Agenda, closed session, first session — Hillsborough City Council, April 10, 2023 (part 2 of 3)

Plant Transmission Main Project, Alignment 3 as identified in the Draft Alternative Analysis for the Water Pipeline Design from Harry Tracy Water Treatment Plant dated November 2021.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution

2. CEQA Proposal
PREPARED BY: Paul Willis, Director of Public Works
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the resolution approving and authorizing the city manager to execute a second amendment to the existing agreement with Freyer & Laureta, Inc. for CEQA compliance services for the Harry Tracy Water Treatment Plant Transmission Main Project in the amount of $181,200.00, for a total contract amount of $752,800.00. -272-
RESOLUTION NO. 23-

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH

APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE EXISTING AGREEMENT WITH FREYER & LAURETA, INC.

FOR CEQA COMPLIANCE SERVICES FOR THE DESIGN OF THE HIGHLINE WATER PIPELINE PROJECT PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15306 WHEREAS, the Town of Hillsborough (“Town”) maintains the Town’s public water system; and
WHEREAS, the water system is complex and includes 17 active storage tanks and one reservoir located at 10 sites throughout the Town; and
WHEREAS, on September 14, 2020, the City Council approved a contract in the amount of $421,600.00 for professional design services with Freyer and Laureta, Inc. (“F&L”) for the new Highline Water Pipeline that would link the Town’s water system to the Harry Tracy Water Treatment Plant; and WHEREAS, on October 10, 2022, City Council approved an amendment to the contract in the amount of $150,000 for a total contract amount of $571,600.00 for additional technical support design services to coordinate with potential project partners, including Millbrae, Burlingame and the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission; and
WHEREAS, the Town received a cost proposal in the amount of $181,200.00 from F&L to conduct CEQA compliance services for the Harry Tracy Water Treatment Plant Transmission Main Project, Alignment 3 identified in the Draft Alternative Analysis for the Water Pipeline Design from Harry Tracy Water Treatment Plant dated November 2021; and
WHEREAS, staff recommends the authorization of a second amendment to the F&L design services agreement, in the amount of $181,200.00, for a total contract amount of $752,800.00.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the Town of Hillsborough hereby approves and authorizes the City Manager to execute a second amendment to the existing agreement with Freyer & Laureta, Inc. for CEQA compliance services for the Harry Tracy Water Treatment Plant Transmission Main Project in the amount of $181,200.00, for a total contract amount of $752,800.00.

Mayor of the Town of Hillsborough
Attest: City Clerk
-273-
ATTACHMENT 1
2 This resolution was adopted by the City Council of the Town of Hillsborough at its regular meeting held on the 10th day of April 2023, by the following vote of the members thereof:

AYES: Councilmembers
NOES: Councilmembers
ABSENT: Councilmembers
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers
-274-
Headquarters North Bay Office East Bay Office South Bay Office 150 Executive Park Blvd, Ste 4200 505 San Marin Dr, Ste A220 825 Washington Street, Ste 237 20863 Stevens Creek Blvd, Ste 400 San Francisco, CA 94134 Novato, CA 94945 Oakland, CA 94607 Cupertino, CA 95014 (415) 534-7070 (415) 534-7070 (510) 937-2310 (408) 516-1090 March 21, 2023
Mr. Paul Willis, P.E.

Public Works Director
Town of Hillsborough
1600 Floribunda Ave
Hillsborough, CA 94010
RE: Proposal for Professional Engineering and Environmental Services for Compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act Harry Tracy Water Treatment Plant Transmission Main Project Town of Hillsborough, California
Dear Paul,
Freyer & Laureta, Inc. (F&L) is pleased to present to the Town of Hillsborough (Town) this proposal to provide professional engineering and environmental services to prepare the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) documents for the proposed Harry Tracy Water Treatment Plant Transmission Main Project (Project). The proposed Project is Alignment 3 identified in the Draft Alternative Analysis for the Water Pipeline Design from Harry Tracy Water Treatment Plant dated November 2021 (Report) and shown on the fact sheet included as Attachment 1 to this proposal. F&L understands that the scope of work presented below will be approved as an amendment to the existing agreement between the Town and F&L.

F&L has included the following specialty subconsultants:
 Carollo Engineers (Carollo) to provide hydraulic engineering, seismic engineering, pump station engineering services, opinion of probable cost development, and funding application support services;
 WRA, Inc. (WRA) to provide CEQA services;
 Alta Archaeological Consulting (ALTA), as a subconsultant to WRA, to provide Cultural Resources analysis, and;
 Baseline Environmental Consulting (Baseline), as a subconsultant to WRA, to provide Air Quality and Noise analyses.

F&L and its subconsultants, referred to herein as the F&L team, will provide the scope of services described in the following sections.

Base Scope of Work
The proposed additional tasks include:

Task 10: CEQA Documentation
The purpose of this Scope of Work is to prepare CEQA documentation for the Project. The Town will serve as the CEQA Lead Agency.
-275-
ATTACHMENT 2
FREYER & LAURETA, INC. Civil Engineers · Surveyors · Construction Managers 2 Task 10.1: Kick-Off Meeting and Information Review
The F&L Team proposes to kick-off the environmental review process with the team by:
 collecting all relevant reports and drawings (or identify relevant documents for copying);  discussing the proposed project;
 resolving issues regarding overall assumptions;
 identifying other key Town contacts; and
 discussing overall communication protocols.

Task 10.2: Prepare Project Description for CEQA Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration The F&L Team will prepare a draft Project Description for the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND), which will include discussions of the following:
 project area regional and local location;
 project objectives and goals;
 project characteristics; and
 a list of required approvals and regulatory permits.

Task 10.3: Prepare CEQA Administrative Draft IS/MND
The F&L Team will prepare an Administrative Draft IS/MND that will include a completed environmental checklist form, including project description; an evaluation of impacts following the outline established in the checklist, including analysis of each issue; and mitigation measures. The F&L Team will tier from existing documents to the extent feasible, including the Town’s General Plan, the Project Alternatives Analysis Report, and WRA’s Environmental Constraints and Permitting Considerations Memo for the proposed project.

The F&L Team has also retained Alta Archaeological Consulting (ALTA) to assist with Cultural Resources analysis and Baseline Environmental Consulting (Baseline) to assist with Air Quality and Noise analyses for the IS/MND.

Task 10.3a: Cultural Resources
Project Initiation, Design Review, and Delineating the Area of Potential Effects The Area of Potential Effects (APE) will follow the project proponents design documents. As the Principial Investigator, Alex DeGeorgey will be available to discuss design review, area of potential effects, and findings with the F&L Team staff to assist them with the project planning.

Background Research and Literature Review
The F&L Team will perform a records search at the California Historical Resources Information System, Northwest Information Center (NWIC) located on the campus of Sonoma State University. The Information Center is the primary repository for cultural resources information that covers an 18-county area including San Mateo County. The purpose of archival research is to identify any previously conducted archaeological surveys or known archaeological sites located on the subject properties and within a one-half mile radius of the project area(s). In addition, ethnographic and historic literature will be reviewed to create background contextual information relevant to the project area.
-276-
FREYER & LAURETA, INC. Civil Engineers · Surveyors · Construction Managers 3 Native American Outreach
The F&L Team will contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) to request a review of the Sacred Lands Files for any resources that may be present within the project areas and to provide a list of local Native American tribes. The F&L Team will contact the Native American groups or individuals identified by the NAHC to inform them of the proposed project and solicit input from the tribe regarding their knowledge of cultural resources that may be within the project area. The letter will state that our outreach letter does not constitute AB52 or Section 106 consultation, and that the Lead Agency should be contacted directly if the tribe would like to enter into consultation. Follow up phone calls may be made to ensure that letters were received and to discuss any potential concerns with the project. Interested Parties will be invited to participate in the field survey. Comments and information provided by the Native American community and government agencies will be provided in the draft and final reports.

Field Survey
The F&L Team will conduct an on-site field reconnaissance of the project area. The project area(s) will be intensively examined for cultural resources. A complete inventory entails systematic pedestrian examination of the ground surface. In accordance with established standards, field reconnaissance will be conducted using transects spaced no more than 10 meters apart. The survey may include periodic shovel tests pits to expose soil in any areas of dense vegetation. As this survey area is predominately urban, a geoarchaeological approach will be used to help direct field efforts. No artifacts will be collected as part of this reconnaissance.

Transect interval spacing will be reduced in areas depending upon the sensitivity or the parcel. Areas of low sensitivity will be given cursory survey coverage. The field crew will maintain daily field notes and the findings will be made available immediately following the field investigation.

All resources identified within the project area will be recorded using the standard State of California Department of Parks and Recreation Archaeological Site Forms. A cultural resource shall have a minimum age of 45 years. As cultural resources are located during survey, approximate boundaries will be delineated and the location of the resource plotted on topographic maps. Global Positioning System (GPS) mapping of each site location will be undertaken. Site recordation will include site and feature mapping, completing of site record forms, and photography. All photographs will be done in a digital format. An evaluation of the impact agents and structural condition will be noted for each resource in the project area. As appropriate, a limited narrative will be provided to further describe the nature, extent, and location of resources.

Archaeological Survey Report
The F&L Team will prepare an Archaeological Survey Report (ASR) in accordance with the standard guidelines in Archaeological Resource Management Reports (1990). The ASR will include Project background; NWIC records search and geoarchaeological analysis results; NAHC outreach efforts; field survey methodology and results; and conclusions and recommendations. The F&L Team will provide a copy of the final ASR to the NWIC.

Task 10.3b: Air Quality Technical Study (Baseline)
The F&L Team will prepare a technical memorandum to evaluate project-related construction emissions to support the CEQA IS/MND.

For the CEQA analysis, the F&L Team will evaluate the project’s potential impacts related to air quality in accordance with the Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s (BAAQMD’s) CEQA Air Quality Guidelines. A project-level conformity analysis will be performed to determine the project’s conformity to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for attaining and/or maintaining the National Ambient Air Quality Standards under -277-
FREYER & LAURETA, INC. Civil Engineers · Surveyors · Construction Managers 4 the Clean Air Act. The project is located within a federal nonattainment area for fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and ozone.

Emissions of criteria air pollutants from construction of the proposed project will be estimated using the most current version of the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod). The F&L Team will incorporate into CalEEMod the project-specific construction information such as construction duration, import and export volumes of soil and aggregates, and off-road construction equipment activity. The F&L Team will provide a template to assist the project team in the compilation of project-specific construction information.

Criteria air pollutant emissions from project construction will be compared to the BAAQMD’s recommended thresholds of significance for CEQA analysis. The project’s emissions of ozone precursors (nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds) and PM2.5 from construction will be compared to the applicable General Conformity de minimis thresholds. The F&L Team will develop mitigation measures, as necessary, to minimize any identified impacts to a less-than-significant level, if feasible.

Task 10.3c: Health Risk Assessment
The F&L Team will perform an air quality health risk assessment (HRA) for substantial construction activities that may last for more than two months at any given residential block (if any). Based on preliminary review of the proposed project, the primary air quality concerns will likely be related to the exposure of nearby residents to emissions of diesel particulate matter (DPM) during project construction. The F&L Team will estimate the project’s construction emissions of DPM using the most current version of CalEEMod. Health risks associated with the project’s DPM emissions at the existing sensitive receptors will be assessed based on the results of air dispersion modeling. The project’s estimated health risks will be compared with the BAAQMD’s recommended thresholds of significance.

Task 10.3d: Noise and Vibration Technical Study
The F&L Team will prepare a technical memorandum to evaluate potential impacts related to noise and vibration. Noise and vibration generated during project construction could expose nearby sensitive receptors to levels that exceeds the standards of the City of Millbrae (Millbrae), the City of Burlingame (Burlingame), and the Town. Noise impacts would not occur during operation of the proposed project.

The primary sources of existing ambient noise levels in the project vicinity are from nearby roadways. The existing noise levels in the project area will be discussed based on the noise conditions maps from the General Plans of Millbrae, Burlingame, and the Town. Baseline will evaluate the project’s construction noise and vibration impacts and prepare mitigation measures, as needed, to reduce any potentially significant impacts to less-than-significant levels, if feasible.

Task 10.3e: Biological Resources Technical Report
A site visit will be conducted by the F&L Team biologists (one botanist/arborist and one wildlife biologist) to review sensitive habitats and assess conditions for potential presence of special-status plant and wildlife species protected under federal, state, and/or local laws and ordinances. Prior to the site visit, he F&L Team will conduct a background review of relevant information in literature and databases to ascertain if any sensitive biological resources have the potential to be present on-site based on previous occurrences reported in the area. Background resources that will be reviewed include the Soil Survey of San Mateo County, and species and habitat specific reviews of databases such as the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) and others. During the site visit, the F&L Team will observe and note the condition of any sensitive habitat areas, such as riparian vegetation, wildlife corridors, and stream habitat that may be special-status species dependent. Any special-status species and/or sensitive natural communities that are observed will be -278-
FREYER & LAURETA, INC. Civil Engineers · Surveyors · Construction Managers 5 recorded and mapped with a full description of location and qualities documented; however, this assessment is not considered a protocol-level survey for plant or wildlife species.

Following the field visit, the F&L Team will prepare a Biological Resources Technical Report (BRTR) that provides information on the known or potential use of the site by any special-status species. Potential use will be ranked as low, moderate, or high depending upon the suitability of the habitat or proximity of any known records uncovered in the database search. If any sensitive species are observed, they will be reported in the findings. Any wetlands, streams, or riparian areas observed will be discussed in the report and depicted on an accompanying map. The BRTR will include an analysis of potential impacts and provide minimization, mitigation, and avoidance measures to reduce impacts to less-than-significant levels.

Task 10.4: Prepare CEQA Administrative Draft IS/MND
After providing the Administrative Draft Initial Study to the Town for review, the F&L Team will address all of the Town’s comments. The F&L Team will prepare one copy of a Screencheck Draft Initial Study/MND that the Town can review to confirm that all comments have been addressed.

Task 10.5: Publication of the Draft IS/MND
Upon approval of the Screencheck Draft IS/MND, the F&L Team will reproduce additional copies of the Draft IS/MND for the Town’s use during the 30-day public review period. Additionally, the F&L Team will coordinate with the Town in providing web-ready documents for publication on the Town’s website. The F&L Team will also produce and circulate the Notice of Intent (NOI), as well as any other CEQA noticing requirements, including the Notice of Completion (NOC) and Notice of Determination (NOD) to the San Mateo County Clerk and/or the State Clearinghouse CEQANet portal as required. This proposal assumes the Town will assist with a mailing list for the NOI and will pay for the NOI to be posted in the local newspaper.

Task 10.6: Prepare Final IS/MND and Response to Comments Following completion of the 30-day public review period, the F&L Team will respond to agency and public comments submitted on the Draft IS/MND. The extent of work necessary to complete the Final IS/MND is contingent upon the number and nature of public comments received after the Draft IS/MND is circulated. The Final IS/MND will include the response to comments, any edits required to the Draft IS/MND, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP). This scope of work includes attendance at up one public hearing.

The F&L Team will file the CEQA NOD with the County Clerk within five working days of project approval; a copy of the NOD will also be submitted to the State Clearinghouse CEQANet portal.

SCHEDULE
The F&L Team will complete the Base Scope of Work presented above on a mutually agreeable schedule. The F&L Team projects that the total duration will be between 10 months and 12 months.

COMPENSATION
The F&L Team proposes to provide the Base Scope of Work on a time and materials basis for a not-to-exceed fee of $181,200. Table 1 attached to this proposal provides a detailed summary of level of effort by personnel classification.
-279-
FREYER & LAURETA, INC. Civil Engineers · Surveyors · Construction Managers 6 Thank you for the opportunity to continue to support the Town on this critical project. Please contact me by phone at (650) 619-3226 or email at [email protected] with any questions or comments.

Very truly yours,
Jeffrey J. Tarantino, P.E., Executive VP/Project Manager Lorraine F. Htoo, P.E., Design Manager FREYER & LAURETA, INC.
cc: Natalie Gribben, P.E. (Town of Hillsborough)
Ed Cooney, P.E. (Town of Hillsborough)
Joanne Yau (Freyer & Laureta, Inc.)
Darren Baune, P.E. (Carollo Engineers)
Justin Davidson, P.E. (Carollo Engineers)
Attachments:

1. Table 1 – Budget for Professional Engineering and Environmental Services, Harry Tracy Water Treatment Plant Pipeline Project

2. Attachment 1 – Alignment 3 Fact Sheet
-280-
TABLE 1

BUDGET ESTIMATE FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES FOR THE

WATER PIPELINE DESIGN FROM HARRY TRACY WATER TREATMENT TO THE TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH WATER SYSTEM Town of Hillsborough, California
ESTIMATED OTHER DIRECT COSTS ESTIMATED COST (2)
LABOR (Hours) (1) TOTAL
TASKS F&L Carollo WRA TOTAL UNIT QNTY UNIT 5% COST SUB Clerical Staff Engineer II Two Main Survey Crew Staff Engineer IV Senior Project Manager Principal Document Processor Technician Senior Technician Assistant Professional Professional (EI&C) Professional Project Professional Principal Project Assistant Senior GIS Specialist Project Engineer Senior Engineer Principal Engineer GIS/Graphics Sr. Staff GIS Senior Project Senior Principal Senior Principal I Clerical Support GIS Professional Senior Field Technician Associate Environmental Planner I Environmental Planner II Senior Environmental Planner Principal Ecologist LABOR
COST
($)
COST
($)
MARKUP
($)
PER
ITEM
($)
TOTALS
($)
100 150 500 170 235 250 150 169 235 225 289 289 327 347 116 163 189 226 315 152 152 189 236 289 341 95.6 184 184 221 184 201 278 295 Task 10: CEQA and DWSRF Compliance
Kick-Off Meeting and Information Review 8 2 2 2 2 2 2 8 8 4 $8,449 LS 1 $86 $4 $8,540 Prepare Project Description 40 40 16 1 24 24 2 8 2 1 8 2 8 24 4 4 $42,791 $42,791 Prepare CEQA Administrative Draft IS/MND 8 1 4 1 4 1 4 1 16 48 24 8 2 $24,199 LS 1 $93 $5 $24,296 Cultural Resources (ALTA - No F&L markup) LS 1 $20,527 (3) $20,524 Air Quality Technical Study (Baseline) LS 1 $4,935 (3) $4,932 Health Risk Assessment (Baseline) LS 1 $3,675 (3) $3,672 Noise and Vibration Technical Study (Baseline) LS 1 $6,300 (3) $6,297 Biological Resources Technical Report 8 32 16 4 $12,058 LS 1 $203 $10 $12,271 Prepare CEQA Administrative Draft IS/MND 16 6 4 $5,256 $5,256 Publication of the Draft IS/MND 4 16 2 2 $4,280 LS 1 $440 $22 $4,742 Prepare Final IS/MND and Response to Comments 8 10 2 8 2 4 2 4 2 16 8 4 $13,914 LS 1 $306 $15 $14,235 Internal Review Allowance 32 32 24 16 4 4 4 $22,883 $22,883 Partner Agency Coordination Allowance 12 12 8 8 $10,742 $10,742 Subtotal Labor Hours - Task 6 80 98 56 32 38 12 37 2 16 11 1 18 9 4 32 32 16 128 52 26 6 $144,573 Estimated Cost - Task 6 $181,200 Total Labor Hours 80 98 56 32 38 12 37 2 16 11 1 18 9 4 32 32 16 128 52 26 6 $144,573 Total Estimated Cost $181,200 Notes to Table:
(1) Billing rates for subconsultants includes 5% markup. (2) Estimated costs are rounded to the nearest $100.
(3) F&L has not included markup on second tier subconsultants to avoid double markup.

CEG LCI
Budget Hillsborough 2023-03-21.xlsx/Budget_Estimate_Final Page 1 of 1 Freyer & Laureta, Inc.

Last Printed: 3/21/2023
-281-
ATTACHMENT 1
FACT SHEET FOR ALIGNMENT 3
-282-
--/--/-- DATE: SCALE: DESIGNED: DRAWN: CHECKED: PROJ. ENGR: AS NOTED ---
---
---
--- SURVEYORS
144 North San Mateo Drive San Mateo, CA 94401
(650)344-9901 CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS CIVIL ENGINEERS www.freyerlaureta.com TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH CITY OF BURLINGAME CITY OF MILLBRAE UNINCORPORATED SAN MATEO COUNTY CONNECT TO DARRELL TANKS LEGENDPROPOSED ALIGNMENT 3 CITY LIMITS APPROXIMATE FAULT LINES LOCATIONS HYDRAULICS REQUIRED PUMPING HEAD 440 FT MIN FLOW RATE 2.91 MGD PIPE DIAMETERS 14-INCH TO 18-INCH POTENTIAL UTILITY CHALLENGES LOCATION UTILITY 36-INCH GAS, 42-INCH GAS, ELECTRICAL TRANSMISSION LINE ALIGNMENT 3 SCORE CATEGORY SCORE WEIGHTED SCORE SEISMIC RESILIENCE 2 8 WILDFIRE PROTECTION 5 20 CONSTRUCTABILITY 3 10.5 PARTNER AGENCY BENEFITS AND APPROVAL 3 9 CAPITAL AND OPERATION COST 3 7.5 PUBLIC SAFETY POWER SHUTOFFS 3 4.5 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 4 6 TOTAL SCORE 65.5 CONNECT TO EX. HELEN TURNOUT PROPOSED PUMP STATION AT HELEN TANK SITE ENHANCED PROTECTIVE MEASURES SFPUC REDUNDANT SUPPLY TO MILLBRAE, BURLINGAME, AND HILLSBOROUGH CITY OF MILLBRAE FIRE HYDRANT ALONG SKYLINE SECONDARY SOURCE OF SUPPLY TO SKYLINE TANK CITY OF BURLINGAME SECONDARY SOURCE OF SUPPLY TO MILLS RESERVOIR SECONDARY SOURCE OF SUPPLY TO MILLS PRESSURE ZONE SECONDARY SOURCE OF SUPPLY TO HILLSIDE RESERVOIR FIRE HYDRANTS 1 1 ALIGNMENT 3 DESCRIPTION APPROXIMATELY 29,900 LF · 13,800 LF WITHIN THE CITY OF MILLBRAE · 8,100 LF WITHIN THE CITY OF BURLINGAME · 8,000 LF WITHIN THE TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH MILLBRAE STREETS: · START: HELEN DR, NEAR MEADOWS ELEMENTARY · LARKSPUR DR · SYLINE BLVD · MILLBRAE AVE · VALLEJO DR BURLINGAME STREETS: · FONTERA WAY · HUNT DR · TROUSDALE · SKYLINE BLVD HILLSBOROUGH STREETS: · SKYLINE BLVD · CHATEAU DR · END: DARRELL ROAD -283-

TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH
San Mateo County
1600 Floribunda Avenue
Hillsborough, CA 94010
10 CONSENT CALENDAR

CITY COUNCIL MEETING
APRIL 10, 2023

AGENDA STAFF REPORT
ITEM SUBJECT: RESOLUTION AWARDING TO AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A CONTRACT WITH G. BORTOLOTTO & COMPANY, INC. FOR THE 2023 STREET RESURFACING PROJECT IN THE AMOUNT OF $3,842,864.40, WITH A 10% CONTINGENCY IN THE AMOUNT OF $384,286.44, FOR A TOTAL COST OF $4,227,150.84; APPROVE FY 2022-23 BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND (CIP #401.47) IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,061,791.80; AND AUTHORIZE THE FINANCE DIRECTOR TO MAKE AN

INTER-FUND BORROWING FOR CASH FLOW PURPOSES PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE SECTION 15301
SUMMARY: The Town conducts Street Resurfacing Projects biennially to rehabilitate damaged pavement sections and to provide preventative maintenance. This year’s roadway project, with the recommended alternative bid items, consists of street resurfacing and rehabilitation work for 27.8 miles of the Town’s roadways including approximately 4.1 miles of hot mix asphalt (HMA) overlay,

7.3 miles of rubberized asphalt concrete (RAC) overlay, 4.5 miles of micro surfacing, 3.8 miles rubberized cape seal, and 8.1 miles of crack sealing. Staff designs and bids the Town’s biennial roadway projects early in the calendar year to ensure contractors have not booked their schedules yet, and to time the paving projects around the summer months to reduce impacts to schools and residents. While the timing is advantageous for assigning and scheduling work that takes several months, it doesn’t typically align with fiscal years for budgeting purposes.

The primary factor for choosing the roadway segments included for rehabilitation is the Pavement Condition Index (PCI) of each roadway. PCI is a measurement of a street’s condition derived through field inspections that utilize scoring criteria developed by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s (MTC) pavement management program. Field inspections were conducted in October of 2022, and the roads with the lowest PCI rating were included in this year’s project. The winter rains have been especially brutal on roadways throughout the bay area this rainy season. It is estimated that this project could result in a Town PCI of 82.

The project was publicly bid and advertised in accordance with the Uniform Public Construction Cost Accounting Act, and the Town received three bids for this project. The list of street segments is also included as Attachment 3 to the staff report. The bid results are summarized below:

CONTRACTOR BASE BID ALTERNATIVE A ALTERNATIVE B
G. Bortolotto & Company, Inc. $2,953,710.00 $738,828.00 $150,326.40 Radius Earthwork, Inc. $3,199,019.00 $713,135.00 $55,000.00 Ghilotti Bros, Inc. $3,299,447.50 $750,323.00 $126,000.00 -285-
Agenda Staff Report – Hillsborough City Council
April 10, 2023

Page 2 ends

Of the three bids received for this project, G. Bortolotto & Company, Inc. was confirmed by staff to be the lowest responsible bidder submitting a responsive bid. Staff conducted an analysis of the bids and verified that the low bidder’s qualifications and experience levels are satisfactory.

G. Bortolotto & Company, Inc. has previously completed several roadway resurfacing projects in the Town with positive results and has experience working on similar projects in other municipalities. Additionally, every two years when the street resurfacing project is advertised, the Town typically sees an increase in bid item unit prices with each subsequent project, correlating with inflation and the current bid climate.

In addition to the Base Bid Schedule roadway resurfacing and rehabilitation segments, the Town received bids on Alternative Bid Items A and B:
• Alternative Bid Item A: Rubberized Cape Seal on various additional streets. The Town did receive a Cal Recycling grant for $88,000 to partially offset the costs of this alternate bid item • Alternative Bid Item B: Concrete rolled gutter to provide residents living adjacent to streets proposed to be resurfaced an opportunity to replace rolled gutter along their frontage prior to the resurfacing. Should a resident elect to move forward with replacing their gutter, this alternative bid item would allow them to take advantage of economies of scale in reliance upon the bid price submitted by the contractor, and individual permits would be included.

Costs associated with this alternative would be reimbursed back to the Town by the resident on a linear foot basis pursuant to the bid price. The net cost to the Town would be zero for this alternative.

Staff conducted an analysis of the Alternative Bid Item costs and recommends awarding Alternative Bid Items A and B in addition to the base bid contract. G. Bortolotto & Company’s Alternative Bid Item A was in the amount of $738,828.00, and the engineer’s estimate for this bid item was $684,310.00; Alternative Bid Item B was in the amount of $150,326.40, and the engineer’s estimate for this bid item was $92,400.00.

The City Council may choose to award and approve all, some or none of the Alternative Bid Items.

Awarding and approving Alternative Bid Items A would allow for the acceleration of rehabilitation of damaged pavement for the roadways this year, versus waiting to restore the roads associated with these items until 2025 which is one of the options in the Town’s street resurfacing program.

Engineering staff added these segments as part of the additive alternative bid items to take advantage of the favorable bidding economy.

Alternative Bid Item B, if awarded, would not be funded from roadway funds such as Gas Tax or Measure A, but instead would be funded from the General Fund as it is not part of the Town’s roadway inventory. The item would be entirely reimbursed by homeowners, should they wish to participate in concrete rolled gutter replacement along their frontages.

The basis of award for this project is the Total Base Bid Schedule only and does not include the Alternative Bid Items. The award of the Alternative Bid Items is at the discretion of the City Council and will not affect the determination of how the responsive low bid is calculated.

FISCAL IMPACT: The FY 2022-23 budget for the 2023 Street Resurfacing Program Project had no allocation for the project from the Streets Capital Improvement Plan, CIP #401.47. Due to -286-
Agenda Staff Report – Hillsborough City Council
April 10, 2023

Page 3 ends

favorable pricing and desired timing of construction, the project was bid in FY 2022-23, however, the majority of the costs will be incurred in FY 2023-24. To meet budget compliance in FY 2022- 23, it is recommended that City Council approve a budget amendment in the amount of the Base Bid ($2,953,710.00) and Alternate A ($738,828.00), plus 10% contingency ($369,253.80) for a total of $4,061,791.80. Alternate B is no cost to the Town as it is reimbursed by residents ($150,326.40).

Due to timing of completion targeted by end of FY Q1 2023-24, the full payment on the project will likely exceed the reserves/revenue available at the end of FY Q1 2023-24. The project will be funded by projected ending street reserves on June 30, 2023 of $1,703,816 and FY 2023-24 projected street revenues from Measure A, Measure W, RMRA, CalRecycle and other sources which amount to $2,141,924 that is received throughout the year. Therefore, it is also recommended that the City Council authorize the Finance Director to make a short-term inter-fund borrowing for cash flow purposes of up to $1.25 million from the General Fund to the Capital Fund for CIP #401.47 to be paid back no later than June 30, 2024. The Town’s Policy No. 409 requires City Council approval for inter-fund borrowings that exceed 45 days.

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: This project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per Section 15301 of the California Code of Regulations.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution

2. Bid Results

3. Street List
PREPARED BY: Paul Willis, Director of Public Works
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the resolution 1) awarding and authorizing the City Manager to execute the contract on behalf of the Town with G. Bortolotto & Company, Inc. for the 2023 Street Resurfacing Project in the amount of $2,953,710.00, and Alternative Bid Item A in the amount of $738,828.00, Alternative Bid Item B in the amount of $150,326.40, with 10% contingency in the amount of $384,286.44, if needed, for a total of $4,227,150.84, and to execute the Alternative Bid Items A and B in whole or in part, 2) approving a FY 2022-23 budget amendment in Capital Improvement Fund CIP #401.47 in the amount of $4,061,791.80, and 3) authorizing the Finance Director to make an inter-fund borrowing for cash flow purposes of up to $1.25 million from the General Fund to the Capital Fund for CIP #401.47 to be paid back no later than June 30, 2024. -287-
RESOLUTION NO. 23-

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH

AWARDING TO AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE CONTRACT WITH G BORTOLOTTO & COMPANY FOR THE 2023 STREET RESURFACING PROJECT IN THE AMOUNT OF $3,842,864.40, WITH A 10% CONTINGENCY IN THE AMOUNT OF $384,286.44, FOR A TOTAL COST OF $4,227,150.84; APPROVE FY 2022-23 BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND (CIP #401.47) IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,061,791.80; AND

AUTHORIZE THE FINANCE DIRECTOR TO MAKE AN INTER-FUND BORROWING FOR CASH FLOW PURPOSES PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE SECTION 15301 WHEREAS, the Town of Hillsborough (“Town”) maintains the Town’s roadway system; and
WHEREAS, Street Resurfacing Projects are conducted biennially; and WHEREAS, the primary factor for choosing the streets for rehabilitation was the Pavement Condition Index (PCI) of each roadway. PCI is a scoring criteria developed by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), and the roads with the lowest PCI rating were included in this year’s roadway project; and
WHEREAS, in addition to the roadway rehabilitation associated with the base bid, the project includes Alternative Bid Items A and B for additional resurfacing and repair; and
WHEREAS, the Project was publicly bid and advertised in accordance with the Uniform Public Construction Cost Accounting Act, and the Town received three bids for the Project; and
WHEREAS, G. Bortolotto & Company, Inc. (Bortolotto) was the lowest responsible bidder submitting a responsive based bid in the amount of $2,953,710.00, Alternative Bid Item A in the amount of $738,828.00, and Alternative Bid Item B in the amount of $150,326.40; and
WHEREAS, staff recommends awarding the Base Bid and Alternative Bid Items A and B, with a 10% contingency, for a total project cost of $4,227,150.84; and WHEREAS, Alternative Bid Item B is reimbursable to the Town so the total budget allocation required is $4,061,791.80; and
WHEREAS, staff conducted an analysis of the bids, and verified that the low bidder’s qualifications and experience levels are satisfactory; and .

WHEREAS, funding will require approval of a budget amendment for FY 2022-23 to the Street Resurfacing Program (CIP #401.47); and
-288-
ATTACHMENT 1
2 WHEREAS, the timing of cash expenditure on the project may exceed the available funds in the first two fiscal quarters of FY 2023-24 and may require a short-term inter-fund borrowing from the General Fund; and WHEREAS, the Town may use a General Fund transfer or long term loan at future City Council meeting to recover cost deficits, if necessary.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the Town of Hillsborough hereby:

1. Awards and authorizes the City Manager to execute the contract on behalf of the Town with G. Bortolotto & Company, Inc. for the 2023 Street Resurfacing Project in the amount of $3,842,864.40, including Alternative Bid Items A and B, and authorizes a 10% Town controlled contingency in the amount of $384,286.44, if needed, for a total of $4,227,150.84, allocating funds from the Street Resurfacing Program (CIP #401.47).

2. Approves a FY 2022-23 budget amendment in Capital Improvement Fund CIP #401.47 in the amount of $4,061,791.80; and

3. Authorizes the Finance Director to make an inter-fund borrowing for cash flow purposes of up to $1.25 million from the General Fund to the Capital Fund for CIP #401.47 to be paid back no later than June 30, 2024.

AYES: Councilmembers
NOES: Councilmembers
ABSENT: Councilmembers
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers
-289-
1) Radius Earthwork Inc. $ 3,199,019.00 $ 713,135.00 $ 55,000.00 Three Million One Hundred Ninety Nine Thousand Nineteen Dollars and No Cents 2) Ghilotti Bros, inc. $ 3,299,447.50 $ 750,323.00 $ 126,000.00 Three Million Two Hundred Ninety Nine Thousand Four Hundred Forty Seven Dollars and Fifty Cents 3) G. Bortolotto & Com, Inc $ 2,953,710.00 $ 738,828.00 $ 150,326.40 Two Million Nine Hundred Fifty Three Thousand Seven Hundred Ten Dollars and No Cents 4) $ - $ - $ - No Dollars and No Cents
5) $ - $ - $ - No Dollars and No Cents
0 * The Apparent Low Bidder is determined on the Grand Total of the Base Bid Schedule only Apparent low bidder*: G. Bortolotto & Com, Inc

COMPANY NAME
Grand Total of Base Bid
Schedule, In Numbers
(Basis of Award)
Grand Total of Base Bid Schedule, In Words (Basis of Award) Alternative Bid Schedule B, In Numbers
Alternative Bid Schedule A,
In Numbers

TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH
Project Name:

Hillsborough Town Hall
2:00 PM
Wednesday, March 15, 2023
2023 Street Resurfacing Project (CIP #401.47)
Location:

Bid Opening Time:

Bid Opening Date:

ATTACHMENT 2 -290-
ATTACHMENT 3
-291-
-292-
-293-
-294-
-295-
-296-

TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH
San Mateo County
1600 Floribunda Avenue
Hillsborough, CA 94010
11 CONSENT CALENDAR

CITY COUNCIL MEETING
APRIL 10, 2023

AGENDA STAFF REPORT
ITEM SUBJECT: RESOLUTION RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 22-14 AND RESOLUTION NO. 22-63 AND APPROVING THE PURCHASE OF ONE REPLACEMENT PUBLIC WORKS WATER MAINTENANCE VEHICLE IN THE AMOUNT OF $69,978.83 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378
SUMMARY: The Public Works Department was scheduled to replace one Sprinter Van for the Water Division in FY 2021-2022. The vehicle scheduled to be replaced was Sprinter Van #305, and the proposed replacement vehicle was a Ford E-Transit Cargo Van T-350. On February 14, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 22-14 approving the purchase of one 2022 Ford ETransit Cargo Van T-350 in the amount of $55,482.13 through the Town’s Sourcewell Cooperative Purchasing arrangement with the National Auto Fleet Group. Shortly after the City Council’s adoption of Resolution No. 22-14, National Auto Fleet Group informed Town staff that the 2022 model of the Ford E-Transit Cargo Van T-350 was not available and instead, staff would need to pay an increased price associated with the 2023 model. On August 8, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 22-63 approving the purchase the 2023 model of the Ford E-Transit Cargo Van T-350 at an increased price of $68,407.28 through the Town’s Sourcewell Cooperative Purchasing arrangement with the National Auto Fleet Group. Since the City Council’s adoption of Resolution No. 22-63, ongoing supply chain shortages have further impacted the Town’s purchase and National Auto Fleet Group has been unable to guarantee a timely production and delivery date of the 2023 model of the Ford E-Transit Cargo Van T-350.

