, the force main continues west along the northern revetment and then south parallel to Highway 101 before discharging back to the gravity system upstream of Lift Station #4.

Photo 2. Harbormaster Lift Station (Lift Station #1)
Storm Drain System
As shown on Figure 3, the storm drain (SD) system within the Project Site serves the Marina, and several nearby parking lots. The system drains stormwater to the Bay via ten outfalls along the revetment. At the time of EKI’s site visit, all outfalls were fully submerged and did not appear to have any tide gates installed.

An example outfall is shown in Photo 3. The SD system within the Project Site includes 11,310 linear feet (LF) ofstorm drain pipes, 117 catch basins, and seven manholes (although only one was found during field investigation). A portion of the SD system located outside of the Project Site is included in this assessment because it may need to be modified in response to SLR adaptations and modifications to the Marina outfalls (Figure 3).
6 of 46
122
M.

Randy Breault, P.E.

City of Brisbane
27 August 2024

Page 4 of 27 ends

Photo 3. Submerged Outfall in the Brisbane Marina
7 of 46
123
M.
� Legend �
i r - I _ _ Marina_AOI
SPW_FireHydrant
r .,
r---------- "
I
I
t
41"' - - - - - -
I
I
,
H SPPW_ServiceValve
H SPPW_SystemValve
I,
17 ft
a
i SPPW_FlushingBlowoff - SPPW_WaterMain
Q)
c::
"'.0
SPPW _ ServiceMeter
91 Sources
Abbreviations
AOI = Area of Interest
SP = Sierra Point
PW = Potable Water
Potable Water System
i 1. Base map provided by Esri Online Services, dated July 29, 2024. 6 B��MM�M
� Notes Brisbane, CA
� 1. All locations are approximate. k August 2024
x 2. This map only shows utilities located within the Brisbane Marina AOI. e I environment C40021.00 � & water Figure 1
o.__� _________________________________________________ _J 8 of 46
124
M.
r - - - - - - - - - "
I
I � - - - - - - ..

I
t ,
�
17 ft
r .,
.. ______
-5l Legend �
i r - I Marina_AOI
0 ss_co
j � SS_GravityMain
Q)
c::
"' .0 � SS_LiftStation
91 Sources
c::::J SS_LiftStationBoundary
e SS_MH
= SS_ForceMain
"' 1. Base map provided by Esri Online Services, dated July 29, 2024. :a � Notes
y 1. All locations are approximate.
x 2. This map only shows utilities located within the Brisbane Marina AOI. .i::

Abbreviations
AOI = Area of Interest
MH = Manhole
SS = Sanitary Sewer
CO = Clean Out
SP = Sierra Point
Sanitary Sewer System
Brisbane Marina
Brisbane, CA
August 2024
C40021.00
�;L_ _______________________ ek1 �
environment
&water Figure 2
9 of 46
125
M.
.. ______ .,
� Legend �
,. -
i _ _ I Marina_AOI
[!) SPSD_CatchBasin
� Sources
o SPSD_Cleanout = SPSD_Pipe
0 SPSD_Manhole
� 1. Base map provided by Esri Online Services, dated July 29, 2024. �
i Notes

1. All locations are approximate.

N
g 2. This map shows utilities connected to the 10 storm drain outfalls y located within the Brisbane Marina A0I.
� 3. Storm drain manholes are not verified in field.

Abbreviations
A0I = Area of Interest
SP = Sierra Point
SD = Storm Drain
ek1
Storm Drain System
environment
&water
Brisbane Marina
Brisbane, CA
August 2024
C40021.00
Figure 3
"--L _________________________________________________ ___, 10 of 46
126
M.

Randy Breault, P.E.

City of Brisbane
27 August 2024

Page 8 of 27 ends

PROJECTED SEA-LEVEL RISE AND IMPACTS TO WET UTILITIES AT THE PROJECT SITE In March 2023, a presentation to the Brisbane City Council included an exhibit showing mean higher high water (MHHW), king tide, and 100-year storm surge elevations based on SLR projections for the years 2030, 2050, 2070, and 2100 (Figure 4). The San Francisco Bay has two tidal cycles every day, and the MHHW elevation is the average of the daily higher high tide. The MHHW elevation is indicative of the elevation where daily tidal flooding is likely and permanent inundation is possible. At this elevation, rising groundwater is also a larger risk, as long-term rising sea levels can raise the water table in nearshore environments. If groundwater comes in contact with wet utilities, it can increase the rate of corrosion of metal components, make maintenance and repair more difficult, and increase the risk of crosscontamination between the groundwater and the various water systems. King tides are a set of unusually high tides that only happen a few times per year, and this means the impacts of the King tide are more similar to the storm surge. They involve temporary inundation and potential damage from wave action.

This can harm structures, disable electrical systems, and increase erosion and soil destabilization.

The Anchor QEA memorandum (Anchor QEA, 2024) analyzes the impacts of SLR on the four structures on the Marina revetment and the two inland structures, which are at the Marina top of slope elevation. The four revetment structures are raised off the ground (Photo 1) and the bottom floor elevation of the structures is estimated at +11 feet. The two top of slope structures have a bottom floor elevation of +15.5 feet. For the 2030 SLR scenario, Anchor QEA does not recommend raising the revetment or top of slope elevation as the storm surge only reaches elevation +10.3 feet and therefore does not impact any of the structures. However, this elevation is higher than the top of the revetment (+9.6 ft), and this means that anything at ground level on the revetment may be at risk from a 100-year storm surge.

In the 2050 SLR scenario, the storm surge (+12.3 feet) threatens the four revetment structures (+11 feet), and the king tide (+10.2 feet) may flood the top of the revetment (+9.6 feet). For that reason, Anchor QEA recommends raising the revetment and the area behind the revetment to +13.3 feet in order to be one foot above the storm surge elevation.

In the 2070 SLR scenario, the MHHW elevation (+10.2 feet) is above the current revetment elevation and therefore anything on the revetment is likely to experience daily flooding. The storm surge elevation is +14.8 feet, which is not yet impacting the top of slope structures. Anchor QEA recommends that the revetment and the area behind the revetment be raised to at least +15.8 feet in order to be one foot above the storm surge elevation.

