Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - BC - 1987.05.07N 0 T I C E L, BURLINGAME BEAUTIFICATION COMMISSION MEETING: MAY 7, 1987 * 5:30 P.M. * A G E N D A I. ROLL CALL II. MINUTES OF APRIL 2, 1987 III. COMMUNICATIONS IV. REPORTS A. Park Director B. Chairman C. Commissioners V. OLD BUSINESS A. Tree Removal/732 Farringdon B. Newsrack Ordinance C. Broadway/Rollins Rd. Beautification VI. NEW BUSINESS A. 9987-88 Park Department Budget B. Beautification Concerns 1) California Dr. behind 852-856 Edgehill 2) Abandoned P.G.&E. poles on California Dr. between Burlingame Ave. & Majilla VII. FROM THE FLOOR zhr &t� of A3=6'�Umr SAN MATEO COUNTY CITY HALL-501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA 94010 TEL:(415) 342-8931 May 13, 1987 Mr. Ted A. Kevranian 3494 Victoria Avenue Santa Clara, CA 95051 RE: 732 Farringdon Lane Dear Mr. Kevranian: At its regular meeting of May 7, 1987, the Burlingame Beautification Commis- sion voted unanimously to issue you a permit to remove 2 liquidambars and 1 palm in the easement in front of your property at 732 Farringdon Lane. The removal would be at your expense, and the 2 liquidambars are to be re- placed with 15 gallon trees from our approved list (enclosed). The other palm tree in the front yard is entirely on private property, and does not require any City action for removal. The decision of the Commission may be appealed to the City Council. To make arrangements for your permit, or if you have any further questions, please call the Park Department at (415) 342-8931. Sincerely, Richard P. Quadri Director of Parks RPQ/kh Enclosure TO: DATE: FROM: CITY �r PIZ BURLlNGAME STAFF AGENDA ITEM t REPORT MTG. DATE 6,18 g4 Honorable Mayor & City Council June 13, 1984 City Attorney SUBJECT: NEWSRACK ORDINANCE SUBMITTED ( /� BY v APPROVED BY RECOMMENDATION: Introduction of Ordinance. BACKGROUND: As you may recall, we have had concern and complaints from time to time about newsracks upon the City sidewalks. The Beautification and Recreation and Parks Commissions have been considering the ;subject -for some time and requested that I prepare an ordinance ;which would address this subject. The attached ordinance,. -with one addition which I will note later, was reviewed by them and recommended to you for adoption. A summary of its contents follows. I should note that newsracks cannot be prohibited from public side- walks but can only be controlled from the safety standpoint. The ordinance which is presented to you follows the format approved ;by the courts in cases involving the City and the County of Los Angeles. Among the definitions is the designation of the Director of Public Works as the person who has the authority to take action under the ordinance. A no -fee hermit is recuired to place any kind of newsrack upon the public right-of-way. -A single permit is -:issued to each company and covers all the racks in the City. It is renewed annually. Each rack is required to have the owner's ...identification and permit number upon it. Various standards are %established for the size and placement of newsracks. Unlawful obstructions are separately spelled out limiting such things as 'distance from a crosswalk or a fire hydrant and stating general safety hazard requirements. Provisions are made for summary removaVl,o of hazardous newsracks, and noticed removal of those .that violate other provisions of the ordinance. An appeals procedure to the Council is established. A provision for giving notice to .,those having existing newsracks is included thereby giving them time to comply with the ordinance. The one item added to the draft originally considered by the Commission is the provision regarding obscene materials. A number of citizens have expressed concern about the contents of some of the newspapers exhibited on our streets, but I have had to inform them that there is a first amendment protection to sell these materials so long as they are properly displayed. The ordinance contains specific prohibitions regarding what may be displayed. This degree of detail is required by court decisions on pornographic materials. Attachment: Ordinance E CITY Ie �A BURUNGAME STAFF REPORT To: Honorable Mayor & City Council DATE: June 21, 198 FROM: City Attorney SUBJECT- Sale of Porographic Materials SUBMITTED BY APPROVED BY AGENDA ITEM p MTG. /O 7/24 DATE O At your last meeting Ordinance 1279 was introduced to control the location of newsracks. As a part of that ordinance Section 12.22.160 described certain prohibited displays. I was asked to research two matters. First, whether more detailed controls of sale of such material to children could be adopted and second, whether the exemption of showing anatomy of children under the age of puberty was necessary. On the first issue it appears that the state has preempted the subject of display of harmful matter to children. Penal Code Sections 313 through 313.4 address that topic and Section 313.1 specifically controls vending machines near schools. Essentially, it prohibits newspaper racks within 500 meters of a school or playground if they display certain specific acts. This state statute was held to preempt any local control of matter which may be displayed to minors in Carl v. Los Angeles 61 Cal. App.3d 265 (.1976). The several code sections are attached for your information