Due to the delivery issues, the Public Works Department recently sought other vendors to supply the 2023 model of the Ford E-Transit Cargo Van T-350 and invited competitive bids from qualified dealerships. The Public Works Department received proposals from Fremont Ford and Towne Ford.

MANUFACTURER PRICE PER E- TRANSIT VAN
FREMONT FORD $69,978.83
TOWNE FORD $70,955.33
Town staff recommends purchasing one Ford E-Transit Cargo Van T-350 from Fremont Ford for $69,978.83.

FISCAL IMPACT: There are existing funds in the Public Works Vehicle Capital Replacement Fund for the replacement vehicles. Ford electric vehicles may be eligible to receive a Federal Tax Credit of up to $7,500 each. Further grants available through California Air Resources Board, Congestion Mitigation Air Quality Funds, and the California Clean Fuel reward program will also be applied for. -297-
Agenda Staff Report - Hillsborough City Council
April 10, 2023

Page 2 ends

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: The proposed action is exempt from environmental review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines sections 15378(b)(2) and 15378(b)(5) as ongoing administrative or organizational activities that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution

2. Resolution No. 22-14

3. Resolution No. 22-63
PREPARED BY: Rick Pina, Public Works Superintendent
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the resolution to rescind Resolution No. 22-14 and Resolution No. 22-63 and approve the purchase of one Ford E-Transit Cargo Van T-350 in the amount of $69,978.83 as a replacement for the current Sprinter Van and allocate funds from the Public Works Vehicle Capital Replacement Fund.
-298-
RESOLUTION NO. 23-

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 22-14 AND RESOLUTION NO. 22-63 APPROVING

THE PURCHASE OF ONE REPLACEMENT PUBLIC WORKS WATER
MAINTENANCE VEHICLE IN THE AMOUNT OF $69,978.83 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378
WHEREAS, the City Council of the Town of Hillsborough (“Town”) approved capital Public Works vehicle capital replacement funding for FY 2021-22 in the amount of $823,000; and
WHEREAS, on February 14, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 22-14 approving the purchase of one 2022 Ford E-Transit Cargo Van T-350 in the amount of $55,482.13 through the Town’s Sourcewell Cooperative Purchasing arrangement with the National Auto Fleet Group; and WHEREAS, shortly after the City Council’s adoption of Resolution No. 22-14, National Auto Fleet Group informed Town staff that the 2022 model of the Ford ETransit Cargo Van T-350 was not available and instead, staff would need to pay an increased price associated with the 2023 model; and WHEREAS, August 8, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 22-63 approving the purchase the 2023 model of the Ford E-Transit Cargo Van T-350 at an increased price of $68,407.28 through the Town’s Sourcewell Cooperative Purchasing arrangement with the National Auto Fleet Group; and WHEREAS, since the City Council’s adoption of Resolution No. 22-63, ongoing supply chain shortages have further impacted the Town’s purchase and National Auto Fleet Group has been unable to guarantee a timely production and delivery date of the 2023 model of the Ford E-Transit Cargo Van T-350; and
WHEREAS, due to the delivery issues, the Public Works Department recently sought other vendors to supply the 2023 model of the Ford E-Transit Cargo Van T-350 and invited competitive bids from qualified dealerships; and WHEREAS, the Public Works Department received proposals from two qualified dealerships, Fremont Ford, and Towne Ford; and
WHEREAS, Fremont Ford submitted the lowest bid in the amount of $69,978.83 for one 2023 model Ford E-Transit Cargo Van T-350.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the Town of Hillsborough hereby rescinds Resolution No. 22-14 and Resolution No. 22-63 and approves the purchase of one Ford E-Transit Cargo Van T-350 replacement Public -299-
ATTACHMENT 1
Works water maintenance vehicle from Fremont Ford in the amount of $69,978.83, allocating funds from the Public Works Vehicle Capital Replacement Fund.

AYES: Councilmembers
NOES: Councilmembers
ABSENT: Councilmembers
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers
-300-
-301-
ATTACHMENT 2
-302-
ATTACHMENT 3

TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH
San Mateo County
1600 Floribunda Avenue
Hillsborough, CA 94010
12 CONSENT CALENDAR

CITY COUNCIL MEETING
APRIL 10, 2023

AGENDA STAFF REPORT
ITEM SUBJECT: RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PURCHASE OF ONE REPLACEMENT PUBLIC WORKS SEWER MAINTENANCE VEHICLE IN THE AMOUNT OF $287,362.69 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378
SUMMARY: The Public Works Department was scheduled to replace one Power Rodder for the Sewer Division in FY 2022-23. The vehicle scheduled to be replaced is HPW Power Rodder #550 which is assigned to the Sewer division and put into use in 2004. Public Works plans to replace this vehicle with a Pipe Hunter, Mini Jetter. The Pipe Hunter, Mini Jetter is equipped with advanced technology that will facilitate reduced water usage and more efficient cleaning of the sanitary sewer system. The Mini Jetter also has 4WD capability, which allows us to deploy this vehicle in the easement areas where portions of the Town’s sewer main infrastructure is located.

The Pipe Hunter Mini Jetter is supplied by Municipal Maintenance Equipment, and is part of the HGAC cooperative pricing agreement for which the Town participates in.

MANUFACTURER PRICE PER UNIT
MUNICIPAL MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT $ 262,722.00
Municipal Maintenance Equipment did not include the 9.375% sales tax which would add $24,630.19 to the price. They also did not include the California Tire Fee which would add $10.50 to the price. The total cost will be $287,362.69.

Staff recommends purchasing one Pipe Hunter Mini Jetter from Municipal Maintenance Equipment for a total cost of $287,362.69.

FISCAL IMPACT: There are existing funds in the Public Works Vehicle Capital Replacement Fund for the replacement vehicles.

ATTACHMENTS: Resolution
PREPARED BY: Rick Pina, Public Works Superintendent
-303-
Agenda Staff Report - Hillsborough City Council
April 10, 2023

Page 2 ends

RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the resolution approving the purchase of one replacement Pipe Hunter Mini Jetter Public Works Sewer Maintenance Vehicle in the amount of $287,362.69 as a replacement for the current Power Rodder and allocate funds from the Public Works Vehicle Capital Replacement Fund.
-304-
RESOLUTION NO. 23-

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH

APPROVING THE PURCHASE OF ONE REPLACEMENT PUBLIC WORKS SEWER MAINTENANCE VEHICLE IN THE AMOUNT OF $287,362.69 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378
WHEREAS, the City Council of the Town of Hillsborough (“Town”) approved capital Public Works vehicle capital replacement funding for the 2021-2022 fiscal year in the amount of $823,000; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Town’s Purchasing Policy, for a purchase of this amount, the Town is required to conduct a formal RFP; and
WHEREAS, the Town is opting to make use of an RFP process already conducted by HGAC as a Cooperative Purchase; and
WHEREAS, Town staff believes the terms of the RFP issued by HGAC are generally similar and consistent with the Town’s requirements imposed by the Town’s Purchasing Policy, thereby ensuring the Town is obtaining the best pricing as part of this cooperative arrangement; and
WHEREAS, the Public Works Department received a quote through the Town’s HGAC cooperative purchasing agreement for a Pipe Hunter Mini Jetter from Municipal Maintenance Equipment for a total cost of $287,362.69.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the Town of Hillsborough hereby approves the purchase of one Pipe Hunter Mini Jetter replacement Public Works sewer maintenance vehicle from Municipal Maintenance Equipment in the amount of $287,362.69 allocating funds from the Public Works Vehicle Capital Replacement Fund.

AYES: Councilmembers
NOES: Councilmembers
ABSENT: Councilmembers
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers

TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH
San Mateo County
1600 Floribunda Avenue
Hillsborough, CA 94010
13 CONSENT CALENDAR

CITY COUNCIL MEETING

AGENDA STAFF REPORT
ITEM SUBJECT: ACCEPTANCE OF THE 2022 GENERAL PLAN ANNUAL PROGRESS REPORT PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15378
SUMMARY:

General Plan
The General Plan is a local government's long-term blueprint outlining the community's vision for the jurisdiction. Every jurisdiction in California is required to adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan, and all land use approvals and decisions made by the jurisdiction must be consistent with that General Plan.

The Town's General Plan includes the following six chapters, referred to by the State as “elements”:
• Housing
• Land Use
• Circulation
• Open Space & Conservation
• Public Safety
• Noise
Typically, General Plans are updated approximately every 15 years, and the Town’s current General Plan was revised and adopted by the City Council on March 14, 2005. However, under California law every jurisdiction in the State is required to update the Housing Element of its General Plan every eight years. The Town is currently in the process of updating is Housing Element for the 2022-2031 period. The previous Housing Element was adopted by the City Council on October 13, 2014.

The Housing Element is a chapter of the General Plan that outlines a community's housing plans and the polices the community has in place to ensure that they will achieve their plan's goals.

While cities don’t build housing themselves, they do create the rules that affect where housing can be built, how much, and how it gets approved.

Annual Progress Report Overview
Government Code § 65400 and § 65700 mandate that all jurisdictions submit an Annual Progress Report (APR) on the status of their General Plan and their progress in its implementation to the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) and the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) by April 1 of each year. Jurisdictions must also provide this report to their legislative body for acceptance.
-305-
Agenda Staff Report – Hillsborough City Council
April 10, 2023

Page 2 ends

The APR is intended to ensure that the goals, policies, and action items of the jurisdiction’s General Plan are being implemented and that progress is being in made in meeting the required number of new units identified in the jurisdiction’s Housing Element. Additionally, in 2019 an update to the Surplus Land Act (Government Code § 54220 et seq.) was signed into law, requiring local agencies to include in their APRs specified information relating to surplus lands, beginning with the 2021 report.

Housing Element APR
The Housing Element portion of the APR fulfills statutory requirements to report certain housing information, including the Town’s progress in meeting its share of the area’s Regional Housing Need Allocation (RHNA). This allocation is given to the region by the State every eight years and is a portion of that allocation is then assigned to each jurisdiction by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG). The nine-county Bay Area region is currently in the fifth cycle of (RHNA 5) which runs from 2014-2022.

The Town of Hillsborough’s previous cycle RHNA 5 allocation was 91 net new units. Per the RHNA 5 assignment, 70 of these units must be at affordable levels, meaning they must be accessible to very low, low- and moderate-income households (up to 120% of the Area Median Income or “AMI”). The remaining 21 units must be available to above moderate-income households (120% AMI and above).

The Town is one of very few jurisdictions in the Bay to meet their RHNA 5 allocation goals. Below is an outline of the Town’s progress to date:
• TOTAL UNITS: Exceeded Target
Between January 1, 2014-December 31, 2022, the Town has issued permits for 255 net new units, exceeding the number of total units required by 164 units. • LOW-INCOME UNITS: Exceeded Target
The Town has met the 70-unit RHNA requirement for the very low, low- and moderateincome categories through the development of ADUs (discussed in greater detail, below). In total, the Town has issues permits for more than 200 units for these income categories, to date. In 2022 the Town issued land-use entitlements for 65 ADUs, and issued building permits for 59 ADUs, significantly exceeding the RHNA 5 target for this unit type. • ABOVE-MODERATE INCOME UNITS: Exceeded Target
To date the Town has issued permits for 40 of the 21 above-moderate units needed by the end of 2022, primarily through the development of net new single-family homes on vacant lots (note that this is not one-for one replacement on previously developed lots).

Methodology for Determining Housing Affordability
As a part of their support of jurisdictions in San Mateo County during the RHNA 5 Housing Element Update process, the firm of Baird + Driskell (staff to the 21 Elements effort) prepared a 2014 report on the affordability of ADUs in the county. According to the report:
• 25-60 percent of ADUs are affordable to very low-income households; • 15-20 percent of ADUs are affordable to low income households; and -306-
Agenda Staff Report – Hillsborough City Council
April 10, 2023

Page 3 ends

• 10-20 percent of ADUs are affordable to moderate income households.

Using this data, for the RHNA 5 cycle the Town has estimated that 75 percent of ADUs constructed in the Town will be affordable for lower-income households. For purposes of RHNA 5 annual reporting the Town has distributed that 75% evenly across the three income categories, as follows:
• 25% to very low-income households;
• 25% to low-income households; and
• 25% to moderate income households.

In an effort to obtain more granular, local data, each year the Town also surveys all property owners who have built an ADU in the previous year. The survey asks for information on the intended use and potential rental rate of the ADU. The survey is not compulsory, however, and completed surveys are rarely returned making a valid statistical analysis essentially unachievable.

For this reason, during the RHNA 5 period of 2014-2022 the Town has opted to utilize the methodology outlined above.

General Plan APR
Each element of Town’s General Plan identifies implementation tasks which are intended to assist the Town in achieving the goals and objectives of that element, and the General Plan as a whole.

These tasks have subsequently been assigned to various City departments, based on the skills needed for task completion.

Each department is responsible for tracking progress as implementation is rolled out, and reporting that progress to the Building and Planning Department at the beginning of each calendar year.

Attachment 2 is an overview of key implementation efforts over the past calendar year.

Surplus Land APR
In accordance with the Surplus Land Act, on or before December 31 of each year, each county and city in the state must: “make a central inventory of all surplus land … within the jurisdiction of the county or city that the county or city or any of its departments, agencies, or authorities owns or controls” (the “Inventory List”), and immediately thereafter make the Inventory List available, without charge, to those who request it.” Pursuant to newly amended Government Code § 54230(a)(2), the Town must also submit the Inventory List to HCD by April 1, each year, as a part of their APR.

At the December 14, 2020 City Council meeting a resolution was adopted declaring two small buffer strips and two landscaped islands as town-owned, non-exempt surplus properties. These small remnant parcels are now also listed in the APR, as required by state law. The two landscaped islands are not Hillsborough Beautification Foundation (HBF) projects. No additional properties were added to the surplus land inventory in 2022.

FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with the preparation and consideration of the 2022 General Plan Annual Progress Report.

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: The proposed action is exempt from environmental review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines sections 15378(b)(2) and -307-
Agenda Staff Report – Hillsborough City Council
April 10, 2023

Page 4 ends

15378(b)(5) as ongoing administrative or organizational activities that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. 2022 General Plan & Housing Element Annual Progress Report (APRs)

2. General Plan Implementation Summary

3. Surplus Land Inventory List
PREPARED BY: Liz Ruess, Planning Manager
RECOMMENDATION: Accept the 2022 General Plan Annual Progress Report. -308-
Jurisdiction Hillsborough
Reporting Year 2022 (Jan. 1 - Dec. 31)
Planning Period 5th Cycle 01/31/2015 - 01/31/2023
Current Year
Deed Restricted 0
Non-Deed Restricted 14
Deed Restricted 0
Non-Deed Restricted 14
Deed Restricted 0
Non-Deed Restricted 15
19 62
Units by Structure Type Entitled Permitted Completed
SFA 0 0 0
SFD 3 3 3
2 to 4 0 0 0
5+ 0 0 0
ADU 65 59 25
MH 0 0 0
Total 68 62 28
77 77
72 0
Total Housing Applications Submitted:

Number of Proposed Units in All Applications Received:

Total Housing Units Approved:

Total Housing Units Disapproved:

Total Units
Housing Applications Summary
Note: Units serving extremely low-income households are included in the very low-income permitted units totals Building Permits Issued by Affordability Summary
Income Level
Very Low
Low
Moderate
Above Moderate
-309-
ATTACHMENT 1
1 3 4
RHNA
Allocation by
Income Level
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total Units to Date (all years)
Exceeded RHNA
by Income Level
Deed Restricted - - - - - - - - - 90
Non-Deed Restricted 16 4 8 6 9 9 24 14 -
Deed Restricted - - - - - - - - - 58
Non-Deed Restricted 8 2 3 4 2 7 18 14 -
Deed Restricted - - - - - - - - - 58
Non-Deed Restricted 10 2 4 3 4 6 13 16 -
Above
Moderate 21 5 2 3 3 5 3 9 19 - 49 28
91 39 10 18 16 20 25 64 62 - 255 164
Very Low 32 58
Table B
Regional Housing Needs Allocation Progress
Permitted Units Issued by Affordability
2 Income Level
Low
17 41
Moderate
21 37
Total RHNA
Total Units
-310-
Policy No./ Action No. Policy/Action Responsible Dept. Status/Implementation Land Use Element
Action LU 1.1
The ADRB will apply the
Hillsborough Residential Design
Guidelines when reviewing new
construction and significant
remodeling.

ADRB, Building and
Planning Department Ongoing
Action LU 1.2
The Town will enforce its Residential
Landscaping requirements to
maintain the attractive visual
character of Hillsborough, as well as
to promote water conservation.

ADRB, Building and
Planning Department
Ongoing - In 2016 the Town adopted
an updated Water Efficient
Landscape Ordinance (WELO).

Action LU 1.3
The Town will enforce its Nuisance
Ordinance, which allows for the
clean-up of overgrown properties
that pose a safety hazard or create a
visual nuisance inconsistent with
the character of Hillsborough.

Code Enforcement Ongoing
Action LU 2.1
The Town will enforce the
Construction Management
Ordinance to ensure the timely
completion of construction projects.

Building and Planning
Department
Ongoing - Building Division continues
to conduct Bi-monthly monitoring.

Action LU 2.2
The Town will explore methods to
clarify for the public the Town’s
various development review and
construction processes.

Planning & Building
Department
Ongoing - Building and Planning
Department continues to host annual
Design, Permitting and Construction
Forum for residents and design
professionals.

Action LU 3.1
The Town will provide for public
review and involvement prior to
approval of any proposed change to
the conditions of a private school
permit.

Building and Planning
Department
Ongoing - As per HMC 17.16.030 any
amendments to a permit to operate
shall be referred to the city council.

Amendments requiring design review
shall first be reviewed by the ADRB,
then referred to the City Council.

Action LU 3.2
The Town will provide notice to the
HCSD when a private school
proposes new development or a
change to operations so that the
District may comment on the
proposal.

Building and Planning
Department Ongoing
Action LU 4.1
The Town will continue to utilize its
budget planning process to ensure
that Town-provided services are
maintained at a level that meets the
community’s needs.

Building and Planning
Department
Ongoing - Adopted balanced budget.

Conducted Rate Studies and
Increased Rates where needed. All
services are funded and there has
been no decrease in service despite
weak economy from COVID 19
CY 2022 General Plan Annual Implementation Progress Report -311-
ATTACHMENT 2
Action LU 4.3
The Town will support the HCSD in
the preparation and
implementation of its Facilities
Master Plan.

Building and Planning
Department Ongoing
Action LU 4.4
The Public Works Department will
continue to monitor water and
sewer distribution and collection
lines to determine those needing
repair and provide needed repair, as
feasible.

City Council, Public
Works/Engineering
Department
Ongoing
Action LU 4.5
The Town will continue to
implement the Recycling of
Construction and Demolition
Ordinance to minimize the amount
of construction debris disposed of in
the landfill.

Public Works
Director/Building &
Planning Department
Ongoing
Action LU 4.6
The Town will continue to contract
for the collection of household
recycling from each home on a
regular basis. When renewing or
amending the contract,
consideration will be given to the
need to meet the State’s 50%
diversion requirements for solid
waste, the ease of pick-up, hours of
collection, visual design of recycling
containers, location where
containers are collected for pick-up
and overall cost for recycling
collection.

Public Works Director The Town has achieved a diversion rate of 73.4% for the 2021 CY.

Action LU 4.7
For Town contracted services, the
Town will utilize the contract
negotiation process to ensure that
the specific needs of the community
for various services, such as
telecommunications, library and
refuse collection, will be met by the
selected service provided.

Department Heads Ongoing
Circulation Element
Action C 1.1
The Public Works Department will
continue to utilize the Pavement
Management System to plan for the
on-going maintenance of the Town’s
roadways.

Public
Works/Engineering Ongoing
-312-
Action C 1.2
The Police Department will monitor
accident reports and complaints to
identify locations that are at high
risk for accidents. They will work
with the Public Works Department
to identify and implement
appropriate improvements to
reduce the incident of accidents.

Police, Public
Works/Engineering Ongoing
Action C 2.1
The Town will work with SM County,
the SFPUC and Caltrans to
implement feasible improvements
at the intersection of Black
Mountain Road/Hayne Road/Skyline
Blvd. to improve traffic flow or limit
the amount of regional cut-through
traffic traveling into the Town. Such
improvements might include adding
a separate eastbound left-turn land
and a separate shared through/rightturn lane. The Town may consider adoption of traffic impact fees to
fund the Town’s share of
improvements.

Police, Public
Works/Engineering
Improvements at the intersection of
BlackMountain Road/Hayne
Road/Skyline Blvd. to improve traffic
flow or limit the amount of regional
cut-through traffic traveling into the
Town are complete.

Action C 2.2
The Town will work with HCSD
through the District’s Facility Master
Plan process to identify roadway
improvements for site access and onsite circulation at the schools, as well as explore and implement
traffic control programs to reduce
congestion in the area around the
public schools. The Town will also
work with the District to identify
and implement short-term
measures, such as providing
additional police presence, to
address traffic congestion until longterm improvements are made.

Police, Public
Works/Engineering Ongoing
Action C 2.3
The Town will work with the School
District and local private schools to
develop a network for parents to
facilitate organizing carpools as well
as encouraging safe walking and
biking.

Police Ongoing
-313-
Action C 2.4
The Town will identify minimum
Levels of Service for intersections
and roadways shared with adjacent
communities and pursue
agreements with adjacent
communities to maintain those
intersections at the agreed upon
Level of Service.

Police, Public
Works/Engineering Ongoing
Action C 2.5
While accepting a lower Level of
Service where appropriate, the
Town will monitor every 5 years via
traffic counts roadway segments or
intersections that are operating at
LOS D or lower. The Town will
explore feasible mitigation
measures to reduce congestion at
these locations.

Public
Works/Engineering Ongoing
Action C 3.1
The Town will review all
construction plans for conformance
with Municipal Code parking
requirements.

Building & Planning
Department Ongoing
Action C 3.2 The Town will update the parking
strip requirement.

Public
Works/Engineering Completed in 2010
Action C 4.1
The Town will coordinate with the
School District and other entities to
develop “Suggested Routes to
School Plans” for all public and
private schools in the Town. Plans
shall identify all pedestrian and
bicycle facilities, and traffic control
devices for residents to determine
the most appropriate travel routes.

The plans shall also identify existing
easements for potential use for offstreet pedestrian pathways.

Police Ongoing
-314-
Action C 5.1
The Town will pursue the creation of
an off-street bicycle trail along
Crystal Springs Road, consistent
with the County’s Trail Plan and
Bicycle Route Plan. In this effort, the
Town will work with current
property owners, including the
SFPUC, to incorporate the trail into
future development along the route.

The Town will recommend that the
County of San Mateo research,
identify and compete for available
funding to assist with the
completion of the trail. Hillsborough
will also request that the County
and C/CAG study feasible
alignments that would avoid
negatively impacting sensitive
biological resources located along
San Mateo Creek.

Building and Planning
Department/Public
Works/Engineering
Will occur in conjunction with
development proposals along Crystal
Springs Road.

Action C 5.2 The Town will develop a
community awareness program to
encourage local use of safer bicycle
routes, including referring residents
to the C/CAG Bicycle and Pedestrian
Advisory Committee’s bicycle route
map. The Town will include bicycle
and pedestrian safety and
enforcement when developing
community awareness programs.

Police Ongoing
Action OSC 1.1
The Town will continue to cooperate
with the HCSD through their Joint
Powers Agreement to maintain the
Hillsborough Recreation
Department.

City Council, City
Manager
Continued support through Council
members serving as Town
commissioners. Continued funding
to support crossing guards for
school operations. Advertisement
of programs in Town
communications. Town-provided
facilities for programming
Action OSC 1.2
The Town will adopt an ordinance in
compliance with the Quimby Act to
require new development to
provide land dedication and/or inlieu fees in the amount equal to 3 acres of parkland per 1,000 new
residents.

Building and Planning
Department Adopted in 2006
Open Space and Conservation Element
-315-
Action OSC 3.1
The Town will evaluate the Tree
Removal Ordinance to recognize the
need to allow for a system of
gradual replacement of important
trees as they age to ensure that
there is a mixture of healthy trees in
the community and that there is not
a period during which all of the
trees die of old age at the same
time.

Building and Planning
Department
In 2017 The Town implemented a
reduced fee for tree
removal/replacement permits for
trees damaged during the drought.

Action OSC 3.2
The Public Works Department will
be responsible for maintaining the
health of trees on public property as
necessary. Trees on private
properties should be maintained by
property owners.

Public Works/Code
Enforcement In progress.

Action OSC 3.3
The Town will continue to direct
residents to the procedures in the
Voluntary Resolution of Disputes
Regarding Trees and Views
Ordinance to allow neighbors to
come to agreement on a balance
between the desire for larger trees
and preservation of views.

City Manager, Code
Enforcement
Continued public education on best
practices regarding working with
neighbors on tree removals. Included
information on what residents
can/should do about trees blocking
their views on the Town website.

Tree Ordinance update underway
with additional public education and
outreach to be completed in the next
year.

Action OSC 3.4
The Town will provide information
to residents on how to reduce the
impact of deer on private property,
such as planting vegetation that
deer generally dislike and fencing.

Residents will be reminded that it is
illegal to feed deer and that it poses
a risk.

Building & Planning
Department
As applicable and through landscape
application plan review.

Action OSC 4.1
The Town will adopt and implement
a Creek Protection Ordinance to
ensure that new development does
not have a negative impact on
creeks and streams.

Public
Works/Engineering
Town complies with CEQA
requirements.

Action OSC 4.2
The Town will continue to
participate in the San Mateo
Stormwater Pollution Prevention
Program
Public
Works/Engineering,
Building and Planning
Department
Ongoing
Action OSC 4.3
The Town will encourage property
owners to incorporate water
conservation techniques into their
landscaping to reduce water usage.

City Council, Public
Works, Building and
Planning Department,
Newsletter
Regular water conservation tips and
reminders (in coordination with
BAWSCA) regularly published in
Town communications
Action OSC 5.1 The Town will continue to enforce
the Historic Preservation Ordinance.

Building and Planning
Department Ongoing
-316-
Action OSC 5.2
The Town will require projects
subject to CEQA to analyze impacts
to cultural resources per state law.

Building and Planning
Department Ongoing
Action OSC 5.3
The Town will require construction
projects to stop if archaeological or
paleontological resources are
uncovered during grading or other
on-site excavation activities.

Building and Planning
Department Ongoing
Public Safety Element
Action PS 1.1
The Central County Fire Department
will review plans for all new
buildings and major additions and
make recommendations for
modifications to reduce fire hazard.

Fire
Ongoing – plans are reviewed for fire
access capabilities, water supply and
fire sprinklers, and landscape
projects within WUI area
Action PS 1.2
When property owners are not
correctly maintaining their property,
the Town will implement fire control
maintenance measures as needed,
provide necessary fire prevention
improvements on properties that
pose a public safety threat, and pass
the costs on to the owners.

Fire
Ongoing – Adopted ordinances for
code and wildland-urban interface
enforcement outline actions to
ensure safety risk is reduced
Action PS 1.3
The Town will work with the Central
County Fire Department to review
and update, if necessary, the Town’s
and Department’s regulations and
approach regarding fire protection
to ensure adequate fire protection.

Fire
Ongoing – 2019 California codes
were adopted by local municipal
code that includes fire protection
measures
Action PS 1.4
The Town will continue to work with
the Central County Fire Department
to ensure that regional approaches
to fire protection and suppression
are implemented in Hillsborough.

Fire
Ongoing – county-wide dispatching
system provides emergency response
based on closest apparatus location
to incident
Action PS 2.2
The Town will continue to
implement its Hillside Lot Size
Ordinance.

Public
Works/Engineering Ongoing
Action PS 2.2
The Town will continue to require
construction plans for all new
houses to be reviewed by a
registered professional engineer.

Building and Planning
Department Ongoing
Action PS 3.1
The Town will review all new
building plans & substantial
renovations for compliance with the
UBC and any additional state or
federal seismic safety regulations
prior to permit approval.

Building and Planning
Department
Ongoing. The Town currently utilizes
the California Building Standards
Code (CBSC) or International Building
Code (IBC).
-317-
Action PS 3.2
The Town will distribute
information to residents on
emergency procedures in case of an
earthquake.

Fire
CCFD continues to provide
information to Town residents for all
hazards including earthquakes.

Encouraging residents to subscribe to
SMCAlert the county’s mass
notification system to receive real
time public safety information.

Zonehaven and the “Know Your
Zone” campaign is another platform
we encourage residents to familiarize
themselves with that provides real
time public safety information on a
map-based website.

Action PS 4.1
The Town will continue to
participate in the National Flood
Insurance Program
Public Works & Building
and Planning
Departments
Ongoing
Action PS 5.1
The Police Department will continue
to provide information on crime
prevention and community
outreach.

Police Ongoing
Action PS 5.2
The Town will continue to support
the Bay Area Air Quality
Management District in monitoring
air pollutants.

City Council, City
Manager
Promoted links to BAAQMD website
and “Spare the Air” days in Town
communications.

Action PS 5.3
The Town will continue to promote
energy conservation by the public
and private sectors.

City Council, City
Manager, Building and
Planning, Public Works
Departments; Newsletter
Continued messaging about energy
conservation, rebates, and utilization
of clean energy in Town
communications.

Action PS 5.4
The Town will work with the County
to offer a periodic drop-off program
for household hazardous waste and
distribute information on
alternative non-toxic landscaping
treatments, especially to the
Country Club and schools.

Public Works/Recycling
Specialist
Annual e-waste event sponsored
with SBWMA; battery drop-off
located at Town Hall; Integrated Pest
Management Plan kept up to date
with current practices
Action PS 6.1
The Town will develop a local
emergency preparedness plan that
identifies a city chain of command,
outlines an action checklist and
coordinates with the SM County
Emergency Operations Plan.

Fire
Ongoing - the joint
Hillsborough/Burlingame Emergency
Operations Plan outlines emergency
preparedness and response on a
local level
-318-
Action PS 6.2
The Town will provide community
awareness and education programs
for citizens describing procedures
and evacuation routes to be
followed in the event of a disaster.

Fire/Police
San Mateo County now utilizes a real
time public safety platform
‘Zonehaven’ that provides real time
emergency information on a mapbased website. The “Know Your Zone” public education campaign
was launched in November 2020.

This platform allows first responders
to identify and direct individuals on
procedures and evacuation routes
following an incident. This platform
will be exercised in the periodic local
and countywide emergency
functional drills.

Action PS 6.3
The Town will conduct periodic drills
using emergency response systems
to test the effectiveness of the
Town’s procedures.

Fire
Annually: Coordinated and
performed jointly with the CCFD and
the City of Burlingame to staff a
FEMA approved single Emergency
Operations Center (EOC). CCFD,
Burlingame and the Town follow the
SEMS/NIMS guidelines for Homeland
Security Exercise and Evaluation
Program (HSEEP) in conducting
annual workshops, seminars, drills,
and exercises within the Town and in
coordination with the county and the
region that include CERTs,
neighborhood network groups and
community members. These drills
include testing of emergency
communications and scenario based
incident response.

Noise Element
Action N 1.1
The Town will continue to advocate
that noise abatement measures are
taken by Caltrans for Caltrans
roadways affecting the Town,
whenever feasible.

Public
Works/Engineering Ongoing
Action N 1.2
The Town will continue to enforce
the Noise Ordinance, Response to
Unruly Gatherings Ordinance and
Toy Ordinance.

Police Ongoing
Action N 1.3
The Police Department will continue
to enforce the California Vehicle
Code pertaining to noise standards
for cars, trucks, and motorcycles.

Police Ongoing
-319-
Action N 2.1
The Town will continue to
participate on the
Airport/Community Roundtable and
coordinate with the SFO Airport
Land Use Commission and SFO’s
Aircraft Noise Abatement Office.

City Council, City
Manager
Continued support through Council
member serving as Town liaison on
roundtable.

Action N 2.2
The Town will cooperate with the
Comprehensive Airport Land Use
Plans’ requirements for review of
proposed land use policy actions
within land influenced by airports.

Building and Planning
Department When applicable
-320-
Jurisdiction Hillsborough
Reporting Period 2022
(Jan. 1 - Dec.
31)
Designation Size Notes
1 2 34 5 6 7
APN Street Address/Intersection Existing Use Number of
Units
Surplus
Designation
Parcel Size (in
acres) Notes
027-340-260 Armsby @ Jackling (Buffer Strip) Vacant Surplus Land 0.02 027-340-270 Armsby @ Jackling (Border w/ Burlingame) Vacant Surplus Land 0.07 030-233-010 Knollcrest (Landscape Island) Vacant Surplus Land 0.08 030-233-010 Cornelia/Whitwell (Landscape Island) Vacant Surplus Land 0.06 Summary Row: Start Data Entry Below
Parcel Identifier
Table H
Locally Owned Surplus Sites

ANNUAL ELEMENT PROGRESS REPORT
Housing Element Implementation
(CCR Title 25 §6202)
Note: No additional sites added since the 2020 APR
-161-
ATTACHMENT 3
-321-

AGENDA STAFF REPORT
ITEM SUBJECT: RESOLUTION APPROVING THE VESTING TENTATIVE MAP FOR THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION OF 85 FAGAN DRIVE AND ADJACENT VACANT LOT PURSUANT TO CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION SECTION 15315 MINOR LAND DIVISIONS SUMMARY: On May 16, 2022, the Town received a Conceptual Plan application to subdivide 85 Fagan Drive and the adjacent vacant lot (APN 027-330-630) into three lots. The proposed subdivision also includes an extension of Fagan Drive to be offered as dedication of public right-ofway.

The relatively flat properties are located at the end of the Fagan Drive cul-de-sac. 85 Fagan Drive is a 2.18 acre parcel that contains a single-family residence and the adjacent 0.90 acre vacant lot contains an existing well, shed, tanks and water lines that provide irrigation to both parcels. The proposed subdivision would result in three parcels:

1. Parcel A: Proposed at 1.65 acres and would retain the existing home and associated improvements along with the existing driveway; and

2. Parcel B: Proposed at 0.58 acres and would be vacant and suitable for a future home with independent driveway access off of Fagan Drive; and

3. Parcel C: Proposed at 0.66 acres and would retain the existing well, shed, tanks and water lines. This lot would be vacant and suitable for a future home with independent driveway access off of Fagan Drive.

