1 BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL
Approved Minutes
Regular City Council Meeting on March 7, 2022
1. CALL TO ORDER
A duly noticed meeting of the Burlingame City Council was held on the above date via Zoom Webinar at 7:01 p.m.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
The pledge of allegiance was led by Councilmember Beach.
3. ROLL CALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Beach, Brownrigg, Colson, O’Brien Keighran, Ortiz MEMBERS ABSENT: None
4. REPORT OUT FROM CLOSED SESSION
There was no closed session.
5. UPCOMING EVENTS
Mayor Ortiz reviewed upcoming events in the city.
6. PRESENTATIONS
There was no presentation.
7. PUBLIC COMMENTS, NON-AGENDA
Former Mayor Terry Nagel thanked everyone who reached out to the Burlingame Neighborhood Network to express their sorrow for the passing of Suzanne Tateosian.
2 8. APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Ortiz asked the Councilmembers and the public if they wished to remove any item from the Consent Calendar. A member of the public, Manito Velasco, pulled item 8e. Councilmember Brownrigg pulled item 8g.
Councilmember O’Brien Keighran made a motion to adopt items 8a, 8b, 8c, 8d, 8f, and 8h from the Consent Calendar; seconded by Councilmember Colson. The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote, 5-0.
a. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR THE FEBRUARY 7, 2022
STUDY SESSION COUNCIL MEETING
City Clerk Hassel-Shearer requested Council approve the City Council Meeting Minutes for the February 7, 2022 Study Session.
b. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR THE FEBRUARY 7, 2020
REGULAR MEETING
City Clerk Hassel-Shearer requested Council approve the City Council Meeting Minutes for the February 7, 2022 Regular Meeting.
c. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR THE FEBRUARY 22, 2022
STUDY SESSION
City Clerk Hassel-Shearer requested Council approve the City Council Meeting Minutes for the February 22, 2022 Study Session.
d. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR THE FEBRUARY 22, 2022
REGULAR MEETING
City Clerk Hassel-Shearer requested Council approve the City Council Meeting Minutes for the February 22, 2022 Regular Meeting.
e. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTIONS AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE
THE PROJECT SPECIFIC MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT WITH CALTRANS FOR THE US 101/BROADWAY INTERCHANGE AND AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO THE COST
SHARING AGREEMENT FOR THE STATE HIGHWAY ELECTRICAL FACILITIES Mr. Velasco thanked staff and Council for finishing this project. He asked a number of questions related to the item including: who is responsible for sweeping the bike lanes on the overpass; can a right turn arrow be installed at the intersection of Old Bayshore Highway and Broadway at Max’s Diner; more signage on the off ramp from southbound 101 as cars turn right on red when they aren’t supposed to; whose right-of-way is the signal at Bayshore and Airport Boulevard. (comment submitted via [email protected] ).
3 DPW Murtuza replied to Mr. Velasco’s questions with the following answers:
• The City is responsible for street sweeping on the overpass • The traffic signal at Old Bayshore in front of Max’s Diner is Caltrans’ responsibility • The traffic signals at the southbound off ramp are Caltrans’ responsibility • The traffic signals at Airport Boulevard and Broadway are maintained by Caltrans in order to ensure that there is no traffic build up at the two left lanes at the on-ramp
Vice Mayor Brownrigg asked when Caltrans will finish their landscaping obligations. DPW Murtuza replied that Caltrans, in conjunction with the Transportation Authority, is finalizing the design, which will go out to bid this year.
Vice Mayor Brownrigg voiced concern regarding the lane striping on Broadway being too challenging.
DPW Murtuza replied that staff are aware of the challenging configuration and noted that there will be opportunities to revisit and potentially change the configuration in the future.
Councilmember Beach stated that she bikes across the overpass and thought the City could do a better job sweeping those lanes.
Mayor Ortiz agreed with the comments about the landscaping and the restriping.
Vice Mayor Brownrigg made a motion to adopt Resolution Number 015-2022 and Resolution Number016- 2022; seconded by Councilmember Beach. The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote, 5-0.
f. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO RENEW THE SERVICE AGREEMENT WITH DOCUSIGN FOR THE PERIOD OF MARCH 30, 2022 - MARCH 29, 2023, FOR THE ELECTRONIC SIGNING OF DOCUMENTS City Clerk Hassel-Shearer requested Council adopt Resolution Number 017-2022.
g. ADOPTION OF TWO RESOLUTIONS APPROVING THE INSTALLATION OF TWO
PUBLIC ART PROJECTS CONSISTING OF THE BUFANO BRONZE OWL AND THE
NATIONAL CHARITY LEAGUE MURAL AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER
TO ENTER INTO ART DONATION ACCEPTANCE AGREEMENTS
Vice Mayor Brownrigg thanked City Librarian McCulley for this initiative. He voiced his support for public art. He noted that he has previously asked that the City either make public art the responsibility of one of the City commissions, or that the City establish a committee to handle public art.