The second question concerns what kind of displays in newsracks may be prohibited. In researching the cases I find a good news, bad news answer. The good news is that there need not be an exemption for displays of children under the age of puberty. The bad news is that the courts have held the language as contained in Section 12.22.160 of the introduced ordinance is not specific enough and more graphic prohibitory language is required. The above cited case of Carl v. City of Los Angeles found that the language as contained in Sect of n 12.22.160 was indistinguishable from that held to be unconstitutional by the United States Supreme Court in Erznoznik v. City of Jacksonville 422 U.S. 205 (1975). A fewer years later Gluck v. County of Los Angeles 93 Cal.App.3d 121, (1979) did uphold certain language which prohibits more specific- sexual displays. The distinction made by the courts is that display of portions of the human atatomy are constitutionally protected but that displays of specific sexual acts or portions of anatomy with a purpose of sexual arousal can be prohibited. I have attached to this memorandum a copy of Sections 1208 and 1209 of the Los Angeles County Ordinance as approved by the courts in Gluck. If you wish to prohibit sexual displays that language would have to be inserted in the place of 12.22.160. Attachments: Sections 1208 & 1209 Chapter 313 to 313.4 JFC/b 153 CITY OF BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL STUDY MEETING AUGUST 23, 19Uf t Mayor Irving S. Amstrup convened the Study Meeting of the Burlingame City Council in Conference Room B of Burlingame City Hall at 8:00 p.m. PRESENT: COUNCILMEMBERS AMSTRUP, BARTON, MANGINI, MARTIN, PAGLIARO ABSENT : NONE STAFF I PRESENT: ARGYRES, COLEMAN, MONROE, KIRKUP, F. FRICKE 1. LIMITING ACCESS FROM EL CAMINO ONTO FAIRFIELD AVENUE The council briefly reviewed the reasons why this project was placed on a Study Session. Councilman Martin clarified his understanding that the Traffic, Safety and Parking Commission's recommendation was for a six-month's trial. Councilman Pagliaro explained that feels that the proposal is before the council due to long-standing problems and a new condominium project, which the city has approved, and the neighborhood request. Coucilwoman Barton expressed a concern that we would have another Oxford -Cambridge situation by reallocating traffic to other streets and suggested that the matter go to public hearing. The council consensus was to place the matter on the second meeting in September for public hearing and that the city staff notice a wider than normal area of those interested. 2. NEWSRACK ORDINANCE Councilwoman Barton indicated that since she works for a newspaper and there was a possible conflict of interest, she would not participate in the discussion of the proposed ordinance. The City Manager briefly reviewed the history of the proposed newsrack ordinance and the Beautification Commission's concerns. The newspaper objections were also reviewed. Mayor Amstrup indicated that he was sure all the council wished they could throw out all of the pornographic material sold at news stands but realized that we are constrained by the court rulings. After discussion of the possible effectiveness of the proposed ordi- nance, it was the council's consensus that we try to limit a newsrack ordinance -to requiring the name and address, of the owner and eliminating the use of chains or other devices to fasten the newsracks to parking meters, trees, etc. to try to encourage more modular racks. Staff was directed to try and work with the newspapers with this approach. Councilman Pagliaro suggested that the issue of pornographic material should be a separate ordinance from the one discussed on newsracks. Councilwoman Barton indicated that this was a subject in which she would like to participate. After the City Attorney reviewed his memo con- cerning pornographic material, it was the council's direction that the attorney draft an ordinance limiting the display of pornographic material for sale in the city using the explicit language required by the courts. Councilman Pagliaro indicated that he would review the case citation by the City Attorney concerning any prohibition of sale. 3. SMOKE DETECTORS IN RESIDENTIAL UNITS AND OFFICES ABOVE COOKING FACILITIES. The council reviewed with the City Manager and Fire Chief the history of the proposed ordinance. The Fire Chief suggested that upon review and given recent state legislation, he felt that the proposed requirements were excessive considering the limited number of effected units. Councilman Pagliaro indicated that he still feels strongly on the issue after the recent hotel fires. After discussion, the council indicated that a possible middle ground would be that we require hard -wire smoke detectors in the common areas of.residential f units above cooking facilities. The Fire Chief will review the possibility of )i some kind of combination hardwire/battery alarms to provide maximum safety and make a futher report to council. CHAPIN AVENUE PARKING --REMOVAL OF TWO SPACES The City Council reviewed the Traffic, Safety and Parking Commission recommen- dation that the spaces proposed for removal remain due to the minimal improve- ment in sight distance that would be achieved. Council acknowledged that we