The proposed vesting tentative map indicates a fourth parcel, Parcel D, which represents an extended area of Fagan Drive proposed at 0.19 acres and would be offered as dedication of public right-of-way. This extension allows proposed Parcel A, B, and C to meet the minimum lot frontage requirements and provides better access for utility service to the properties from the public right-ofway. The vesting tentative map also indicates the quitclaim of 410 square feet of existing right-ofway in favor of proposed parcel C and the quitclaim of 2,505 square feet of existing right-of-way in favor of 80 Fagan (APN: 027-330-580). The vesting tentative map is included as Attachment 2.

In September 1967 the Fagan Estates Subdivision was approved and recorded. The subdivision consisted of 21 roughly half-acre lots and one 2.5-acre lot. In August 2006 a previous owner merged lots 17 (.58 acre) and 18 (2.5 acre) into one parcel creating the current 3.08-acre parcel.

In July 2020, the owners subdivided the property back into two lots, essentially returning the property to a configuration similar to the original 1967 Fagan Estates Subdivision design. The current property owners are now requesting to subdivide these two properties into three and extend Fagan Drive as public right-of-way.

TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH
San Mateo County
1600 Floribunda Avenue
Hillsborough, CA 94010
14 PUBLIC HEARING

CITY COUNCIL MEETING
APRIL 10, 2023
-323-
Agenda Staff Report – Hillsborough City Council
April 10, 2023

Page 2 ends

DISCUSSION
Conceptual Review
Hillsborough Municipal Code (HMC) section 16.16.020 requires Conceptual Review of all proposed subdivision projects. This preliminary review of proposed subdivisions is intended to facilitate optimum subdivision design, reduce unproductive efforts by all parties, and bring about a better result for applicants, Town residents and the City Council. The process provides a forum for citizens and the City Council to provide preliminary feedback on issues relating to the subdivision’s design and potential environmental issues.

While not required, the applicant has also prepared a conceptual site plan for proposed Parcel B and C, which is included as Attachment 2 to the staff report. Note that the houses are shown in concept only, intended to illustrate that a future new home on the site could meet the minimum development standards required by the Municipal Code. The actual design of any future new home would be subject to review and approval by the Town’s ADRB. The applicant has also included an exhibit showing the slope densities of each parcel, which is included as attachment 3.

As proposed, the water line and associated facilities would be located in an easement on Parcel C and would be a reservation from the grant deed when Parcel C is sold. In addition, a joint maintenance agreement (or similar) would be created to outline the maintenance responsibilities of the water facilities between Parcel B and C.

Conceptual review of this subdivision was initially proposed at the July 2022 Council meeting.

However, this item was rescheduled. Public comment received for this item in advance of the July 2022 City Council meeting is included as Attachment 4 to the staff report.

Consistent with the Town’s subdivision process, another conceptual review was conducted by council on February 13th, 2023 in the form of a public hearing to gather council’s and the public’s preliminary comments on the subdivision. These comments are included as Attachment 5. The subdivision was then presented to the Town’s Architecture and Design Review Board (ADRB) for the first time on March 6th, 2023 as an informational item and then again for conceptual review on April 3rd, 2023 as a public hearing to gather the board’s and the public’s comments. These comments are included as Attachment 6.

Compliance with Town’s Subdivision Ordinance and the State Subdivision Map Act HMC Section 16.20 requires the City Council to hold a public hearing to consider the application’s compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), review the City Engineer’s staff report, and determine whether the tentative map complies with the Subdivision Map Act and the Hillsborough Municipal Code.

The applicant has also submitted the required California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) documentation associated with the proposed subdivision. These documents are included as attachments 7 and 8. As noted, the Project has been determined to be exempt from CEQA pursuant to Categorical Exemption Section 15315: Minor Land Divisions. -324-
Agenda Staff Report – Hillsborough City Council
April 10, 2023

Page 3 ends

The proposed subdivision meets all requirements of the State of California Subdivision Map Act and the Town’s Subdivision Ordinance for lot design, access, topography and future building site.

Details on each lot are outlined in the table below:

Average
Slope (%)
Minimum
Required Lot
Size (Acres)
Proposed
Lot Size
(Acres)
Maximum
Allowed
Floor Area
(SF)*
Existing
Floor Area
(SF)
Parcel A 13.3 0.560 1.65 15,141.9 14,495
Parcel B 13.5 0.561 0.58 6,347.8 N/A
Parcel C 12.0 0.552 0.65 7,117.0 N/A
*The total covered floor area shall not exceed twenty-five percent of the net lot area for the first acre plus fifteen percent of the net lot area over one acre. Per HMC Section 17.32.030.

Public Comment letters for this conceptual review item received before 5:00 p.m. on Wednesday, April 5, 2023 are included as Attachment 9 to the staff report. The public comment letters received thus far primarily express concerns over the subdivision process, cul-de-sac layout, safety, property value, existing and proposed utilities, neighborhood, and assurances that public comment is heard. Any public comment received after 5:00 p.m. on Wednesday, April 5, 2023 and prior to 2:30 p.m. on Monday, April 10, 2023 will be emailed to the City Council and posted on the Town website.

Alternative Options
In the event the City Council is not in favor of extending Fagan Drive, staff and the applicant are prepared to present alternatives maintaining the current configuration of Fagan Drive with reduced minimum lot frontage on some of the newly proposed parcels. Pursuant to Hillsborough Municipal Code 16.08.020(D), the City Council has discretion to allow for a reduction in the minimum lot frontage requirements of the Town’s Subdivision Ordinance where the City Council determines that the goals of the Housing Element of the General Plan will be advanced.

In the event the City Council sought to deny the tentative map, the City Council will need to determine if there are facts in the record to support denial. Denial could be based on noncompliance with the Town’s Subdivision Ordinance or the State Subdivision Map Act. At this time, staff believes the proposed tentative map complies with both the Town’s Subdivision Ordinance and the State Subdivision Map Act. In general, Government Code Section 66474 includes the findings for denial which include the following:
• That the proposed map is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans as specified in Section 65451.
• That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans.
• That the site is not physically suitable for the type of development. • That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development. • That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or -325-
Agenda Staff Report – Hillsborough City Council
April 10, 2023

Page 4 ends

their habitat.
• That the design of the subdivision or type of improvements is likely to cause serious public health problems.
• That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. In this connection, the governing body may approve a map if it finds that alternate easements, for access or for use, will be provided, and that these will be substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public. This subsection shall apply only to easements of record or to easements established by judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction and no authority is hereby granted to a legislative body to determine that the public at large has acquired easements for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision.

FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with this agenda item.

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: The project has been determined to be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Categorical Exemption Section 15315 Minor Land Divisions.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution

2. Vesting Tentative Map

3. Slope Density Exhibit

4. Previous Public Comment (July 2022 City Council Meeting)

5. Previous Public Comment (February 2023 City Council Meeting)

6. Excerpt from Unapproved Minutes of the February 13, 2023 City Council Meeting

7. ADRB Comments (March and April 2023 ARDB Meetings)

8. CEQA Determination Letter

9. CEQA Documentation

10.Public Comments Received by 5:00 p.m. April 5, 2023 for April 10, 2023 City Council Meeting PREPARED BY: Doug Belcik, Acting Senior Civil Engineer
RECOMMENDATION:

1. Open the public hearing and receive comments;

2. Close the public hearing; and

3. Adopt a resolution approving the Vesting Tentative Map for the proposed subdivision of 85 Fagan Drive and the adjacent lot (APN 027-330-630) into three parcels and dedication of public right-of-way.
-326-
RESOLUTION NO. 23-

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH

APPROVINGTHE VESTING TENTATIVE MAP FOR THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION OF 85 FAGAN DRIVE AND ADJACENT VACANT LOT PURSUANT TO CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION SECTION 15315 MINOR LAND DIVISIONS WHEREAS, on May 16, 2022, the owner(s) of 85 Fagan Drive and the adjacent vacant lot submitted an application to the Town of Hillsborough for a Vesting Tentative Parcel Map (“VTM”), seeking approval to subdivide the existing

3.08 acre lot at 85 Fagan Drive and the adjacent vacant lot into three lots, Parcel A, Parcel B and Parcel C and proposed an extension of Fagan Drive to be offered as dedication of public right-of- way (the “Project”); and WHEREAS, the City Council of the Town of Hillsborough, County of San Mateo, State of California, reviewed the Conceptual Plan at the February 13, 2023, City Council meeting and provided comments but no recommendation; and WHEREAS, the Architectural Design Review Board (“ADRB”) conceptually reviewed the VTM at the March 6, 2023 and April, 2023 ADRB meetings and provided comments; and
WHEREAS, the VTM complies with all applicable requirements of Title 16 (‘Subdivisions’) of the Hillsborough Municipal Code and the State Subdivision Map Act; and
WHEREAS, the project has been determined to be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Categorical Exemption Section 15315: Minor Land Divisions; and,
WHEREAS, the City Engineer has reviewed the Project and has prepared a written staff report to the City Council containing his recommendation as to the approval of the vesting tentative parcel map sought thereby, together with his reasons therefore and all applicable conditions, per Hillsborough Municipal Code Section 16.20.040(A); and
WHEREAS, on April 10, 2023, in accordance with Hillsborough Municipal Code Section 16.20.040(C), the City Council held a duly-noticed public meeting, at which all interested parties were invited to be heard, and at which the City Council reviewed the City Engineer's report on the Project determining that the Project complies with the Subdivision Map Act and the Town’s Subdivision Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, all other legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the Town of Hillsborough hereby finds, determines and resolves as follows:
-327-
ATTACHMENT 1
SECTION 1. Recitals
The City Council has considered the full record before it, which may include but is not limited to such things as the staff report, testimony by staff and the public, and other materials and evidence submitted or provided to it. Furthermore, the recitals set forth above are found to be true and correct and are incorporated herein by reference.

SECTION 2. California Environmental Quality Act Findings The Project has been reviewed under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA,” as codified at California Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq., and as further governed by the State CEQA Guidelines). The City Council finds that the Project qualifies for the following categorical exemption from CEQA:

A. § 15315(‘Minor Subdivision’)
Class15 consists of the division of property in urbanized areas zoned for residential, commercial, or industrial use into four or fewer parcels when the following conditions are true:

1. The division is in conformance with the General Plan and zoning.

The Project is consistent with the general plan land use designation of Residential and all applicable general plan policies, including Goal LU-1 (“provide for the preservation and enhancement of the Town’s unique residential character”) insomuch as it preserves the existing residence on Parcel A and will allow for the development of new residences on Parcels B and C, which residences will be subject to the development standards and guidelines of the Town of Hillsborough. Goal LU-2 (“Provide for orderly development in a manner compatible with the existing character of Hillsborough”). The project is consistent with the character of the Town and the neighborhood where it is located with a similar or larger lot size than surrounding properties. Goal LU-2.2 (“Continue to review new development proposals to ensure that they do not overwhelm their sites or their neighborhood.”) This project has been reviewed by staff and the City Council to ensure that the new lot is compatible with the existing neighborhood.

2. No variances or exceptions are required.

The Project does not require any variances or exceptions to the Hillsborough Municipal Code title 16 (‘Subdivisions’) and the proposed vesting tentative map meets all applicable requirements of title 16.

3. All services and access to the proposed parcels to local standards are available.

The existing services and access to Parcel A will not change with the proposed Project. Services and access to Parcels B and C will be from Fagan Drive and are compliant with Town of Hillsborough standards.
-328-

4. The parcel was not involved in a division of a larger parcel within the previous 2 years.

The parcel has not been involved in a division of a larger parcel since 2020.

5. The parcel does not have an average slope greater than 20 percent.

The average slope of the parcel is 12.5%.

SECTION 3. Tentative Subdivision Map (Hillsborough Municipal Code Section

16.20.040(C)) and California Government Code Section 66473.5 and 66474 Findings
The owner requests approval of a Vesting Tentative Parcel Map to permit the subdivision of the Project site into three parcels. In support of the Tentative Subdivision Map application, and as required by Hillsborough Municipal Code Section

16.20.040(C) and Government Code Sections 66473.5 and 66474, the City Council hereby finds:

A. The tentative subdivision map is consistent with Hillsborough Municipal Code title 16 (‘Subdivisions’), per Hillsborough Municipal Code Section

16.20.040(C).

As set forth in the report of the City Engineer that was presented to the City Council at its meeting of April 10th, 2023, the map is consistent with the Hillsborough Municipal Code Title 16 (‘Subdivisions’). Among other things, the map: includes all the requirements set forth in the Tentative Map Information Policy prepared by the City Engineer (Hillsborough Municipal Code § 16.20.020(A)), depicts all existing rights-of-way (§ 16.20.020(C)), was accompanied by a current title guarantee report or letter by a title company showing all parties whose consent is necessary to pass clear title to the land being subdivided (§ 16.20.020(E)), and provides for emergency vehicle access and pedestrian pathways connecting to adjacent streets (§

16.20.020(F)).

B. The vesting tentative parcel map, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the Hillsborough General Plan, per California Government Code Section 66473.5.

The proposed map is consistent with the general plan land use designation ((RD) of the Project site, as well as with Hillsborough General Plan Goal LU-1 (“provide for the preservation and enhancement of the Town’s unique residential character”) insomuch as it preserves the existing residence on Parcel A and will allow for the development of a new residences on Parcels B and C, which residences will be subject to the development standards and guidelines of the Town of Hillsborough. Goal LU-2 (“Provide for orderly development in a manner compatible with the existing character of Hillsborough”). The project is consistent with the character of the Town and the neighborhood where it is located with a similar or larger lot size than surrounding properties. Goal LU-2.2 (“Continue to review new development proposals to ensure that they do not overwhelm their sites or their neighborhood.”) This project has been reviewed by staff and the City Council to ensure that the new lot is compatible with -329-
the existing neighborhood.

C. None of the conditions identified in California Government Code Section 66474 exist, to wit:

1. That the proposed map is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans as specified in Government Code Section 65451.

As set forth in Section 3(B) above, the proposed map is consistent with the general plan land use designation (RD) of the Project site, as well as with various Hillsborough General Plan Goals as detailed in Section 3(B). Thus, the proposed map is fully consistent with the General Plan and no specific plan applies to this location.

2. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans.

The design of the subdivision is consistent with the density range permitted by the applicable requirements of the General Plan. No specific plan applies to the Project site.

3. That the site is not physically suitable for the type of development.

The site, which is surrounded by residential development, has been determined to be suitable for the type of residential development (single-family) that will be allowed on the Project site. No slope or environmental issues exist on the site that would prohibit residential development.

4. That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development.

The Town, through adoption of the Hillsborough General Plan, which has established densities applicable to residential parcels throughout the Town, has determined that the design of the subdivision is consistent with the density range permitted by the applicable requirements of the General Plan.

5. That the design of the subdivision is likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.

The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage, as it simply consists of the legal subdivision of existing parcels into three legal parcels. The Project site includes no waterways and thus provides habitat to no fish. Finally, the Project is not likely to substantially and avoidably injure wildlife or their habitat, as it proposes no new improvements at this time.

6. That the design of the subdivision or type of improvements is likely to cause serious public health problems.

No improvements are proposed at this time. The design of the Project is not likely to -330-
cause serious public health problems in that it will merely subdivide the existing 85 Fagan and adjacent vacant lots into three legal parcels. This action is not anticipated to yield deleterious public health effects. As noted in the staff report, no traffic impacts are expected from the proposed subdivision.

7. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision.

Upon review of the proposed subdivision map, it has been determined that the design of the subdivision will not conflict with any easements acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision as no public access easements run through the property. No improvements have been proposed at this time.

On the basis of the foregoing, and subject to the Conditions of Approval attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit ‘A,’ the City Council of the Town of Hillsborough approves the Vesting Tentative Map for 85 Fagan Drive and the adjacent vacant lot into three parcels.

AYES: Councilmembers
NOES: Councilmembers
ABSENT: Councilmembers
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers
-331-
Project Location: 85 Fagan Drive
Description: Vesting Tentative Parcel Map – COA
Date: April 10, 2023
Permit No.: ENC23-0116
Plans Dated & By: DK Engineering, 03/26/2023
EXHIBIT A:

VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
E1. Applicant is subject to submitting the following fees per the fee schedule: water and Sewer Capital Development.

FUTURE IMPROVEMENT PLAN CONDITIONS
E2. Applicant is subject to submitting the following fees per the fee schedule at the time of permit issuance: Building, Grading, Erosion Control, and Encroachment Permit Fees.

E3. For sites disturbing over 1 acre, the property owner shall submit permit documentation through the State of California’s SMARTS (Stormwater Multiple Application & Report Tracking System) process, consistent with California SWPPP Requirements as described in the State’s Construction General Construction Permit.

E4. All conditions of approval, as set by the ADRB during the design review phase, are addressed on the plan set.

E5. The Town of Hillsborough has adopted a grading moratorium from October 1st to April 30th to enforce the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. Exemptions may only be permitted under the discretion of the City Engineer. In order for the Town to issue grading permits prior to the moratorium, the following two conditions must be met.

First, grading plans shall be submitted and approved by no later than September 1st.

Second, grading mobilization shall commence by September 15th and completion of all grading activities by October 1st. Grading shall occur only between May 1st and September 30th.

E6. Provide an Arborists Report and implement suggestions within the plan set. (HMC 14.04.040) E7. A soils report/investigation is required for all new homes and as may be required by the City Engineer or Building Official (HMC 15.24.040-A.11)
Grading Plan
E8. A grading permit is required when the total volume of soil moved (sum of cut and fill) exceeds 50 cubic yards. Grading shall fall under one of three categories (HMC 15.24.030):
a. Category 1 – Grading under 50 cy of material requires no grading permit, but will be approved along with the granting of the Building Department. Engineering Department review may be incorporated under the Building Permit application b. Category 2 – Grading of 50 cy with a maximum 1500 cy of off-haul plus on-haul Town of Hillsborough
Public Works Department / Engineering Division
1320 La Honda Road • Hillsborough • CA • 94010
650.375-7444 [ tel ] • 650.548-0859 [ fax ]
-332-
c. Category 3 – Grading of 50 cy with more than 1500 cy of off-haul plus on-haul.

Also requires approval from the City Council (HMC 15.24.070) and must comply with applicable requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (HMC 15.24.040-B)
E9. Prior to grading permit approval, a Class A or Earthwork contractor shall complete and sign the attached Grading Permit Application.

E10. The grading plan shall incorporate the recommendations and conclusions of the soils report (if required) and be prepared and signed by a registered civil engineer with at minimum the following information (HMC 15.24.040):
a. All property lines and bearings which shall be properly dimensioned and scaled, b. Property line setbacks and relative distances,
c. Location, dimension, and name of holder of existing and proposed public utility easements,
d. Street names, widths, and centerline,
e. Right-of-way call outs and all existing and proposed street improvements within right-of-way,
f. Location of buildings and structures,
g. Pad and appropriate spot elevations for proposed structures, h. Show and clearly differentiate between existing and proposed utilities including line locations, dimensions, and type,
i. Show and clearly differentiate between existing and proposed contours (2’ intervals); including top and toe of all slopes and slope ratio (slopes may not exceed 2:1),
j. Earthwork quantities in tabular form (cut, fill, import and export in cubic yards), k. Grading limits (area of disturbance in square feet), l. Location of retaining walls, showing top and bottom of wall elevations at minimum the end and middle points, along with appropriate details, m. An erosion control plan.

E11. Retaining walls shall not exceed allowable height of 6 feet within the street line setback and between setbacks and 4.5 feet within the interior setback areas. (HMC 17.24.010) E12. All retaining walls over four (4) feet high shall be constructed of reinforced concrete or masonry, and shall be designed by a registered engineer. (HMC 15.04.160 per amending Section 1611.6 of the UBC)
E13. Show driveway profile including slopes, elevations, and vertical curves.

E14. Unless otherwise approved by the Fire Department, all new or reconfigured driveways shall have a minimum width of fourteen (14) feet, with a maximum slope of 16%, except that the first fifteen (15) shall have a slope no greater than 5%. (TOH Engineering Standards) Drainage Plan
E15. Complete and implement applicable design measures per the attached C.3 and C.6 Requirements Checklist for Small Projects.

E16. Complete the attached Impervious Surface Data Collection Worksheet. Show the breakdown location of existing and proposed impervious areas (in square feet) and quantity of these areas in tabular form on reduced size plans. Note that any projects that create additional impervious areas greater than 1,000 sqft shall propose a detention system onsite. Use rational method for the hydrology calculations to reflect the following parameters for the increased surface area of impervious:
a. Provide sufficient detention volume to store the difference between the current pre-project 10-year event and the post project 25-year event. -333-
i. For a 10-year pre-development flow, rainfall intensity, i = 1.35 in/hr ii. For a 25-year post-development flow, rainfall intensity, i = 1.7 in/hr Where t = duration time for a 10-year flow of 30 minutes b. Design outlet per a 10-year storm event with a minimum of 2” diameter. c. Detention system shall include an access for maintenance similar to a 2’ x 2’ minimum w/ solid lid and “child proof”.

E17. Prior to grading permit close-out, the owner shall sign and notarize the Operations & Maintenance (O&M) Agreement required for stormwater detention systems and pump stations. A word version is available upon request. Please contact Doug Belcik at (650) 375- 7588 or [email protected] to obtain the word version or for any questions.

E18. Operation and maintenance access for on-site detention facilities shall be provided on the downstream end of the pipe, where sediment buildup occurs.

E19. Detention facilities shall be located downhill of all structures, where practical, and parallel to the ground contours.

E20. The drainage plan shall include the following information:
a. Existing flow lines, locations and details of all existing on-site drainage facilities/pipes,
b. Proposed flow lines, locations and details of all proposed on-site drainage facilities/pipes; including top of drain elevations and drain invert elevations, c. Existing and/or proposed subgrade drainage for building foundations d. Location and owner of drainage easements,
e. Location and method/detail of drainage discharge.

E21. Clearly differentiate between existing and proposed drainage features, showing any tie-ins between the two. Existing rim and invert elevations may be required when tie-in to the existing system is proposed.

E22. Show existing and proposed onsite drainage patterns on drainage plan using flow arrows to identify direction of flow and how this flow will enter the public right-of-way.

E23. Cleanouts shall be installed in all storm drain pipes where a change in horizontal direction exceeds 135 deg, or for each 100 foot length of pipe.

E24. Maintain separate lines for storm drains and subdrains so that surcharge and overflow of the subdrains by the storm drains does not occur.

E25. Provide a detail for retaining wall and indicate the location of the perforated subdrains. Also include the discharge location for the retaining wall subdrain system.

E26. All roof leaders shall be shown on the plan set. Where feasible, downspouts shall discharge to a splashblock or impervious surface and flow to landscaped features before entering the drainage system. Use of area drains (rather than direct connection to drainage system) to collect roof/surface water is required. Use flow arrows to show proposed routes of water flow directed away from the splash blocks.

E27. All runoff collected from impervious surfaces, including but not limited to roofs, patios/decks and driveways, shall drain to an approved drainage system. No collected storm water shall be allowed to drain onto any adjoining property, unless an approved easement exists.

E28. The following notes shall be included on the grading and drainage plan:
a. Add Note: Grading operations shall be conducted only between the hours of 8:00 am to 5:00 pm, Monday through Friday. (HMC 15.24.080-G) -334-
b. Add Note: Grading shall occur only between May 1 and September 30. In rare cases for flat lots, in conjunction with an approved erosion and sedimentation control plan, the City Engineer may approve limited grading outside of this time frame for Category 1 and Category 2 projects. Additional bonding will be required by the City Engineer . (HMC 15.24.040-A.9)
c. Add Note: All grading shall be performed in conformance with the provisions of Chapter 15.24 of Hillsborough Municipal Code (HMC) and Chapter 33 of Uniform Building Code (UBC).
d. Add Note: All grading for which the Town has required a soils report shall be supervised, during the placement and compaction period, by the soils engineer of record. The said engineer shall certify such grading work upon completion of the work and such certification shall be provided to the Town. (HMC 15.24.080-C) e. Add Note: Civil engineer and soils engineer of record shall provide professional inspections within such engineer’s area of technical specialty per Section 3317 of UBC. In the course of fulfilling their respective duties, the engineers find that the work is not being done in conformance with the HMC or UBC or the approved grading and drainage plans, the discrepancies shall be reported immediately in writing to the permittee and to the Engineering Department. f. Add Note: Contractor shall schedule two inspections with the Engineering Department (650.375.7444) one following completion of mass grading but prior to the first foundation inspection and one following completion of all grading operations but prior to landscape installation (final sign-off). Final inspection shall not be scheduled until the certification letters from the Civil Engineer and Geotechnical Engineer have been received by the Town.
g. Add Note: The Contractor shall take extreme care and protect all existing trees to remain, as required by the Landscape Plan. Protection shall be installed in accordance with the project Arborist Report by [Arborists Company Name], dated [date], and shall be inspected by the Arborist prior to beginning grading. h. Add Note: Prior to constructing any improvements within the public right-of-way or Public Utility Easement (PUE) and for work on Town utilities including water, sewer, and storm drain piping, the Contractor shall obtain an Encroachment Permit from the Town of Hillsborough. (HMC 12.04.020)
i. Add Note: All connections to Town water/sewer/storm drain facilities and on-site detention facilities shall be inspected by the Town prior to trench backfill.

Contractor shall coordinate with the Town Public Works Department at 650-375- 7444 for inspection.
j. Add Note: Any damaged or otherwise displaced curb, gutter and/or parking strip shall be removed and replaced as directed by the City Engineer or his designee. The contractor shall contact the Public Works Department at (650)375- 7444 to schedule a site visit prior to final sign off. (HMC 12.04.120) k. Add Note: Permitee must schedule two inspections with the Public Works Department for the parking strip installation: (1) after the compaction of the base/bedding material and (2) upon the completion.

Encroachment Permit
E29. Contractor shall obtain an encroachment permit to construct any improvements in the Right-Of-Way or in Public Utility Easements. Provide Town Standard Details on plans for all improvements in the Right-Of-Way.
-335-
E30. Contractor shall perform any necessary upgrades along the frontage of the property, as directed by the Town.

E31. All new driveway entrances shall be installed off of Fagan Drive. Diveway entrances along Oakdale Road are not permitted.

E32. No new structures exceeding 18” in height are allowed within the right-of-way without council approval. Trees are only permitted when there is no interference with the parking strip, curb or gutter, or any other public utility easement. A root barrier should be proposed along with the tree installation. Trees shall be approximately 8’± off of the edge of the curb and gutter.

E33. No trees or permanent structures shall be proposed or constructed within any PUE bordering the interior property lines or within the property itself.

Utilities
E34. Prior to grading permit issuance, the contractor shall complete and submit a water meter application for any developing property.

E35. All domestic water services in the right-of-way (parking strip/street) to be installed are required to use approved copper material. All other applications outside the right-of-way could be of any material approved by the 2007 California Plumbing Code.

E36. Pressure regulator valve and water meter isolation valve shall be installed on all water service lines. Isolation valves shall be placed on the discharge side and within one foot of the water meter box (HMC 15.16.080-C). Pressure reducing valves are required and shall be located on the exterior wall of the structure and/or between the isolation valve and the structure. A backflow prevention device shall be installed between the meter and isolation valve.

E37. An approved backflow prevention device and isolation valve shall be installed for all irrigation systems. (See USC list of approved assemblies.) E38. Prior to permit approval, contractor shall conduct video inspection on the entire section of existing lateral from house to sewer main. The inspection video (Windows media format or equivalent) shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval. The Contractor shall perform any necessary cleaning and/or repairs within the lateral and at the connection as directed by Public Works.

E39. Sewer laterals must have a minimum of two cleanouts, one adjacent to the building and one at the property line (dual direction, standard detail S8), with a backflow prevention device (STD S9) between the two. Certification by a licensed Plumber may be provided to exempt a property from the backflow preventer requirement, see Sewer Backwater Valve Requirements handout available at the Building Department.

Erosion Control Plan
E40. An erosion control plan providing for the prevention of silt and construction related runoff from the site shall be prepared and submitted for review and approval. Erosion control details can be found at www.cabmphandbooks.org
E41. The plan shall also provide for the protection and revegetation of disturbed and exposed soil.

E42. The plan shall also clearly show the extent of disturbed area by providing a distinguishable line around the area. All sites that disturb in excess of one acre of land shall demonstrate coverage under the State Construction Activity Stormwater General Permit, which includes a Notice of Intent, WDID #, and a SWPPP.

E43. Include the attached Best Management Practices (“BMP”) plan sheet. -336-
E44. Add Note: The Contractor shall adhere to NPDES (National Pollution Discharge Elimination System) best management practices (BMP) for sedimentation prevention and erosion control to prevent deleterious materials or pollutants from entering the Town or county storm drain systems.

E45. Add Note: The Contractor shall assume the concepts on the erosion control plan are schematic minimum requirements, the full extent of which are to be determined by the Contractor.

E46. Add Note: Site conditions at time of placement of erosion control measures will vary.

The Contractor shall adjust erosion control measures as the site conditions change and as the need of construction shift to prevent erosion and sedimentation from leaving site.

E47. Add Note: The contractor must install all erosion and sediment control measures prior to the inception of any work onsite and maintain the measures until the completion of all landscaping.

E48. Add Note: The Contractor shall maintain adjacent streets in a neat, clean dust free and sanitary condition at all times and to the satisfaction of the Town inspector. The adjacent street shall be kept clean of debris, with dust and other nuisance being controlled at all times. The contractor shall be responsible for any clean up on adjacent streets affected by their construction, method of street cleaning shall be by dry sweeping of all paved areas. No stockpiling of building materials within the Town’s right-of-way.

E49. Add Note: Sediments and other materials shall not be tracked from the site by vehicle traffic. The contractor shall install a stabilized construction entrance prior to the inception of any work onsite and maintain it for the duration of the construction process so as to inhibit sediments from being deposited into the public right-of-way until the completion of all landscaping.

E50. Add Note: The contractor shall protect down slope drainage courses, streams and storm drains with rock filled sand bags, temporary swales, silt fences, and earth perms in conjunction with properly installed inlet filters.

E51. Add Note: All exposed slopes that are not vegetated shall be hydroseeded. If hydroseeding is not used or is not effective by October 1st, then other immediate methods shall be implemented, such as erosion control blanket. Hydroseeding shall be in accordance with the provision of Section 20 “erosion control and highway planting” of the standard specification of the State of California of Transportation, as last revised.

E52. Add Note: Stockpiled material shall be covered with visqueen or a tarpaulin until the material is removed from the site. Any remaining bare soil that exists after the stockpile has been removed shall be covered until a natural ground cover is established or it may be seeded or planted to provide ground cover prior to the fall rainy season.

E53. Add Note: Excess or waste concrete must not be washed into the public right-of-way or any other drainage system. Provisions shall be made to retain concrete wastes on site until they can be disposed of as solid waste.

E54. Add Note: Trash and construction related solid wastes must be deposited into a covered receptacle to prevent contamination and dispersal by wind.

E55. Add Note: Fuels, oils, solvents, and other toxic materials must be stored in accordance with their listing and are not to contaminate the soil and surface waters. All approved storage containers are to be protected from the weather. Spills must be cleaned up immediately and disposed of in a proper manner. Spills must not be washed into the drainage system.

E56. Add Note: Dust control shall be done by watering and as often as required by the Town Inspector.
-337-
E57. Add Note: Silt fence(s) and/or fiber roll(s) shall be installed prior to September 15 and shall remain in place until the landscaping ground cover is installed. Contractor shall continuously monitor these measures, following and during all rain events, to ensure their proper function.

E58. Add Note: Plans shall be designed to meet the C.3 requirements of the Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit (“MRP”) CAS612008
Note: The Town of Hillsborough has adopted a grading moratorium from October 1st to April 30th to enforce the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. Exemptions may only be permitted under the discretion of the City Engineer. In order for the Town to issue grading permits prior to the moratorium, the following two conditions must be met. First, grading plans shall be submitted and approved by no later than September 1st. Second, grading mobilization shall commence by September 15th and completion of all grading activities by October 1st. Grading shall occur only between May 1st and September 30th. In rare cases for flat lots, in conjunction with an approved erosion and sedimentation control plan, the City Engineer may approve limited grading outside of this time frame for Category 1 and Category 2 projects. Additional bonding will be required by the City Engineer in granting any exceptions. (HMC 15.24.040- A.9) Applicants that wish to work during the winter period shall adhere to the Town’s requirements. Please call the Public Works Department for more information at (650) 375-7444.
-338-
ATTACHMENT 2
-339-
-340-
-341-
-342-
-343-
-344-
-345-
-346-
-347-
ATTACHMENT 3
-348-
From: James McDowell
To: Natalie Gribben; Lisa Natusch
Cc: Caryn McDowell
Subject: Further Subdivision at 85-90 Fagan Drive
Date: Monday, June 27, 2022 3:56:26 PM
Dear Ms Gribben & Ms Natusch –
Caryn McDowell and I are the owners of the property at in Hillsborough. We received, today 6/27/22, the notice regarding the further subdivision of 85-90 Fagan Drive, which abuts our property. This proposed hearing is slated to be part of the July 11, City Council meeting.

Unfortunately, we will be in-transit on a long-delayed vacation at the time of the July 11 meeting, and will not be able to attend either in person or virtually. The materials are scheduled to be available by Friday July 8, however, three days (including only a single business day) is an extraordinarily short period to digest and prepare comments on such a substantial subdivision proposal, especially one being done so shortly after the property had already been subdivided.

Given several important facts, including --
1) This property was already subdivided once very recently, 2) The short notice of the hearing date,
3) The extraordinary short period (one business day) to review the materials, and
4) We are the immediate neighbors to the side of the property that does not have the existing structure, sharing a long property line, and we believe (but without the materials have no way of knowing) that we will be impacted more than any other party in the city of Hillsborough,
We respectfully request the hearing on this matter be postponed at least until the August 2022 meeting so we have the ability to thoroughly review the proposal and offer appropriate comments.

Thank you,
James and Caryn McDowell
Hillsborough, CA
-133-

ATTACHMENT
ATTACHMENT 4
5 -349-
James McDowell
http://www.linkedin.com/in/mcdowellj
-13 -350- 4-
From: Mike Folgner
To: James McDowell
Cc: Natalie Gribben; Lisa Natusch; Caryn McDowell
Subject: Re: Further Subdivision at 85-90 Fagan Drive
Date: Monday, June 27, 2022 5:53:05 PM
Thank you James.

Dear Ms Gribben and Ms Natusch,
We are the lot next to James, across the cul de sac from the lot in question and we share the same concern regarding the timing. We will also be unavailable to attend on July 11th but more importantly this notice period is too short for such an impactful change and we kindly ask that this be delayed until at least the August meeting and that there be more time between the disclosure of the materials and the meeting.

Thank you,
Mike and Karen Folgner
On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 3:56 PM James McDowell wrote:

Dear Ms Gribben & Ms Natusch –
Caryn McDowell and I are the owners of the property at in Hillsborough. We received, today 6/27/22, the notice regarding the further subdivision of 85-90 Fagan Drive, which abuts our property. This proposed hearing is slated to be part of the July 11, City Council meeting.

Given several important facts, including --
1) This property was already subdivided once very recently, 2) The short notice of the hearing date,
3) The extraordinary short period (one business day) to review the materials, and
4) We are the immediate neighbors to the side of the property that does not have the existing structure, sharing a long property line, and we believe (but without the materials have no way of knowing) that we will be impacted more than any other party in the city of Hillsborough, We respectfully request the hearing on this matter be postponed at least until -13 -351- 5-
the August 2022 meeting so we have the ability to thoroughly review the proposal and offer appropriate comments.

