HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - CC - 1990.05.1215
CITY OF BURLINGAI/IE
CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY MEETING
Saturday, May 12, 1990
Holiday Inn crowne Plaza Board Room
Vice Mayor cloria Barton convened the joint study session of the
Burlingame city council and Planning Commissj.on on the above date in
the Board Room of Holiday Inn Crowne P\aza, at 9:05 AM.
PRESENT: COUNCILMEMBERS BARTON, HARRfSON, OTMAHONY, PAGLIARO
ABSENT: MAYOR LEIVIBI
PLANNING COMMISSION PRESENT: DEAL, ELLIS, GALLIGAN, GRAHAM, JACOBS,
KELLY, MINK
SEAFE PRESENT: ARGYRES, COIEMAN, MONROE
1. DISCUSSION OF POLICIES AND PROCEDURES
Vice Mayor Barton started the meeting by indicating that this was
the annual opportunity for Planning commissioners and Council to
discuss their viewpoints on various topics. Given the changes in
both the Council and the Commission in the last year, she felt itwas important that we get to know one anotherrs positions. She
referred to the possible topics outline prepared by staff.
The first item \"ras side setbacks for extensions of existing build-
ings where the existing side setback is nonconforming. city council
has overturned the Planning Commission on several of these waiving
the need for a greater reguired side setback for the new first floor
addition to single family houses. coNnissioner DeaI felt it was
difficutt to review some of these given the requirements of our cur-
rent findings for a variance. Common sense was saying one thing but
it was difficult to make findings for extenuating circumstances.
There was a general discussion and a number of people felt that we
needed to review these exceptions to the code but that commission
needed more latitude so that decisions could be final at that level
rather than needing to be appealed. A commissioner asked if it $ras
possible to redefine exceptional circumstances. City Attorney indi-
cated that he wished there was some other approach.
After further discussion, it was the consensus of the Council and
Commission to Look at modifying the City's minor modification proce-
dure so that side setbacks of this type could be addressed there.
The next topic discussed was Hillside Area construction Permits.
Commission asked Council if it had any direction to give them.
Shelley craham feLt that r"rhat was needed was more communication be-
tween neighbors. It was also discussed that some type of visualpresentation such as a 2-by-4 structure or balloons and a string
needed to be displayed so that neighbors would get a better feelingfor what the impact of the addition would be like. It was proposed
that staff add this to its administrative procedures for these ap-plications. The Cornrnission and Council discussed the difficulty in
balancing property owners rights versus the buLk of new additions.
The city Planner asked the council and Commission to provide herwith any guidance about how they felt about the future policy forthe industrial area. Did we want to continue the warehouse in-dustriaf use or look for some change towards office and commercial
uses into the future. Councilwoman Barton felt that the industriaL
area had been very important to the City and felt that we should tryto preserve its light industrial/r^rarehouse use. Commissioner Minkfelt that this was a dif f icul-t topic to discuss hrithout consideringthe impact on the existing infrastructure such as water, sewer, andny type of proposed use might add. Councilmanthat we needed to watch very carefully the usescars or long-term parking since he questioned how
se uses brought to the City. He indicated that he
streets that
Pagliaro though
at
1
et
such as renta
much revenue th
has asked that his review issue be put on a future study session.
16
The next subject was whether there were any new areas vrhere residen-tial uses might be considered, such as on the bay front, in the in-
dustriaL areas, or in areas zoned heavy commercial. There were a
number of general comments about the difficulty of providing addi-
tionat housing since the City was built out. Councilwoman o'Mahony
indicated that she is wlIIing to look at some type of mixed use in
the industrial area.
There was a discussion as to whether it might be possible to use
Bayside Park for other uses if the park and recreation uses could be
replaced somewhere el-se, such as in the industrial area. Staff
noted that since Bayside Park is an old burned dump that there may
be difficulties in using the land for other purposes. Commissioners
caltigan and Kelly thought it might be a good idea for the city to
undertake soils testing of Bayside Park to see what the land could
be used for. Councilman Pagliaro stated that he and Mayor Lembi in-tend to bring up this matter at the May 23 City Council study ses-si-on. There h,as a general discussion of the pros and cons of having
our park and recreational facilities in the Bayside area versus somepotential site in the industrial area. Councilwoman Barton thought
tshat traffic in the Rollins Road area was more of a hazard than
Bayside Park and that there was a potential for improving pedestrian
access to Bayside.
The last item suggested for discussion by staff was what roLe thecity should have in dealing with old structures with unique ar-chitecture. Councilman Pagliaro stated that this would be discussedin June at the study session. The city Attorney outlined the
material he intended to provide Councit. Councilman Pagliaro said
that he wanted to look at the options and that his focus would be
the Burlingame Avenue commercial area and not residential homes.
Under general discussion, Commissioner Galligan asked whether the
City had any plans to update the current housing element. Staff
reviewed the history of our l-978 element and the state requirementsfor updates. Given the difficulty in meeting state reguirements,the City has no plans at this time to update the current housing
element. Commissioner Galligan then suggested the city might wantto look at providing incentives for homeowners to improve previous
unpermitted construction in buildings.
Councilwoman o'Mahony asked staff if it was possible to revise the
format of the Planning Commission minutes. After discussion, staff
indicated it will try and group the pro and con arguments. Council-
woman o'Mahony also asked if it was possible to look at some of the
massive additions that are being made within our declining or-dinance. Commissioner DeaI asked Council to look at one variancethat had been granted where the purpose of the variance was to save
a large tree and it appeared that the tree was now removed.
FROM THE FLOOR
There were no co[unents from the floor.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 11:20 AM.
\_
Judith A. Ma1fa
city clerk
vmy