Mayor Ortiz opened the item up for public comment.
Mike Nagler voiced his support for the art and thanked Council for considering it.
Mayor Ortiz closed public comment.
4 Councilmember Colson made a motion to adopt Resolution Number 018-2022 and Resolution Number 019- 2022; seconded by Vice-Mayor Brownrigg. The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote, 5-0.
h. APPROVAL OF PUBLIC LIBRARY ASSOCIATION CONFERENCE OUT OF STATE TRAVEL
City Librarian McCulley requested Council approve of out-of-state travel for the Public Library Association Conference.
9. PUBLIC HEARINGS
There were no public hearings.
10. STAFF REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
a. HOUSING ELEMENT ANNUAL PROGRESS REPORT (APR) AND HOUSING PROGRAM
DISCUSSION
CDD Gardiner stated there are three parts to staff’s presentation:
1. Review of the 2021 Housing Element Annual Progress Report (APR)
2. Discussion of Housing Element policies and programs to be considered
3. Discussion of potential uses and allocations of housing funds
Part 1: The 2021 Housing Element Annual Progress Report (APR)
CDD Gardiner explained that California requires each jurisdiction to prepare a Housing Element as part of its General Plan in order to ensure that all jurisdictions are planning for the projected housing demand throughout California. He stated that the process begins with the State advising a region of its Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA), which is the estimated number of housing units that will be needed over the planning period (usually eight years). He stated that RHNA is measured by building permits issued. He noted that the RHNA counting now includes projects that are in the pipeline.
CDD Gardiner reviewed the planning and building permit activity:
• 474 net new building permits issued
• 1,222 net new building permits issued 2015-2021
• 863 units required in RHNA Cycle 2015 (141.6%)
• 227 below market rate units in RHNA Cycle 2015-2023 (18.5% of total) • 346 units entitled (Planning approval)
• 474 building permits issued
• 53 below market rate units
• 73 accessory dwelling unit (ADU) applications received, 52 permits issued • 807 units “in progress”
5 CDD Gardiner stated that the 807 “in progress” units and the 346 entitled units will roll over into the next cycle, which will count towards the 3,257 units of that cycle.
CDD Gardiner explained that the RHNA allocation is subdivided among four household income categories:
very-low, low, moderate, and above moderate. He outlined the San Mateo County Income Limits (based on Federal Income Limits for SMC).
CDD Gardiner stated that staff need a motion to accept the 2021 Housing Element Annual Progress Report and authorize its transmittal to the California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) and the California Department of Housing and Community Development.
Part 2: First Discussion of Housing Element Policies and Programs to be Considered
CDD Gardiner stated that Envision Burlingame is part of the General Plan. He explained that Burlingame is in a good position and noted that the City doesn’t need to figure out where to put new housing because the General Plan outlines locations and new neighborhoods. He added that as a result, the City can instead focus on policies and programs around housing. He reviewed the upcoming outreach events:
• March 20 – “Pop-Up” Event at Fresh Market
• March 23 – Community Meeting Number 1 - Zoom
• March 26 – “Pop-Up” Event on Broadway
• April 6 – Community Meeting Number 2
• April 23 – Annual Joint City Council and Planning Commission Meeting
Vice Mayor Brownrigg asked what staff hopes to garner from the public outreach. CDD Gardiner replied that staff is undertaking public outreach to inform the public about the update and to ask t what they think the City could do to make housing work better for the community.
CDD Gardiner explained that at Community Meeting Number 1, the City will provide an explanation of the Housing Element and ask participants what can be done to make housing better for the community. He stated that the purpose of Community Meeting Number 2 is to report the feedback staff has heard and to start formulating policies and programs.