Thank you,
James and Caryn McDowell
Hillsborough, CA
James McDowell
http://www.linkedin.com/in/mcdowellj
-13 -352- 6-
1 Lisa Natusch
Subject: FW: 85-90 Fagan Drive
From: Boutin, Peter <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2022 9:38 PM
To: [email protected]; Natalie Gribben <[email protected]> Cc: Boutin, Peter <[email protected]>;
Subject: 85‐90 Fagan Drive
Dear Ms. Gribben and Ms. Natusch,
My wife Suzanne and I are the owners of the property located at . Our property backs up to 85‐90 Fagan Drive.

Upon returning today from business out of town, I received the notice regarding a July 11, 2022 hearing to consider a proposal for Conceptual Review of further subdividing 85‐90 Fagan Way. Providing one business day to review the materials relating to this Conceptual Review is demonstrably insufficient. We ask that the hearing in this matter be continued to the Council’s August or September meeting so that we and our neighbors have adequate time to review the materials and provide comments.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Sincerely,
Peter Boutin
Hillsborough, CA. 94010
Sent from my iPhone
-13 -353- 7-
From: James McDowell
To: Natalie Gribben
Cc: Caryn McDowell; Mike Folgner; Lisa Natusch
Subject: Re: Further Subdivision at 85-90 Fagan Drive
Date: Friday, July 1, 2022 10:48:34 AM
Hi Natalie -
Thank you for the additional information and response.

Before I consider the last-minute offer to meet with their engineer, I need the City to explain the process as it will proceed from here. I appreciate your initial note indicating that at the July 11 meeting "there will be no action taken by the Council." However, our experience with the 2020 subdivision was that at each meeting the subdivision as proposed moved one step closer to approval, and despite numerous issues raised by the neighbors related to timing (e.g., prior behavior by the long-time owners, concerns about traffic and suggestions to improve the proposal as it related to traffic and access), the proposal was approved in its initial form. We intend to submit comments, as we did in 2020 when this property was subdivided, although we feel that our prior comments were overlooked in favor of the developer.

Although I hesitate to speak for the Folgners, I believe we both accepted the outcome graciously and realized we had to live with the inevitable update of 85 Fagan and construction of a new home at 90 Fagan, along with the related traffic. Among other issues, we have experienced jackhammers, stone cutting, noise and an incredible amount of dust from the just the current driveway redesign at 85 Fagan. The building department has confirmed that much of this work has been done before the permits were approved--not the sort of behavior on their part that gives me confidence that promises made during any discussion will be kept, or that moving and adding a street will be done with any sensitivity to the neighbors. Despite our direct conversations with the Stanley Lo and contacting the Hillsborough police, the cul-de-sac and the property in front of our house (and often our driveway) is still treated as an empty parking lot with little regard for our families.

My questions for the City are: 1) what assurances are there that if the current project is approved that there will not be an additional request to further subdivide and add another lot and home to the area? 2) what is the process of the City and the Council, how many meetings, where is input from the public considered? 3) which meeting/when is the action taken? 4) who will respond to the citizen input and fully explain which legitimate concerns of long-term residents are dismissed in favor of the developers and why? 5) will this be the final subdivision -- it is very difficult to understand the intent and also raise our concerns if these are merely incremental changes that fundamentally affect the street and our home. Finally, is there any concrete assurances the City can give us that our concerns are as important as the developers?
Each time I read the lengthy and complex documents and plans, I find additional items of concern, so I'm not sure I'm ready to discuss this with the engineer yet, -13 -354- 8-
especially with the Holiday weekend upon us. I am also concerned that the offer to meet came only AFTER we responded to the mailed notice, and not in the many months before. This is especially concerning since (so far) I see they are proposing 1) to change my curb, move me from the cul-de-sac--which any realtor knows is more valuable property--to a simple street side (while getting 2 lots on a valuable cul-desac for themselves), 2) move my water meter, 3) change my drainage, and 4) have the street positioned in a way that vehicles coming downhill from the new street will have headlights pointed at our front door, which is flanked by two windows approximately 5 feet x 7.5 feet. It is unclear what new requirements we will have if the cul-de-sac is carved out and added to our property. Will the town require us to make any changes to our property to comply with regulations? And these are only the immediate issues I see related to our property, without listing any concerns of the Folgners or the properties on Oakdale or those on Downey. Again, it is also necessary to point out we have made numerous complaints to the City police about parking during the current renovations 85 Fagan, which include fully blocking the street on a few occasions, parking not parallel to the existing curbs, leaving construction trailers on the street overnight and repeated incidents of blocking the existing fire hydrant. As I write this email, Stanley Lo's construction crew is blasting music, parking in front of our house, and blocking the fire hydrant with two trucks. The town and the police almost never make their way to our cul-de-sac so Stanley Lo and crew do not seem to follow laws or regulations.

Item 4 above is particularly distressing for many reasons. Even with the short amount of roadway in the current configuration, cars and currently large numbers of construction vehicles come down from 85 Fagan quite quickly, and go into the blind curve in front of 70 Fagan in the center of the street. If there is a longer street and more homes, aesthetically, there will be more traffic, and from a safety perspective much more distance to gain speed. Another is that our home was designed by Claude Oakland, an architect known for working with the Eichler homes, who placed a particular emphasis on the harmony with nature. Some of the hallmarks of this architecture is creating a feeling inside/outside throughout the home by using large amounts of glass and very deliberate site selection. By increasing traffic and moving the street, this site selection is undermined, and our window expanses change from an asset to liability, with the proposed street pointing at our home - fundamentally changing our enjoyment of, and the value of our property.

When we purchased this home, only 6 years ago, we purchased a quite home at the end of a cul-de-sac, with only one home, tucked across the street on almost 3 acres.

In the last 2 years, the City approved the subdivision of that land into 2 lots over our objections. Now, it appears the City is poised to approve yet another lot, remove our peaceful cul-de-sac and, unarguably and permanently degrading the character of the entire neighborhood for the benefit of a single owner.

Finally, as it relates to the offer to meet. Stanley Lo, who you indicate is the applicant, but you did not confirm he is the owner of the property, has been on site weekly since last October, and almost daily over the last few weeks as work on 85 Fagan continues. He has never once mentioned the proposed subdivision, solicited our thoughts or given any indication of this plan--which includes the City giving us land -13 -355- 9-
(?!). The plans you received and then provided to us are sufficiently thorough that you and we both know the owner(s) have been working on them for a long time.

During all of these visits, there was a complete lack of communication from the applicant or engineers. The public notice through the City shortly before the July 4th Holiday, with the minimum notice allowed under regulation, made during summer vacations, are clearly part of the owner's plan to spring this egregious change on the neighbors without regard to their concerns, safety or property values.

At this point, I really need to understand the City process as I outlined above before I feel that I can have any productive conversations with the applicant's hired engineer.

I would also like to request that at this point you do not share our concerns with the applicant until we have an understanding of the process and when/where our concerns are best addressed to the Council and City. The incredible complexity of the process and the extraordinary changes proposed only prove the need to delay even the initial presentation to the Council.

We look forward to hearing from you.
best
James
James McDowell
http://www.linkedin.com/in/mcdowellj
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 08:34:40 AM PDT, Natalie Gribben <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi Mr. Folgner,
They are extending the end of the cul-de-sac, so the “bulb” of the cul-de-sac would be located in what is now 85 Fagan and the vacant lot (part of the bulb in each lot). This shape or any part of the street along your frontage would not change.

The project proposes the land part of the current existing “bulb” revert back to the adjacent property owners, which means the McDowell’s would be most impacted. (Mr. McDowell, I encourage you especially to allow me to share your contact information with the applicant who would like to have a detailed discussion with you about this.)
The slope of the street would remain generally consistent with the existing slope all the way to the end of the proposed new “bulb” location.

Stanley Lo is the applicant and your contact information would be shared with him and the project -1-356- 40-
engineer of record, and you would be contacted by Ben McVeigh from dk Engineering.

Please let me know if you have any further questions. Please don’t hesitate to call either.

Thanks,
Natalie Gribben, P.E., QSD
Senior Civil Engineer
Town of Hillsborough | Public Works Department
P: (650)375-7444
D: (650)375-7510
Drought is Here: Is Your Yard DrSught Ready? Visit www.hillsborough.net/Drought for more information.

Download the new Simplicity App for Hillsborough to stay up-to-date Subscribe to the Town’s e-Announcements
Sign up for SMCAlert to receive emergency updates by phone and email The opinions expressed in this email are solely those of the sender and are not an official position of the Town of Hillsborough, of the respective body, or of the board I serve on at the Town.

From: Mike Folgner
Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2022 6:34 PM
To: Natalie Gribben <[email protected]>
Cc: Caryn McDowell ; James McDowell ; Lisa
Natusch <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Further Subdivision at 85-90 Fagan Drive
Hi Natalie,
Thanks for your reply and help.

Am I understanding the plans that they are moving the location of the cul de sac to the middle of the property and creating a larger downhill curve towards our house? That’s a substantial change so I want to make sure I’m interpreting these correctly.

Also the name on the property plans is Hussein AlSaud LLC. I was under the impression that Stanley Lo -1-357- 41-
had purchased the property. I may be interested in talking to them but can you please clarify who the applicant is, then We would be happy to consider that request.

Thank you!
Mike
On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 5:18 PM Natalie Gribben <[email protected]> wrote:

Sorry one clarification on the highlighted sentence below: Any public comment submitted before 5pm Wednesday will be included in the agenda packet, and any public comment received after that but before 4pm on the 11th, will be provided to the City Council, posted to the website, and retained for the record.

From: Natalie Gribben
Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2022 4:55 PM
To: Mike Folgner >; James McDowell >
Cc: Lisa Natusch <[email protected]>; Caryn McDowell Subject: RE: Further Subdivision at 85-90 Fagan Drive
Hi Mr. Folgner & Mr. McDowell,
Apologies for the delayed response. I’d like the clarify that the full agenda packet is typically posted 3 days before the Council meeting, but materials related to public hearing items are available upon request. Please see attached conceptual plans available for your review that the applicants wanted to share.

I am sorry Mr. Folgner that you will not be able to attend on the 11th. The meeting will by a hybrid meeting, so perhaps you can join by zoom or by phone. If not, the meeting will be recorded and available for viewing afterwards. There will be no actions taken by the Council on the 11th on this item - this meeting is only to allow the Council to provide their preliminary comments on the proposed subdivision, and to hear feedback from neighbors and public. Any public comment submitted before Wednesday will be included in the agenda packet, and any public comment received before the 4pm on the 11th, will be read into the record. And course, there will be an opportunity to speak for 3 minutes at the meeting as well. Also, if you are not able to attend or have any after thoughts, I welcome any additional comments and feedback after the meeting as again, there is no action associated with this item.
-1-358- 42-
Lastly, applicants would like to reach out and discuss the proposed subdivision prior to the Council meeting to any neighbors that have expressed interest. Would it be alright if I shared your phone numbers or emails with the applicant team? Feel free to email me separately and directly with this information if you’d like.

Please feel free to give me a call anytime to discuss.

From: Mike Folgner
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022 5:53 PM
To: James McDowell
Cc: Natalie Gribben <[email protected]>; Lisa Natusch <[email protected]>; Caryn McDowell
Subject: Re: Further Subdivision at 85-90 Fagan Drive
Thank you James.

Dear Ms Gribben and Ms Natusch,
We are the lot next to James, across the cul de sac from the lot in question and we share the same concern regarding the timing. We will also be unavailable to attend on July 11th but more importantly this notice period is too short for such an impactful change and we kindly ask that this be delayed until -1-359- 43-
at least the August meeting and that there be more time between the disclosure of the materials and the meeting.

Thank you,
Mike and Karen Folgner
On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 3:56 PM James McDowell wrote:

Unfortunately, we will be in-transit on a long-delayed vacation at the time of the July 11 meeting, and will not be able to attend either in person or virtually.

The materials are scheduled to be available by Friday July 8, however, three days (including only a single business day) is an extraordinarily short period to digest and prepare comments on such a substantial subdivision proposal, especially one being done so shortly after the property had already been subdivided.

Given several important facts, including --
1) This property was already subdivided once very recently, 2) The short notice of the hearing date,
3) The extraordinary short period (one business day) to review the materials, and
4) We are the immediate neighbors to the side of the property that does not have the existing structure, sharing a long property line, and we believe (but without the materials have no way of knowing) that we will be impacted more than any other party in the city of Hillsborough, We respectfully request the hearing on this matter be postponed at least until the August 2022 meeting so we have the ability to thoroughly review the proposal and offer appropriate comments.

Thank you,
James and Caryn McDowell
-14 -360- 4-
-14 -361- 5-
From: James McDowell
To: Natalie Gribben; Lisa Natusch
Cc: Caryn McDowell; Mike Folgner
Subject: Comments for City Council meeting 11 July, 85 Fagan additional subdivision Date: Wednesday, July 6, 2022 4:51:31 PM
Attachments: 11 July comments to City
Dear Lisa & Natalie,
Lisa, it was good to speak to you in person today, we appreciate your time.

In addition to the concerns I expressed in my earlier email, most of which are related to the process the City Council uses and the standard used to judge the proposal, I have put together some concerns with the proposal itself. I have attached them in a Word document, and believe I am sending them in time to be included in the written packet.

I remain especially curious as to the standard for approval or rejection that the Council uses, as well as any rules that relate to the incremental changes proposed by repeatedly returning to the Council to request yet another division to create yet another parcel. As you can imagine, in addition to being blind-sided by this notice, we now live with the dread another notice for the creation of another parcel may come at any time.

I understand additional comments will be considered by the Council if emailed in, but will not make it into the initial packet for Council members, so I do hope I made the deadline. I am sorry we will be unable to make the meeting via Zoom.

Please let me know if the attached is unreadable.
thank you,
James & Caryn McDowell
James McDowell
http://www.linkedin.com/in/mcdowellj
-14 -362- 6-
We are James & Caryn McDowell, who own and reside at with our two daughters (Crocker class of 2022). We have lived on this quiet street since 2016 and are heartbroken to learn about the proposal to fundamentally and irrevocably change our neighborhood (and likely Blackhawk neighbors) and we are pleased that the Council will seriously consider our concerns.

Because the proposed changes are so significant and extensive, and fundamentally and permanently alter our neighborhood, we have requested, and reiterate our request that consideration by City Council be delayed so that we and the other neighbors can have ample time to digest the proposal and make meaningful comments. We acknowledge the notice was delivered timely, however, with summer vacations (after two years of lockdown), and the holiday weekend intervening, the time between notice and meeting is particularly burdensome on the existing homeowners. It appears the applicant timed the submission to minimize the likelihood of comment.

When we purchased our home at , we deliberately chose the location for its quiet and seclusion, as well as the site placement of the home. The title search we had at the time showed a single home at 85 Fagan tucked away on a single lot of 3 acres. In 2020, the Council approved subdivision of 85 Fagan into two parcels. Now, the owner and/or applicant proposes to remove our cul-de-sac and gain two building sites on a cul-de-sac for themselves. This dramatically and permanently alters the character, and peace we specifically sought when we found and purchased our home and also affects our property value.

As far as we can see, all burdens of the proposal fall on us and long-term neighbors of the Fagan Estates, while all benefits and value accrue to someone who does not live here and will not suffer the endless noise and disruption the proposed construction guarantees. Fagan is a dead-end street, with only one entry/exit, few families and a character uncommon, even here in Hillsborough. It is not a major thoroughfare like Sharon Drive, with its extra setback, providing access to huge parts of town, with multiple entries and exits. In the short time since we learned of the proposal, several neighbors have expressed deep concern, and none of have been supportive—how can this proposal possible benefit the residents if I am unable to find a single neighbor in favor?
Concern #1: Public Safety and Our Safety.

1. Our property, as well as 85 Fagan are both within the WUI zone that requires a bi-annual inspection from Central County Fire because of the heightened fire risk. The plans provided include the removal of the fire hydrant that abuts our property, which, at a minimum • increases the risk of damage if/when a fire might occur, and • will require the shutoff of water for an undefined period during construction, both of which negatively impact our safety, and should a fire occur, dramatically increase the risk to us and all other homes nearby.
-14 -363- 7-

2. Removal of existing road and construction of a new road will inevitably lead to periods of poor and zero access to our property and some adjoining properties. The historic wall that surrounds the existing Fagan Estates neighborhood is over 10-12 feet high behind our home and prevents emergency access from anywhere other than Fagan Dr., a severe compromise of public safety.

3. During the current renovation of 85 Fagan, there has been a significant increase in traffic, and the departing vehicles frequently move too fast as they reach the blind curve which is sharpest (over 90 degrees) at the border of our home and 70 Fagan. If the road were extended as provided in this proposal, there would be
• a longer and/or second curve to the road, with poor visibility, and • a longer run for vehicles to gain even more speed before entering the blind curve which would increase the likelihood of an accident involving the numerous families from the neighborhood who enjoy using Fagan and the cul-de-sac for learning to bike, skateboard or hoverboard because this is a dead-end with limited traffic.

The proposed subdivision would allow two large homes to be built, which increase the number of driveways above us by 200%, which could go to 500% if all properties installed ADUs, fundamentally increasing the traffic load for every home on Fagan, Sheldon and Margo.

4. During renovation of 85 Fagan, there have been multiple times the entire street has been blocked (without prior notice) by construction trucks, usually in front of 60 Fagan, completely blocking access to 60, 70 and 80 Fagan, as well as 85 Fagan. This disregard for our safety, and lack of common courtesy, will become even worse while executing the proposed plan.

5. On the morning we are drafting this, trucks involved in the renovation at 85 Fagan have filled the cul-de-sac. Despite numerous visits by Hillsborough Police, at least two of the vehicles are blocking the existing fire hydrant. This pattern and practice disregarding the rules of public safety, especially during fire season in a super-drought indicate a complete lack of respect for safety, neighbors and the law.

Concern #2: issues surrounding utilities – both convenience and safety • In addition to the water and sewer questions below, what is the overall plan for water and sewer?
• Fagan and Sheldon already experience a large number of electric blackouts (we have had more in the last 3 years than we did in the 10 years we lived in Burlingame). What is the electric upgrade plan to support additional homes?
• Will all utilities be underground?
• Where will the gas lines run?
-14 -364- 8-
• Can the water main support additional homes? Or will there be an additional project to address that?
Concern #3: Issues of our own quiet enjoyment and our ability to make a living We have been working from home for several years now, and with the fundamental shift in workplace behavior ushered in by the pandemic, this situation appears permanent for us. The recent work on the driveway at 85 Fagan introduced jackhammers, concrete destruction and stone cutting to the area, making it nearly impossible to conduct phone calls or video conferences for several days. Destroying part of the road and building a new one will be substantially worse and burden both our personal and business lives.

Local experience (2225 Oakdale) shows that home completion can take nearly 3 years. By doubling the number of allowable homes, the construction period we will suffer could easily reach six years, equal to the amount of time we have lived here! We do not speak for other neighbors, but believe other abutting properties have full-time stay at home and full-time work from home inhabitants who will also be hit hard from the proposed changes, and we encourage the city to actively interview neighbors to gauge their concerns.

Concern #4: Finality
85 Fagan was just subdivided less than 2 years ago. Now, the owners come for another bite at the apple. It is unfair to us and the long-term residents to have an endless grind against our peace and enjoyment and degradation of our property values. When does this end? Isn’t the 2020 decision a final word?
Concern #5: Issues of destruction of Value
As described above, we sought a quite location, and fell in love with being at the end of a cul-desac, where our children (and others!) play safely. In addition to these joys the proposal will strip from us, we will lose the substantial monetary value of being on the cul-de-sac and “the last house on the right,” while the developer gains not one, but two sites at the end of a cul-de-sac, and all the value that goes with it. In addition to that permanent loss, doubling the allowable homes doubles the construction disruption we will suffer, substantially lowering any value from sale we could realize until the building is completed, on a schedule we do not control.

Concern #6: Unanswered questions about the gift of land from the City The proposal indicates the City will gift us a triangle of land. In smaller type, the proposal indicates the existing fire hydrant will be removed and our water meter must be moved. There is no mention of the costs or who will perform this work, and how careful they will be. Further, the -14 -365- 9-
first we learned of this was when the City provided plans to us – no one from the developers ever mentioned this to us. We also do not see anything addressing the points below. Nor do we know if these are even the most pressing items, as “free land” is so uncommon, we do not know where to start an evaluation.
• What is the landscaping requirement for the area where 50-year-old road will be jackhammered and removed?
• What sort of pollutants exist in the road, or under it, and will be disturbed? Will these drain to the bay or public sewers when it rains? Who will remediate? How? • What is the quality of the underlying soil – is it arable for plans or does it contain old chemicals?
• Will the slope and drainage of the site change?
• Will the geologic characteristics be integrated into our existing yard? • Will the City grant permits (without cost) for us to landscape in accord with our existing landscape? Will we be reimbursed for any requirements to hire a landscape architect or other professionals off our choosing? Or will current requirements require us to remodel the entire area?
• Where is the water main? Will moving the street require additional access to our yard for moving water or other utilities? How long will we lose water during the various construction phases?
• Where is sewer main? What other concerns should we have relating to sewer? • Will the existing fence between 80 and 85/90 Fagan be extended? Will it match the existing fencing? Will it integrate with the existing road-fronting fence we have? • Will this work damage our current irrigation system (recently updated for water savings)? • What are the tax consequences of receiving additional land? Concern #7: Positioning of the revised street
• The street proposal is such that vehicles coming downhill from the new street will have headlights pointed at our front door, which is flanked by two windows approximately 5 feet x 7.5 feet, and will shine through our open-plan house (the backyard can be viewed through our home while standing on the front walk).
• By increasing traffic and moving the street, the site selection made by the architect of our home (Claude Oakland, of Eichler fame) is undermined, and our expansive windows change from an asset to liability, with the proposed street pointing at our home - fundamentally changing our enjoyment of, and the value of our property.

We urge the Council to make several Site Visits (unannounced) before making any decision to better understand the lack of regard to safety and for the neighbors shown by the applicant
As noted above, at one time today, there were more than 7 large trucks parked around our house (including several in front of the fire hydrant). Two trucks and at least one car drove around the blind curve today at an excessive speed. This needs to be seen to be appreciated -1-366- 50-
In Conclusion
We believe the Council is well-versed in analyzing the public safety issues such as fire risk, density, traffic and utilities, including the unreliable above-ground electric that serves the Fagan Estates, so I want to emphasize the intangibles here:
• The Fagan Estate itself is one of the original mansions of Hillsborough, and the 1967 subdivision (and further division in 2022) have created and maintained a wonderful and safe enclave that cannot be reproduced—and should not be destroyed. • Innumerable families have and continue to visit Fagan for its seclusion, peace and safety.

Often, this is to teach their children the simple joys of biking. This availability is especially important in a town that prides itself for having no sidewalks and with most streets living up to the “hill” in Hillsborough. The grade of the proposed cul-de-sac along with the increased traffic prevents the proposed street from being a substitute. • While it is impossible to know how many families have pulled off their training wheels and learned to ride their two-wheelers on Fagan, we do know there are currently 18 school-aged (or younger) children living inside the Fagan Estate gates—not including regularly visiting grandchildren.

Every bit of new traffic puts the residents, their children and the children of the neighborhood at greater risk. This proposal degrades the legacy of all those families who have trekked up here over 50 years, and strips the opportunity from generations to come. We urge the council to reject this proposal and preserve the Fagan Estates as they have thrived for over fifty years. -1-367- 51-
-368-
From: Rob Schmeltzer
To: Lisa Natusch; Doug Belcik
Cc: jennifer fine
Subject: Fwd: Proposed 85 Fagan Subdivision
Date: Wednesday, February 8, 2023 5:17:31 PM
Hi Lisa and Doug,
I'm re-submitting our comments on the 85 Fagan Subdivision that I originally submitted last July. Since this proposal was dropped from the agenda of that July meeting, I want to make sure our comments are included in advance of next week's meeting. From what I can tell, the proposal that is being reviewed next week is not substantially different from the proposal submitted last year, so our concerns remain largely the same as outlined below.

Our only additional comment after reading the engineer's note is that we find it disconcerting for him to suggest that they need to split the property into 3 lots and to sell 2 of them in order to be able to afford to maintain the existing house. I don't understand why that was not something the buyer factored into their decision when purchasing the property initially or when they came back to the town to get it split into 2 parcels two years ago. All I can speculate is that their intentions have always been to split this lot up so they could flip the property and that there was never any intent to live in the house or maintain the property moving forward. As a family who has established roots here, it is hard to watch someone treat our neighborhood so poorly.

Thank you for including our comments.

Rob Schmeltzer and Jennifer Fine
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Rob Schmeltzer
Date: Thu, Jul 7, 2022 at 6:59 PM
Subject: Proposed 85 Fagan Subdivision
To: <[email protected]>
Cc: jennifer fine
To Planning Board and City Council Members,
We are long time residents of Fagan Estates and have resided at since 2011.

We moved here because this neighborhood, while close to downtown Burlingame, is an out of the way, quiet oasis, with hardly any traffic except for the handful of neighbors who live here.

In short, it is an ideal place to raise a family. When we purchased our home for ourselves and our 3 daughters, we considered these attributes in deciding to move here.

The Fagan Estates consists of only 20 homes, making it a private area with little traffic. Our kids safely walk to their friends' houses, learned how to ride bikes on the cul de sac, and we walk our dog without worry. The original brick wall is a reminder that there is history in this neighborhood, as are the cobblestones that mark the hard-to-find entrance to the estates. Most people outside of our immediate neighborhood don't even know it exists - but this proposed project will change that.
-369-
ATTACHMENT 5
We have a number of concerns with this proposed subdivision:

1. Increased traffic - by adding at least 2 more residences, plus associated ADUs, traffic will increase by at least 10%, and likely more than that. There is only 1 way in and out, so all those additional cars will be on the same road.

2. Extended noise and disruption - This looks to be a major, multi-year project, with numerous trucks, workers, large and heavy machinery needed to build a new road, move and extend utilities, and then actually build multiple homes. The disruption to our daily life will be extensive and lengthy. My wife and I both work from home and our children and all of the neighborhood children need to be driven to and from school and activities. Noise from machinery and trucks, plus their blocking the road and the resulting traffic on Fagan Way will become a major negative impact on how we live. We are concerned about our ability to come in and out of Fagan Estates, to drive and pick up our children from school and activities, to do errands, and go to appointments in a timely way.

3. Safety - We are extremely concerned about the safety of residents and all neighbors who walk in the Fagan Estates. The kids who live in this neighborhood walk and ride bikes on these streets daily. Dogs get walked here by those who live in the Fagan Estates and by neighbors in surrounding Burlingame and Hillsborough. The increased traffic and disruption from trucks over the years it takes to carry out construction and the additional cars as well as the traffic in the long term will negatively impact the safety of our streets. In addition, the developers and workers don't live here, and as we've experienced so far with the current work being done on the property, do not care about or demonstrate any consideration for the safety of the residents and neighbors living on and using Fagan Way. We have been forced to jump to the side of the road with our dog as trucks speed down Fagan Way without recognition or care that we are on the street. We have already had to warn our children to stay on the edge of the street and we have been concerned about teaching our children to drive here now because of the way workers have been driving. We are extremely concerned about accidents and destruction which may occur due to recklessness which is likely to continue and potentially increase as the effort and number of workers increases. 4 Utility Issues - the power in our neighborhood is already an issue. In the past 12 months, we've lost power 6 times. Adding additional houses to our already strained electrical grid will only make the issue worse. What is the plan to address and improve this issue?

5. Property Value - Given our concerns (more traffic, less privacy, more noise, less safety), these items all likely will reduce our property value. That alone is disconcerting to us - why would we support something that likely will cost us financially in the future? This board and the city council already approved dividing this property into 2 parcels barely two years ago. We don't see how dividing it further is good for anyone except for someone who does not even live here, has no stated intention to be part of this community, and seems to just be looking to make a profit with no identified upside or benefit whatsoever to the people who are actually part of this neighborhood. We're supportive of residents improving their homes - it's good for both them and their neighbors in the long run. From our vantage as people living in this neighborhood, this project reduces our quality of life, the safety of current residents, and the quality and value of this neighborhood. We urge you to consider the negative and potentially deleterious impact the proposed effort will cause. -370-
Thank you very much for your consideration.

Rob Schmeltzer and Jennifer Fine
-371-
From: Mike Folgner
To: Lisa Natusch; [email protected]; Karen Folgner Subject: Proposed Subdivision Plan for 85 Fagan Dr.

Date: Sunday, February 12, 2023 9:46:36 PM
Attachments: 85 Fagan Plan
Thank you Lisa for distributing this note regarding the proposed subdivision at 85 Fagan Dr.

Dear Council Members,
We are Mike and Karen Folgner at We enjoy living at the end of the cul-de-sac across from 85 Fagan. Along with the McDowells, the plan and the work at 85 Fagan Dr. will impact us the most and we hope that the council considers the point of view of the existing residents in any decision and weighs these heavily with those of the developer and the future residents:
- We are opposed to the plan that moves the cul de sac bulb - We ask the council to consider that this will result in a loss of value for residents and to revise the plan to have either flag pole lots or a single entrance on Fagan and another on Oakdale
- We would like the council to ensure that any development on the two lots happens at the same time and require that the developer make other assurances to minimize the impact of the construction
Opposition to moving the cul de sac bulb:

I'm adamantly opposed to the altering of the location of the cul de sac within this plan and wish that the counsel will reject any plays that alter the location of the cul de sac. The plan removes my home from being located on the cul de sac bulb. This will reduce the value of my home and diminish our location within the Fagan estate, we will no longer be at the end of the street and rather we will be on a downhill curve with a banked turn of more than 90 degrees that has already proven to be dangerous when non residents speed around that corner.

I have spoken to Mr. McVeigh from dk Consulting, as well as emailed Tim Anderson. Mr.

Anderson in an email exchange indicated "The Town will not approve a Flag lot without an exception being granted. By moving the Bulb up the road, the applicant can avoid the need to request an exception." I would like to ask the town to approve this exception or indicate their willingness to do so, to allow a flag pole lot in order to prevent the bulb from being moved.

Mr. McDowell points out in his letter that the proposed lot lines do not conform to code Section because they are not 100 feet apart at non intersecting lines. I can see a few obvious configurations where an access from Oakdale can be pursued for one of the lots that will avoid these code violations while keeping the bulb in its current location. If the town is making exceptions for these plans I would ask them to pursue a plan that does not move the bulb, either with two longer driveways originating from the existing bulb (granting a flag lot exception) or by working with the developer to overcome any obstacles in providing access from Oakdale. There are several ways to grant this density and help the developer achieve his objectives without so severely impacting the existing residents by moving the bulb.

Loss of Value
When speaking to Mr. McVeigh I voiced my concerns that the proposed development moves me from the bulb and would impact my property value. He replied, "in development, there are winners and there are losers." I later had a very nice conversation with Linda from city -372-
planning. She was extremely helpful and I appreciate her time, thank you Linda! As part of our discussion I relayed this statement from my conversation with Mr. McVeigh and she replied that "well, it's true." While I agree that it is, in fact, true, that in a zero sum game there are winners and losers, I want to bring to the council's attention that BOTH the developer's architect and a city employee have agreed with the assessment that my property is the "loser" in this plan. I interpret these two statements as an indication that there is an understanding from all parties that we will experience a loss of value. I would like the town to help me understand this loss of value and, prior to approving anything, work with myself (and the McDowells) to understand what this will mean for our property value and what can be done.

Again, it is our strong preference to not move the bulb and lose this value.

Minimizing Construction Impacts
The concentrated work that will be done over the next years will severely impact our quality of life and now is the time, before approving anything, to ensure the development process minimizes the impact on residents.

Specifically:
- The lots should be developed simultaneously to minimize the time the area is experiencing construction impact. With the work that has been done on the estate, the proposed work in this plan and two large builds, the area could be in a state of construction for 6-10 years. I implore the town to minimize this timeframe. We work from home and the noise and inconvenience of the construction during the day is hugely impactful, we would like the town's support to minimize this impact.
- All parking, deliveries etc should be on the estate and the lots. Fagan is a narrow street with minimal places to park on shoulders, cars can not park without blocking the street. Parking on the street will block garbage access and impede fire and emergency access. The estate and lots have sufficient room for all construction parking and materials and should be required to do this. I ask that the town commit to proactively enforcing that garbage, mail, fire and emergency access is available at all times and that all residents be given the option to not have parking on their property for the development, enforced aggressively by the town and the developer.
- The developer should at least create access to the construction from Oakdale, if not permanently for the lot configuration, at least temporarily to help with construction traffic.

The wall has been taken down and rebuilt in several places already so removing a section to create access should be required by the city and should not be blocked for aesthetic or other reasons.

We would like the town to achieve proactive assurances from the developer prior to approving anything. Mr. McDowell has a list of questions should be addressed in full before considering this.

The new configuration of the street will cause lights to shine from above our house through several windows, as our house is located well below the street line. Should the council choose to move forward with this against the wishes of the existing residents I would like the council to require the developer to minimize the impact of these changes with fencing.

Summary
I implore you not to improve this plan as it significantly degrades the location and value of mine and the McDowell's properties to the benefit of a two new homes that WILL be located on a cul de sac. These plans create a great new value for two new buyers and the developer, while negatively impacting existing residents. I hope the council understands our point of view -373-
and can step in to protect existing residents. The developer can accomplish what they want to do while not permanently impacting us or the street, I ask that the council stand up for the current residents, reject this plan and work towards one that does not move the bulb and includes detailed assurances for minimizing impact to the residents.

Thank you,
Mike and Karen Folgner
I'm attaching this letter as a word doc for your convenience:
-374-
From: Suzanne Boutin
To: Natalie Gribben; Lisa Natusch; Peter Boutin
Subject: 85-90 Fagan Drive
Date: Sunday, February 12, 2023 1:12:52 PM
Attachments: 85-90 Fagan Drive Propsed Subdivision
Natalie and Lisa,
Please enter into the public record the attached letter sent by us to the City Council in July of 2022 regarding the proposed subdivision at 85-90 Fagan Drive which will be an agenda item at this Monday's Council meeting. It does not currently appear to be included in the agenda packet. We look forward to attending the meeting via zoom on Monday.

Thank you very much for your assistance in this matter.

Regards,
Suzanne and Peter Boutin
-375-
July 9, 2022
City Council
Town of Hillsborough
1600 Floribunda Avenue
Hillsborough, CA 94010
Re: 85-90 Fagan Drive, Proposed Subdivision
Dear Council Members:

We have resided at since 1984. Our back property line runs along the property located at 85-90 Fagan, which is the subject of the above-referenced proposed subdivision.

We oppose this proposed subdivision plan for all of the reasons set forth in the numerous emails from neighbors already submitted to the Council. We would add that, as proposed, the new road and cul-de-sac would significantly reduce the buildable space on the new proposed lot, Parcel “B.” That parcel, which will abut our property, barely meets the minimum acreage requirement of one-half acre and is configured in such a way (narrow triangle) that any proposed home on that lot would necessarily end up right along our fence line (not to mention any possible ADU). With a little imagination, an additional lot could be added to the property without the necessity of extending the road (possibly an access between 55 Fagan and 85 Fagan, similar to the configuration approved at 2100 Forest View).

Should the Council consider approving this subdivision proposal despite the many compelling arguments against such a decision, we request that such approval be conditioned on moving the property line between proposed Parcel “B” and Parcel “A” to a location closer to the existing house which would result in much needed additional building space on Parcel “B.” We understand this change would necessitate the removal of the old swimming pool, but considerable space would remain for the placement of a new pool.