In the 2100 SLR scenario, the storm surge may reach +16.3 feet, putting the top of slope structures (+15.5 feet) at risk. Planning for 2100 SLR, Anchor QEA recommends that the revetment, the area behind the revetment and the buildings at the top of slope elevation be raised to +17.3 feet.

In the sections below, EKI assesses each SLR scenario and its anticipated impacts on the potable water, sanitary sewer, and storm drain systems.
11 of 46
127
M.

Randy Breault, P.E.

City of Brisbane
27 August 2024

Page 9 of 27 ends

Figure 4. The Brisbane Marina Site Inundation Map
(a) 2023 Conditions
(b) 2030 Site Inundation
12 of 46
128
M.

Randy Breault, P.E.

City of Brisbane
27 August 2024

Page 10 of 27 ends

Randy Breault, P.E.

City of Brisbane
27 August 2024

Page 11 of 27 ends

(e) 2100 Site Inundation
14 of 46
130
M.

Randy Breault, P.E.

City of Brisbane
27 August 2024

Page 12 of 27 ends

Potable Water System
The water distribution pipes were constructed along the San Francisco Bay Trail and are located at the edge of the pavement along the shoreline. Connected to pipeline are related infrastructure components such as valves, meters, fire hydrants and flushing blow-offs. The facilities are generally at ground level with an elevation of approximately +9.6 feet.
2030 SLR Conditions
The magnitude of SLR by 2030 is relatively small, and the tidal and storm surge elevations for 2030 are essentially equal to the 2023 elevations. In 2030, these PW components are less likely impacted by the daily highest tides (MHHW), but components on the ground surface are at risk of flooding from the 100- year storm surge, which may reach an elevation of +10.3 feet (Figure 5). The underground pipes are not expected to be impacted by the temporary storm surge.
2050 SLR Conditions
The 100-year storm surge may reach an elevation of +12.3 feet, and the daily highest tides will reach an elevation of +8.6 feet (Figure 4c). At their current elevations, the surface components of the PW system would be at risk from the 100-year storm surge but not yet impacted by the daily tides (Figure 5).

As previously noted, Anchor QEA recommends that the revetment be raised to at least elevation +13.3 feet, by 2050. The landside adaptation is expected to affect the operation of 3,200 feet of water main, 6 fire hydrants, and 6 system valves along the shoreline. It is recommended that the PW utilities be replaced and raised at the same time as the revetment. This is because when the pipes get deeper, they become harder to access for maintenance and repair. Additionally, the pipes are more likely to be submerged below the groundwater table. This is undesirable as the groundwater can cause corrosion of metal components, and any leaks in the pipes can lead to cross-contamination. 2070 SLR Conditions
By 2070, the 100-year storm surge may reach an elevation of +14.8 feet and the daily higher tide will reach +10.2 feet (Figure 4d). At their current elevations, the surface components of the PW system would be at risk from both the 100-year storm surge and the daily higher tides (Figure 5). As described above, the structures on the revetment are also at risk of flooding, and therefore Anchor QEA recommends that the revetment be raised an additional 2.5 feet, to elevation +15.8 feet. As a result, an additional 90 feet of distribution water main may be affected.
2100 SLR Conditions
By 2100, the 100-year storm surge may reach elevation +16.3 feet, and the daily higher tide will rise to elevation +13.6 feet (Figure 4e). It is recommended that the revetment and the top of slope be raised to elevation +17.3 feet. For the revetment, this represents a 1.5-foot increase from the 2070 recommendation, and for the top of slope it represents a 1.8-foot increase from the current elevation. All PW infrastructure within the Marina Area of Interest (AOI) is recommended to be replaced. The estimated costs of the PW system improvements are shown in Table 2. 15 of 46
131
M.
� Legend
i � Storm Surge 2030
j � Storm Surge 2050
41"' - - - - - - ..
�
I
I
,
r - I _ _ Marina_AOI
a SPW_FireHydrant
,
I
..
'
,
H SPPW_ServiceValve
H SPPW_SystemValve
Abbreviations
AOI = Area of Interest
SP = Sierra Point
PW = Potable Water
� Storm Surge 2070 i SPPW_FlushingBlowoff - SPPW_WaterMain --------------------.J :g � Storm Surge 2100
"' .0
.�
9l Sources
B SPPW_ServiceMeter
i 1. Inundation area projections provided by Anchor QEA, dated February 2024. � 2. Base map provided by Esri Online Services, dated July 29, 2024. 0 0
9 Notes
� 1 . All locations are approximate.
� 2. This map only shows utilities located within the Brisbane Marina AOI. ek1 Flooding Risk:

Potable Water System
environment
&water
Brisbane Marina
Brisbane, CA
August 2024
C40021.00
Figure 5
16 of 46
132
M.

Randy Breault, P.E.

City of Brisbane
27 August 2024

Page 14 of 27 ends

Sanitary Sewer Systems
Two sets of sanitary sewer networks are present in the Marina area, including a gravity sewer system and a pressurized sewer system. The sewer pipes run underground beneath the shoreline revetment with associated lift station unit, cleanouts and manholes. Many of these components are at ground level along the revetment, which is approximately at elevation +9.6 feet. However, the lift station housing, which contains its electrical components, is raised off the ground (Photo 2). Therefore, it is recommended that the lift station be replaced at the same time as the other structures on the revetment. The SLR impacts on the SS system are similar to the previously discussed impacts on the PW system (Figure 6). The impacted sewer infrastructure includes 1,500 feet of gravity main, 1,700 feet of forced main, and one lift station. The cost of replacing these systems is shown in Table 2. 17 of 46
133
M.
� Legend �
�
41"' - - - - - -
I
I
,
,
,
I
r .,
Abbreviations
i � Storm Surge 2030 ::._ : I Marina_AOI
0 SS_CO
c:::::J SS_LiftStationBoundary AOI = Area of Interest
MH = Manhole
CO = Clean Out
SP = Sierra Point
j � Storm Surge 2050
"' � Storm Surge 2070
" � Storm Surge 2100
c::
"' .0
"'
� Sources
� SS_GravityMain
� SS_LiftStation
• SS_MH = SS_ForceMain
i 1. Inundation area projections provided by Anchor QEA, dated February 2024. � 2. Base map provided by Esri Online Services, dated July 29, 2024. � Notes
� 1. All locations are approximate.
� 2. This map only shows utilities localed within the Brisbane Marina AOI.