County
Income
Category
Number of Persons in Household
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
San Mateo
County
4-Person
Area Median
Income
(AMI):
$149,600
Extremely Low (30% AMI) 38,400 43,850 49,350 54,800 59,200 63,600 68,000 72,350 Very Low (50% AMI) 63,950 73,100 82,250 91,350 98,700 106,000 113,300 120,600 Low (80% AMI) 102,450 117,100 131,750 146,350 158,100 169,800 181,500 193,200 Median (100% AMI) 104,700 119,700 134,650 149,600 161,550 173,550 185,500 197,450 Moderate (120% AMI) 125,650 143,600 161,550 179,500 193,850 208,200 222,600 236,950
6 Part 3: Potential Uses and Allocations of Housing Funds
CDD Gardiner stated that the City Council established commercial linkage fees for new commercial development in Burlingame in 2017, and on April 1, 2019, the City Council adopted residential impact fees for new residential development in Burlingame. He noted that over time, these fees will provide a dedicated source of funding for programs supporting workforce housing in Burlingame.
CDD Gardiner reviewed the funds that the City has obtained through impact fees:
• $3,886,724 currently in the housing fund account
• $5,188,950 additional anticipated in next one to two years
He noted this does not include the projects currently under review.
CDD Gardiner explained that in 2019, the City Council began discussing possible uses of these funds. He stated that at the time, the City Council recommended adopting guiding principles with a list of eligible uses for the funds and creation of an emergency rent assistance program.
CDD Gardiner reviewed where the City stands on housing programs and impact fees since that initial discussion in 2019:
• Commercial Linkage Fee is being studied for an update • Developments are including more low-income (80% AMI) units than had been anticipated due to changes in the State Density Bonus Law
• Reaching very low and extremely low-income categories remains a challenge without a subsidy
Councilmember Colson asked if the City exceeds the RHNA numbers for this cycle, will the excess units roll over for the next cycle. CDD Gardiner replied that some are cumulative and some roll over. He noted that building permits, once issued, are counted and do not roll over. However, the projects in progress right now (proposed but not yet entitled, or entitled but the building permits have not yet been received) do roll over.
Councilmember Colson stated that even with the excess and the new RHNA, the City seems to be in good shape. CDD Gardiner replied in the affirmative
Councilmember Colson asked about the income level descriptions and individuals with special needs who might not fall into the different categories. CDD Gardiner replied that the City could consider programs and policies that would assist the needs of households that have special needs/disabilities.
Vice Mayor Brownrigg asked if he was correct that if the City receives funds from a developer for affordable housing, the funds have to be used within five years or be returned. CDD Gardiner replied in the affirmative.
He added that the funds need to be used or assigned within the time frame.
Vice Mayor Brownrigg stated that this is something the City should be mindful of as it takes time to put money to work in the housing sector.
7 Vice Mayor Brownrigg discussed losing affordable units that are redeveloped into market-rate units. He stated that it is important to track this loss.
Councilmember O’Brien Keighran commented that the City has a large stock of older housing under rent control. She asked if the City uses money to preserve these units, does the City have to define how the preservation will be done and for which programs. CDD Gardiner replied that the funds can be utilized for preserving “naturally affordable housing”. He explained that the Housing Element has a new requirement called Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing that looks at existing market rents in Burlingame. He stated that the study shows rents are naturally moderate for the older units. He noted that there has been discussion over using linkage fees for a seismic retrofit program or an energy efficiency program. He added that the City wouldn’t necessarily be able to count those units towards the regional housing numbers, but it would help meet the needs of the community.
Councilmember Beach asked if she was correct that the funds could go towards preservation of naturally affordable units, but those units would not count towards the City’s RHNA numbers. CDD Gardiner replied in the affirmative. He explained that RHNA is focused on production of new units. He stated that the linkage fees can be used for housing related to the workforce, which gives it a broader use.
Councilmember Beach asked for a high-level overview on the soft-story building working group. CDD Gardiner responded that the working group has had three meetings and discussed the costs of retrofits and working with building owners who need financial help in exchange for keeping some number of units affordable.
Mayor Ortiz opened the item to public comment.
Jennifer Pfaff expressed her support for the preservation of naturally affordable units. She asked about older units being subdivided and counting towards the RHNA numbers. CDD Gardiner responded that any net increases count, including ADUs.
Ms. Webster commented on the need to provide extremely low-income units for those with developmental disabilities.
Mayor Ortiz closed public comment.
Mayor Ortiz asked his colleagues to comment on part one of the report.
Councilmember Colson discussed smaller multi-family buildings (under 21 units) being turned into condos.
She noted the large market for entry level/affordable home ownership opportunities. She wondered if there was a way to assist tenants in purchasing their building when it goes up for a sale.
Vice Mayor Brownrigg concurred with Councilmember Colson about the growing market for entry level ownership. He asked if staff could add a line in the report about the importance of preservation of naturally affordable housing and how it is not rewarded in the RHNA reporting requirements. CDD Gardiner replied that it could be added to the transmittal letter.