Additionally, the proposed subdivision does not appear to be “categorically exempt” from CEQA provisions under the section cited by the Town Planning Department in its July 5, 2022 letter, for at least two reasons. First, “services and access” are not currently available as is evidenced by the new road and services being proposed in the conceptual plan. Second, the final map of the last subdivision proposal for this property was filed with the County Recorder on 12/18/2020, less than two years ago.

Thank you for your consideration.

Regards,
Suzanne and Peter Boutin
-376-
From: Rob Schmeltzer
To: Lisa Natusch; Doug Belcik
Cc: jennifer fine
Subject: Fwd: Proposed 85 Fagan Subdivision
Date: Wednesday, February 8, 2023 5:17:31 PM
Hi Lisa and Doug,
I'm re-submitting our comments on the 85 Fagan Subdivision that I originally submitted last July. Since this proposal was dropped from the agenda of that July meeting, I want to make sure our comments are included in advance of next week's meeting. From what I can tell, the proposal that is being reviewed next week is not substantially different from the proposal submitted last year, so our concerns remain largely the same as outlined below.

Thank you for including our comments.

We moved here because this neighborhood, while close to downtown Burlingame, is an out of the way, quiet oasis, with hardly any traffic except for the handful of neighbors who live here.

In short, it is an ideal place to raise a family. When we purchased our home for ourselves and our 3 daughters, we considered these attributes in deciding to move here.

The Fagan Estates consists of only 20 homes, making it a private area with little traffic. Our kids safely walk to their friends' houses, learned how to ride bikes on the cul de sac, and we walk our dog without worry. The original brick wall is a reminder that there is history in this neighborhood, as are the cobblestones that mark the hard-to-find entrance to the estates. Most people outside of our immediate neighborhood don't even know it exists - but this proposed project will change that.
-377-
We have a number of concerns with this proposed subdivision:

Rob Schmeltzer and Jennifer Fine
-379-
Unapproved Minutes – Hillsborough City Council
Monday, February 13, 2023

Page 5 ends

6. RESOLUTION AWARDING TO AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH BURNETT LANDSCAPE DEVELOPMENT INC. TO INSTALL LANDSCAPING AT FIRE STATION 32 FOR THE TOWN OF
HILLSBOROUGH FOR A NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $21,839.15 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15301
The resolution awarding and authorizing the City Manager to execute the agreement on behalf of the Town with Burnett Landscape Development Inc. for a not-to-exceed amount of $21,839.15 and authorizing the use of the Fire Stations CIP surplus to fund the project was adopted.

7. RESOLUTION AWARDING TO AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO

EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH NORGO ENGINEERING FOR THE EMERGENCY BOWHILL SEWER MAIN REPAIR IN THE AMOUNT OF $162,000.00, WITH A 10% CONTINGENCY, FOR A TOTAL ALLOCATION OF $178,200.00 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15301
The resolution awarding to and authorizing the City Manager to execute the agreement for the emergency Bowhill Sewer Main Repair to NORGO Engineering in the amount of $162,000.00, with a 10% contingency, for a total allocation of $178,200.00, allocating funds from the Miscellaneous Sewer System Repairs Fund and the Priority Basins Inflow & Infiltration Fund was adopted.

X. PUBLIC HEARING

8. CONCEPTUAL REVIEW OF THE SUBDIVISION OF 85 FAGAN DRIVE AND ADJACENT VACANT LOT (APN 027-330-630) INTO THREE PARCELS AND

DEDICATION OF PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY PURSUANT TO CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION SECTION 15315 MINOR LAND DIVISIONS
City Attorney Christopher Diaz outlined the process for the item.

Mayor Krolik disclosed she had a conversation with the neighbor last summer when the item was initially on the City Council meeting agenda.

Councilmember Royse disclosed he visited the site and spoke to neighbors last summer.

Councilmember Chuang disclosed that she walked up to the property to observe the landscape and did not speak to anyone.

Vice Mayor Cole disclosed that she visited the site and drove around and did not speak to anyone.

Public Works Director/City Engineer Paul Willis introduced the item and responded to City Council questions. Acting Senior Engineer Doug Belcik provided the staff report.

Assistant Director of Building & Planning Tim Anderson and City Attorney Diaz responded to City Council questions.

Mayor Krolik opened the public hearing at 7:02 p.m.

Benoit McVeigh, Senior Engineer, DK Engineering, on behalf of the applicant, presented information regarding the project and responded to City Council questions.

James McDowell, 80 Fagan Drive, spoke in opposition to the project as currently proposed citing concerns with the ongoing construction and maintenance at the existing home, the smaller setbacks proposed, privacy, the loss of his home being at the end of the cul-de-sac, relocation of the fire hydrant at the corner of his property, and concern that parcels B and C do not meet the requirements of HMC 16.08.030.

Peter Lipson, 10 Sheldon Way, inquired as to the planned mitigation of increased water runoff, whether Fagan will lose its status as a cul-de-sac and what would be done to protect the trees that border Fagan Drive during construction. Lipson reported that one of the contractors at 85 Fagan Drive drove into the driveway of 55 Fagan Drive to attempt a -380-
ATTACHMENT 6
Unapproved Minutes – Hillsborough City Council
Monday, February 13, 2023

Page 6 ends

three-point turn and crashed into the garage which caused a car in the garage to crash into the kitchen and inquired as to the plan to deal with construction vehicles during the project.

Morton Newman, 45 Fagan Drive, provided information regarding his professional background and stated that the cul-de-sac was not meant to be extended due to the location and siting of the existing homes and spoke in support of a private driveway in a different location.

Michael Folgner, 70 Fagan Drive, spoke in opposition to moving the bulb, requested an exception for a flag lot be revisited as a possibility and additional transparency regarding the spike strip to ensure all options are considered including potential access via Oakdale. Folgner expressed concerns regarding traffic and pedestrian safety during construction, reduction in property value, and quality of life.

Mayor Krolik closed the public hearing at 7:19 p.m.

The City Council provided preliminary comment on the Conceptual Plan for the subdivision of 85 Fagan Drive:

Councilmember Chuang inquired about comments made regarding construction management and safety issues on the street and the safety of the design of the road.

Councilmember Royse requested information regarding an option for Oakdale access or a flag lot as opposed to extending the cul-de-sac.

Councilmember Ragsdale expressed concerns regarding changing a property from being on a cul-de-sac to no longer on a cul-de-sac and requested additional information regarding exceptions for flag lots, the one-foot strip on Oakdale related to access, and construction management to keep vehicles parked on the lot and enforcement of the speed limit.

Vice Mayor Krolik requested additional information regarding flag lots and the one-foot strip on Oakdale.

Mayor Krolik stated that the plan is creative but expressed concerns regarding a new culde-sac, disruption for another large home which is not helping the housing affordability crisis in the area, and stated the original two lots could have homes and an ADU, regarding setting a precedent for expanding a cul-de-sac, and the egress issue for Fagan.

Mayor Krolik re-opened the public hearing at 7:30 p.m.

Michael Lagan, 2211 Oakdale Road, expressed concerns regarding the prospect of a new cul-de-sac and expressed his intent to pursue funds to make an offer on the properties to keep the three acres intact and expressed concerns regarding illegal activity at the unoccupied lots.

Mayor Krolik closed the public hearing at 7:32 p.m.

9. INTRODUCTION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTERS 8.16, 8.28, 14.04,

16.44, AND 17.56 OF THE HILLSBOROUGH MUNICIPAL CODE RELATED TO TREE

PROTECTION AND PRESERVATION PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTIONS 15061(b)(3), 15307, 15308, 15378(b)(2) AND (b)(5)
City Manager Ann Ritzma and Abby Beissinger, Plant Pathologist & Urban Forester, Dudek, provided a report. City Attorney Christopher Diaz, Ryan Allen, Urban Forester, Dudek, and Assistant Director of Building & Planning Tim Anderson provided additional information.

Mayor Krolik opened the public hearing at 8:14 p.m. There were no speakers. Mayor Krolik closed the public hearing at 8:14 p.m.
-381-
ADRB Comments and Responses
85 FAGAN DRIVE AND ADJACENT VACANT LOT (APN 027‐330‐630) DK Engineering/Hillsborough Public Works Staff
Presented Informational review on March 6, 2023
Presented Informational review on April 3, 2023
CONCEPTUAL REVIEW OF THE SUBDIVISION OF 85 FAGAN DRIVE AND ADJACENT VACANT LOT (APN 027‐330‐630) INTO THREE PARCELS AND DEDICATION OF PUBLIC RIGHT‐OF‐WAY PURSUANT TO CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION SECTION 15315 MINOR LAND DIVISIONS In conformance with the Hillsborough Municipal Code for the review and approval of minor lot subdivisions, the proposed application is presented to the ADRB for information and comment only, no vote or action will be taken by the Board on this matter. The following Board member comments, in addition to any public commentsreceived, are provided to the City Council for their consideration prior to their final review of the application.

Board Comments provided March 6, 2023 Staff Response provided April 3, 2023 Provide more feedback on the flag lot options. Design team provided a number of flag lot design optionsincluded as alternative lotting exhibit 1, 2,
3 and 4.

Flag Lot Option 1 (Attachment Image 1): Would
require a variance for 3 codes:

16.08.020 A, 16.08.030 B and 16.08.030 C,
additionally, would require a fire access road, fire
truck turn around and private fire hydrant and
utility, first responder access, garbage and mail.

Flag Lot Option 2 (Attachment Image 2): Would
require a variance for 2 codes:

16.08.020 A and 16.08.030 C, additionally would
require the existing pool would need to be
demolished, fire truck turn around and private
fire hydrant and utility, first responder access,
garbage and mail.

Flag Lot Option 3 (Attachment Images 3 and 4):

Would require a variance for 3 codes:

16.08.020 A, 16.08.030 B and 16.08.030 C,
additionally, would require a fire access road, fire
truck turn around and private fire hydrant and
utility, first responder access, garbage and mail.

Provide more information about the spite
strip/access from Oakdale
Applicant reached out to two separate title
companies Orange Coast Title Company and
ATTACHMENT 7
-382-
Chicago Title/Fidelity National Title. Both
responded that they were unable to determine
ownership. The location of the spite strip along
Oakdale along with the existing retaining wall
would make any proposed flag lot infeasible.

Proposed retaining walls are out of character for
Hillsborough
The only proposed retaining wall is provided to
protect existing trees to remain. Anything within
the public right of way larger than 18” ht. will
require the revokable encroachment property.

Confirm importance of well and storage tank The well and storage tank are provided for irrigation of the two parcels and proposed to
remain.

Confirm number of trees to be removed The total number of trees proposed to be removed is 11.

Explore history on similar subdivisions Existing subdivision precedents include:

Roehampton Road near 519, Easton Drive near
2801, and Darrell Road near 295. Exhibits show
abandoned cul‐de‐sac at Roehampton Road;
parcel map showing the right of way vacation at
Roehampton and rededication of land to parcel A;
and Easton Dr. where the street was extended to
accommodate access to new parcels; the final
example is Darrell Rd. where a three way stop was
converted to a four way stop (Attachment
Images 5, 6, 7 and 8)
Confirm if a Traffic Analysis has been conducted
or will be
A traffic analysis can and will be conducted as part
of CEQA.

Fire Hydrant locations The existing fire hydrant will be relocated back into the public right of way.

Public Comments provided March 6, 2023 Staff Response provided April 3, 2023 James McDowell: Resident and owner of
property at 80 Fagan Dr.

Michael Folgner Resident and owner of property
at 70 Fagan Dr.

Does not agree with the claim that the lots are
consistent with the code.

1. Violation of code section 16.08.020 A:
150‐foot minimum frontage.

2. Violation of code section 16.08.030 B:
100‐feet from parallel property lines.

Staff prepared exhibits demonstrating the
following comments.

1. Revised plan shows Parcel B with the
minimum requirement of 75 feet (along
the cul‐de‐sac) Parcel C and 80 Fagan Dr.
both have the minimum frontage of 150
feet. (Attachment image 9)

2. Exhibit shows that there are several
conditions (Margo Lane, Sheldon Way,
and Fagan Dr.) that share the same cul‐
de‐sac configuration. Impossible to have
-383-

3. Violation of code section 16.08.030 D:
lot lines shall be perpendicular to street.

4. Existing road is not 40 feet as shown on
map.

5. Blind turn and increase in grade of
street.

6. Increase in noise.
a 100‐foot minimum lot frontage along a
cul‐de‐sac. (Attachment image 10)

3. Exhibit shows several locations where
the lot lines do not meet the street
frontage at a perpendicular angle. The
code states that the side lines of lots
shall run approximately at rights angles
along which the lot abuts. (Attachment
image 11)

4. This is correct. The right of way is 40 feet
the actual roadway is 20 feet which is
consistent the existing roadway.

5. Blind turn is existing not to be amended
and grade to match the topography.

6. Staff noted it was a valid concern as,
construction may increase noise
however it is a temporary condition.

Board Comments provided on April 3, 2023
FOSTER: Ownership of spite strip. Can the Town
look at resolving this issue to allow rights to
develop this remainder?
Recommend finding what the Town can legally
do to gain rights of this area.

The proposed configuration allows for the
setbacks. Town does what it can to keep a
balance with the existing tenants and new
residents and builders.

GILL: Thanks the Public Works staff for the
excellent presentation of complex information.

Anything we can do to create more housing is
good. There is one primary neighbor who is most
impacted, they will have some land added to
their property, if preferred. Just developing that
area would be helpful. Does like the proposal,
not popular opinion but feels it would allow at
least one more family to live in Town.
-384-
EGAN: If it was left as is, you would save 11 trees
and provide only two lots. Is there an option to
leave just the two subdivided parcels?
Yes, the current configuration adjusts the lot to
allow for the third parcel.

YEH: Would continue to exhaust all options
regarding potential lotting options. What are the
options to allow access from Fagan/Lot A?
Public Comments provided April 3, 2023
Suzanne Boutin – 35 Downey. Supportive of
McDowell’s comments and concerns.  Adjust lot
line between parcel A and B to form more of a
rectangular lot.  Once exception for a variance,
to reduce size of parcel A, can it be reduced to
allow more area for lot B and C?  Agree with
McDowells comment to extend the road for a
single lot as it sets a bad precedent. Over the top
approach to accommodate a modest outcome.

Kristen Sandifer – 35 Fagan Dr. Likes the quiet
nature of the small cul‐de‐sac. Additional lots do
not make sense. Changing a cul‐de‐sac to
accommodate one additional lot doesn’t make
much sense.

Michael Lagan ‐ 22 Oakdale Rd. Whole business
is incredible to me. Owner’s assertion that the
owner must sell two lots to afford the upkeep of
the original lot. Why is he pursuing this when he
claims to want to restore the grandeur of the
existing lot when there is a public street directly
behind the house? Mental stress of many of the
residents is ‘torture’ dealing with the potential
development. Has had problems with the
previous subdivision, made many efforts to stop
the development but doesn’t seem to do any
good. Not sure if any steps were taken to
address his complaints. Will provide public
comment to the City Council on how going to
civil court can be avoided.

James McDowell: 80 Fagan Dr. – Provided
written comments and received the updated
options with the agenda packet. The previous
issues that were raised have been addressed.

Alternative suggestions of 1 – 2 is preferred.

Doesn’t support the proposal.
-385-
Flag Lot
- Would require a variance for 3 codes:
- 16.08.020 A- 16.08.030 B- 16.08.030 C
- Fire access road, fire truck
turn around, and private fire hydrant
- Utility, first responder access, garbage/mail
-386-
Flag Lot
- Would require a variance for 2 codes:
- 16.08.020 A- 16.08.030 C
- Existing pool would need to be demoed- Fire access road, fire truck turn around, and private fire hydrant
- Utility, first responder access, garbage/mail
-387-
Flag Lot
- Would require a variance for 3 codes:
- 16.08.020 A- 16.08.030 B- 16.08.030 C
- Fire access road, fire truck
turn around, and private fire hydrant
- Utility, first responder access, garbage/mail
-388-
Flag Lot
- Would require a variance for 3 codes:
- 16.08.020 A- 16.08.030 B- 16.08.030 C
- Fire access road, fire truck
turn around, and private fire hydrant
- Utility, first responder access, garbage/mail
-389-
-390-
-391-
-392-
-393-
Revised Proposal
-394-
Code Section: 16.08.030 B
Public’s Comments:Violation of code section 16.08.030 B: 100feet from parallel property lines -395-
Code Section: 16.08.030 D
Public’s Comments:Violation of code section 16.08.030 D: lotlines shall be perpendicular to street -396-
Building and Planning Department
Phone: 650-375-7411 | Fax: 650-375-7415 | 1600 Floribunda Ave., Hillsborough, CA 94010 | www.hillsborough.net

TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH
California July 5, 2022
Benoit A.V.J. McVeigh, PE, LS
DK Engineering, Senior Engineer
1931 San Miguel Drive, Suite 100
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
RE: 85-90 Fagan Drive, Environmental Review for proposed Subdivision #ENV22-0001 Dear Mr. McVeigh:

Thank you for the opportunity to review the proposed work at the above referenced site in Hillsborough, CA. The Town Planning Department is pleased to provide our determination for the Environmental Review of the 85-90 Fagan Drive subdivision application.

The project has been determined not to have a significant effect on the environment and is therefore, categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). CEQA provides several exemptions for projects that the lead agency (Town of Hillsborough) has determined do not pose a risk of significant impact on the environment. Under article 19 section 15315 Minor Land Divisions, this project is categorically exempt.
“Class 15 consists of the division of property in urbanized areas zoned for residential, commercial, or industrial use into four or fewer parcels when the division is in conformance with the General Plan and zoning, no variances or exceptions are required, all services and access to the proposed parcels to local standards are available, the parcel was not involved in a division of a larger parcel within the previous 2 years, and the parcel does not have an average slope greater than 20 percent.” For the reasons cited above, the project will not result in a significant environmental impact and qualifies for a Categorical Exemption.

Regards,
Linda Roberson, AICP
Associate Planner
ATTACHMENT 8
-397-
ATTACHMENT 9
-398-
-399-
-400-
r: l!!!f ENGINEERING
, ~ "ti SURVEYING• PLANNING
85/90 Fagan Drive, Hillsborough, California
Environmental Information Form
Information to be Provided on Separate Sheet
31 May, 2022
Project Description

7. Site size, square feet.

The existing property area is 134,100 sf, and is comprised of two parcels with the following areas:

Parcel 'A' - 94,809 sf.

Parcel 'B' - 39,291 sf.

The proposed property area will be comprised of four parcels with the following areas:

Parcel 'A' - 72,164 sf.

Parcel 'B' - 25,264 sf.

Parcel 'C' - 29,548 sf (including 1,211 sf of existing street right of way to be quitclaimed by the Town.

Parcel 'D' - 8,335 sf (proposed street right of way parcel to be granted to the Town)

8. Structure size(s) in square feet.

Existing house, garden sheds, etc. to remain, on Parcel 'A':

Basement 2,916 sf
First floor 7,592 sf
Second floor 4,333 sf
Outbuildings 618 sf (dilapidated and to be demolished)
(Note: the above areas are actual floor areas and not as modified for Floor Area Ratio calculation purposes)
Proposed houses on Parcels 'B' and 'C':

Proposed Parcel 'B' and Parcel-'C' house areas are unknown at this time. The future purchasers of Parcels 'B' and 'C' will apply for separate permits at the time of house construction.

9. Parking - number of spaces.

At Parcel 'A' there is space for eight cars in the existing parking area near the front door. These are proposed to remain. The number of parking spaces at proposed Parcels 'B' and 'C' is unknown at this time and will be determined by the future purchasers of these parcels.
1 O. Proposed scheduling
Construction associated with this minor subdivision will consist of the demolition of a portion of the existing street improvements and the extension of the street into the subject property. The work will consist of demolition, the grading of the street subgrade, and the 1931 San Miguel Drive, Suite 100, Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Tel: {925) 932-6868 www.dkEngin.com -401-
r:' ENGINEERING
,. ii l SURVEYING • PLANNING
construction of new curbs and pavement, utilities, etc. In addition, all existing sprinkler lines that presently cross the proposed property lines will be removed. This is a city requirement for the subdivision. These construction items will take place after the recordation of the proposed Parcel Map and after the approval of the street Improvement Plans. Based on the history of previous map processing, it is likely that the construction might begin sometime around June 2023 and would take approximately three months.

The scheduling of construction on Parcels 'B' and 'C' is unknown at this time and will depend on the future purchasers of these parcels, who will perform their construction under separate permits to be applied for in the future.

11. List and describe associated projects.

There are no other projects associated with this project - it is a stand-alone 3-parcel minor subdivision.

12. Anticipated incremental development of this project and associated projects.

There will be no incremental development of this project - the proposed 3-parcel minor subdivision is the limit of proposed development, with no further subdivisions contemplated. It is anticipated that the development of proposed Parcels 'B' and 'C' will be performed under separate permits to be obtained later by the future purchasers of these parcels.

13. Tree removal.

It is proposed to remove eleven trees as part of the extension of Fagan Drive into the subject property. They are: two palms (30-inch and 36-inch diameter); three oaks (12-inch, 20- inch and a bifurcated 12-inch / 16-inch diameter); and six unidentified trees (10-inch, 12-inch, 16-inch, 16-inch, 18-inch, 18-inch diameter). All stumps will be ground and/ or roots removed. All tree removals will be in accordance with the Town of Hillsborough's "Tree Removal Guidelines", dated February, 2019. An arborist's report has not yet been prepared for this project. A Conceptual Tree Protection Plan accompanies this Environmental Information Form.

It is anticipated that, at the time of the development of Parcels 'B' & 'C', the future purchasers will perform all work, including tree removal and protection, under future permits to be applied for at that time.

14. Grading
It is not known what house designs the future owners of Parcels 'B' and 'C' will decide on. Because of this, the location of the driveways is unknown. It is likely that the future owners will want very attractive frontages, possibly including decorative steps and walls. Because of the unknown nature of the future frontage treatment, it is prudent to keep the currently proposed frontage treatment to a minimum, since any anticipation of such features as driveway locations, wall stepping, etc. would be fruitless. Any frontage features that would be constructed as part of the proposed subdivision would likely be demolished with the construction of the future houses. For this reason, it is proposed to construct the frontage of Parcels 'B' and 'C' with an interim 2:1 bank, except in the vicinity of existing trees to be 1931 San Miguel Drive, Suite 100, Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Tel: (925) 932-6868 www.dkEngin.com -402-
,: I ENG/NEER/NG ,. ~ SURVEYING• PLANNING
preserved, in which location a retaining wall is proposed. The future owners can modify this bank and add driveway cuts as desired, with approvals under separate permits.

There are numerous 'volunteer' trees that have been allowed to grow on this site, as well as numerous ornamental trees that have been planted. It is not believed that these are significant trees that should be preserved at all costs. However, there are two very large oak trees on the north side of the proposed street extension. They are 36-inch and 48-inch in diameter and they must be very old. It is proposed to preserve these trees by matching the existing ground elevation on the north side of the proposed street extension and cutting deeper on the south side, rather than balancing the cut and fill on both sides.

It is anticipated that the grading quantity for the proposed street extension and associated grading will be approximately 1,760 cubic yards of cut, with a fill of 19 cubic yards. The earthwork quantity will be refined further when the construction drawings are prepared.

Grading for other aspects of the project (future house pads, driveways, etc.) is not proposed at this time.

The truck trip count will be dependent on the equipment that the contractor uses, which will most likely be 5- or 10-cubic yard vehicles. A soils report has not yet been prepared for this project. The haul route will be along Fagan Drive to Armsby Drive, Vancouver Avenue and then northeasterly along Broadway to Highway 101. A haul route exhibit is attached.

No grading on the individual parcels is proposed at this time, except for the grading associated with the construction of the street extension.

Future grading for the purpose of house and flatwork construction on Parcels 'B' & 'C' will be performed under a separate permit to be applied for in the future. It is anticipated that the soils report, earthwork quantity, truck trip count, etc. will be provided to the Town at that time. The truck trip count will be dependent on the equipment that the contractor uses.

15. If not residential, indicate major function of project.

The project is residential.

16. Variance or other application.

This project is a 3-parcel minor subdivision and, therefore, will require a Parcel Map to accomplish this, in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act. No variances, General Plan Amendments, Conditional Use Permits or the like are proposed. However, the Town-owned 5- ft. wide strip easements along each side of the existing Parcel 'A'/ Parcel 'B' lot line are to be quitclaimed concurrently with the granting and Town acceptance of new 5-ft. wide strip easements along the new property lines.

33. Environmental setting - project site.

The project site consists of two existing residential lots fronting onto Fagan Drive. The land slopes gently upward towards the south at approx. 13% average. The larger lot (85 1931 San Miguel Drive, Suite 100, Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Tel: (925) 932-6868 www.dkEngin.com -403-
r:.,, ENGINEERING
,;, l SURVEYING• PLANNING
Fagan Drive) contains a large old house of great visual appeal, with some dilapidated sheds and a swimming pool. The house is proposed to remain. The smaller lot (90 Fagan Drive) is vacant, apart from an irrigation well and ancillary equipment. There are no landslides, erosion or soil subsidence. There are numerous trees on the site. Some are 'volunteer' trees which have sprung up after many years of property neglect. Some are ornamental, non-native trees that were deliberately planted or have reproduced as volunteers from the planted trees.

Some are very large, very old oak trees (36-inch and 48-inch) which are to be preserved. Other plants on site are ornamental shrubs and grass. Since this is a built-up area, there is no significant wildlife present. Site photographs are attached.

34. Environmental setting - surrounding properties.

The surrounding area consists of expensive single-family houses of one or two stories on 0.5 acre lots. The front-yard setbacks are 30 feet with the side and rear yards at 20 feet setback. These houses are well-maintained and have manicured landscaping and a generally high-quality appearance. Since this is an area that was developed many years ago, there are no cultural, or historic aspects present. While of a generally pleasant appearance, the neighborhood contains no particularly scenic elements. Neighborhood photographs are attached.
1931 San Miguel Drive, Suite 100, Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Tel: (925) 932-6868 www.dkEngin.com -404-
-405-
-406-
-407-
-408-
From: Suzanne Boutin
To: Lisa Natusch
Cc: Peter Boutin; Doug Belcik
Subject: 85-90 Fagan Drive Subdivision Proposal
Date: Wednesday, April 5, 2023 4:27:44 PM
Attachments: 85-90 FaganDrive.04.05.23
Hi Lisa,
Please include in the agenda packet for the City Council Meeting on Monday, April 10th, the two letters contained in the attachment below.

Thank you very much for your assistance.

Best,
Suzanne Boutin
-409-
ATTACHMENT 10
April 5, 2023
City Council
Town of Hillsborough
1600 Floribunda Avenue
Hillsborough, CA 94010
Re: 85-90 Fagan Drive, Proposed Subdivision
Dear Council Members:

We have resided at since 1984. Our back property line runs along the property located at 85-90 Fagan Drive, which is the subject of the above-referenced proposed subdivision. This proposed subdivision was first submitted to Council in the summer of 2022 and remains in all material respects identical to that initial proposal. The concerns set forth in our letter of July 9, 2022, a copy of which is included in your agenda packet, also remain unchanged.

We continue to object to the proposed extension of Fagan Drive and the building of a new cul-de-sac. This is an unnecessarily extreme and disruptive approach to adding a single lot on the property. In addition, as noted in our letter of July 9th, the new cul-de-sac as proposed significantly reduces the buildable space on the new “Parcel B,” resulting in an odd triangular shaped lot which violates Municipal Code 16.08.030. Following the City Council Meeting on February 13th, the applicant submitted numerous alternative lotting exhibits which show ways the property could be subdivided without the need for an extension of the street and cul-de-sac. Applicant notes that each of these alternatives would require certain exceptions to the Municipal Code, but the subdivision as currently proposed would also require exceptions.

Should Council consider approving this second subdivision of the subject property in just over two years despite many compelling arguments against such a decision, we would renew our earlier request that any approval be conditioned on moving the property line between proposed Parcel “B” and Parcel “A” to a location closer to the existing house.

This modification would result in much needed additional building space on proposed Parcel “B.” In addition, we would ask that any approval be conditioned on the property owner addressing all privacy, security, safety, traffic, etc. concerns of the neighbors.

Thank you for your consideration.

Regards,
Suzanne and Peter Boutin
-410-
July 9, 2022
City Council
Town of Hillsborough
1600 Floribunda Avenue
Hillsborough, CA 94010
Re: 85-90 Fagan Drive, Proposed Subdivision
Dear Council Members:

We have resided at since 1984. Our back property line runs along the property located at 85-90 Fagan, which is the subject of the above-referenced proposed subdivision.

Thank you for your consideration.

Regards,
Suzanne and Peter Boutin

-411-
-412-

TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH
San Mateo County
1600 Floribunda Avenue
Hillsborough, CA 94010
15 OLD BUSINESS

CITY COUNCIL MEETING
APRIL 10, 2023

AGENDA STAFF REPORT
ITEM SUBJECT: CONSIDER APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO

EXECUTE A LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH THE BURLINGAME COUNTRY CLUB TO

CONSTRUCT A PATHWAY PROJECT WITH MODIFICATIONS REQUESTED BY THE BURLINGAME COUNTRY CLUB PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15301 SUMMARY: On October 11, 2021, the City Council approved and authorized the City Manager to execute a license agreement with the Burlingame Country Club (BCC) to construct a pathway on a shoulder of the road bordering Eucalyptus Avenue with two language changes. As the Town is now ready to execute the license agreement, Town staff provided the revised license agreement to the BCC, but they have indicated they cannot agree to one of the proposed changes requested by the City Council on October 11, 2021.

BACKGROUND
In July 2017, the City Council considered a license agreement prepared by the prior City Attorney’s Office that would have provided a license between the BCC and the Town allowing the Town to access and make use of property located along the road shoulder adjacent to the paved surface on Eucalyptus Avenue. At that time, the Hillsborough Beautification Foundation (“HBF”) and other Town residents had expressed an interest in partnering with the Town to fund a pathway along this road shoulder (the “Pathway Project” or “Project”). After this initial consideration of the license agreement, the City Council directed that the Town seek better terms in the license agreement and negotiations occurred sporadically over a 2 year period between the Town and BCC.

In November 2019, the City Council approved a Right of Entry Agreement as a first step to allow the Town to access the property for the limited purpose of scoping the Project and determining the level of environmental review that will be required under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) for construction of the Pathway Project.

Thereafter, at the October 11, 2021 City Council meeting, the City Council considered approval of the draft license agreement. In doing so, two changes to the draft agreement were proposed by the City Council as follows:
• The first change was to amend Section 3 to revise the existing language that proposed to restrict the BCC from constructing any improvements on, over, or near the proposed path which would interfere with the use of the path. The draft language required unilateral approval from the Town for any such construction by the BCC. The revised language suggested by the City Council instead allowed for mutual agreement between the Town and BCC in lieu of only the Town having a unilateral right to approve or reject any BCC construction that would interfere with the path. -413-
Agenda Staff Report - Hillsborough City Council
April 10, 2023

Page 2 ends

• The second change was to add the Town’s Value Statement into the license agreement similar to the Town’s current practice of including it in every Town consultant and public construction agreement with outside vendors.

The Town is now ready to execute the license agreement. In providing the revised draft agreement to the BCC, they have indicated that they cannot agree to the inclusion of the Town’s Value Statement in the agreement.

The City Council now has two options to consider:
• First, the City Council has the option to agree with the BCC’s request and remove the Values Statement from the license agreement. This means the license agreement can be executed by all parties and the Pathway Project will likely proceed.
• Second, the City Council could opt to keep the license agreement in its current form. The BCC has already indicated they cannot agree to the current version so this may mean that the license agreement will not be executed and the Pathway Project will not proceed.

FISCAL IMPACT: The Town will assume the liability for the licensed area and any associated costs for maintenance. After October 11, 2021 City Council meeting, the Town secured grant funding for the construction of the pathway in the amount of $589,000 with a Town contribution of $175,000.

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: The City Council’s approval of the license agreement that will allow for the construction of the Pathway Project has been analyzed from an environmental perspective and it has been deemed exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Class 1 exemption (Existing Facilities) under CEQA Guidelines 15301.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Excerpts of City Council Meeting Minutes of October 11, 2021, November 12, 2019, August 12, 2019, May 14, 2018, December 11, 2017, September 11, 2017, July 10, 2017

2. Draft License Agreement with the inclusion of the Values Statement PREPARED BY: Christopher J. Diaz, City Attorney
RECOMMENDATION: Consider approving and authorizing the City Manager to execute a License Agreement with the Burlingame Country Club to construct the Pathway Project with modifications requested by the BCC pursuant to CEQA Guideline 15301.
-414-
Minutes- Hillsborough City Council
Monday, October 11, 2021

Page 5 ends

Joe La Mariana, Executive Director, RethinkWaste provided comments in appreciation of Town staff, the City Council, and staff at HF&H Consultants.

Mayor Royse closed public comment.

On motion of Vice Mayor Kralik, seconded by Councilmember Chuang and unanimous on roll call vote with Councilmember May absent, the City Council accepted the recommendations for solid waste rate increases and changes as outlined in the HF&H Solid Waste Rate Study Report; directed staff to mail the Notice of Public Hearing on Proposed Adjustments and Increases to Town of Hillsborough 2022 Solid Waste Rates; and set the public hearing at no less than 45 days.

13. INTRODUCTION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 8.12 OF THE

HILLSBOROUGH MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO GARBAGE, RECYCLABLES AND ORGANIC WASTE COLLECTION TO COMPLY WITH SENATE BILL (SB) 1383, CALIFORNIA'S SHORT-LIVED CLIMATE POLLUTANT ACT (2016)
Senior Management Analyst Mandy Brown provided the staff presentation. Joe La Mariana, Executive Director, RethinkWaste and Deputy City Attorney Joanna Gin provided additional information.

Mayor Royse opened public comment. There were no speakers. Mayor Royse closed public comment.

On motion of Councilmember Chuang, seconded by Councilmember Cole and unanimous on roll call vote with Councilmember May absent, the ordinance entitled "Ordinance of the City Council of the Town of Hillsborough Amending Chapter 8.12 of the Hillsborough Municipal Code Relating to Garbage, Recyclables and Organic Waste Collection" was introduced and further reading waived.

14. TREE PROTECTION GUIDELINES IN HILLSBOROUGH
Senior Management Analyst Mandy Brown provided the staff presentation. City Manager Ann Ritzma provided additional information.

Mayor Royse opened public comment.

Eric Nyhus spoke regarding his experience with trees at sites in Hillsborough and volunteered to serve on a committee if a committee is formed.

Mayor Royse closed public comment.

Following discussion, by consensus, the City Council accepted the Tree Protection Guidelines report and directed staff to proceed with the proposed work plan with the inclusion of a community task force in an effort to shorten the timeline, to be appointed by the City Manager, with Vice Mayor Kralik serving as a Council Liaison to the task force.

15. CONSIDER APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A

LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH BURLINGAME COUNTRY CLUB TO CONSTRUCT THE

PATHWAY PROJECT
Vice Mayor Kralik left the meeting at 8:53 p.m. per her announcement earlier in the meeting that she would recuse herself from participation in this item as her husband is a member of the Burlingame Country Club.

City Attorney Christopher Diaz provided the staff presentation. Mediator Bill Nagle and City Manager Ann Ritzma provided additional information.

City Attorney Diaz stated that modified language for Section 3 in the license agreement would essentially read as follows, "During the term of this License, BCC shall not -415-
ATTACHMENT 1
Minutes- Hillsborough City Council
Monday, October 11 , 2021

Page 6 ends

construct any improvements on, over or near the Path which would interfere with or restrict the use of the Path, without the mutual agreement of the Town and the BCC." Mayor Royse opened public comment. There were no speakers. Mayor Royse closed public comment.