SS = Sanitary Sewer
Flooding Risk:

Sanitary Sewer System
ek1 environment
&water
Brisbane Marina
Brisbane, CA
August 2024
C40021.00
Figure 6
18 of 46
134
M.

Randy Breault, P.E.

City of Brisbane
27 August 2024

Page 16 of 27 ends

Storm Drain System
Like the other wet utility systems, surface components of the Storm Drain (SD) system, including catch basins and manholes, would be at risk of damage from temporary flooding. However, the storm drain system faces an additional difficulty during large storm surges, because if the catch basins and pipes are inundated during a 100-year storm, this could reduce the system’s capacity to drain the stormwater from further uphill. During EKI’s visit to the site, it was noted that the SD outfalls were below the water level, indicating that daily tidal fluctuations are already impacting the infrastructure. EKI recommends that in order to maintain the system functionality the outfalls are raised at the same time as the revetment.

Unlike the PW and SS systems, the existing SD network in the Marina is entirely a gravity-based system.

Hence, when the outfalls are raised, either some of the upstream pipes will need to also be raised or a system of pumps will need to be installed. EKI evaluated both options and they are presented below.

Gravity Powered System
The first scenario looks at maintaining a gravity-based storm drain system under the different levels of SLR. This involves raising the outfalls along the revetment and raising any pipes behind the outfalls that would no longer maintain a sufficient slope.
2030 SLR Conditions
Similar to the other two systems evaluated above, no major impacts are anticipated by 2030. 2050 SLR Conditions
Raising the revetment will require replacing the SD catch basins and raising the outfall elevations. Raising the outfall elevations will require that some of the uphill SD pipes also be raised in order to maintain a minimum slope. There is incomplete data on the current elevations of the SD pipes, but using the invert elevations from the catch basins, it is possible to estimate which pipe segments will need to be raised.

Because the revetment is being raised more than the top-of-slope elevation, the new pipes will likely have a lower slope than before. This means the diameter of the pipes will also need to be increased in order to maintain a similar system capacity. The new pipe diameters shown in the OPC are for cost estimation purposes and are generalized across the system. The new diameters for individual pipes may differ from these estimations depending on factors such as the new watershed area and the exact pipe slope.

Assuming the outfalls are raised the same amount as the revetment (3.7 feet), that will require replacing 2,800 feet of SD pipes, 21 catch basins, and one manhole. 2070 SLR Conditions
Assuming the outfalls are raised an additional 2.5 feet above the 2050 recommendation (the same amount as the Revetment), that will require replacing a total of 3,800 feet of SD pipes, 27 catch basins, and one manhole.
2100 SLR Conditions
Assuming the outfalls are raised an additional 1.5 feet above the 2070 recommendation, that will require replacing a total of 6,100 feet of pipe, 52 catch basins and one manhole. The pipes that would need to be 19 of 46
135
M.

Randy Breault, P.E.

City of Brisbane
27 August 2024

Page 17 of 27 ends

replaced and their new invert elevations are shown on Figure 8. The cost estimates of these upgrades are shown in Table 2.

Ground Cover Analysis
One important consideration with the gravity-based system is whether there will be sufficient ground cover after raising the pipes. For 2100, Anchor QEA (Anchor QEA, 2024) identified +17.3 ft as the minimum elevation for all marina buildings in order to be safely above the 100-yr storm surge. Specifically, they recommend three adaptations: raising the revetment, filling the area behind the revetment and raising the bottom floor of the top of slope buildings. This leaves flexibility in whether the top of slope ground level is raised or if just the buildings are raised off the ground. For analyzing the ground cover over the new pipes, EKI conservatively assumed that the top of slope ground level would not be raised. This means the ground surface inland of the top of slope elevation will remain in its current state, and the shoreside ground surface will be raised to +17.3 ft. EKI calculated the new invert elevations of each pipe, assuming that the layout of the SD system is unchanged, that each pipes needs a minimum 1% slope, and that the outfalls are raised the same amount as the revetment. The outcome is shown on Figure 8, and EKI concluded that all pipes will have a minimum of 2.5 ft of ground cover.

Lift Station Powered System
The alternative to a gravity-based system would be installing new pump stations and creating a partially pressurized SD system. In this scenario most of the SD pipes inland of the revetment would stay unchanged, however, the outfalls would still be raised with the revetment. The benefits of a pumped system are that most of the existing storm drain system would not need to be replaced and the system would be easier to adapt to continually changing environments. For example, if the revetment needs to be raised again after 2100, a gravity-based system may need to be mostly replaced, whereas the pumped system only needs new outfalls, and maybe larger pumps. The drawbacks of the pumped system are that the pumps have a higher operational cost, require more maintenance, and have the risk of failure compared to a gravity system.

Figure 9 presents a conceptual plan for delineating four sub-drainage areas around the Marina, based on current topography and the existing storm drainage network profile. The plan proposes converting three of the sub-drainage areas into partially pressurized SD networks, with one new booster pump stations within each of the three sub-drainage areas. These new pump stations are expected to collect stormwater within their respective sub-drainage areas and discharge it into the bay through new downstream pipes and outfalls. The sub-drainage area between dock 2 and 3 (shown in purple on Figure 9), would maintain its current gravity-based SD networks.

This analysis assumes that the new stormwater pump stations will be designed to convey peak flows within each sub-drainage area during a 10-year design storm, in accordance with criteria set forth in other publicly available storm drainage studies from the San Francisco Bay Area, as well as EKI’s engineering experience from similar projects.

The City’s 2003 Storm Drainage Master Plan (SDMP) divided the City into distinct watersheds and estimated peak stormwater inflow and runoff volume for each, based on various hydrological factors such as land use, precipitation, and soil conditions. Since the SDMP does not provide projected peak flows for the Marina area, EKI compared its hydrologic parameters with those of other watersheds. It was observed 20 of 46
136
M.

