Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - CC - 2017.02.06 Burlingame City Council February 6, 2017 Approved Minutes 1 BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL Approved Minutes Regular Meeting on February 6, 2017 1. CALL TO ORDER A duly noticed regular meeting of the Burlingame City Council was held on the above date in the City Hall Council Chambers. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG The pledge of allegiance was led by Jennifer Pfaff. 3. ROLL CALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Beach, Brownrigg, Colson, Keighran, Ortiz MEMBERS ABSENT: None 4. REPORT OUT FROM STUDY SESSION A study session was held on tree ordinance revisions in the Council Chambers. 5. UPCOMING EVENTS Mayor Ortiz reviewed the upcoming events taking place in the City. 6. PRESENTATIONS a. NOMAD CITY FLAG PRESENTATION Students from Nomad, a mobile project based middle school, made a presentation to the City Council on the creation of a City flag. The students explained that currently the City of Burlingame doesn’t have a City flag. Therefore, after studying flag design and learning common design flaws, the students met with Councilmember Keighran to gain her input. The students presented their flag design to the City Council. The flag was done in the colors of Burlingame’s seal, with a maple tree in the middle and Burlingame, California written under the tree. Council thanked the students for their hard work and creativity. Burlingame City Council February 6, 2017 Approved Minutes 2 b. STORM UPDATE DPW Murtuza made a presentation concerning the January 20, 2017 winter storm. He stated that after the storm, staff consulted with outside industry experts and reviewed data from NOAA and other sources to better understand what happened in Burlingame. DPW Murtuza gave a brief background of the previous storms leading up to January 20th. He stated that between November 2016 and January 19, 2017, the City received 21 inches of rainfall. Moreover, he stated that 12 inches of the rainfall occurred in the two weeks prior to January 20, 2017. Accordingly, the ground was waterlogged. DPW Murtuza reviewed the tide schedule and the rainfall levels on the morning of January 20th. He explained that staff discovered that in 30 minutes the City received almost 2 inches of rain. Moreover, he added that this was during high tide which intensified the issue. Mr. Murtuza used maps to show where the rain collected that morning and caused flooding. DPW Murtuza reviewed staff’s response on the morning of January 20th. He explained that the City always has a staff member on “standby” 24 hours a day in the event of an emergency. That morning, the standby staff member was alerted that there was an issue prior to 5:00 a.m. at the Cal/Grove Pump Station. He stated that each pump station has a system of alarms, controls and programming that constantly measures how the pumps are working. The Cal/Grove Pump Station has 4 pumps that are designed to turn off in order to give themselves a break while others are turned on. However, Mr. Murtuza stated that when the staff member arrived at Cal/Grove Pump Station only Pump 2 was running. He stated that staff is currently reviewing how the pumps cycled on and off during the storm. DPW Murtuza stated that staff responded to several alarms at the pump stations and received 113 phone calls from residents regarding flooding. In reviewing the next steps, DPW Murtuza stated that the City hired EDCO, an outside consultant, to determine how the pumps had functioned during the storm at Cal/Grove Pump Station. As well, staff was setting up meetings with affected residents to provide information. Lastly, DPW Murtuza added that staff is reviewing the feasibility of installing additional warning and notification systems to alert staff of issues in the future. Councilmember Keighran asked if in recent history, the City experienced a storm of a similar caliber. DPW Murtuza replied in the negative. Councilmember Beach asked what the procedures are in place for staff to track incoming storms. DPW Murtuza stated that staff reviews the storm warnings ten days out and receives updates from CCFD and the County. However, he stated that in this situation, it was not predicted that the storm would settle on the peninsula for any amount of time. Councilmember Colson asked how many residents were impacted by the storm. DPW Murtuza stated that staff received 113 phone calls and City Attorney Kane stated that the City has received 7 claims. Burlingame City Council February 6, 2017 Approved Minutes 3 Vice Mayor Brownrigg stated that he would support putting sensors in creeks if staff felt that this would assist in the future to prevent flooding and provide an earlier warning to homeowners. Vice Mayor Brownrigg asked if the storm drain system was separate from the creeks. DPW Murtuza replied in the affirmative. Councilmember Colson asked if because it was high tide during the worst of the storm, if it became more challenging for the pumps to pump the water out. DPW Murtuza replied in the affirmative. Mayor Ortiz asked if hypothetically, all four pumps had worked, would the pumps have been able to push against the high tide to evacuate the water. DPW Murtuza stated that more data is needed as other issues could have contributed like the high water levels in the creeks. Mayor Ortiz asked if DPW Murtuza meant that the pumps may have shut off because there was nowhere for the water to go. DPW Murtuza stated that this is a possibility. Mayor Ortiz stated that many residents informed him that once staff arrived the water levels quickly decreased. DPW Murtuza stated that by the time staff arrived the worst of the storm was over, and that staff was able to override the shutdown of pumps 1, 3 and 4 to turn them back on. Councilmember Keighran asked if in the future there was a way to reset the alarms so that staff received an earlier alert. DPW Murtuza stated that staff is looking into