Mayor Royse asked Mr. Nagle if he was amenable to adding the Town's Values Statement to the agreement. Mr. Nagle stated that it should not be a problem.

On motion of Councilmember Cole, seconded by Councilmember Chuang and unanimous on roll call vote with Councilmember May absent and Vice Mayor Kralik recused, the City Manager was approved and authorized to execute a License Agreement with the Burlingame Country Club to construct the Pathway Project, with the modification to Section 3 in the agreement as read into the record by the City Attorney, and inclusion of the Town's Values Statement in the agreement.

Following action on Item 15, Vice Mayor Kralik returned to the meeting at 9:25 p.m.

XI. NEW BUSINESS

16. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO PURSUE A POWER

PURCHASE AGREEMENT WITH PENINSULA CLEAN ENERGY FOR

PARTICIPATION IN PENINSULA CLEAN ENERGY'S PUBLIC FACILITY SOLAR AND

STORAGE PROCUREMENT PROCESS
Councilmember May joined the meeting at 9:27 p.m.

Public Works Director Paul Willis and Dave Fribush, Distributed Energy Resources, Peninsula Clean Energy provided the presentation.

Mayor Royse opened public comment. There were no speakers. Mayor Royse closed public comment.

On motion of Councilmember May, seconded by Councilmember Cole and unanimous on roll call vote, the resolution authorizing the City Manager to pursue an agreement with Peninsula Clean Energy for participation in a Power Purchase Agreement for participation in Peninsula Clean Energy's Public Facility Solar and Storage Procurement Process was adopted and the City Manager was authorized to add a Battery Energy Storage System if determined to be a financially feasible option.

Following action on Item 16, Councilmember May left the meeting at 9:54 p.m.

17. RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS AND DETERMINATIONS UNDER ASSEMBLY BILL 361 FOR THE CONTINUATION OF VIRTUAL MEETINGS FOR ALL LEGISLATIVE BODIES
City Attorney Christopher Diaz provided the staff presentation.

Mayor Royse opened public comment. There were no speakers. Mayor Royse closed public comment.

On motion of Vice Mayor Kralik, seconded by Councilmember Chuang and unanimous on roll call vote with Councilmember May absent, the resolution making findings and determinations under Assembly Bill 361 for the continuation of virtual meetings for all legislative bodies was adopted.

XII. INFORMATIONAL

18. CITY MANAGER'S UPDATE
City Manager Ann Ritzma provided an informational update. -416-
Minutes – Hillsborough City Council
November 12, 2019

Page 6 ends

Hillsborough resident Annie Pong commented that recent fires were caused by failure of power poles and lines. She stated that there should be fire regulations and rationale for the approval of cell towers for fire safety.

Hillsborough resident Orna Resnekov commented that the power poles involved in the recent fires were overloaded which brought the power poles down.

On motion of Councilmember Benton, seconded by Councilmember Chuang and unanimous with a voice vote, December 9, 2019, was set as the public hearing date for adoption of a resolution adopting the fire severity assessment map and designating additional parcels to be included within the wildland-urban interface areas in the Town of Hillsborough; and staff was directed to notice the additional parcel owners of the public hearing.

Councilmember May and Vice Mayor Royse returned to the dais.

8. APPROVE AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A TEMPORARY

RIGHT OF ENTRY AGREEMENT WITH THE BURLINGAME COUNTRY CLUB IN

ORDER TO FACILITATE A POTENTIAL PATHWAY ALONG THE WEST SIDE OF

EUCALYPTUS AVENUE AND DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO TERMINATE ANY

EXISTING LICENSE AGREEMENT
Due to a conflict of interest, Mayor Christianson and Councilmember Benton recused themselves and left the Council Chambers at 7:58 pm based on their membership in the Burlingame Country Club. Vice Mayor Royse conducted this portion of the meeting.

City Attorney Christopher Diaz provided a PowerPoint presentation on the Temporary Right of Entry Agreement for the Pathway Project. He reviewed the background and stated that in July 2017 the City Council considered a license agreement with the Burlingame Country Club (BCC) for the Pathway Project. He stated that in December 2017 the City Council authorized the execution of the license agreement subject to revised indemnity language. He stated that in 2018-2019 discussions occurred between the Town and the BCC on the revised indemnity. He further stated that in July 2019 the City Council recommended that Councilmember May and the City Attorney meet with BCC on a revised approach.

Mr. Diaz stated that instead of a license agreement the revised approach will include a Temporary Right of Entry Agreement because it will allow the Town access to scope the project and determine the appropriate environmental review. He reported that the Temporary Right of Entry Agreement grants the Town a temporary and non-exclusive right to enter upon the property for the sole purpose of evaluating the feasibility of the proposed pathway, including conducting an environmental review. He stated that the temporary agreement has a term that runs from the time it is executed until August of 2021. He stated that the agreement allows for termination by either party with or without cause upon 60 days written notice; allows for termination by the BCC immediately if the Town’s actions are illegal, unsafe, or a liability to the BCC; requires the Town to indemnify the BCC from any claim suffered by any person caused by the Town’s use of the property, except to the extent arising from the negligence of BCC, its agents, employees, members or invitees; and requires the BCC to indemnify the Town from any claim suffered by any person caused by any activity occurring on BCC's golf course, except to the extent arising from the negligence of Town, its agents, employees, members or invitees.

Mr. Diaz stated that late edits were received from the BCC and copies of the modified Temporary Right of Entry Agreement are on the dais for the Councilmembers and at the back of the Council Chambers for the public.

Mr. Diaz stated that the next steps are for the City Council to approve the Temporary Right of Entry Agreement this evening, and in the coming months the project will be scoped and the environmental review will be determined. He stated that staff will return -417-
Minutes – Hillsborough City Council
November 12, 2019

Page 7 ends

to the City Council with the license agreement and a potential construction project for the path once the scope is determined and any environmental review conducted.

Mr. Diaz recommended that the City Council approve and authorize the City Manager to execute the Temporary Right of Entry Agreement; and direct staff to terminate any existing license agreement.

The Councilmembers, Mr. Diaz and Assistant City Manager John Mullins discussed the Temporary Right of Entry Agreement and the Pathway Project.

Councilmember May introduced Burlingame Country Club President Patrick Fallon.

Hillsborough resident John Lavrich stated that he was very impressed with the due diligence given for the Pathway Project and its potential environmental impact. He stated that he hopes that this process becomes pervasive and a standard for the Town to truly evaluate projects and maintain the rural character and aesthetics throughout Hillsborough.

On motion of Councilmember May, seconded by Councilmember Chuang and unanimous with a voice vote, the City Council approved and authorized the City Manager to execute the Temporary Right of Entry Agreement, as modified, with the Burlingame Country Club in order to facilitate a potential pathway; directed the City Manager to terminate any existing license agreement; and authorized the City Attorney to negotiate a minor modification to the Temporary Right of Entry Agreement based on one edit in the introductory clause posed by the BCC.

Mayor Christianson and Councilmember Benton returned to the Council Chambers at 8:12 pm.

NEW BUSINESS:

9. RESOLUTION APPROVING ENHANCEMENTS TO THE DESIGN STANDARDS FOR

WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES (WCFS) AND OTHER

INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYMENTS
City Manager Ann Ritzma stated that on January 14, 2019, the City Council adopted an urgency ordinance for wireless communication facilities (WCFs), and adopted a resolution establishing design standards specific to WCFs. She stated that the design standards were intended to be flexible and have guidelines that could be revised as needed. She reported that since the adoption of the design standards, there have been no new applications submitted to the Town.

Ms. Ritzma stated that in September 2019 comments and questions were received from the wireless carriers about the Town’s design standards. She stated that after careful consideration by the Town’s legal team and analysis by Town staff, revisions are being proposed only to the design standards guidelines.

Ms. Ritzma stated that on October 30, 2019, the Wireless Communications Advisory Committee (WCAC) was provided with a copy of the proposed revisions and an executive summary of the substantive changes. She further stated that the Chair and Vice Chair of the WCAC have requested comments from the committee members on the proposed revisions and will provide any comments received at this meeting. She reported that she met with some of the WCAC members on the afternoon of Friday, November 8, 2019, to discuss the revisions to the design standards.

Ms. Ritzma reported that the community was provided with a notice of the meeting in the November 1, 2019 Town e-announcement, and the executive summary and proposed revisions to the design standards were posted for public information and review on the Town's website on October 31, 2019. She stated that several comments have been received from residents and copies of the comments are on the dais for the Councilmembers and at the back of the Council Chambers for the public. -418-
Minutes – Hillsborough City Council
August 12, 2019

Page 5 ends

current PCE initiative aimed at improved economic and energy performance addresses building electrification with reduced natural gas use and more electric vehicle (EV) charging for increased EV readiness.

Mr. Reyes stated that the benefits of reach codes include a major economic value for residents, safer and healthier homes with no combustion, advancement in climate goals, much greater EV adoption, and fiscal prudence as it is more cost effective to address at new construction. He added that by 2025 there will be approximately 45,000 EVs in San Mateo County, and the EV savings over a gas car is $1,200 to $1,500 per year. For health benefits, Mr. Reyes reported that gas stoves in homes increase children’s asthma risk by 42%, total electric living eliminates the risk of carbon monoxide poisoning, and induction ranges automatically turn off when not in use, eliminating a leading cause of house fires.

Mr. Reyes reviewed the model code summary for building electrification and EV readiness, and compared the capital costs, annual energy use and generation of a mixed-fuel home and all-electric home. He also reviewed the timeline for the energy reach codes and participation to-date by PCE member agencies. He stated that PCE will support cities by providing model codes, a facilitated process, $10,000 grant per participating city for study and analysis, adoption assistance and technical implementation assistance.

Mr. Reyes, Mr. Anderson and City Manager Ann Ritzma discussed the energy reach codes, the Letter of Intent and the $10,000 grant from PCE.

The Councilmembers directed staff to move forward with exploring reach code options by signing the Letter of Intent.

11. DESIGNATION OF A VOTING DELEGATE AND AN ALTERNATE TO THE 2019 LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES CONFERENCE ON OCTOBER 16-18, 2019 Mayor Christianson stated that she will be attending the 2019 League of California Cities Annual Conference in Long Beach and will be able to attend the Annual Business Meeting on Friday, October 18, 2019, as the voting delegate.

Vice Mayor Royse stated that he will be able to attend the League’s Annual Business Meeting as the Town’s alternate, if needed.

Councilmember Chuang stated that she will also be attending the 2019 League of California Cities Annual Conference and will be able to serve as an alternate, if needed.

Mayor Christianson was designated as the voting delegate, Vice Mayor Royse as the first alternate and Councilmember Chuang as the second alternate at the 2019 League of California Cities Annual Conference's Annual Business Meeting on Friday, October 18, 2019.

OLD BUSINESS:

12. APPROVE AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A LICENSE

AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH AND THE BURLINGAME

COUNTRY CLUB TO ALLOW THE TOWN TO CONSIDER THE CREATION OF A PEDESTRIAN PATH AND LANDSCAPED AREA ALONG THE 500 TO 700 BLOCK OF

EUCALYPTUS AVENUE
Mayor Christianson and Councilmember Benton recused themselves from the Council Chambers.

City Attorney Christopher Diaz stated that the Pathway Project and license agreement were first brought to the City Council in September 2017, and the City Council provided direction for the license agreement to be modified. He stated that the license agreement was authorized to be executed in December 2017. He further stated that during an update on the Pathway Project, the City Council requested that the license agreement -419-
Minutes – Hillsborough City Council
August 12, 2019

Page 6 ends

be revised to include an additional indemnity clause for the Town and Burlingame Country Club (BCC). He reported that staff met with the BCC representative to discuss the proposed mutual indemnity provision and, after some time passed, comments were received from the BCC with a golf ball indemnity provision. He stated that the proposed license agreement has been provided for the Councilmembers on the dais and copies are available in the back of the Council Chambers for the public.

Mr. Diaz reported that the revised license agreement does not approve any project, but states that the Pathway Project is subject to environmental review and California Environmental Quality Act compliance, sufficient funding, community support, and future City Council and BCC approval. He stated that the term of the license agreement shall expire on its own terms unless a construction contract is awarded in which case the license shall remain in effect unless otherwise revoked or terminated. He further stated that additional language has been added for the right to revoke the license which is tied to the Town’s construction contract for the Pathway Project, and for indemnity to cover the BCC from any claim for loss or damage by any person on the pathway, and to cover the Town from any claim that is the result of errant golf balls.

The Councilmembers, Mr. Diaz and BCC legal counsel William Nagle discussed the license agreement.

The Councilmembers discussed designating a Councilmember to meet with the City Attorney, BCC attorney and board or management of BCC to resolve differences of opinion regarding the license agreement as previously expressed, and bringing the license agreement back for further review and action at either the October 14, 2019, or November 12, 2019 City Council meeting.

The Councilmembers requested that staff receive clarification from the PLAN (Pooled Liability Assurance Network) Corporation that the Town has coverage for the indemnity clause.

On motion of Councilmember May, seconded by Councilmember Chuang and unanimous on voice vote, the City Manager was authorized to execute the license agreement, as revised, between the Town of Hillsborough and the Burlingame Country Club to allow the Town to consider the creation of a pedestrian path and landscaped area along the 500 to 700 block of Eucalyptus Avenue.

On motion of Councilmember Chuang, seconded by Vice Mayor Royse, and unanimous on voice vote, Councilmember May was designated to meet with the City Attorney, BCC attorney and board or management of BCC to resolve differences of opinion regarding the license agreement as previously expressed; and staff was directed to bring the license agreement back for further review and action at either the October 14, 2019, or November 12, 2019 City Council meeting.

Mayor Christianson and Councilmember Benton returned to the Council Chambers.

City Manager Ann Ritzma reported that the rubberized asphalt repaving project on Eucalyptus Avenue will begin in September, but will not impact the proposed pathway.

PUBLIC COMMENT:

There were no public comments.

CITY COUNCIL ITEMS:

Councilmember Chuang reported that she attended the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office of Emergency Service’s Active Shooter Training held on Wednesday, July 31, 2019, at Mills High School.

Councilmember Benton reported on the bankruptcy and closures of the RePlanet recycling redemption centers and the effect the closures are having on Recology’s recycling center.
-420-
Minutes – Hillsborough City Council
May 14, 2018

Page 3 ends

Mayor Chuang opened the public hearing. There were no comments. The public hearing was closed.

After waiving the second reading, on motion of Councilmember Benton, seconded by Councilmember Royse, and unanimous on voice vote, the ordinance titled "Ordinance of the City Council of the Town of Hillsborough Amending Subsection 5.04.020(E) of the Hillsborough Municipal Code Regarding Business License Taxes, and Making Other Findings and Taking Other Actions Relating Thereto" was adopted.

7. ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION OF THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES’

RETIREMENT SYSTEM AND THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF

HILLSBOROUGH - ADOPTION
Human Resources Manager Kristin Armbruster stated that this ordinance was introduced and the first reading was waived at the April 9, 2018 City Council meeting.

She reported that in order to implement Section 20516, the Employees Sharing Additional Cost of one percent for the first tier classic local miscellaneous members in the Public Works and Clerical Unit, the California Public Employees' Retirement System requires that the Town adopt an ordinance authorizing the Mayor to execute the contract amendment.

Mayor Chuang opened the public hearing. There were no comments. The public hearing was closed.

After waiving the second reading, on motion of Vice Mayor Christianson, seconded by Councilmember May, and unanimous on voice vote, the ordinance titled "Ordinance of the City Council of the Town of Hillsborough Authorizing an Amendment to the Contract between the City Council of the Town of Hillsborough and the Board of Administration of the California Public Employees' Retirement System" was adopted.

8. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SEWER SERVICE CHARGES AND WATER AND SEWER CONNECTION FEES EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2018
Finance Director Jan Cooke reported that the resolution authorizing sewer service charges and water and sewer connection fees for fiscal year 2018-2019 was being pulled from the agenda and will be brought back at the June 11, 2018 City Council meeting.

DISCUSSION:

9. UPDATE FOR THE CONCEPTUAL PLAN OF A PEDESTRIAN PATH, LANDSCAPED AREA AND ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS ALONG THE 500 TO 700 BLOCK OF

EUCALYPTUS AVENUE
Vice Mayor Christianson and Councilmember Benton recused themselves and left the Council Chambers.

Assistant City Manager John Mullins introduced Hillsborough resident Eric Nyhus, Chair of the Hillsborough Beautification Foundation (HBF) Project Committee.

Mr. Mullins provided a presentation on the update for the conceptual creation of a pedestrian path, landscaped area and roadway improvements along the 500 to 700 block of Eucalyptus Avenue. He reviewed the original draft conceptual design and provided an aerial map and street view of the proposed 1,400 linear foot pathway along the west shoulder of the road.

Mr. Mullins stated that at the December 11, 2017 City Council meeting staff was directed to develop a project plan in conjunction with HBF and the Burlingame Country Club (BCC), begin preliminary public outreach, develop a budget outlining all project and -421-
Minutes – Hillsborough City Council
May 14, 2018

Page 4 ends

shared costs, confirm that HBF can raise the funds to install the pathway and landscaping, and research liability exposure.

Mr. Mullins reported that since the December 11, 2017 City Council meeting, as part of the development of the conceptual plan there were several changes from the original proposed scope of work. He provided a revised conceptual plan and stated that the changes include additional road corridor improvements, landscaping, tree removals, signage, two new crosswalks and an additional pathway along a section of the east road shoulder. Mr. Mullins reviewed the project’s estimated costs for the Town, HBF and BCC.

The Councilmembers, Mr. Mullins, City Attorney Christopher Diaz and Public Works Director Paul Willis discussed the curb and gutter work, tree removals, additional pathway and crosswalks, liability and license agreement with BCC, bicycle use, width of path and narrowing of road, and maintenance costs.

Mr. Mullins stated that the next steps will be to finalize the plans and scope of work, conduct an environmental review and a new tree survey, expand public outreach efforts, revise the license agreement with BCC, and return to the City Council with a project update and final project package.

The Councilmembers, Mr. Mullins and City Attorney Christopher Diaz further discussed the license agreement with BCC, bicycle use, and curb and gutter work.

Staff was directed to continue to pursue the conceptual plan for the Eucalyptus Avenue pathway, revise the license agreement with the Burlingame Country Club to include an indemnity clause for golf balls from the BCC and falling limbs from the BCC’s eucalyptus trees, provide public outreach to inform residents about the revised conceptual plan and to examine the pathway or some other area that would be suitable for bicyclists, and reexamine the location of the curb and gutter along the pathway to avoid reducing the road width.

Mayor Chuang opened the meeting for public comment.

Mr. Nyhus stated that he is involved in the planning effort and would like to make the pathway a bike accessible path and not a path just for pedestrians. He reported that the primary concern is safety for both pedestrians and bicyclists as there have been many close calls along the Eucalyptus Avenue corridor.

A number of children held up signs in favor of the Eucalyptus Avenue pathway.

Hillsborough resident Alexa A. stated that she was in favor of a safe pathway to bike to school.

Hillsborough resident Ashana Khan stated that a pathway would make her feel safer because some cars drive by so fast.

A Hillsborough resident stated that she was in favor of a pathway as she trips on the roots on the ground.

Hillsborough resident Matt Mochary stated that the pathway should be for children to walk and bike to school. He reported that the roots cause pedestrians and bicyclists to go into the road. He stated that so far no kid has been seriously injured. He commented that if bikes are not allowed on the path, there is no point in having a path.

Hillsborough resident Julie Ann Dougery stated that she is a Chairperson on North School’s Safety and Wellness Committee and a Doctor of Physical Therapy. She stated that the Town could lose a child to a serious head injury and that it is absurd not to have bikes on the pathway.

Mayor Chuang closed the meeting for public comment and thanked everyone for their comments.
-422-
Minutes – Hillsborough City Council
May 14, 2018

Page 5 ends

Vice Mayor Christianson and Councilmember Benton returned to the Council Chambers.

PUBLIC COMMENT:

There were no public comments.

CITY COUNCIL ITEMS:

Councilmember Royse asked Police Chief Mark O’Connor for an update on crimes related to the delivery of cannabis. Chief O’Connor reported that according to the Northern California Regional Intelligence Center (NCRIC) there have been very few crimes reported. He stated that there was an isolated case involving a cannabis theft in which a cannabis delivery vehicle was followed from Vallejo, California, to Riverbank, California, and while unattended someone broke the delivery vehicle’s window and took a backpack containing cannabis.

Councilmember Benton reported that since China stopped accepting all shipments of recycled mixed paper and cardboard and there is virtually no market for those materials, the South Bayside Waste Management Authority’s (SBWMA) budget for fiscal year 2018-2019 has a 15 percent increase in tipping fees, which may result in a less than five percent increase to residents. He also reported that because the conversion of compostable materials is 25 percent more than disposal of those materials at Ox Mountain Sanitary Landfill, the SBWMA will be looking at alternatives, such as sending food waste to a treatment plant where it can be converted into methane gas to generate electricity.

Councilmember May stated that he serves on the Peninsula Clean Energy (PCE) Audit and Finance Committee and reported that PCE reached $260 million in sales this year and that there may be $60 million in cash reserves at the end of this year. He stated that the Committee is discussing PCE’s investment policy and investment options.

Mayor Chuang announced that the Hillsborough Memorial Parade will be held on Monday, May 28, 2018, and that Police Chief Mark O’Connor will be the Grand Marshal.

ADJOURNMENT:

Mayor Chuang adjourned the meeting at 7:44 p.m.
-423-
Minutes – Hillsborough City Council
December 11, 2017

Page 4 ends

11. REJECTION OF CLAIM: ED AND CHRIS SCHWEITZER - 85 GLENGARRY WAY,

HILLSBOROUGH
The claim filed by Ed and Chris Schweitzer of 85 Glengarry Way was rejected.

NEW BUSINESS:

12. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A LICENSE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TOWN OF

HILLSBOROUGH AND THE BURLINGAME COUNTRY CLUB FOR THE CREATION OF A PEDESTRIAN PATH AND A LANDSCAPED AREA ALONG THE 500 TO 700

BLOCK OF EUCALYPTUS AVENUE
Vice Mayor Christianson and Councilmember Benton recused themselves and left the Council Chambers.

Assistant City Manager John Mullins introduced Burlingame Country Club (BCC) member William Nagle and Hillsborough Beautification Foundation (HBF) members Letty Callinan and Eric Nyhus. Mr. Mullins provided a PowerPoint presentation on the license agreement with BCC to enable the possible creation of a pedestrian path and a landscaped area. He stated that for a number of years pedestrians have utilized portions of the land between the paved portions and the adjacent fence of the 500 to 700 block of Eucalyptus Avenue. He provided a brief history of the area and reported that HBF and other residents have expressed interest in partnering with the Town to fund a pathway to enhance the Eucalyptus Avenue corridor.

Mr. Mullins stated that the Town has been maintaining the roadway, road shoulder, street scape and infrastructure, and he provided maps of the area. He reported that in 2016, during a land survey conducted by the Town’s contract surveyor, it was determined that a large portion of the 500 to 700 block of Eucalyptus Avenue is actually the property of BCC. He explained that because the Town does not currently own the area where the pathway is proposed, and because HBF cannot invest funds in a project on non-public land, the concept of a license agreement was developed to give the Town and HBF the legal authority to further explore the possibility of improving the corridor.

He stated that the Town would be under no obligation to pursue the potential pathway and road shoulder improvement project unless funds to defray the costs were committed for the project from HBF and Town residents.

Mr. Mullins reported that the Town’s street repairs and storm drain improvements associated with the project are estimated at $150,000.00. He stated that a landscape architect would develop preliminary designs to determine the landscaping cost for the pathway, trees and shrubs along the Eucalyptus Avenue corridor. He stated that once the conceptual plans are completed, staff will then be able to develop a project outline and project cost estimates, and begin public outreach in order to determine if the community supports and will fund the project. He stated that the total estimated project cost will be brought back to the City Council at the April 2018 meeting for review and approval once the conceptual plans are completed, and staff confirms that the Town will receive the necessary funds to defray the landscaping costs from HBF and Town residents.

The Councilmembers, Mr. Mullins, Mr. Nagle, City Attorney Christopher Diaz and Mr.

Nyhus discussed the project and license agreement.

On motion of Councilmember Royse, seconded by Councilmember May, and unanimous on voice vote, the resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute the license agreement between the Town of Hillsborough and the Burlingame Country Club for the creation of a pedestrian path and a landscaped area along the 500 to 700 block of Eucalyptus Avenue was adopted.

Vice Mayor Christianson and Councilmember Benton returned to the Council Chambers. -424-
Minutes – Hillsborough City Council
September 11, 2017

Page 3 ends

Ms. Cullinan thanked the Councilmembers for their feedback. She stated that she will verify the additional cost, and at a future meeting provide a resolution for consideration for the Town as a municipal account to opt up to the ECO100 program.

10. REVIEW AND DISCUSS POTENTIAL OPTIONS BETWEEN THE TOWN OF

HILLSBOROUGH AND THE BURLINGAME COUNTRY CLUB FOR THE CREATION OF A PEDESTRIAN PATH ALONG THE 500 TO 700 BLOCK OF THE EUCALYPTUS

AVENUE CORRIDOR
Councilmember Benton and Vice Mayor Christianson recused themselves and left the Council Chambers.

Assistant City Manager John Mullins introduced Special Counsel and former City Attorney Norm Book. Mr. Mullins provided a PowerPoint presentation on the creation of a pedestrian path along the 500 to 700 block of the Eucalyptus Avenue corridor. He stated that for a number of years students and other pedestrians have used portions of the area as a pathway to North and Crocker Schools and to other destinations. He provided a brief history about the previous attempts to create a safer pathway. He stated that recently the Hillsborough Beautification Foundation (HBF) and a few parents have expressed interest in partnering with the Town to fund a pathway for the safety of pedestrians. He reported that the Town has been maintaining some of the infrastructure in the area; however, in 2016 during a land survey, it was determined that a large portion of the area is owned by the Burlingame Country Club (BCC).

Mr. Mullins reported that in order for HBF to fund the potential project, the area must be considered public lands pursuant to HBF’s bylaws. He stated that after discussions with HBF and BCC, Town staff and Mr. Book reviewed various options and possibilities to create the pathway, and a license agreement was developed. He further stated that the Town would not be obligated to pursue the pathway unless funds to defray the costs were committed from HBF and residents. Mr. Mullins provided a slide showing a conceptual design of the pathway on Eucalyptus Avenue.

Mr. Mullins stated that staff is seeking City Council input on whether the real estate issues should be further explored as additional records could be searched in order to ensure all potential ownership issues have been exhausted, and whether the license agreement is an option the City Council wishes to pursue.

The Councilmembers, Mr. Mullins and Mr. Book discussed the license agreement, liabilities and risks, removal of trees, real estate issues, and potential costs incurred by the Town.

The Councilmembers expressed their interest in the Eucalyptus Avenue pathway.

City Attorney Christopher Diaz stated that he will work with Mr. Book to perform a more comprehensive analysis and explore all options for the Eucalyptus Avenue pathway.

Councilmember Benton and Vice Mayor Christianson returned to the Council Chambers.

PUBLIC HEARING:

11. RESOLUTION APPROVING A REVOCABLE ENCROACHMENT PERMIT APPLICATION FOR 595 EL CERRITO AVENUE
Director of Public Works Paul Willis provided a PowerPoint presentation on the Revocable Encroachment Permit Application for 595 El Cerrito Avenue, which included a slide showing an overview of the property. He reviewed the existing property frontage and reported that in the past there have been security and stormwater issues. He stated that the home itself when originally constructed did not have a typical setback from the property line so it is closer to the roadway and as a result the fence and other frontage improvements would have to be in the right of way. He further stated that the location of the new gates and columns are consistent with neighboring fences that are on the -425-
Minutes – Hillsborough City Council
July 10, 2017

Page 7 ends

24. LAND USE LICENSE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH

AND THE BURLINGAME COUNTRY CLUB
Mayor Chuang announced that at staff’s recommendation Agenda Item 24 will be postponed until a future meeting date and the item will not be discussed this evening.

PUBLIC COMMENT:

There were no public comments.

CITY COUNCIL ITEMS:

Councilmember Benton reported that South Bayside Waste Management Authority’s (SBWMA) Board members approved the 15-year franchise agreement extension with Recology San Mateo County at the Thursday, June 22, 2017 Board meeting.

Councilmember Benton reported that he attended the Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation (BAWSCA) Board Policy Committee meeting on Wednesday, June 14, 2017, where it was reported that the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) has been releasing water from the Hetch Hetchy Reservoir to avoid flooding.

Councilmember May reported that he attended the Peninsula Clean Energy (PCE) Board meeting on Thursday, June 22, 2017, where it was reported that Phase II is now complete, and next year’s revenue is projected to be $330 million. He stated that the employment contract amendment and compensation adjustment for PCE’s Chief Executive Officer was approved.

Councilmember May updated the City Council on State Senate Bill 649 and expressed his concern that SB 649, if passed, would reduce the Town’s oversight and would allow installation of “small cell” wireless towers and associated equipment on Town property without any aesthetic review by the Town.

Councilmember Royse asked if San Mateo County law enforcement agencies have seen epidemic opioid or other narcotic overdoses as the Midwest and East Coast have.

Police Chief Mark O’Connor replied that Hillsborough has not; however, there are isolated cases in San Mateo County of opioid related overdoses, and law enforcement agencies in Santa Clara County, San Francisco County and Los Angeles County are dealing with increases in opioid overdoses.

Vice Mayor Christianson reported that it was announced at the Thursday, June 15, 2017 Commute.org Board meeting that the agency has an opening for an Accounting Assistant.

Councilmember Benton reported that the American City Business Journal recently ranked the Town of Hillsborough as Number 18 of the nation’s top 25 most affluent communities.

Mayor Chuang announced that the Hillsborough Concours d’Elegance will be held on Sunday, July 16, 2017, at the Crystal Springs Golf Course.

ADJOURNMENT:

Mayor Chuang adjourned the meeting at 7:34 p.m.
-426-
61236.01000\30813478.9

LICENSE AGREEMENT
This License Agreement (“License”), made and entered into this _____ day of _____________, 2023 by and between the Town of Hillsborough, a municipal corporation (“Town”), and the Burlingame Country Club, a _______________________ (“BCC”), bears the following recitals.

RECITALS
A. For a number of years, elementary and junior high students from North Hillsborough School and Crocker Middle School, as well as other pedestrians, have utilized portions of land between the paved portions of Eucalyptus Avenue and the fence adjacent thereto as a pathway for access to and from Crocker Elementary School and Crocker Junior High School, and for other pedestrian purposes.

B. Recently, the Hillsborough Beautification Foundation (“HBF”), as well as citizens of Town, have expressed interest in funding the creation of a pathway adjacent to the west side of the paved surface of Eucalyptus Avenue, the creation of which would enhance the safety of those presently using this area for pedestrian purposes (the “Pathway Project”).

C. BCC is willing to grant Town a license on the terms and conditions and for the purposes set forth herein.

D. The parties enter into this License with the understanding that it is not approval of any project.

Instead, as noted in this License, the Pathway Project is subject to sufficient funding, community support, and future City Council approval.

NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows:

1. BCC hereby grants Town a license of the property shown on Exhibit A attached hereto for the purpose of creating and maintaining a pathway to be used solely for pedestrian purposes, except as provided in paragraph 2 below. A legal description of the licensed area is attached hereto and marked Exhibit B. So long as the License is in effect, Town at its expense shall have the right to remove all or some of the eucalyptus trees as shown on Exhibit A. The Town at its expense shall replace any trees removed with trees from among the species listed on Exhibit C, the location of which shall be subject to BCC’s approval, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. The Town at its expense may also install and shall maintain other landscaping, subject to approval of BCC, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld.

2. Town agrees to construct a pathway consisting of an approximately five (5) foot wide ADA accessible pathway that is 1900 lineal feet along with a three (3) foot wide area for plantings for a total of eight (8) feet in width within the licensed area, as shown on Exhibit A, on the west side of Eucalyptus Avenue from the 500 block to the 700 block and the east side of the Eucalyptus Avenue along the 600 block (the “Path”). The Town’s obligation to construct the Pathway Project is subject to:
(1) the approval of this Agreement by the Town Council, in such Council’s sole and absolute discretion; and (2) there being community support and sufficient monetary donations received by the Town, as determined by the Town, in its sole and absolute discretion. Town shall not change the location of the Path without the prior written approval of BCC, which shall not be unreasonably withheld. In no event, however, may Town construct a path within the licensed area on the east side of the 500 block of Eucalyptus Avenue. The Path shall be limited to pedestrians; bicycle use shall be prohibited unless otherwise permitted by Town. The Path shall not be used in a manner which interferes with the use of -427-
ATTACHMENT 2
61236.01000\30813478.9
2 BCC’s adjoining golf course. Town shall have the responsibility of maintaining the Path in good condition and repair. The Path shall be constructed in a manner in compliance with applicable Town engineering standards. The Town shall not detract from BCC’s right to revoke the License pursuant to paragraph 4 below.

3. During the term of this License, BCC shall not construct any improvements on, over or near the Path which would interfere with or restrict the use of the Path, without the mutual agreement of the Town and the BCC.

4. The License is personal to Town, and the grant thereof does not convey an interest in real property. The term of this License shall run from the date in the introductory clause above and shall expire on its own terms on ___________________ unless the Town has awarded a construction contract for the Pathway Project, in which case the License shall remain in effect unless otherwise revoked or terminated. BCC may revoke the License at any time on not less than one hundred twenty (120) days prior written notice to Town. Town may revoke the License at any time on not less than sixty (60) days prior written notice to the BCC provided that the Town has not awarded a construction contract for the Pathway Project. Upon revocation of the License, Town shall not be obligated to remove any improvements which it installs in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement.

5. Town agrees to indemnify, defend and hold BCC harmless from any liability, loss, damage, cost or expense, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, arising from any claim for loss or damage to person or property suffered by any person while traversing the Path except to the extent arising from the negligence of BCC, its agents, employees, members or invitees.

6. BCC agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold Town harmless from any liability, loss, damage, cost or expense, including reasonable attorneys' fees, arising from any claim for loss or damage to person or property suffered by any person while traversing the Path caused by any activity occurring or emanating from BCC's golf course except to the extent arising from the negligence of Town, its agents, employees, members or invitees. In the event of any such claim for loss or damage, Town agrees to provide prompt notice of the claim to BCC.

7. All notices to be given or required to be given by either party to the other shall be in writing and shall be sent by: (i) United States registered mail, certified mail, return receipt requested; (ii) be transmitted by facsimile if such facsimile is promptly followed by a notice sent by mail; (iii) delivered by a nationally recognized overnight courier; or (iv) delivered personally.

8. Any notice shall be addressed to the parties as provided below:

To Town:

BCC:
(a) Any notice will be deemed delivered three (3) days after if it is posted or sent by mail, the date the facsimile is transmitted, the date the overnight courier delivery is made, or the date personal delivery is made. Any party may change its address by providing notice to the other parties as provided above.
-428-
61236.01000\30813478.9
3 9. Any dispute, claim or controversy arising out of or relating to this Agreement or the breach, termination, enforcement, interpretation or validity thereof, including the determination of the scope or applicability of this agreement to arbitrate, shall first be mediated before a mutually agreeable mediator. If the parties are unable to resolve the matter by mediation, it shall be determined by arbitration in San Mateo County, California, before one mutually agreeable arbitrator. Judgment on the award may be entered in any court having jurisdiction or such other arbitration service as the parties may agree upon. This clause shall not preclude parties from seeking provisional remedies in aid of arbitration from a court of appropriate jurisdiction.