Randy Breault, P.E.

City of Brisbane
27 August 2024

Page 18 of 27 ends

that Watershed 18C at buildout shares similar hydrological conditions with the Sierra Point area (including the Marina). Table 1 summarizes the projected flows for Watershed 18C at buildout, including the factors used for each hydrological parameter in the SDMP, and provides an estimate for the peak stormwater flow in the Marina area. The peak flow of each new pump station’s service area during a 10-year design storm are approximately 3,500 gpm, 6,500 gpm, and 4,700 gpm.

Table 1. Estimated Stormwater 10-year Peak Flow in the Marina Drainage
Area
Subdrainage
Area
Area
(acres) Land Use
Imperviousness
(%)
10-year
Peak
Inflow
(cfs)
10-year
Runoff
Volume
(AF/24hrs)
Total
Peak
Flow
(gpm)
Sierra Point
(Marina)
Future
Pump
Station 1

5.5 office 75 7.5 0.4 3,400
Future
Pump
Station 2

10.5 office 75 14.3 0.5 6,500
Future
Pump
Station 3
7 office 75 9.5 2.0 4,700
Watershed
18C 27.2
commercial
mixed use
(buildout)
80 47.3 7.7 22,900
Abbreviations:

AF = acre-feet cfs = cubic feet per second gpm = gallons per minute hrs = hours Notes:
(1) Source: Brisbane, 2003.

Based on the estimated peak flows, the new pump stations are expected to have firm pumping capacities of 3,500 gpm, 6,500 gpm, and 4,700 gpm, respectively. Note that these pumping capacity requirements represent high-level estimates and are for planning purposes only. EKI recommends that the City conduct further studies to refine the peak flow calculations and assess the feasibility of implementing such a pumped system.
21 of 46
137
M.

Legend
� Storm Surge 2030 � Storm Surge 2100 o SPSD_Cleanout
� Storm Surge 2050 r - I Marina_AOI O SPSD_Manhole
� Storm Surge 2070 [!) SPSD_CatchBasin = SPSD_Pipe
Sources

1. Inundation area projections provided by Anchor QEA, dated February 2024.

2. Base map provided by Esri Online Services, dated July 29, 2024.

Notes
1 . All locations are approximate.

2. This map shows utilities connected to the 10 storm drain outfalls located within the Brisbane Marina AOI.

3. Storm drain manholes are not verified in field.

Abbreviations
AOI = Area of Interest
SP = Sierra Point
SD = Storm Drain
ek1
Flooding Risk:

Storm Drain System
environment
&water
Brisbane Marina
Brisbane, CA
August 2024
C40021.00
Figure 7
22 of 46
138
M.
23 of 46
139
M.
24 of 46
140
M.

Randy Breault, P.E.

City of Brisbane
27 August 2024

Page 22 of 27 ends

PROPOSED UPGRADES AND OPINION OF PROBABLE COST TO ADDRESS PROJECTED SEA-LEVEL RISE Descriptions and costs for recommended projects are provided in the sections below. Because this is a planning-level effort, many of the practical constraints that will govern the detailed design and construction of actual infrastructure improvements are unknown at this time, such as:
• Utility interference and relocation;
• Right-of-way and/or easement availability;
• Traffic control requirements;
• Geotechnical and hazardous waste conditions;
• Archaeological discoveries and environmental impacts; and • Regulatory and permitting requirements.

Utility Improvements
As described in previous sections, the sea-level rise and impact projections were analyzed for different time horizons by Anchor QEA. However, for capital improvement projects budget planning purposes, the utility improvements are evaluated below using the time horizon of the year 2100.

The recommended improvements are described below and itemized improvements for each system are included in Table 2. Note that these are high level recommendations and exact details of the improvements require further evaluations and planning.

Potable Water System
• Cut and cap the existing 16-inch diameter HDPE water main at the existing blow-off located at the southwest corner of the Marina area of interest (AOI) (Figure 1) and near the existing 16-inch x 6-inch Tee located at the northwest corner of the Marina AOI; • Abandon existing fire hydrants, system valves, blow-off assemblies, service valves, and water meters on and fed by the proposed abandoned 16-inch HDPE water mains (Figure 1); • Install new 16-inch HDPE water mains running through the existing parking lots and connect to the existing 16-inch HDPE water mains near the north and south limits of the Marina AOI; • Install new blow-off assemblies, system valves, and fire hydrants; and • Reconnect or install new service lines and water meters.

Sanitary Sewer System
• Abandon existing gravity sewer pipes, manholes, and cleanouts in the Marina area (Figure 2); • Cut and cap the existing 6-inch ACP force sewer main in the northwest corner of the Marina AOI (Figure 2);
• Abandon the existing Harbormaster lift station located next to the Dock 3 restroom (Figure 2);
25 of 46
141
M.

Randy Breault, P.E.

City of Brisbane
27 August 2024

Page 23 of 27 ends

• Install a new lift station with a firm capacity of 220 gallons per minute (gpm)1 near the existing parking lots and construct associated 6-inch HDPE piping to connect to the existing 6-inch HDPE force sewer main at the northwest limit of the Marina AOI (Figure 2); • Install new 8-inch polyvinyl chloride (PVC) or HDPE gravity sewer mains and manholes near the existing parking lots in the Marina area; and
• Realign or install new sewer services and cleanouts.

Storm Drain System Scenario 1 – Gravity System
• Abandon existing RCP storm drain pipes, outfalls, manholes, and catch basins in the Marina area (Figure 3); and
• Install new RCP storm drain pipes, outfalls, manholes, and catch basins in the Marina area.

The storm drain pipes should be upsized to maintain the current system capacity2 . Note that
the actual slope and capacity of each pipe will vary depending on the final rim and invert elevation of each facility.