this. Councilmember Beach asked if Burlingame received more rainfall than other neighboring communities. DPW Murtuza stated that he doesn’t have details about the storm’s impact on other cities. Councilmember Beach asked whether all of the other city pump stations were properly functioning during the storm. Murtuza replied in the affirmative. Burlingame residents Heather H., Deb Donaldson, Steve Maco, Vira Wilson, and a few others spoke about their concerns over: 1) staff’s response time to the flooding; 2) sewer and water flooding; 3) FEMA flood zone; and 4) creek maintenance and safety. As well, they each spoke of the damage to their own property and asked who they should contact about issues. And lastly, they asked the City to look into preventative measures such as more staff on call and earlier warning alarms. DPW Murtuza asked the residents who spoke to leave their contact information with him in the back. As well, he discussed how before winter storm season, staff sends letters to property owners about creek cleaning, repairs, unclogging areas, etc. He stated that staff needs to look into how they can improve outreach. Councilmember Keighran asked what happens if a resident contacts the City about an individual’s failure to maintain their portion of a creek. DPW Murtuza stated that under the code there is no enforcement mechanism for the City to ensure that individuals properly maintain the creeks. He explained that creeks are under the authority of the Department of Fish and Wildlife. City Attorney Kane stated that staff would look at how other cities have addressed this issue. Burlingame City Council February 6, 2017 Approved Minutes 4 Councilmember Colson asked if the City increased the number of staff on call, would the City need to hire additional staff. DPW Murtuza stated that he would need to get back to Council on this. Councilmember Beach asked about the storm drains in the hills and if there had been any issues with them during the storm. DPW Murtuza stated that staff does cleanings of the storm drains before and after storms. He stated that during storms debris can clog the drains. Therefore, staff performs ongoing maintenance by cleaning and checking on drains during storms. DPW Murtuza stated that during the storm there were no issues with the storm drains in the hills. He stated that the issues in the flat areas of Burlingame were caused by the intensity of rainfall. Councilmember Beach asked that staff review what lessons they learned and plan what they can do to prepare for the next storm. DPW Murtuza replied in the affirmative. Vice Mayor Brownrigg stated that Council will support added budget if that is what it takes going forward. He also discussed having an early warning system for the neighbors so that they knew when a storm was coming and could take measures to prevent damage. He asked that staff look into increased outreach. 7. PUBLIC COMMENT Burlingame resident Don Pope discussed his support for Topgolf developing at the golf center site. 8. CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Ortiz asked the Councilmembers and the public if they wished to remove any item from the Consent Calendar. No items were removed. Vice Mayor Brownrigg made a motion to approve the consent calendar; seconded by Councilmember Keighran. The motion was approved unanimously by voice vote; 5-0. a. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 17, 2017 City Clerk Hassel-Shearer requested Council’s approval of City Council Meeting Minutes for January 17, 2017. b. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 28, 2017 City Clerk Hassel-Shearer requested Council’s approval of City Council Meeting Minutes for January 28, 2017. c. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES DECEMBER 6, 2016 CDD Meeker requested Council’s approval of City Council Meeting Minutes December 6, 2016. Burlingame City Council February 6, 2017 Approved Minutes 5 d. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) AND ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AMENDING TITLE 25 (ZONING CODE) OF THE BURLINGAME MUNICIPAL CODE, CHAPTERS 25.08, 25.26, 25.50, 25.59, 25.60, AND 25.70 TO UPDATE EXISTING SECONDARY DWELLING UNIT REGULATIONS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH RECENTLY ADOPTED AMENDMENTS TO CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65852 RELATED TO ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS CDD Meeker asked Council to adopt Ordinance 1939 and Resolution Number 11-2017. e. OPEN NOMINATION PERIOD TO FILL TWO VACANCIES ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION City Manager Goldman asked Council to open the nomination period to fill two vacancies on the Planning Commission. f. QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPORT, PERIOD ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2016 Finance Director Augustine asked Council to adopt the Quarterly Investment Report, period ending December 31, 2016. 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS a. INTRODUCTION OF, AND PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING, AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 18.10 OF THE BURLINGAME MUNICIPAL CODE TO AMEND THE 2016 CALIFORNIA RESIDENTIAL CODE FOR ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS WITH LOCAL AMENDMENTS Central County Fire Department Fire Marshall Yballa presented the staff report concerning an ordinance to amend Chapter 18.10 of the Burlingame Municipal Code; which adopts by reference the 2016 edition of the California Residential Code, California Code of Regulations, Title 24 (CCR-T24 Part 2.5). He stated that these amendments are required by the State of California after passage of Senate Bill 1069. Fire Marshall Yballa stated that additionally the proposed ordinance includes “clean-up” language to the recent November 2016 adoption of the California Residential Code as amended by the Burlingame Municipal Code. Mayor Ortiz asked the City Clerk to read the title of the ordinance. Vice Mayor Brownrigg made a motion to waive further reading and introduce the ordinance; seconded by Councilmember Colson. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. Mayor Ortiz opened the public hearing. Burlingame City Council February 6, 2017 Approved Minutes 6 Burlingame resident Tom Payne stated that he understood that Council was mandated to make these changes. However, he asked that Council consider reviewing appropriate setbacks for structures on properties. Mayor Ortiz closed the public hearing. Vice Mayor Brownrigg stated that Council would be reviewing the regulations for accessory dwelling units. He stated that he would suggest the Council consider appropriate setbacks and converting basements into accessory dwelling units. Councilmember Beach made a motion to bring back the ordinance at the February 21, 2017 meeting; seconded by Vice Mayor Brownrigg. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. b. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER REPEALING ORDINANCE 1219 AND AMENDING TITLE 2 OF THE BURLINGAME MUNICIPAL CODE BY CONSOLIDATING THE CITY’S GENERAL ELECTION WITH STATEWIDE GENERAL ELECTION DATES COMMENCING NOVEMBER 2022 City Clerk Hassel-Shearer presented the staff report introducing an ordinance to repeal Ordinance 1219 and amend Title 2 of the Burlingame Municipal Code by consolidating the City’s general election with statewide general election dates commencing November 2022. City Clerk Hassel-Shearer stated that based on Council direction, the proposed ordinance consolidates the City’s general election with statewide general election dates by holding the November 2017 election for three seats each for a five-year term, and the November 2019 election for two seats each for a five-year term. Mayor Ortiz asked the City Clerk to read the title of the ordinance. Councilmember Keighran made a motion to waive further reading and introduce the ordinance; seconded by Councilmember Colson. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. Mayor Ortiz opened up the public hearing. No one spoke. Vice Mayor Brownrigg stated that the Council hopes to use vote by mail elections to decrease the expected costs of holding elections in 2017 and 2019. Vice Mayor Brownrigg made a motion to bring the ordinance back for adoption at the February 21, 2017 meeting; seconded by Councilmember Colson. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. Burlingame City Council February 6, 2017 Approved Minutes 7 10. STAFF REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a. REPORT ON IMPLEMENTATION OF MULTI-FAMILY SMOKING BAN City Attorney Kane presented the staff report on the implementation of the multi-family smoking ban. She stated that in 2015, Council passed Ordinance 1919 which prohibited smoking in multi-family housing. She explained that Council requested that staff update them on the implementation and enforcement of the ban. City Attorney Kane stated that the ban had a slow roll out period to allow time for staff to ensure outreach and education on the ban to all interested parties. She added that the City’s Code Enforcement Officer conducted an extensive education campaign on the ban; including reaching out to landowners; creating flyers and helping apartment managers educate their tenants. City Attorney Kane stated that the City received a low amount of calls after the ban was rolled out. However, she stated that those who do call the City about infractions on the ban are persistent. She stated that the City has limited enforcement capabilities. She explained that the ban involves behavior inside residential units and that occupants’ 4th amendment rights may prevent code enforcement officers and police from entering those units. Therefore, because it is difficult to document the behavior it becomes hard to charge people with an infraction of the code. City Attorney Kane stated that Council understood these limitations when they adopted the ordinance. However, she explained the ordinance was adopted to provide residents with leverage over their neighbor’s nuisance behavior. She stated that in some instances the desire effect was achieved; however in some instances staff wasn’t able to effect a change in behavior. Councilmember Beach asked if the County’s resources were of any help in enforcement. City Attorney Kane replied in the negative. Mayor Ortiz stated that it appears more people are going outside to smoke. He stated that this seems to support the idea that the ordinance is effective and asked the City Attorney if she had data to support this idea. She stated that at this point there is no way to track that data. Councilmember Colson stated that she believed staff was on the right track and that staff’s outreach and education was assisting in decreasing the nuisance behavior in multi-family housing. Mayor Ortiz opened the item up for public comment. Former Councilmember John Root voiced his support for the ordinance. Mayor Ortiz and Vice Mayor Brownrigg stated that they were glad this law was in place. 11. COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND ACTIVITIES REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS Council reported on various events and committee meetings they each attended on behalf of the City. Burlingame City Council February 6, 2017 Approved Minutes 8 12. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Councilmember Beach suggested reaffirming the City’s stance on welcoming diversity and inclusivity. Staff stated that they would look into how to put this before the Council. Vice Mayor Brownrigg asked for a social media policy for Council. Staff stated that they would work on this matter. 13. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS a. JANUARY 2017 PERMIT ACTIVITY 14. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Ortiz adjourned the meeting at 9:13 p.m. in memory of Angel “Bill” Garcia. Respectfully submitted, /s/ Meaghan Hassel-Shearer City Clerk