10. By executing this Agreement, BCC represents and warrants that it will comply with the values statement set forth in Exhibit “D” to the same extent as a member of the Town of Hillsborough City Council or of a Hillsborough board or committee.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of date first written above.

TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH
By:

Its:

BURLINGAME COUNTRY CLUB
By:

Its:
-429-
61236.01000\30813478.9
4 EXHIBIT A
Map of Licensed Area
-430-
61236.01000\30813478.9
5 EXHIBIT B
Legal Description of Licensed Area
-431-
61236.01000\30813478.9
6 EXHIBIT C
Tree Species List
-432-
61236.01000\30813478.9
7 EXHIBIT D
Values Statement

TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH CITY COUNCIL, BOARDS, AND COMMUNITIES

VALUES STATEMENT
As a member of the Town of Hillsborough City Council or of a Hillsborough board or committee, I agree to uphold the Town mission statement and adhere to the following values. I will:
• Serve with integrity and be a responsible steward of taxpayer dollars and the natural environment.
• Treat everyone with respect, listen to understand, and promote civility, courtesy, and thoughtfulness in all interactions.
• Create an atmosphere where individual members, Town staff, and members of the community are free to express their ideas and work to their full potential. • Promote public and individual trust through honest and open practices and communications.
• Recognize and celebrate the diversity of our community through the pursuit of equal access, equal participation, and fair treatment for all. • Work collaboratively with others toward the common good in order to achieve innovative solutions for the public benefit.
• Maintain a balanced sense of community and quality of life through the protection and improvement of our natural and built environments.
• Respect the dignity and privacy of individuals and organizations. • Safeguard the community from the threats of natural, technological, or other threats to our safety and wellbeing.
• Avoid and discourage conduct which is divisive or harmful to the best interests of Hillsborough.
-433-

TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH
San Mateo County
1600 Floribunda Avenue
Hillsborough, CA 94010
16 NEW BUSINESS

CITY COUNCIL MEETING
APRIL 10, 2023

AGENDA STAFF REPORT
ITEM SUBJECT: RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH MIG, INC. FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TO CONDUCT ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FOR THE TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH 6TH CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE 2023-2031 AND ASSOCIATED GENERAL PLAN ELEMENTS IN THE NOTTO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $248,745.00 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15306 SUMMARY: At the City Council meeting on February 27, 2023, the Council reviewed revisions to the Draft Housing Element document. Following discussion, without objection, the Council directed staff to submit the Draft Housing Element to the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) and issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) for a CEQA consultant to Conduct Environmental Review required for the Town of Hillsborough 6th Cycle Housing Element Update 2023-2031.

Council provided direction that the selection of the consultant should be considered by staff in consultation with the City Council Subcommittee and some members of the Housing Element Advisory Committee, who have particular expertise in this area.

On March 9, 2023, staff submitted the Revised Draft Housing Element Document to HCD. The Town anticipates receiving comments back from the State by Tuesday May 9, 2023.

On March 13, 2023, staff issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) soliciting submittals from firms interested in conducting the environmental review for the Town of Hillsborough (“Town”) Housing Element Update and Associates General Plan elements. The original submittal deadline was set for March 27th, then extended to April 3rd. Two proposals were received.

Staff reviewed the two proposals with the City Council Subcommittee and two qualified members of the Housing Element Advisory Committee (HEAC). The proposals were evaluated based on Firm Experience, Staff Qualifications, Organization & Project Management, Quality Control and Assurance, and Positive Professional References.

The firm MIG, Inc. was selected as the most qualified and responsive consultant. MIG has been providing environmental consulting services related to CEQA and NEPA for over thirty-five years and has a long track record of successful working relationships with many cities, counties, and special districts in the South Bay area and San Francisco Peninsula. Their recent local experience includes preparation of the CEQA analysis for the City of San Carlos Focused General Plan Update, which included updates to the City’s 6th Cycle Housing Element, Environmental Safety Element and related General Plan and zoning code amendments. In addition, they prepared CEQA documentation for similar General Plan and 6th Cycle Housing Element updates for the City of -435-
Agenda Staff Report - Hillsborough City Council
April 10, 2023

Page 2 ends

Redwood City and the County of Marin. The Town of Hillsborough has an existing contract with MIG for on-call environmental consulting services.

MIG will prepare a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) document analyzing the environmental effects of implementing the Housing Element Update, related amendments to other General Plan elements, updates to implementing tools (i.e., Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance), and new Objective Design Standards. The scope of the environmental review will cover the maximum build-out allowed by the Housing Element, related General Plan amendments, and related ordinances over the course of the 2023-2031 6th Cycle term.

Based on their review of the proposed Housing Element Update, they have determined a programmatic Environmental Impact Report (EIR) will provide environmental clearance for the project. Specific development projects would be addressed under subsequent CEQA review, tiering off the EIR. The Program EIR will be structured to minimize the environmental review needed for future development proposals by describing anticipated impacts of housing development on the sites identified in the Housing Element within the 8-year planning period of the Housing Element, including the Town Hall and Tobin Clark sites, and presenting programmatic level mitigation measures to avoid or reduce the anticipated impacts.

The Town of Hillsborough Planning Division will be the Lead Agency for the CEQA process. MIG’s proposed approach is consistent with the requirements outlined in the RFP. MIG will prepare a legally defensible Program EIR based on current CEQA Statutes and Guidelines, relevant case law, and the Town’s environmental review procedures.

The Administrative Draft EIR will be submitted to City staff in approximately 10 weeks from the notice to proceed, with the estimated completion of the EIR process at approximately 30 weeks.

The term of the project will run through November 1, 2023, and the estimated not-to-exceed project costs total $248,745.00.

FISCAL IMPACT: Funds for this project have been included in the previously approved FY 2022- 23 budget for the General Plan and Housing Element.

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: Pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Town is in the process of preparing the necessary environmental review for the Town of Hillsborough RHNA 6 Housing Element Update. Prior to the time that the City Council is required to adopt the Town of Hillsborough RHNA 6 Housing Element Update, CEQA review will have been completed and will be available to the City Council for consideration prior to any discretionary action of the City Council to adopt the housing element.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution

2. MIG Proposal for Environmental Review for 6th Cycle Housing Element Update 2023-2031 & Associated General Plan Elements

3. Professional Services Agreement
PREPARED BY: Liz Ruess, Planning Manager
-436-
Agenda Staff Report - Hillsborough City Council
April 10, 2023

Page 3 ends

RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the resolution approving and authorizing the City Manager to execute an agreement with MIG, Inc. for professional services to conduct environmental review for the 6th Cycle Housing Element Update 2023-2031 and associated general plan elements in the not-to-exceed amount of $248,745.00.
-437-
RESOLUTION NO. 23-

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH

APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH MIG, INC. FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TO CONDUCT ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FOR THE TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH 6TH CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE 2023-2031 AND ASSOCIATED GENERAL PLAN ELEMENTS IN THE NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $248,745.00 PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15306; AND APPROVING A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

AGREEMENT
WHEREAS, on March 13, 2023, staff issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) soliciting submittals from firms interested in conducting the environmental review for the Town of Hillsborough (“Town”) Housing Element Update and Associates General Plan elements and two proposals were received; and WHEREAS, staff reviewed the two proposals with the City Council Subcommittee and two qualified members of the Housing Element Advisory Committee (HEAC); and
WHEREAS, proposals were evaluated based on Firm Experience, Staff Qualifications, Approach to Organization & Project Management, Approach to Quality Control and Assurance, and Positive Professional References; and WHEREAS, the firm MIG, Inc. was selected as the most qualified and responsive consultant; and
WHEREAS, the term of the project will run through November 1, 2023, and the estimated not-to-exceed project costs total $248,745.00; and WHEREAS, funds for this project have been included in the previously approved budget for the General Plan; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the Town of Hillsborough hereby approves and authorizes the City Manager to execute an agreement with MIG, Inc. for professional services to conduct Environmental Review for the Town of Hillsborough 6th Cycle Housing Element Update 2023-2031 and Associated General Plan Elements for the not-to-exceed amount of $248,745.00.

Mayor of the Town of Hillsborough
Attest: City Clerk
This resolution was adopted by the City Council of the Town of Hillsborough at its regular meeting held on the 10th day of April 2023 by the following vote of the members thereof:
-438-
ATTACHMENT 1
2 AYES: Councilmembers
NOES: Councilmembers
ABSENT: Councilmembers
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers
-439-
Environmental Review for
6th Cycle Housing Element
Update 2023-2031 & Associated
General Plan Elements

TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH
2055 Junction Avenue | San Jose, CA 95131
(650) 327-0429 | www.migcom.com
In association with:

W-Trans
Proposal | March 31, 2023
-440-
ATTACHMENT 2

PLANNING / DESIGN / COMMUNICATIONS / MANAGEMENT / TECHNOLOGY / SCIENCE 2055 Junction Avenue
San Jose, CA 95131
(650) 327-0429
www.migcom.com

CALIFORNIA

BERKELEY, FULLERTON,

LOS ANGELES, PASADENA,

RIVERSIDE, SACRAMENTO,

SAN DIEGO, SAN JOSE,

AND SONOMA

COLORADO
DENVER

NEW YORK

BROOKLYN
OREGON

PORTLAND
TEXAS

SAN ANTONIO

WASHINGTON

SEATTLE
March 31, 2023
Liz Ruess, Planning Manager
Town of Hillsborough, Building & Planning Department
1600 Floribunda Ave.

Hillsborough, CA 94010
[email protected]
Subject: Request for Proposals – Professional Services to Conduct Environmental Review for the Town of Hillsborough 6th Cycle Housing Element Update 2023-2031 and Associated General Plan Elements
Dear Liz Ruess:

MIG, Inc., is pleased to present our proposal to provide environmental review for the Town of Hillsborough 6th Cycle Housing Element Update 2023-2031. Our Executive Summary is included herein, followed by the remainder of our proposal. As noted below, Mike Campbell, Director of Environmental Analysis at our San Jose office, will be the primary point of contact for this project. If you have any questions about our proposal, please do not hesitate to contact us. We can be reached directly via the following:
» Mike Campbell: (408) 239-3610, [email protected]
» Paula Hartman: (650) 269-3895; [email protected]
Sincerely,
Paula Hartman, Esq.

Principal

1. Executive Summary
The Housing Element of the Town of Hillsborough (Town) General Plan is intended to plan for the housing needs of the Hillsborough community while meeting the State’s housing goals as set forth in Article 10.6 of the California Government Code. The Housing Element analyzes housing needs in Hillsborough, the resources available to meet those needs, and the governmental and non-governmental constraints that can impact the supply of affordable housing. It contains goals, policies, and action programs designed to provide housing for all segments of the population, within the constraints of very limited land availability, steep terrain, and extraordinarily high land values. The current Hillsborough Housing Element (5th housing cycle) covered the planning period of January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2022.

The 6th housing cycle, covering the 2023 – 2031 planning period, requires jurisdictions to update their Housing Elements to plan for the number of housing units assigned to them by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) through the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) process. The Town’s RHNA allocation is 554 units, broken down into the following categories: Very Low Income (153 units); Low Income (88 units); Moderate Income (87 units); and Above Moderate Income (223 units). The Town provided a second draft of the Housing Element to the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) on March 9, 2023, for review and expects comments back by mid-May.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Executive Summary 1

2. Project Team and 2
Qualifications

3. Approach Proposal 5

4. Cost Proposal 13

5. References 15

6. Liability Insurance 15

7. Litigation 15

8. Proprietary Information 15
-441-
Town of Hillsborough | 6th Cycle Housing Element Update & Associated General Plan Elements Environmental Review 2 The population of Hillsborough has been diversifying over the past 20 years while also seeing an increase in the
median age. Home values have increased significantly
since 2000, with a significant portion of the housing stock being owner-occupied single-family units. Considering
these changes in demographics will help the Town plan for housing that is accommodating for all demographics over the next 8-year cycle.

MIG will prepare a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) document analyzing the environmental effects
of implementing the Housing Element Update, related
amendments to other General Plan elements, updates to
implementing tools (i.e., Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance), and new Objective Design Standards. The
scope of the environmental review will cover the maximum build-out allowed by the Housing Element, related General Plan amendments, and related ordinances over the course of the 2023-2031 6th Cycle term.

Based on our review of the proposed Housing
Element Update, we have determined a programmatic
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) will provide
environmental clearance for the project. Specific
development projects would be addressed under
subsequent CEQA review, tiering off the EIR. The Program EIR will be structured to minimize the environmental
review needed for future development proposals by
describing anticipated impacts of housing development
on the sites identified in the Housing Element within the 8-year planning period of the Housing Element, including the Town Hall and Tobin Clark sites, and presenting
programmatic level mitigation measures to avoid or reduce the anticipated impacts.

The Town of Hillsborough Planning Division will be the
Lead Agency for the CEQA process. MIG’s proposed
approach is consistent with the requirements outlined in the RFP. MIG will prepare a legally defensible Program
EIR based on current CEQA Statutes and Guidelines,
relevant case law, and the Town’s environmental review
procedures.

MIG has been providing environmental consulting services related to CEQA and NEPA for over thirty-five years and has a long track record of successful working relationships with many cities, counties, and special districts in the South Bay area and San Francisco Peninsula. Our recent
local experience includes preparation of the CEQA
analysis for the City of San Carlos Focused General Plan Update, which included updates to the City’s 6th Cycle
Housing Element, Environmental Safety Element and
related General Plan and zoning code amendments. In
addition, we prepared CEQA documentation for similar
General Plan and 6th Cycle Housing Element updates for
the City of Redwood City and the County of Marin.

This project will be managed out of our San Jose office.

Mike Campbell, Director of Environmental Analysis, will be the primary point of contact and Contract Manager
responsible for overseeing preparation of the EIR. We
have dedicated sufficient time, personnel, and resources to the successful completion of the tasks described in
the RFP and are committed to maintaining our availability throughout the duration of the project. To supplement
our in-house expertise, MIG is teaming with W-Trans, a
well-established firm with a wealth of local transportation planning knowledge and housing element project
experience.

2. Project Team and
Qualifications
About MIG
The project team assembled for this proposal is
composed of staff from our San José office who are
highly experienced on MIG projects throughout the San
Francisco Peninsula and South Bay, helping to ensure the project is completed on schedule. The project will be led by a seasoned Senior Project Manager who will lead the
project from start to finish. The following management staff will be assigned to the project:

MIG KEY PERSONNEL
Mike Campbell, AICP, Director of Environmental
Analysis. Mike has over 35 years of experience in planning and environmental consulting for both public and private development projects throughout Santa Clara and
San Mateo Counties and the Bay Area. He will provide
overall leadership on this project and remain the primary point of contact with the City. Mike will provide Town
representation and be responsible for quality control,
budget and schedule.

Barbara Beard, Senior Project Manager. Barbara is a MIG Senior Project Manager and Senior Analyst with over 35
years of experience in preparing documentation pursuant to CEQA and NEPA. As a Senior Project Manager, she has
directed the preparation of CEQA documents on a wide
variety of projects including those for numerous Bay Area Housing and Safety Elements and General Plan updates.

As the Senior Project Manager for this project, Ms. Beard will maintain day-to-day communications with the Town,
direct the work of project team members, review and
incorporate technical documents from the transportation subconsultant, and prepare key sections of the EIR. She will assist the Town with all aspects of the CEQA process including project scoping, notification requirements, public meetings, and project findings (if requested).
-442-
Town of Hillsborough | 6th Cycle Housing Element Update & Associated General Plan Elements Environmental Review 3 Taylor Peterson, Director of Biological Analysis. Tay will direct MIG biologists in assessing the biological impact analysis for the project, and will provide any outreach needed to public agencies regarding permitting issues.

Chris Dugan, Director of Air Quality, GHG, and Noise
(AGN) Analyses. Chris will oversee all preparations of air quality, climate change/GHG, and noise impact analyses.

About W-Trans
MIG will be teaming with W-Trans, with whom we have
a longstanding successful working relationship, for the transportation study on this project. W-Trans provides
traffic engineering and transportation planning services.

Projects range from analyses for traffic studies, including Initial Studies and EIRs, traffic collision reduction programs, transportation facilities design including traffic signal and roundabout design as well as pedestrian and bicycle facilities to downtown revitalization, streetscape planning efforts, and complete street projects.

W-TRANS KEY PERSONNEL
Mark Spencer, PE, Senior Principal, and Barry Bergman,
AICP, Senior Planner, will oversee the preparation of the transportation study.

Resumes
Resumes for all key staff resumes are provided below and on the following pages.

RESUMES FOR KEY PERSONNEL

STAFF/ROLE CREDENTIALS RELEVANT EXPERIENCE
MIG, Inc.

Mike Campbell, AICP
Director of Environmental
Analysis
» 35+ years of experience preparing CEQA and
NEPA documents for residential, mixed-use,
commercial, industrial, TOD, and public park
projects throughout Northern California, as
well as expertise in stormwater management
» Leads the preparation of EIRs, Initial Studies,
Environmental Assessments, and Categorical
Exemptions/Exclusions in conformance with
CEQA and NEPA requirements
» BS, Natural Resources Planning &
Interpretation, Humboldt State University
» American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP)
» Certified Professional in Storm Water Quality
» Association of Environmental Professionals
and American Planning Association, Member
San Carlos Housing and Safety Element Update Project
and Program EIR and 1021 Howard Avenue Project
Categorical Exemption in San Carlos; Lawrence-Mitty
Park and Trail Master Plan IS/MND and I-280 Trail IS/
MND in Cupertino; 310-330 Esplanade Infrastructure
Preservation Project EIR in Pacifica; Red Morton
Community Park Stormwater Capture Project IS/MND
in Redwood City; 200 Manabe Ow Road Distribution
Facility IS/MND in Watsonville; Milpitas High School
Performing Arts Center and Gym Project
Experience prior to joining MIG: 405 E 4th Street
Mixed-Use Project EIR, 406 E 3rd Street Mixed-Use
Project IS/MND, and Peninsula Heights IS/MND in San
Mateo; El Camino Real Specific Plan in Santa Clara;
Green Infrastructure Plans in San Jose & Redwood City
Barbara Beard
Senior Project Manager » 35+ years of experience preparing Housing and Safety Elements, infill development and
commercial and residential development,
landfills and waste processing facilities,
pipelines, linear recreational trails, concrete
and asphalt recycling facilities, schools,
low-income housing projects, a new county jail,
and other municipal infrastructure projects
» Directs the work of project team members,
reviews and incorporates technical documents
from outside contractors as well as prepares
key sections of project documents and assists
with all aspects of the CEQA process including
project scoping, notification requirements,
public meetings, and project findings
» BS, Natural Resource Policy and Management,
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
San Carlos Housing and Safety Element Update Project
and Program EIR and Walnut Street Mixed Use In-Fill
Development CE in San Carlos; Marin County Housing
and Safety Element Update Project and Program EIR;
Redwood City Housing and Safety Element Update
Project; Santa Clara Valley Medical Center Child &
Adolescent Psychiatric Facility/Behavioral Health
Services Center IS/MND; 608 Harbor Boulevard
Residential Project General Plan Consistency Analysis
and 601 Harbor Boulevard Life Science Building Initial
Study in Belmont; San Mateo County Government
Center Campus Development Project EIR; Cupertino
Parks and Recreation System Master Plan IS/MND;
Mercy Housing Veterans Village Low-Income Housing
Project EIR/EA in Colma; Palo Alto Parks, Trails, Natural Open Space and Recreation Master Plan IS/MND; Half
Moon Bay Parks and Recreation Master Plan IS/MND
Taylor Peterson
Director of Biological
Analysis
» 40+ years of experience preparing and
overseeing biological assessments, wetland
delineations, Initial Studies, EAs, EIRs/
EISs, mitigation monitoring plans, natural
environment studies, revegetation plans and
applications for USACE, California Fish and
Wildlife, California Coastal Commission and
Regional Water Quality Control Board permits.
» BA, Human Biology, Emphasis in Animal
Behavior, Stanford University
» Wetlands Training Institute, Wetlands
Delineation Certificate
Marin County Housing and Safety Elements Update
EIR Biology Section; San Mateo County Project
Development Unit, Cordilleras Mental Health Center
Redevelopment Biological Technical Studies, Resource
Agency Permits, EIR, and construction monitoring;
Esplanade Infrastructure Preservation Project,
Technical Studies, Resource Agency Permits, EIR, for a
sea wall and Highway 1 Bridge Over San Pedro Creek
Replacement Technical Documents and Permits in
Pacifica; City of Brisbane On-call Biological Services, Technical Reports and Operating Programs for projects
within San Bruno Mountain Habitat Conservation Plan
-443-
Town of Hillsborough | 6th Cycle Housing Element Update & Associated General Plan Elements Environmental Review 4

RESUMES FOR KEY PERSONNEL

STAFF/ROLE CREDENTIALS RELEVANT EXPERIENCE
MIG, Inc.

Chris Dugan
Director of Air Quality,
Greenhouse Gas, and
Noise Services
» 15 years of experience planning, preparing
and managing environmental compliance
documents and air quality, greenhouse gas
and noise impact analyses pursuant to CEQA/
NEPA, the Clean Air Act and the Occupational
Safety and Health Act
» Prepares and oversees emissions estimates
and CEQA impact assessments and plans and
implements ambient and source-oriented noise
measurement and monitoring in support of the
CEQA review process
» BS, Natural Resource Management, Cook
College, Rutgers University, New Jersey
Burlingame General Plan Update EIR and Climate
Action Plan; Marin County Housing and Safety Element
Update Project and Program EIR; Patrick Henry Drive
Specific Plan EIR and Freedom Circle Focus Area Plan
and Greystar Project General Plan Amendment in
Santa Clara; San Pablo Avenue Specific Plan Update
Supplemental EIR in El Cerrito; 405 Industrial Road
Life Science Project IS/MND in San Carlos; 601 Harbor
Boulevard IS/MND Noise Peer Review Services in
Belmont; Half Moon Bay Building and Garden Concrete
Batch Plant Replacement Project EIR; West Bay
Sanitation District Flow Equalization and Resource
Recovery Facility Levee Improvements and Bayfront
Recycled Water Facility Project EIR in Menlo Park
Steve Ridone
Senior Environmental
Planner
» 10+ years of environmental planning
experience preparing environmental
documents (initial studies and EIRs) and master
plans, research for background conditions
reports and constraints analysis, and other
planning and land use analysis tasks
» BA, History, University of California, Davis
» Association of Environmental Professionals
Meadowood Estates Subdivision EIR in Hillsborough;
Marin County Housing and Safety Element Update
Project and Program EIR; Redwood City 2023-2031
Housing Element Update EIR, Downtown Redwood
City Precise Plan EIR On-Call CEQA Services, and 851
Main Street Project SEIR; Patrick Henry Drive Specific
Plan EIR and Freedom Circle Focus Area Plan and
Greystar Project General Plan Amendment in Santa
Clara; Crystal Springs Uplands School EIR in Belmont
Kim Briones
Senior Biologist » 18+ years of experience preparing biological surveys, species-specific habitat assessments,
and mitigation compliance for projects ranging
from public infrastructure to parks and open
space with the purpose of preservation of
sensitive species, habitats, and other important
biological resources
» MS, Biology, University of North Carolina at
Greensboro
» BS, Environmental Studies, San Jose State
University
» CDFW Special Use Permit (S-210530001-
21053-001) Authorized Citizen Scientist to
independently conduct bumble bee sampling
» CA Bumble Bee Atlas Survey Training
Marin County Housing and Safety Element Update
Project and Program EIR; Redwood City Focused
General Plan Update and 2023-2031 Housing Element
Update EIR; Red Morton Community Park Stormwater
Capture Project in Redwood City; Quarry Park Wildfire
Reduction and Visitor Serving Projects in El Granada,
San Mateo County; Lawrence-Mitty Park and Trail
Master Plan Project Biological Constraints Analysis in
Cupertino; 642 Quarry Road Development Project –
Avian Collision Risk Assessment and Road Life Science
Project in San Carlos; 7111 Dry Creek Road Vineyard
Project in Napa County
W-Trans
Mark E. Spencer, PE
Senior Principal » 30+ years of experience managing a wide array of transportation planning studies and
impact analyses for multidisciplinary projects,
from EIRs and Specific Plans to parking studies
and neighborhood traffic management plans
» MS, Civil Engineering, UC Berkeley
» BEng, Civil Engineering, McGill University,
Montreal, Canada
» Registered Traffic Engineer, #1737 CA
» Institute of Transportation Engineers, Fellow
Belmont Housing Element EIR; Milpitas Metro
Specific Plan and SEIR; Dell Avenue Area Plan and
EIR in Campbell; Centennial Village Transit Oriented
Development Transportation Impact Analysis in South
San Francisco Mission Clay Quarry Truck Route Study
in Fremont; Rockway Quarry Reclamation Project
Transportation Impact Analysis in Pacifica; Car Max
Transportation Impact Analysis in Pleasant Hill; Power
Plant Transportation Impact Analysis in Richmond;
Marriott Hotel Traffic & Parking Study in Walnut Creek
Barry D. Bergman, AICP
Senior Transportation
Planner
» 30 years of experience in multimodal
transportation planning background,
specializing in active transportation and
complete streets, and managing regional,
citywide, corridor-level, and project-specific
plans in rural, suburban, and urban contexts
» MRP, Regional Planning, University of
Massachusetts
» BS, Human Development & Family Studies,
Cornell University
» American Institute of Certified Planners
Belmont Housing Element EIR; Milpitas Metro Specific
Plan and SEIR; Isaacsons Affordable Housing Traffic
Study in Arcata; Supplement to EIR for Bella Vista
Housing Project in Mendocino County; Napa Valley
College On-Campus Housing CEQA IS and Conn Creek
Winery Traffic Impact Study in Napa County; Village
at Novato Traffic Impact Study in Novato; Traffic and
Parking Study for Aldersly Senior Living Community in
San Rafael; Downtown Station Development Project,
Ross Street Mixed Use Project, Santa Rosa First
Supportive Housing Project, and Santa Rosa Junior
College On-Campus Housing Project in Santa Rosa
-444-
Town of Hillsborough | 6th Cycle Housing Element Update & Associated General Plan Elements Environmental Review 5

3. Approach Proposal
Approach
MIG will prepare a CEQA document that analyzes the
environmental effects of implementing the Housing
Element Update, related amendments to other General
Plan elements, and updates to implementing tools (i.e., Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance), and new
Objective Design Standards in a programmatic manner.

The scope of the environmental review will cover the
maximum build-out allowed by the Housing Element,
related General Plan amendments, and related ordinances over the course of the 2023-2031 6th Cycle term.

Based on our review of the proposed Housing Element
Update, we have determined that due to potentially
significant biological and VMT impacts, a programmatic
EIR would best provide environmental clearance for
the project. Specific development projects would be
addressed under subsequent CEQA review, tiering off the programmatic EIR.

The Town of Hillsborough Planning Division will be the
Lead Agency for the CEQA process. MIG’s Approach
and Work Program are consistent with the requirements
outlined in the RFP.

LEGALLY DEFENSIBLE CEQA DOCUMENT
MIG prepares solid, defensible environmental documents
in an efficient and cost-effective manner. MIG has
developed a reputation for technical accuracy and
innovative solutions to our client’s needs. Our services are based on a thorough understanding of guiding
regulations, case law, and incorporating analytical
approaches to assessing environmental effects while
ensuring we meet the Town’s environmental review
procedures. MIG’s team of environmental professionals
assists our clients in navigating the sometimes complex and difficult environmental review and permitting
process. The Program EIR will be prepared consistent
with CEQA Guidelines and will clearly articulate key
CEQA components including baseline conditions, project
objectives, Thresholds of Significance, clear impact
statements for each potential environmental impact, and mitigation measures that are implementable and have a
clear ability to minimize or eliminate the identified impact.

The alternatives analysis will be based on identified
project impacts, relevant case law, and the ability to meet the project objectives as listed in the project description.

CEQA TEAM ACCESSIBILITY TO COUNTY STAFF/

TOWN LEGAL COUNSEL
Coordination with the Town’s Housing Element consultant team will ensure the Housing Element and the EIR
mutually inform each other as appropriate to anticipate and planning environmental impacts associated with
implementing the Housing Element update. MIG
welcomes the involvement of Town legal counsel early
and frequently in the EIR process to ensure our team has factored all considerations into the CEQA document. We
propose a CEQA kick-off meeting with the Town and legal counsel to highlight key environmental issues, potential project alternatives, areas of controversy, the system for maintaining the Administrative Record, etc. We will also prepare a CEQA Project Description that will be circulated for review to ensure the Project Description can support the full impact analysis needed for the project (see task descriptions in Scope of Work below).

SCHEDULE EFFICIENCIES
MIG has carefully considered the overall project schedule and the CEQA Scope of Work and has proposed a
process that will enable MIG to implement the Scope of
Work expeditiously and economically, within the Town’s
overall project schedule and contracted budget. We have identified the following considerations for maximizing
efficiency and condensing the CEQA schedule. Primarily, MIG’s CEQA team has several efficiency and schedule
benefits including:

1. Appropriate Staffing. Our project management
strategies, including assigning appropriate staff, careful scoping, engagement of senior project management
throughout the project, and consistent quality control, ensure we fulfill our contract requirements to the best of our ability. Our strategy starts with assigning the right personnel to the project team. MIG has several very
experienced senior CEQA analysts who will be assigned
to this project to ensure a depth of seasoned staff to
work on the CEQA document.

2. Project Management. Our Project Managers place a
high priority on meeting schedules by managing staff
workloads and making themselves available to lead
agencies as often as needed. MIG’s success is largely
due to a management style that emphasizes clear and
frequent communication with clients, seasoned senior
managers who can foresee potential problems and
work with clients and regulatory agencies to design
solutions in early project phases, and a company culture of teamwork and flexibility which optimizes our ability to manage the flow of case work to ensure projects are
adequately staffed and deadlines are met.

3. MIG’s schedule indicates the Notice of Preparation will be circulated for the 30-day public comment period
following the review of the existing documents. This will allow time for Town/MIG outreach to agencies for early
consultation and will inform MIG of issues that should be part of the EIR.
-445-
Town of Hillsborough | 6th Cycle Housing Element Update & Associated General Plan Elements Environmental Review 6

4. MIG’s Scope of Work calls for the submission of the EIR Project Description as a specific deliverable. This will allow the Town and legal counsel to review and approve
the Project Description, which will then be used as the basis for all impact analysis presented in the EIR. This step can avoid costly and time-consuming revisions to
the impact analysis because the project description did not adequately capture all relevant project features.

PROGRAM EIR
Based on our initial project review and consultation, we have determined a program EIR should be prepared for the project. As described in CEQA Guidelines section 15168, program EIRs are appropriate when a project consists
of a series of actions related to the issuance of rules, regulations, and other planning criteria. Program EIRs look broadly at the implications of a wide range of actions. Use of a program EIR can provide certain advantages including:
» Provide an occasion for a more comprehensive
consideration of effects and alternatives than would be practical in an EIR on an individual project,
» Ensure consideration of cumulative impacts that might be slighted in a case-by-case analysis,
» Allow the Lead Agency to consider broad policy
alternatives and program-wide mitigation measures at
an early time when the agency has greater flexibility
to deal with probable future environmental issues and
cumulative impacts, and
» Frame and customize the environmental analysis to
prepare for CEQA streamlining of future, individual
project proposals.

Once a program EIR has been certified, later activities under the program must be examined in light of the
program EIR to determine whether an additional
environmental document must be prepared. A program
EIR will be most helpful in dealing with later activities if it provides a description of planned activities that would implement the program and deals with the effects of the program as specifically and comprehensively as possible.

With a good and detailed project description, and analysis of the program, many later activities could be found to be within the scope of the project described in the program EIR, and no further environmental documents would be
required. (CEQA Guidelines section 15168).

TECHNICAL DOCUMENTATION
MIG is teaming with one subconsultant to provide analysis for the EIR. W-Trans will provide a transportation and traffic analysis and will author the EIR Transportation chapter.

The scope of the Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) is described in detail under Scope of Work, below. MIG’s
in-house technical staff will provide technical expertise for preparation of the biology, cultural/tribal cultural resource, air quality/GHG, energy, and noise chapters of the program EIR. This analysis is detailed in the Scope of Work below.

EIR ASSUMPTIONS

1. Data Availability: MIG assumes that the Town will
provide all information related to implementation of the Town’s adopted plans, ordinances, polices, and routine
practices needed to complete the EIR.

2. Print Copies: MIG has not budgeted for providing any print copies of the EIR but will provide electronic copies.

3. Administrative Drafts: The cost estimate assumes there will be only one round of administrative review before
finalizing the work product. If more administrative drafts are required, the cost of additional consultants’ time and materials will be subject to additional compensation and an amendment to the scope of work. MIG assumes the
Town will consolidate all administrative draft comments into one set of review comments per each round of
document review.

4. Response to Comments on the Draft Program EIR:

MIG has allotted budget to organize, label, and prepare written responses to public comments pertaining to the
EIR. MIG will label all written comments and identify oral comments made at public hearings based on a transcript
of the hearing provided by the Town. Any work required
beyond the budgeted limit to complete the task shall be subject to additional compensation.

5. Meeting/Hearings: Meetings and hearings are included under specific tasks. If additional meetings are required and cannot be accommodated in the budget, MIG will
request additional funds to attend additional meetings.

6. New Work as a Result of Public Comment: Any new
data gathering and new analysis required as a result
of public comment received on the Draft EIR would be
subject to additional compensation.

7. AB 52 Tribal Consultation: MIG’s scope of work
assumes the Town will complete any tribal consultation
requests made under the requirements of AB 52.

8. SB 18 Tribal Consultation: SB 18 requires that prior to the adoption or amendment of a city or county’s
general plan, the city or county conduct consultations
with California Native American tribes that are on the
contact list maintained by the Native American Heritage Commission for the purpose of preserving or mitigating
impacts to places, features, and objects described in
sections 5097.9 and 5097.995 of the Public Resources
Code that are located within the city or county’s
jurisdiction. MIG’s scope of work assumes the Town will undertake this consultation process.

9. Written Transcript of Public Meetings: MIG will
summarize oral comments made at the scoping meeting
based on a written transcript of the meeting provided by the Town.
-446-
Town of Hillsborough | 6th Cycle Housing Element Update & Associated General Plan Elements Environmental Review 7 Scope of Work
MIG crafted this scope of work based upon our extensive experience and knowledge gained while preparing
numerous General Plan CEQA documents, and specifically
EIRs for several recent 6th cycle Housing and Safety
Element updates and the associated Zoning Code update
projects. This scope of work reflects the direction provided in the Request for Proposal (RFP), several conversations with Town staff, and our understanding of Hillsborough’s Draft Housing Element update.

TASK 1: PROJECT INITIATION

1.1 Kick-Off Meeting and Scope Refinement
MIG will conduct a virtual kick-off meeting with Town staff to refine the work scope, identify key project team roles, establish communication channels and procedures, and
establish product review procedures. The project scope
and schedule (see Section 3.2) will be refined based on our discussions and critical project milestones.

1.2 Data Collection/Material Review
MIG’s EIR team will gather and review existing documents and materials needed for the EIR analysis and begin to
develop a bibliography organized by subject. We will
provide the Town with a data request for information
needed for the EIR.

MIG will also conduct a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search
through the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC)
and conduct outreach efforts to Native American Tribes
and Individuals identified by the NAHC as having affiliation with the project vicinity, as recommended by the NAHC.