Storm Drain System Scenario 2 – Partial Pressurized System with new Stormwater Pump Stations • Abandon existing RCP storm drain pipes, outfalls, manholes, and catch basins in the Marina area in the vicinity of the revetment (Figure 9);
• Install new RCP storm drain pipes, outfalls, manholes, and catch basins by open trenching in the Marina area between Dock 2 and Dock 3. This will maintain gravity-based discharge to the bay through the new outfalls in this sub-drainage area (Figure 9); • Install 3 new stormwater pump stations (PSs), new catch basins, and new RCP storm drain pipes to direct flows towards new PSs (Figure 9); and
• Install new RCP storm drain pipes and outfalls downstream from the new PSs to convey water from the PSs and discharge into the bay.

Cost Basis and Opinions of Probable Cost
Table 2 provides unit cost information for the potable water distribution, sanitary sewer collection, and storm drain collection system improvements. Costs have been estimated based on a variety of available information, including:
• Cost estimation guides (e.g. RSMeans)
• Inflation indices, published by the Engineering News Record (ENR) • Actual cost and bid data from recent similar projects in the San Francisco Bay Area 1 The size was determined based on the existing Harbormaster Lift Station firm capacity of 200 gpm. 2 The future slopes are expected to be reduced considering the raise of the revetments described in previous sections.
26 of 46
142
M.

Randy Breault, P.E.

City of Brisbane
27 August 2024

Page 24 of 27 ends

• Engineering judgement
Table 2 also shows the Opinions of Probable Costs (OPCs) for the conceptual utility improvements resulting from SLR adaptations in the Marina area, which were developed by multiplying the unit costs by the quantities of each type of improvement. The OPCs presented herein are in 2024 dollars based on the ENR Construction Cost Indexes (CCI) for San Francisco of 15,525 and are planning-level Class 5 estimates defined by the American Association of Cost Engineering, which has an accuracy range of -50% to +100%.

The OPCs include the construction costs with an additional 60% for contingency and soft costs to account for variability in actual costs, including 25% for construction contingency, 10% for engineering design, 10% for construction management, 10% for general permitting, and 5% for project implementation.

It is expected that the environmental documentation and permitting requirements will be specific to each storm drain system improvement. EKI recommends that the City conduct further studies to confirm the requirements from relevant permitting agencies and to evaluate the projects’ qualification for opportunities such as negative declarations.
27 of 46
143
M.

Project:

Prepared By:

Date
Proj. No.:

Item ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT QUANTITY
UNIT

PRICE PRICE
A - Potable Water System
A1 Cut and Cap Existing 16-inch Main EA 2 $1,900 $3,800 A2 Valve Abandonment EA 30 $750 $22,500
A3 Blow-off Assembly Abandonment EA 2 $750 $1,500
A4 Abandon Existing Fire Hydrants EA 6 $1,715 $10,290
A5 Install New 16-inch HDPE Water Main LF 2,800 $660 $1,848,000 A6 Main Connections Tie-ins EA 2 $10,000 $20,000
A9 Install New 16-inch Butterfly Valves EA 8 $7,500 $60,000 A10 Install New Fire Hydrant Assembly EA 6 $15,115 $90,690 A11 Install New Blow-off Assembly EA 2 $4,750 $9,500
A12 Reconnect Water Services EA 2 $3,650 $7,300
Subtotal A - Potable Water System $2,096,000
B - Sanitary Sewer System
B1 Abandon Existing Sewer Manholes EA 8 $8,180 $65,440
B2 Abandon Existing 6-inch or 8-inch Gravity Sewer Mains LF 1,600 $490 $784,000 B3 Install New 6-inch or 8-inch Gravity Sewer Mains via Open Trench LF 1,520 $360 $547,200 B4 Realign Lateral, via Open Trench LF 150 $320 $48,000 B5 Replace Existing Lateral from New Sewer Main to New or Existing Cleanout EA 7 $3,640 $25,480 B6 Abandon Existing Harbormaster Lift Station2 LS 1 $75,000 $75,000 B7 Cut and Cap Existing 6-inch Force Sewer Main EA 2 $150 $300 B8 Install New Sewer Lift Station LS 1 $402,000 $402,000 B9 Install New Sewer Manhole - Concrete Manhole EA 8 $11,600 $92,800 B10 6-inch Main Connections Tie-ins EA 1 $6,550 $6,550
B11 Install New 6-inch HDPE Force Sewer Mains LF 1,700 $280 $476,000 B12 Install Cleanout at Property Line EA 7 $870 $6,090
Subtotal B - Sanitary Sewer System $2,529,000
C - Storm Drain System (Scenario 1)
C1 Install New 12-inch RCP Strom Drains by Open Trench (<10' deep) LF 1,920 $360 $691,200 C2 Install New 15-inch RCP Storm Drains by Open Trench (<10' deep) LF 923 $390 $360,119 C3 Install New 18-inch RCP Strom Drains by Open Trench (<10' deep) LF 1,380 $420 $579,600 C4 Install New 24-inch RCP Storm Drains by Open Trench (<10' deep) LF 1,320 $520 $686,400 C5 Install New 27-inch RCP Strom Drains by Open Trench (<10' deep) LF 80 $600 $48,000 C6 Install New 36-inch RCP Strom Drains by Open Trench (<10' deep) LF 140 $800 $112,000 C7 Install New 12-inch Catch Basins or Manholes EA 10 $27,070 $270,700 C8 Install New 15-inch Catch Basins or Manholes EA 6 $27,070 $162,420 C9 Install New 18-inch Catch Basins or Manholes EA 18 $27,430 $493,740 C10 Install New 24-inch Catch Basins or Manholes EA 14 $27,590 $386,260 C11 Install New 27-inch Catch Basins or Manholes EA 2 $27,770 $55,540 C12 Install New 36-inch Catch Basins or Manholes EA 3 $28,880 $86,640 C13 Install New Outfalls3 EA 9 $40,790 $367,110
Subtotal C - Storm Drain System (Scenario 1) $4,300,000 D - Storm Drain System (Scenario 2)
D1 Install New 8-inch RCP Strom Drains by Open Trench (<10' deep) LF 336 $360 $121,011 D2 Install New 10-inch RCP Strom Drains by Open Trench (<10' deep) LF 115 $380 $43,845 D3 Install New 12-inch RCP Strom Drains by Open Trench (<10' deep) LF 782 $390 $304,870 D4 Install New 15-inch RCP Storm Drains by Open Trench (<10' deep) LF 203 $410 $83,231 D5 Install New 18-inch RCP Strom Drains by Open Trench (<10' deep) LF 576 $440 $253,645 D6 Install New 21-inch RCP Storm Drains by Open Trench (<10' deep) LF 123 $490 $60,435 D7 Install New 8-inch Catch Basins or Manholes EA 3 $19,040 $57,120 D8 Install New 10-inch Catch Basins or Manholes EA 2 $19,140 $38,280 D9 Install New 12-inch Catch Basins or Manholes EA 7 $19,240 $134,680 D10 Install New 15-inch Catch Basins or Manholes EA 2 $19,330 $38,660 D11 Install New 18-inch Catch Basins or Manholes EA 4 $19,470 $77,880 D12 Install New 21-inch Catch Basins or Manholes EA 1 $19,630 $19,630 D13 Install New Outfalls3 EA 5 $40,790 $203,950
D14 Install New 3,500 gpm Storm Water Pump Station EA 1 $540,000 $540,000 D15 Install New 4,700 gpm Storm Water Pump Station EA 1 $720,000 $720,000 D16 Install New 6,500 gpm Storm Water Pump Station EA 1 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 Table 2. Opinion of Probable Cost
Brisbane Marina Sea Level Rise Analysis
EKI Environment & Water Inc.
27-Aug-24
EKI C40021.00
28 of 46
144
M.