8 Councilmember Colson made a motion to accept the housing element with the addition of Vice Mayor Brownrigg’s request for including language regarding the importance of preserving naturally affordable housing in the transmittal letter; seconded by Vice Mayor Brownrigg. The motion passed by roll call vote, 5-0.
Mayor Ortiz asked that his colleagues now discuss part two of the staff report.
Councilmember Colson stated that she would like staff to explore ways to assist first time home buyers.
Vice Mayor Brownrigg concurred with Councilmember Colson. He agreed that there needs to be avenues for people to transition from renting to ownership but expressed caution about what the tradeoffs might be.
Vice Mayor Brownrigg wasn’t sure that the City needed to make many changes to the Housing Element policies as what needs to be done is very well outlined. He questioned the need for extensive public outreach.
Councilmember O’Brien Keighran agreed with Vice Mayor Brownrigg on the sentiment that change in policy should be minimal. She stated her concerns with condo conversion. She noted that the process to convert older buildings can get very expensive, but she agreed with the need for entry level/affordable ownership. She favored not touching any policy at this time.
Councilmember Beach discussed setting a goal for the use of the housing funds. She explained she wanted to see more ways the City can subsidize the very low-income units as that would help people with disabilities and those in the service economy. She thought a good use of funds could be to work with a non-profit or the school district on various projects. She noted that she wanted to hear more about the City being able to help residents with homeownership. She added that she supported using the funds for safety upgrades in buildings, emergency rental assistance, and addressing unhoused people.
Councilmember O’Brien Keighran discussed the need to educate the public about what the City is doing in relation to housing.
Vice Mayor Brownrigg voiced his support for using the outreach events as an educational opportunity. He noted that the City could have material on the new Rollins Road development.
Mayor Ortiz asked his colleagues to discuss part three of the staff report.
Councilmember Colson voiced her support for using the linkage fees to help those with special/developmental needs. She discussed working with Peninsula Hospital, Gatepath, and other organizations on housing needs.
Councilmember Colson discussed creating partnerships with nonprofits in order to further assist low-income people and individuals with special/developmental needs. She noted that more research might need to be done on how to incorporate more services into the housing for those with special/developmental needs. She
9 thought the City might be able to fund ADUs for those families that have someone that has special/developmental needs in order to give them some independence.
Vice Mayor Brownrigg concurred with Councilmember Colson’s suggestion. He discussed paying a developer the difference between a market-value unit and a low-income unit in order to create more affordable units.
Councilmember O’Brien Keighran agreed with putting money towards preservation of units. She added that she wanted to see funds be set aside for emergency assistance.
Councilmember Colson asked if the City had asked Summerhill about a buy down of units. CDD Gardiner replied in the affirmative and stated that the number was in the millions.
Councilmember Colson stated she does not want to take $5 million and help five people. She liked the idea of piggy-backing on a development, but argued that a buy down would be very expensive. She stated that it might be better to work on the existing stock of housing and work with non-profits on those units. She argued that it might be more beneficial to focus on ADUs or smaller units (for those with low-income grandparents, children with special needs, and parents with special needs) which might get more production.
Councilmember Beach wanted to explore subsidizing the very low-income bracket by partnering with a non- profit developer. She thought working with a non-profit might be easier than buying down with a for-profit developer. She endorsed the idea of an emergency fund.
Vice Mayor Brownrigg asked that staff agendize a further discussion on potential uses of housing funds.
Mayor Ortiz summarized the ideas Council gave:
• Buying down market-rate units
• Programs that would help the lowest income bracket and help those with disabilities • Preservation of existing units
• Emergency fund
• Partnering with a non-profit developer
Councilmember Colson asked if a subcommittee should be established to further review these suggestions and explore housing on the City Hall site. City Manager Goldman replied that staff is talking about a public-private partnership for the development of the City Hall space. She noted that the Council could establish a subcommittee to further review the Council’s suggestions with respect to the housing fund.
Mayor Ortiz stated that he thought it was a good idea to create a subcommittee and that he would appoint members at a later date.
Mayor Ortiz thanked staff for their presentation.
10 11. COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND ACTIVITIES REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
There were no reports.
12. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
There were no future agenda items.
13. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The agendas, packets, and meeting minutes for the Planning Commission, Traffic, Safety & Parking Commission, Beautification Commission, Parks & Recreation Commission, and Library Board of Trustees are available online at www.burlingame.org
.
14. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Ortiz adjourned the meeting at 9:56 p.m. in memory of Suzanne Tateosian.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/
Meaghan Hassel-Shearer
City Clerk