Follow-up outreach and scoping will be via email that will indicate the project area, briefly describe the nature of the proposed project, and request information recipients may have regarding additional Native American Tribal Cultural Resources, properties, and/or archaeological sites that may be impacted by the proposed project.

Task 1 Deliverables:
» Project kick-off meeting, agenda, and meeting minutes » Data Request
» NAHC Search / Tribal Letters
TASK 2: NOTICE OF PREPARATION

2.1 Notice of Preparation and Scoping Meeting
Once the key components of the project have been clearly articulated and project objectives identified, a Notice of Preparation (NOP) will be prepared according to CEQA
Guidelines section 15082. The intent of the NOP is to invite the public and agencies to provide input on the content (e.g., resource areas of interest, issues, alternatives, mitigation measures) that should be explored in an EIR.

The NOP process is intended to identify potential public concerns that may otherwise arise later in the review
and eliminate from detailed study issues found not be
important.

MIG will provide a draft and final NOP containing project information as specified in CEQA Guidelines section 15082.

The Town will send the NOP to the State Clearinghouse,
which will distribute the NOP to CEQA Responsible and
Trustee agencies. The Town will send the NOP to other
interested public agencies and other interested entities for the CEQA-required 30-day review period. The Town should also post the NOP with the San Mateo County Clerk. There is a 30-day public comment period for the public to respond to the NOP with written comments to the Town. MIG can
assist with this noticing per discussion in Task 1.1.

2.2 Public Hearing
During the 30-day public comment period, the Town will
hold one virtual public hearing in which to receive oral comments from the public. MIG has budgeted four hours
each for the Director and Senior Project Manager to
prepare for, attend the public hearing virtually, and lead the presentation.

2.3 Assemble Public Comments
Comments on the scope of the EIR will be organized,
referenced, and considered in the Draft EIR. MIG will refine the scope of the environmental analysis, if warranted, in response to the public scoping process. In addition, MIG will, if necessary, coordinate with Town staff with respect to follow up consultation with interested and/or Responsible public agencies.

Town staff is responsible for compiling the NOP mailing list, including interested individuals and non-governmental entities, distributing the NOP, securing the scoping meeting location, and notifying interested parties that do not directly receive the NOP.

Task 2 Deliverables:
» Draft and Final NOP
» Power Point Presentation
» Virtual hearing Attendance.

TASK 3: ADMINISTRATIVE DRAFT EIR
MIG will prepare a Program EIR consistent with CEQA
Statutes and Guidelines and recent court cases to address the Housing Element Update and associated General Plan
Element and Town Code updates that are required for
internal consistency and for implementation of new Housing Element policies (collectively called the proposed Project).

The Program EIR will address direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts associated with the proposed Project.

The project described in the EIR will focus on the following project components as described in the RFP. Each
component will be described and analyzed, and mitigation measures identified as needed:
» General Plan Elements
o Housing
o Land Use (including Land Use Map)
o Public Safety
-447-
Town of Hillsborough | 6th Cycle Housing Element Update & Associated General Plan Elements Environmental Review 8 » Related Implementing Tools
o Zoning Ordinance (including Zoning Map)
o Subdivision Ordinance
o Residential Design Guidelines
MIG’s Scope of Work assumes that the Town will provide
all the information related to each component of the
project that needs to be described and analyzed in the
EIR, including: 1) General Plan element text edits (needed text edits for each element that requires updating), 2) draft or summary text of the required Zoning Ordinance
amendments, 3) an updated Zoning Map, and 4) the
proposed Residential Design Guidelines.

The Program EIR will also be structured to minimize the environmental review needed for future development
proposals and other projects by describing anticipated
impacts of housing development on the sites identified in the Housing Element within the 8-year planning period of the Housing Element and presenting programmatic level
mitigation measures to avoid or reduce the anticipated
impacts. This includes the Town Hall and Tobin Clark sites.

Several available methods under CEQA can be used to
eliminate often redundant project-level analysis.
» Use of Categorical Exemptions and a variety of other
CEQA exemptions, including those designed for infill,
Transit Priority Areas, and housing incentives.
» Determining later projects consistent with the Program EIR.
» Addendums to the Program EIR in those cases where
characteristics of later projects are different than
originally envisioned in the General Plan, but potential environmental impacts are similar to or less than those analyzed in the Program EIR.

We are very familiar with using Program EIRs in this
manner. MIG has completed several Program EIRs
that jurisdictions have used for tiering subsequent
environmental review of proposed development projects.

The following subtasks are included in the Administrative Draft EIR task.

3.1 Project Description
MIG will prepare a Project Description that will be
submitted as a separate deliverable. The environmental
analysis shall not proceed until the Town and MIG have
confirmed the completeness and accuracy of the project
description.

The Project Description will be consistent with CEQA
Guidelines section 15124, including a description of the project location and boundaries, a statement of the
objectives sought by the proposed project, a description of the new Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA)
assignment for the 2023-2031 housing cycle, the new sites identified as potential housing locations, potential housing densities at each identified site, and new housing goals, policies, and programs. The Project Description will also present proposed Housing Element policies and programs
with the potential to cause environmental impacts, a
summary discussion of changes needed to other General
Plan elements, the Municipal Code, and other town
policies for internal consistency and to implement new
Housing Element policies. The EIR will include a statement briefly describing the intended uses of the EIR, a list of agencies that are expected to use the EIR in their decision making, and a list of permits and other approvals required to implement the project. The project description will be supported by tables, figures, maps, and photographs, as necessary.

Our Scope of Work assumes that the Project Description
will not change or need to be edited once the Town
approves the final draft. Should changes or edits need
to be made to the Project Description after the Town’s
approval, additional services may be needed to make the necessary edits and to carry the edits through to the EIR impact analysis.

Deliverables:
» Draft and Final Project Description

3.2 Administrative Draft Program Environmental Impact
Report (EIR)
MIG will develop a program-level Administrative Draft EIR that considers all aspects of General Plan implementation.

Environmental topic areas and potential CEQA-defined
impacts will be aligned with potential policies,
implementation programs, and other components of the
General Plan where applicable. The EIR will include all CEQA-required components, including baseline/existing
conditions, project description, cumulative impacts,
growth inducing impacts, and project alternatives. The
CEQA-required executive summary will also be included,
along with a summary table of impacts and mitigation
measures. Where necessary to address potentially
significant impacts, practical, implementable, and
enforceable mitigation measures will be developed. This scope of work assumes that the Housing Element update
and related General Plan and Town Code amendments will
not create significant land use or public safety impacts.

The technical reports necessary to support the Draft EIR will also be prepared under this task.

The Program EIR will focus on providing detailed analysis on the following CEQA subject areas; potential impacts
of the other CEQA subject areas that are found to be less than significant will be summarized in a separate section of the EIR.

Air Quality Analysis. MIG will evaluate the proposed
Housing Element’s potential individual and cumulative
air quality impacts in accordance with Appendix G of
the CEQA Guidelines and recommended guidance
from the Bay Area Air Quality Management District
(BAAQMD), which recommends that plan-level CEQA
analyses compare potential population growth to potential VMT growth and evaluate the plan’s consistency with
-448-
Town of Hillsborough | 6th Cycle Housing Element Update & Associated General Plan Elements Environmental Review 9 the 2017 Clean Air Plan to determine if a potentially
significant air quality impact could occur. MIG will rely upon population and VMT growth estimates from the
Town’s Housing Element and the transportation analyses
prepared by W-Trans for the Housing Element to prepare
the air quality report. If necessary, MIG will identify best management practices or mitigation measures to reduce
construction and operational emissions generated by
the proposed Housing Element. MIG anticipates VMT
reduction measures will be necessary to reduce potentially significant impacts associated with the Housing Element.

To complete this task, MIG has assumed the Town of
Hillsborough will provide land use change data and
population growth estimates associated with the Housing Element update for use in the transportation and air quality analyses. Deliverables will include a technical data request and a Draft and Final Air Quality study.

Biological Resources. The biological resources chapter
of the EIR will identify areas within the Housing Element area that have the potential to support sensitive biological resources, including special-status fish and wildlife
species, sensitive communities, wetlands, and wildlife
movement corridors. The analysis will focus on potential impacts of Housing Element implementation on protected
biological resources, and programmatic mitigation
measures will be recommended. The primary subtasks
associated with preparing the Biological Resources
chapter of the EIR are described in more detail below.
» Background Review. Prior to conducting the analysis,
MIG biologists will review all project materials and
relevant background information concerning biological
resources found within the Town’s planning area,
including (1) existing biological reports prepared for
the Housing Element and other relevant projects; (2)
occurrence records for special-status species and
sensitive natural communities maintained by California
Department of Fish & Wildlife (CDFW) California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS), the California Native Plant Society
(CNPS), and any other data resources for the region; (3) any information on special-status species maintained by the Town; (4) the USFWS National Wetlands Inventory;
(5) the San Mateo County Soil Survey; and (6) any
available environmental documentation for other
projects in the Housing Element area.
» Site Visit. Following the background review, MIG will assess the habitat values on each parcel identified in
the Housing Element by reviewing aerial photography
and making site visits when necessary. For the sake
of budgeting this effort, we have assumed that up
to 32 person hours would be needed to perform
reconnaissance-level site visits of a subset of the
Housing Element parcels where aerial imagery does not
provide sufficient detail for the analysis. No focused site surveys or species-specific surveys are proposed for this effort.
» Preparation of Biological Resources Section of
the EIR. A MIG biologist will prepare the Biological
Resources chapter of the EIR. This chapter will include:
(1) a Regulatory Setting section that includes state and federal laws and regulations that protect sensitive
biological resources, and other existing Town and other local policies that provide protections for sensitive
biological resources; (2) an Environmental Setting
section that describes the existing natural communities and vegetation alliances, jurisdictional features,
potential for occurrence of special-status plant and
wildlife species, and presence of any other features
noted within the Housing Element planning area and
designated housing sites that would be regulated under
CEQA guidelines; (3) an analysis of the potential adverse impacts from implementing the Housing Element on
biological resources, and (4) programmatic mitigation
measures to mitigate potentially significant impacts on sensitive biological resources to less-than-significant.

The biological resources section will include maps
depicting biological resources including sensitive and
jurisdictional habitats in the Housing Element area.

Cultural/Tribal Cultural Resources. Because this is a
program EIR, MIG is not proposing to conduct a planning area-wide search of known cultural resources through
the Northwest Information Center, nor will MIG conduct
a Paleontological Resources Search. MIG will however,
conduct a Sacred Lands File search through the Native
American Heritage Commission as described in Task

1.2. The EIR chapter will identify known historic and
archaeological resources and provide a regulatory
context. Thresholds of Significance will be presented, and the environmental impact assessment will analyze the
potential impacts to historic and archaeological resources from the implementation of the new Housing Element
goals, policies, implementation programs, and identified housing sites. Mitigation measures in the form of new or revised Town policies will be recommended, as necessary.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions/Energy Demand Analysis.

MIG will prepare a clear and concise technical study
that fully evaluates the proposed Housing Element’s
GHG and Energy impacts in accordance with Appendix
G of the CEQA Guidelines. MIG will use the California
Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod, Version 2022.1.0)
to estimate the project’s potential construction and
operational emissions. The emission estimates will be
based on project-specific data (e.g., construction schedule, land use and trip/mobility data) and compared to CEQA
significance thresholds maintained by the BAAQMD. MIG
notes the BAAQMD’s most recent CEQA guidance for
GHG emissions includes a prohibition on all natural gas use in new development projects. The analysis will also consider the project’s consistency with applicable GHG
reduction plans, including CARB’s 2022 Scoping Plan.

Regarding energy resources, the memorandum will include brief setting information that places energy resources in the appropriate context, quantify the project’s potential -449-
Town of Hillsborough | 6th Cycle Housing Element Update & Associated General Plan Elements Environmental Review 10 energy consumption levels (where possible, for example, using information from the project’s CalEEMod output file), and evaluate whether the project will result in the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy
resources.

To complete this task, we have assumed the following:
» The Town will assist MIG with identification of the any Town-required green or sustainable building systems
that support consistency with state and local GHG
reduction and energy efficiency goals.
» MIG’s scope of work includes up to two (2) CalEEMod
runs (unmitigated and mitigated conditions).
» MIG will prepare up to two (2) energy consumption
spreadsheets for the project detailing electricity, natural gas, and vehicle fuel consumption estimates.

Noise Analysis. MIG will prepare a clear and concise
technical study that fully evaluates the proposed Project’s individual and cumulative noise and vibration impacts in accordance with Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines and
Town requirements. The technical study will:
» Describe the existing noise and vibration environment in the project vicinity and applicable Town regulations related to noise, including the Town’s General Plan
Noise Element and the Town’s Municipal Code (e.g.,
Chapter 8.32, Noise).
» Evaluate potential construction noise and vibration
levels associated with the Housing Element Update,
including construction noise and operational noise
sources such as heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) equipment, as well as off-site project-related
increases in vehicular traffic along major Town arterials. » Evaluate whether the project would expose people
living in the area to excessive noise associated with
operations at San Francisco International Airport.

As part of the project, MIG will conduct long-term (up to 24 hours) and short-term noise monitoring at up to eight (8) locations to adequately describe the existing noise environment at and near Housing Element sites. MIG will use the Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) Traffic Noise Model (TNM, Version 3.0) to estimate potential
traffic noise level changes associated with the Housing Element update.

To complete this task within the schedule identified in Section 3.3 below and budget provided in Section 4, we
have assumed that MIG’s analysis includes an evaluation of standard construction noise, on-site operational noise, and off-site traffic noise sources using standard noise propagation and attenuation equations. Deliverables will include a Draft and Final Noise and Vibration Study and all noise monitoring and modeling files.

Transportation Impact Analysis. The Transportation
chapter of the EIR will be based on a Transportation
Impact Analysis prepared for the Housing Element
update by W-Trans. It will include a description of the transportation network in Hillsborough, including the
roadway network, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and transit service. The description of the regulatory setting will include applicable plans and policies from the Town of Hillsborough General Plan, City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County (C/CAG), and Caltrans.

W-Trans will estimate the number of net new trips added to the study area based on the number and type of housing
units proposed, and will work with Kittelson & Associates (KAI) to conduct travel demand forecasting services for the project. KAI will extract project VMT for residential per capita and employment per service population. The
VMT per capita will be compared to the existing VMT and the 2040 no-project VMT. KAI will work with VTA and the Town of Hillsborough staff to determine appropriate VMT thresholds for a CEQA impact finding. This could follow OPR’s guidelines which require VMT to be 15% below
the existing average, or other threshold developed in
coordination with Town staff.

Kittelson will use the Travel Demand Model to assess the following VMT metrics for the baseline (2015 interpolated up to 2023) and cumulative scenarios (2040), both without the Housing Element Update (i.e., uses under the existing General Plan and Zoning) and with the Housing Element
Update (i.e., with the proposed Housing Element uses).
» Townwide – All VMT
» Townwide – Home based VMT
» Housing Element sites as a group (excluding sites which are screened out) – Home-based VMT
» Housing Element sites as a group, including sites
screened out from transportation VMT impacts – All
VMT (for use in the air quality and greenhouse gas
analysis)
If the VMT for the project remains impacted, then W-Trans will recommend appropriate TDM measures as required to
provide maximum feasible mitigations
W-Trans has budgeted for project administration as well as project related meetings, including conference calls, project team meetings, and public meetings.

Traffic Level of Service (LOS) for Town policy consistency, and CMP conformance analysis will not be included in this scope of work. Travel forecast model results will not be required for segment or intersection LOS, therefore those outputs will not be extracted under this scope.

Wildfire. Hillsborough contains areas within the Very
High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) as identified
by Cal Fire and an extensive Wildland Urban Interface
where structures are at increased risk from wildfires.
-450-
Town of Hillsborough | 6th Cycle Housing Element Update & Associated General Plan Elements Environmental Review 11 The EIR Wildfire chapter will describe Hillsborough’s fire conditions, regulatory requirements for building within the high fire hazard areas, requirements for vegetation management, and emergency response infrastructure
requirements. MIG will identify the Wildfire Thresholds of Significance by which potential impacts of Housing
Element implementation will be measured and present
programmatic mitigation measures as appropriate.

3.3 Other CEQA-Mandated EIR Sections
The EIR will include other CEQA-mandated sections, as
described below.

Cumulative Impacts. An EIR shall discuss cumulative
impacts of a project when the project’s incremental
effect is cumulatively considerable, as defined in CEQA Guidelines section 15130. Where a lead agency is
examining a project with an incremental effect that is
not “cumulatively considerable,” a lead agency need
not consider that effect significant but shall briefly
describe its basis for concluding that the incremental
effect is not cumulatively considerable. The cumulative impact discussion presented in the EIR will be
consistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15130. It will
address cumulative impacts of the goals, policies, and
implementation programs of the Housing Element and
related General Plan and Town Code amendments, and
development of housing on the sites identified in the
Housing Element. A summary of projections contained in
adopted, local, regional, and statewide plans or related planning documents, including general plans, regional
transportation plans, climate action plans, and local coastal plans, will be used to define cumulative development
scenarios.

The cumulative impact discussions for each environmental topic area may be presented within each individual chapter or in a separate cumulative impact chapter in the EIR.

Alternatives. The EIR will identify a range of reasonable alternatives that would reduce or avoid the project’s
significant impacts while obtaining most of the project’s objectives. The range of reasonable alternatives will be developed according to the CEQA Guidelines, relevant
court rulings, and consultation with the Town. The
feasibility of an alternative may be determined based
on a variety of factors including, but not limited to, site suitability, economic viability, availability of infrastructure, general plan consistency, other plans or regulatory
limitations, jurisdictional boundaries, and site accessibility and control (CEQA Guidelines section 15126(d)(5)(A)). This chapter will also identify the environmentally superior alternative. As required by CEQA, if the environmentally superior alternative is the No Project / No Action
Alternative, the EIR will identify an environmentally
superior alternative among the other alternatives (CEQA Guidelines section 15126.6(e)(2)).

For MIG’s base fee, MIG will analyze the No Project
Alternative and two other alternatives selected in
consultation with the Town.

W-Trans will prepare a qualitative transportation analysis of up to two project alternatives. This will include a trip generation comparison of each alternative to the proposed project, and a qualitative assessment of whether the
alternative would result in additional impacts compared to the proposed project. Because VMT is evaluated on a per capita basis to determine transportation impacts, it is not anticipated that travel model runs to evaluate alternatives would be necessary. However, if a more detailed
quantitative analysis is requested (i.e., VMT model runs of an alternative), then W-Trans will prepare a separate scope and fee estimate at that time.

Other CEQA Considerations. The EIR will address other
CEQA-required considerations per the CEQA Guidelines
(CEQA Guidelines section 15126.2 (b-d)). These include
impacts determined to be significant and unavoidable,
irreversible changes in the environment, and the potential for the project to be growth inducing. Additionally, CEQA Guidelines section 15128 requires an EIR to contain a
statement briefly indicating the reasons that various
possible significant effects of the project were determined not to be significant and were therefore not discussed in detail in the EIR. Impacts found to be less than significant will be summarized in this section.

3.4 Screen Check Draft EIR
MIG will revise the Administrative Draft EIR based on
comments received from Town staff and provide a
redline “screen check” draft to the Town to ensure that all comments and revisions have been addressed. Following
Town sign off, the Draft EIR will be ready for public
circulation. MIG will prepare a Notice of Completion (NOC) and related and required forms for submittal to the State Clearinghouse and a Notice of Availability (NOA) to be
transmitted with the Draft EIR to other public agencies, special interest groups, and interested persons. Circulation of the Draft EIR will initiate a CEQA-required 45-day
public review period. MIG can assist with this noticing per discussion in Task 1.1. The Town would be responsible for posting notices in the local newspaper.

The Town will hold a public hearing during the 45-day
comment period to provide an opportunity for the Town’s deciding body to receive oral comments from the public.

MIG has allocated four hours for the Director and Senior Project Manager to attend the hearing virtually. The budget for this task is presented in Task 5, below. As an Optional Task MIG could prepare a Power Point presentation for the hearing. The budget for this optional task is presented in Task 7.

MIG will request a typed transcript of the oral comments made at the hearing so they may be accurately
characterized in the Final EIR.
-451-
Town of Hillsborough | 6th Cycle Housing Element Update & Associated General Plan Elements Environmental Review 12

3.5 Response to Comments/FEIR and MMRP
Following the close of the 45-day review period on the
Draft EIR, MIG will prepare a Response to Comments/
Final EIR (RTC/FEIR) that includes responses to public and agency comments received. This scoped work and budget
assumes that the response to comments can be organized
so a set of master responses can be used to respond to
many similar comments. Comments will be addressed with
a reasoned analysis supported by substantial evidence
related to the issues raised. Some responses may result in revisions to the text or exhibits contained in the Draft EIR, and such changes would be documented in the RTC/
FEIR. This task will also include a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP). We have allocated a total of 110 hours for the annotation of comment letters and
drafting responses to the letters. W-Trans has budgeted for a limited number of traffic-related comments on the DEIR. Should the volume of comments exceed the amount
we have anticipated in the budget or should one or more comments require significant new analysis, MIG will
request additional services to complete the work.

MIG will provide responses to state agency comments
to the commenting agency 10 days before the Final EIR
certification hearing.

Task 3 Deliverables:
» Draft and Final Project Description
» Air Quality and Noise Technical Reports
» Administrative Draft EIR
» Screen Check EIR
» Public Draft EIR and CEQA Notices
» Administrative Draft Response to Comments/Final EIR
(RTC/FEIR) Document,
» Final Response to Comments / Final EIR Document
» Responses to comments made by state agencies
provided 10 days before certification hearing
» Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP)
TASK 4: PUBLIC HEARINGS
We have budgeted for virtual attendance at the Draft EIR public hearing, and two public hearings for adoption of the Final EIR with the Town Council, for a total of three hearings. Town staff will be responsible for preparing
public notices, presentation materials, and staff reports. A MIG staff member will attend each hearing, and will assist Town staff in responding to any public or Town Council
questions or comments.

Task 4 Deliverables:
» Virtual Attendance at three public hearings
TASK 5: NOTICE OF DETERMINATION (NOD)
MIG will provide the Town with a Notice of Determination for the Town to file with the County Clerk’s office and the State Clearinghouse within five working days of EIR certification. The NOD filed with the County Clerk’s office must be accompanied with a payment for the required
CEQA fees.

Task 5 Deliverables:
» NOD
TASK 6: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
This task comprises MIG’s internal management and
regular coordination and communication with the Town of Hillsborough and project team members to ensure MIG
completes work tasks on time and within budget.

6.1 Monthly Conference Calls with Town and CEQA Team
MIG will participate in monthly conference calls with
the Town and will also attend conference calls with the Town and the planning team as needed. These regular
conference calls will facilitate team discussion and ensure information sharing among the project team and the Town.

Call frequency and duration will be adjusted as needed
during the course of the project, but the work scope and budget assume an average of two calls per month for a
total of 12 conference calls. MIG will prepare a call agenda and meeting minutes after the call.

6.2 Administrative Record
MIG has allocated budget to manage and maintain the
project’s administrative record concurrent with EIR
preparation.

6.3 Project Management
This task allows MIG to manage staff and subconsultants and includes implementation of MIG’s quality control
procedures (e.g., senior level review) of all deliverables.

6.4 Contract Management
This task allocates time for MIG’s CEQA Senior Project
manager to manage the contract, schedule, budget, and
approve invoices.

Task 6 Deliverables:
» Meeting action items and call summaries
» Administrative record (as needed)
» Monthly invoices
TASK 7: OPTIONAL TASKS

1. PowerPoint Presentations: MIG’s scope of work
does not include the development of a Power Point
presentation for the three required public hearings (one on the Draft EIR and two for certification of the Final EIR). Should the Town request assistance in preparing
the PowerPoint presentation, MIG could prepare the
presentation. The presentations could be prepared in 8
hours for each presentation (draft and final).
-452-
Town of Hillsborough | 6th Cycle Housing Element Update & Associated General Plan Elements Environmental Review 13

2. Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding
Considerations: CEQA requires specific findings regarding the significance of environmental impacts in an EIR and the feasibility of mitigation and project changes. MIG will coordinate with Town Staff and Town Attorney to prepare this document; we will submit a draft for one round of review/ revisions. MIG will also prepare a Statement of Overriding Considerations (SOC) for any unavoidable significant and adverse impacts.

Schedule
The Administrative Draft EIR will be submitted to City staff in approximately 10 weeks from the notice to proceed, with the estimated completion of the EIR process at approximately 30 weeks. This timeline assumes that the Project
Description will not change or need to be edited once the Town approves the final draft. The conceptual schedule
below can be adjusted once the project is underway.

CONCEPTUAL SCHEDULE

PRODUCT/MILESTONE COPIES TO CITY SCHEDULE

1. Project Coordination -- Week 1

2. Town response to MIG
data request -- Weeks 2-3

3. Project Description &
Notice of Preparation
1 PDF and 1 MS
Word file Week 4

4. Administrative Draft EIR 1 PDF and 1 MS
Word file Week 10

5. Town staff comments on
Admin. Draft EIR received -- Week 12

6. Screen Check Draft EIR 1 PDF and 1 MS
Word file Week 13

7. Town staff comments
on/approval of Screen
Check Draft EIR received
-- Week 14

8. Published Draft EIR &
public review (45 days) 1 PDF Weeks 15-22

9. Administrative Final EIR 1 PDF and 1 MS
Word file Week 24

10. Town staff comments
on Admin. Final EIR
received
-- Week 26

11. Published Final EIR 1 PDF Week 29

12. Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting
Program & Notice of
Determination
1 MS Word file Week 30

4. Cost Proposal
The estimated cost to complete the project is presented on the following page. Factors that would trigger an Increase in cost are listed below.

1. Meetings and Hearings. The number of proposed meetings and hearings are identified in the Scope of Work. Attendance at additional meetings or hearings would be additional
services. The budget does not include public meeting
attendance by Basin Research Associates.

2. Expense Estimates. MIG’s expense estimates are based on estimated mileage, records searches, equipment use fees, and mailing costs. All MIG work products will be provided in electronic format. The Town shall be responsible for printing hard copies. Should the Town request printed copies of
documents, this would be an added expense and subject to reimbursement.

3. Administrative Drafts. The cost estimate also assumes there will be only one round of administrative review of each of the work products prior to finalization of the documentation. If more administrative drafts are required, the cost of additional consultants’ time and materials will be subject to additional compensation and an amendment to the scope of work.

4. Project Information or Changes in Project. The scope does not cover new or revised analysis needed to address changes to the project made by the Town or the Applicant after start of work. Any changes to the project that requires redo completed work would be subject to additional compensation and an amendment to the scope of work.

5. Site Access. This scope of work assumes that the Town will ensure reasonable access to individual project sites. This will include informing MIG of any persons that we will need to contact in advance of or while visiting the site, and that site conditions are safe and secure.

6. Permit Applications. This scope does not include assistance with permit applications or specific analyses, which may be required by permitting agencies, such as endangered species authorizations, streambed alteration agreements, Clean Water Act permits, or encroachment permits.

7. Tribal Resources. Our budget does not include time
for participating in extended consultations with tribes resulting from the SLF tribal outreach letters. Participating in consultations with tribes who submit responses would be additional services.

8. Response to Comments. MIG has estimated a specific level of effort in responding to public comment as described in our scope of work. Should the volume of public comments exceed the anticipated volume, or the comments raise new technical issues that need addressing, MIG would notify the Town of the need for additional budget to complete the response to comments document.

9. Public Notices and Filing. The scope of work assumes that MIG will provide drafts of all CEQA notices and the Town will finalize the notices and post the required CEQA notifications, mail out documents for the public review, and file the Notice of Completion with the State Clearinghouse and the County Clerk’s Office. Town staff will be responsible for preparation of staff reports and project findings that may be required under the CEQA Guidelines.

10.Contract Duration / Project Management. This scope
assumes that the project will be completed in approximately 6 months. Additional budget will be requested for Project Management if the schedule slips more than 3 months
beyond that term. If the project work schedule experiences start and stops, long delays, or MIG is required to spend unanticipated project management time to manage the
CEQA effort, MIG will request extra services to cove the unanticipated investment of labor into project management. -453-
Town of Hillsborough | 6th Cycle Housing Element Update & Associated General Plan Elements Environmental Review 14 Subconsultant
Hrs@ $230 Hrs@ $195 Hrs@ $230 Hrs@ $165 Hrs@ $175 Hrs@ $160 Hrs $120 Hrs@ $115 Hrs@ $105 1 Project Coordination

1.1 Kickoff and Scope Refinement 4 $920 4 $780 0 $0 $0 0 $0 4 $640 $0 0 $0 0 $0 12 $2,340 $0 $0 $2,340

1.2 Data Collection / Material Review 0 $0 8 $1,560 1 $230 8 $1,320 0 $0 8 $1,280 16 $1,920 0 $0 0 $0 41 $6,310 $0 $0 $6,310 Subtotal 4 $920 12 $2,340 1 $230 8 $1,320 0 $0 12 $1,920 16 $1,920 0 $0 0 $0 53 $8,650 $0 $0 $8,650 2 Notice of Preparation

2.1 Draft and Final NOP 0 $0 8 $1,560 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 8 $1,280 0 $0 6 $690 0 $0 22 $3,530 $0 $0 $3,530

2.2 Public Hearing 4 $920 4 $780 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 8 $1,700 $0 $0 $1,700

2.3 Assemble Public Comments 0 $0 2 $390 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 4 $480 0 $0 0 $0 6 $870 $0 $0 $870 Subtotal 4 $920 14 $2,730 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 8 $1,280 4 $480 6 $690 0 $0 36 $6,100 $0 $0 $6,100 3 Administrative Draft EIR

3.1 Project Description 2 $460 10 $1,950 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 30 $4,800 10 $1,200 0 $0 0 $0 52 $8,410 $0 $0 $8,410

3.2 Admin Draft Program EIR 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Summary/Introduction 0 $0 2 $390 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 10 $1,600 6 $720 0 $0 0 $0 18 $2,710 $0 $0 $2,710 Aesthetics 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 14 $1,680 4 $460 0 $0 18 $2,140 $0 $0 $2,140 Air Quality 0 $0 0 $0 2 $460 0 $0 24 $4,200 0 $0 0 $0 40 $4,600 0 $0 66 $9,260 $0 $0 $9,260 Biological Resources 0 $0 0 $0 4 $920 66 $10,890 0 $0 0 $0 16 $1,920 0 $0 0 $0 86 $13,730 $0 $90 $13,820 Cultural Resources 0 $0 1 $195 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 2 $320 8 $960 0 $0 0 $0 11 $1,475 $0 $0 $1,475 Energy 0 $0 0 $0 1 $230 0 $0 14 $2,450 0 $0 0 $0 24 $2,760 0 $0 39 $5,440 $0 $0 $5,440 Geology and Soils 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 2 $320 8 $960 2 $230 0 $0 12 $1,510 $0 $0 $1,510 Greenhouse Gas 0 $0 0 $0 1 $230 0 $0 14 $2,450 0 $0 0 $0 24 $2,760 0 $0 39 $5,440 $0 $0 $5,440 Hazardous materials 0 $0 2 $390 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 6 $960 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 8 $1,350 $0 $0 $1,350 Hydrology and Water Quality 2 $460 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 16 $1,920 0 $0 0 $0 18 $2,380 $0 $0 $2,380 Land Use 0 $0 2 $390 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 16 $2,560 8 $960 0 $0 0 $0 26 $3,910 $0 $0 $3,910 Noise 0 $0 0 $0 16 $3,680 0 $0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 78 $8,970 0 $0 94 $12,650 $0 $90 $12,740 Traffic and Circulation 0 $0 4 $780 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 10 $1,600 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 14 $2,380 $61,282 $0 $63,662 Utilities and Public Services 0 $0 4 $780 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 18 $2,880 20 $2,400 0 $0 0 $0 42 $6,060 $0 $0 $6,060 Other CEQA Requirements 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 16 $2,560 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 16 $2,560 $0 $0 $2,560 Alternatives 4 $920 6 $1,170 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 20 $3,200 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 30 $5,290 $0 $0 $5,290 Production/QC 14 $3,220 24 $4,680 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 16 $1,920 0 $0 10 $1,050 64 $10,870 $0 $0 $10,870

3.3 Screen Check Draft EIR 2 $460 6 $1,170 2 $460 6 $990 4 $700 8 $1,280 10 $1,200 0 $0 0 $0 38 $6,260 $0 $0 $6,260

3.4 Response to Comments / FEIR / MMRP 2 $460 18 $3,510 4 $920 16 $2,640 4 $700 34 $5,440 32 $3,840 0 $0 0 $0 110 $17,510 $0 $0 $17,510 Subtotal 26 $5,980 79 $15,405 30 $6,900 88 $14,520 60 $10,500 172 $27,520 164 $19,680 172 $19,780 10 $1,050 801 $121,335 $61,282 $180 $182,797 4 Public Hearings

4.1 DEIR and FEIR Virtual Attendance (3 hearings) 12 $2,760 12 $2,340 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 24 $5,100 $0 $0 $5,100 Subtotal 12 $2,760 12 $2,340 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 24 $5,100 $0 $0 $5,100 5 Notice of Determination

5.1 Draft and File NOD 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 4 $480 0 $0 0 $0 4 $480 $0 $0 $480 Subtotal 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 4 $480 0 $0 0 $0 4 $480 $0 $0 $480 6 Project Management

6.1 Monthly Conference Calls 12 $2,760 12 $2,340 4 $920 2 $330 0 $0 4 $640 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 34 $6,990 $0 $0 $6,990

6.2 Administrative Record 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 6 $720 0 $0 0 $0 6 $720 $0 $0 $720

6.3 Project Management 8 $1,840 16 $3,120 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 24 $4,960 $0 $0 $4,960

6.4 Contract Management 0 $0 8 $1,560 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 16 $1,680 24 $3,240 $0 $0 $3,240 Subtotal 20 $4,600 36 $7,020 4 $920 2 $330 0 $0 4 $640 6 $720 0 $0 16 $1,680 88 $15,910 $0 $0 $15,910 Base Scope Labor + Cost Total 66 $15,180 153 $29,835 35 $8,050 98 $16,170 60 $10,500 196 $31,360 194 $23,280 178 $20,470 26 $2,730 1006 $157,575 $61,282 $180 $219,037 7 Optional Tasks

7.1 Powerpoint Presentations for Hearings 0 $0 4 $780 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 12 $1,440 0 $0 0 $0 16 $2,220 $0 $0 $2,220

7.2 Findings / Overriding Considerations 4 $920 1 $195 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 16 $2,560 10 $1,200 0 $0 0 $0 31 $4,875 $0 $0 $4,875 Subtotal 4 $920 5 $975 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 16 $2,560 22 $2,640 0 $0 0 $0 47 $7,095 $0 $0 $7,095 Professional Time & Costs Subtotal 70 $16,100 158 $30,810 35 $8,050 98 $16,170 60 $10,500 212 $33,920 216 $25,920 178 $20,470 26 $2,730 1053 $164,670 $61,282 $180 $226,132 $22,613
70 $16,100 158 $30,810 35 $8,050 98 $16,170 60 $10,500 212 $33,920 216 $25,920 178 $20,470 26 $2,730 1053 $164,670 $61,282 $180 $248,745 Professional Fees
Totals
Direct
Costs
MIG Staff W-Trans (w/ 2%
Markup) Support MIG Totals

FINAL TOTAL
Director Senior Project
Manager Senior Biologist
10% Contingency
AQ & Noise & Biology
MIG, Inc.

Director Senior Analyst Senior Planner Planner/Biologist II Analyst & Graphics

Page 1 ends

Hillsborough City CouncilApril 10, 2023

Hillsborough City Council
April 10, 2023