Project:

Prepared By:

Date
Proj. No.:

Item ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT QUANTITY
UNIT

PRICE PRICE
Table 2. Opinion of Probable Cost
Brisbane Marina Sea Level Rise Analysis
EKI Environment & Water Inc.
27-Aug-24
EKI C40021.00
Subtotal D - Storm Drain System (Scenario 2) $3,697,000 Total Direct Costs4 $8,925,000
Construction Contingency 25% $2,231,000
Design, Construction Management, Permitting and Project Implementation5 35% $3,124,000 TOTAL OPINION OF PROBABLE COST $14,280,000
Total Direct Costs4 $8,322,000
Construction Contingency 25% $2,081,000
Design, Construction Management, Permitting and Project Implementation5 35% $2,913,000 TOTAL OPINION OF PROBABLE COST $13,316,000
Notes

2. Wide variations in actuall abandonment costs are expected due to unknown facility conditions.

3. Wide variations in actual outfall costs are expected.

4. Includes General Conditions, Bonding, and Contractor markups (Overhead & Profit, Contract Administration).

5. Includes mark-ups equal to 35% for design (10%), construction management (10%), general permitting (10%), and project implementation (5%).

6. Cost estimates do not include specific permitting or environmental documentation related cost for Storm Drain system improvements. It's recommened that City to conduct further study for more detailed permitting requirements and costs.

7. Total costs were rounded to the nearest thousand dollars.

Opinion of Probable Cost for Improvements of Potable Water System, Sanitary Sewer System, and Storm Drain System (Scenario 1)

1. Cost estimates were developed by referencing recent bid results for similar projects in the San Francisco Bay Area and are Class 5 estunates and defined by the American Association of Cost Engineering. Costs are presented in July 2024 dollars.

Opinion of Probable Cost for Improvements of Potable Water System, Sanitary Sewer System, and Storm Drain System (Scenario 2) 29 of 46
145
M.

Randy Breault, P.E.

City of Brisbane
27 August 2024

Page 27 of 27 ends

For improvements including the storm drain system (scenario 1 – fully gravity system), the total OPC is estimated at approximately $14.3 million in 2024 dollars, including approximately $3.4 million for the potable water system improvements, approximately $4.0 million for the sanitary sewer collection system improvements, and approximately $6.9 million for the storm drain collection system improvements as described above.

For improvements including the storm drain system (scenario 2 – partially pressurized system plus three stormwater pump stations), the total OPC is estimated at approximately $13.3 million in 2024 dollars, including approximately $3.4 million for the potable water system improvements, approximately $4.0 million for the sanitary sewer collection system improvements, and approximately $5.9 million for the storm drain collection system improvements as described above. Note that while this option has a lower capital cost, the ongoing operation and maintenance cost for the pressurized storm drain alternative is anticipated to be higher.

SUMMARY
The landside wet utilities largely exist within or near the revetment along the Marina shoreline. Therefore, it is recommended that the utilities be replaced in accordance with adaptations and improvements made to the revetment. It is recommended that the utilities be replaced in one effort planning for SLR in the year 2100 rather than incrementally.

References
Anchor QEA, 2024. Draft Memorandum Assessment of Sea Level Rise at Brisbane Marina.

Brisbane, 2003. City of Brisbane Storm Drainage Master Plan Final Report, RBF Consulting, dated November 2003.
30 of 46
146
M.

Memorandum May 22, 2024
33 New Montgomery Street, Suite 1210
San Francisco, California 94105
415.230.0862
To: Randy Breault, PE
From: Chris Mansour, PE, and Joshua Burnam, MPH, D.Env, Anchor QEA Re: Memorandum – Assessment of Sea Level Rise at Brisbane Marina Anchor QEA and EKI Environment and Water are providing separate memoranda to consider how best to analyze future sea level rise (SLR) effects on Brisbane Marina. Anchor QEA has reviewed the March 2, 2023, presentation materials provided by the City of Brisbane and is familiar with Brisbane Marina’s (marina’s) facilities through past efforts. To best analyze these issues, Anchor QEA proposes a process based on assessing specific key marina assets in terms of short-term (acute) and long-term SLR effects and proposing possible adaptations or solutions for each. A rough order-of-magnitude (ROM) cost estimate (in 2024 dollars) is also provided for suggested engineering solutions (Attachment 1). Costs for dredging have been excluded from this report.

The following features would be assessed:
• Marina docks and piles
• Concrete panel breakwater
• Flooding of the landside and top-of-slope impacts
Anchor QEA analyzed for the likely effects of SLR on each key feature in the years 2030, 2050, 2070, and 2100 using the data provided. For each feature, Anchor QEA has proposed potential short- and long-term engineering remedies and evaluated ROM costs as well as key data needs and design steps.

Site Background
In the 1950s and 1960s, the area east of the US 101 freeway known as Sierra Point was constructed as a landfill. From 1980 to 1982, the concrete breakwater was constructed, and the marina was constructed behind the breakwater in 1983.

In March 2023, a presentation to the City Council of Brisbane included an exhibit showing SLR, king tide, and storm surge elevations based on the years of 2023, 2050, 2070, and 2100 (Figure 1). The elevations listed in the presentation for the 2023 mean higher high water elevation of 6.7 feet closely approximates National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Tidal Station 9414750, Alameda, California, with a reference datum of mean lower low water (MLLW) equal to 0.0 feet. 31 of 46
147
M.

May 22, 2024

Page 2 ends

Figure 1
March 2023 Presentation Material
2030 Sea Level Rise Case
Breakwater
Original design drawings provided by the City were used as a reference for construction of the breakwater and navigational aids. The top of the concrete breakwater is estimated at elevation +13.4 feet (MLLW). Based on Figure 2, the breakwater will not be submerged during a king tide and storm surge. It is recommended that an inspection of the breakwater be conducted to determine the condition of the wall and that structural calculations be performed to determine whether the breakwater was designed for overtopping. If the breakwater is structurally adequate, the breakwater would not need to be replaced or augmented until 2050 or 2070.

Brisbane Fishing Pier
The fishing pier’s walking surface elevation is estimated at +14.5 feet (MLLW). For the 2030 case, where the storm surge is estimated at +10.3 feet, the fishing pier is not in danger of flooding and is above the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) minimum floor elevation. Therefore, no action is required in 2030.
32 of 46
148
M.

May 22, 2024

Page 3 ends

Navigational Piles
The navigational piles to the southeast of the marina entrance have a top-of-pile elevation estimated to be +20 feet. Top-of-pile elevation should be increased with taller piles starting in 2050, with a future top-of-pile elevation of +25 feet. The top-of-pile elevation should be verified with U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) regulations at the time of design.

Marina
In 2030, the marina will be approximately 50 years old. The concrete floats have reached the end of their service life and should be replaced. The marina comprises 467 piles, 108,500 square feet of floating docks, and six gangway structures.
• Piles: The existing piles have a top elevation of +10 feet and were installed in 1982. The piles may have a life expectancy of 80 to 100 years if they are not damaged. With a design life of 80 to 100 years, the piles should be replaced with taller piles by 2050. However, with the replacement of the marina, it may be prudent to replace the piles at the same time (2030).

With the anticipated surge height of +16.3 feet (2100) and 2 feet of freeboard of the docks, the replacement piles should be designed with a top elevation of +20 feet. • Floats: The existing concrete floats were constructed in the 1980s. As we have seen in other marinas of this era, the tops of the floats will experience cracking and spalling for the concrete. Replacement of the floats with either concrete or wood decking will be required. • Gangways: The six existing gangways are each 40 feet long. With the expected replacement of the marina, based on Department of Boating and Waterways code, it is anticipated that the new marina will be required to meet Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements.

Therefore, one of the gangways will need to be replaced with an 80-foot-long gangway to meet ADA requirements and provide access to the ADA-designated slips. • Gangway Platforms: Based on the current elevation of +9.6 feet at the gangway platforms floor elevation, the platform floor elevations will need to be raised to place the floor of the platforms above the future king tide elevation. The platforms should be raised to elevation +12 feet by 2030, then to elevation +14 feet by 2050, and to elevation +17 feet by 2070.

Landside
The top of the existing revetment appears to have an elevation of +9.6 feet. There are four structures located in proximity of the revetment and marina. These structures include the three restrooms and the harbor master’s office. These structures appear to have a base floor elevation of +11 feet. Two inland structures, the Sierra Point Yacht Club and a single-car storage garage, have a floor elevation estimated at +15.5 feet. Per FEMA guidelines, the minimum floor elevation should be located at least 12 inches above the base flood elevation (surge elevation). For the 2030 case, where the estimated storm surge elevation is +10.3 feet, it appears that all the structures are in no danger of flooding in the short term (Figure 2).
33 of 46
149
M.

May 22, 2024

Page 4 ends

Figure 2
2030 Site Inundation Map
Landside Utilities
To be evaluated under separate cover by EKI.

Estimated Costs
Costs for replacement or modification are provided in Table 1 based on 2024 dollars.

Table 1
2030 Sea Level Rise Case Costs
Element Replaced/Modified Cost
Breakwater $0
Fishing Pier $0
Navigational Piles $0
Marina $46,000,000
Landside $0
Total $46,000,000
34 of 46
150
M.

May 22, 2024

Page 5 ends

2050 Sea Level Rise Case
Breakwater
The top of the concrete breakwater is estimated at elevation +13.4 feet (MLLW). Based on Figure 3, the breakwater will not be submerged during a king tide and storm surge. It is recommended that the concrete breakwater be raised to elevation +20 feet between 2050 and 2070. The raising of the breakwater could be accomplished by replacing the concrete breakwater with a new, taller breakwater; or the breakwater could be raised by constructing atop of the existing breakwater; or the existing breakwater could be augmented by the installation of a new steel sheet pile wall on the bay side of the marina. The design life of the concrete breakwater is estimated to be between 80 and 100 years. Therefore, a new breakwater constructed before 2070 would have a design life to 2170.

Brisbane Fishing Pier
The fishing pier’s walking surface elevation is estimated at +14.5 feet (MLLW). For the 2050 case, where the storm surge is estimated at +12.3 feet, the fishing pier is not in danger of flooding and is above the FEMA minimum floor elevation. Therefore, no action is required in 2050. Rasing the pier may be required starting around year 2070.

Navigational Piles
The navigational piles to the southeast of the marina entrance should be replaced with taller piles between 2050 and 2070. Top elevation of the navigational piles should be at least +25 feet and should be verified with USCG regulations at the time of design.

Marina:
• Piles: If not completed in 2030, the piles should be replaced with new, taller piles with the anticipated top elevation of +20 feet by 2050.
• Floats: Assuming the marina was replaced in 2030, the replacement marina will be approximately 20 years old in 2050. The concrete floats should have another 30 years of service life remaining. • Gangways: Assuming the marina was replaced in 2030, the replacement gangways will be approximately 20 years old in 2050 and should have 30 years of service life remaining. • Gangway Platforms: The platform should be raised to elevation +14 feet by 2050 and to elevation +17 feet by 2070.

Landside
For the 2050 case, where the estimated storm surge elevation is +12.3 feet, the four structures closest to the water’s edge (three restrooms and the harbor master’s office) should be raised to an elevation of +13.3 feet minimum and to +17.3 feet ideally. The two landside structures (Sierra Point 35 of 46
151
M.

May 22, 2024

Page 6 ends

Yacht Club and a single-car storage garage) are not in danger of flooding in the short term. Raising the revetment to elevation +13.3 feet and filling the area behind the revetment to elevation +13.3 feet would require an estimated fill of 30,000 cubic yards (cy; Figure 3).

Figure 3
2050 Sea Level Rise Case
Landside Utilities
To be evaluated under separate cover by EKI.

Estimated Costs
Costs for replacement or modification are provided in Table 2 based on 2024 dollars.

Table 2
2050 Sea Level Rise Case Costs
Element Replaced/Modified Cost
Breakwater $6,400,000 (modification) to $60,000,000 (complete replacement) Fishing Pier $0
Navigational Piles $300,000
Marina $0
Landside $5,800,000
Total $12,500,000 to $66,100,000
36 of 46
152
M.

May 22, 2024

Page 7 ends

2070 Sea Level Rise Case
Breakwater
Assuming the breakwater was reconstructed before 2070, the breakwater should have a life expectancy to 2150 and 2170.

Brisbane Fishing Pier
The fishing pier’s walking surface elevation is estimated at +14.5 feet. For the 2070 case, where the storm surge is estimated at +14.8 feet, the fishing pier does not have adequate elevation to be above the storm surge, and the pier will be submerged. It is advised that the pier be replaced with a new pier of sufficient elevation to survive a future storm surge. With an expected service life of 75 years, the pier should be designed for the anticipated storm surge elevation of +16.3 feet plus a 1-foot freeboard, or +17.3 feet.

Option for Non-Replacement
If in the year 2050 to 2070, the piles and pile caps are in good condition, the existing concrete decking could be removed and a new elevated decking installed on a raised pile cap. The span between the pile caps could be constructed of lightweight materials, such as an aluminum gangway or fiberglass members and flooring, to keep the same weight as the existing structure. The intent of this methodology is to keep the existing supporting structure (piles and pile caps) in place and replace only the decking with a decking of equal or lesser weight and thereby not require rebuilding of the supporting pile.

Navigational Piles
Assuming the navigational piles to the southeast of the marina entrance were replaced in 2050, the navigational piles should have a life expectancy extending to 2130 and 2150.

Marina
• Piles: Assuming the floating dock guide piles were replaced in 2030 or 2050, the piles should have a useful life to 2110 and 2150.
• Floats: Assuming the marina was replaced in 2030, the replacement marina will be approximately 40 years old in 2070. The concrete floats should have another 10 years of service life remaining. Replacement of the marina should be anticipated within the next 10 years. Assumed replacement of the marina in 2080.
• Gangways: Assuming the marina was replaced in 2030, the replacement gangways will be approximately 40 years old in 2070 and should have 10 years of service life remaining.

Replacement of the marina gangways should be anticipated by 2080. 37 of 46
153
M.

May 22, 2024

Page 8 ends

• Gangway Platforms: In the 2070 case, the platform should be raised to elevation +17 feet.

Landside
For the 2070 case, where the estimated storm surge elevation is +14.8 feet, the four structures closest to the water’s edge (three restrooms and the harbor master’s office) should be raised to an elevation of +15.8 feet minimum and to +17.3 feet ideally. The two landside structures (Sierra Point Yacht Club and a single-car storage garage floor with a finished floor elevation estimated at +15.5 feet) are not in danger of flooding in the short term. Raising the revetment to elevation +15.8 feet and filling the area behind the revetment to elevation +15.8 feet would require an estimated fill of 20,000 cy (Figure 4).

Figure 4
2070 Site Inundation Map
Landside Utilities
To be evaluated under separate cover by EKI.

Estimated Costs
Costs for replacement or modification are provided in Table 3 based on 2024 dollars. 38 of 46
154
M.

May 22, 2024

Page 9 ends

Table 3
2070 Sea Level Rise Case Costs
Element Replaced/Modified Cost
Breakwater $0
Fishing Pier $1,200,000 (modification) to $4,000,000 (complete replacement) Navigational Piles $0
Marina $33,000,000
Landside $2,000,000
Total $36,200,000 to $39,000,000
2100 Sea Level Rise Case
Breakwater
Assuming the breakwater was reconstructed in 2070, the breakwater should have a life expectancy to between years 2150 and 2170.

Brisbane Fishing Pier
Assuming the fishing pier was reconstructed in 2050 to an elevation of +17.3 feet, the fishing pier should have a life expectancy to 2125.

Navigational Piles
Assuming the navigational piles to the southeast of the marina entrance were replaced in 2050, the navigational piles should have a life expectancy extending to between years 2130 and 2150.

Marina
• Piles: Assuming the floating dock guide piles were replaced in 2030 or 2050, the piles should have a useful life to between years 2110 and 2150.
• Floats: Assuming the marina was replaced in 2080, the replacement marina will be approximately 20 years old. The concrete floats should have another 30 years of service life remaining.
• Gangways: Assuming the marina was replaced in 2080, the replacement gangways will be approximately 20 years old and should have 30 years of service life remaining. (Note that the report anticipated that the marina and piles were replaced in 2030 and 2080.) • Gangway Platforms: Assuming that the gangway platforms were raised in 2070 to elevation +17 feet, the gangway platforms should have a useful life to 2150. 39 of 46
155
M.

May 22, 2024

Page 10 ends

Brisbane City CouncilDecember 5, 2024

Brisbane City Council
December 5, 2024