HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - CC - 1988.01.20Mayor Frank Pagliaro convened the study session of the BurlingameCity Council on the above date in Conference Room B of Burlingamecity HaIl at 7:44 p.m. He apologized for the delay in starting the
meeting since two members of Council were interviewing candidatesfor the Mosquito Abatement District.
PRESENT: COUNCfLMEMBERS AMSTRUP, BARTON, LEMBf, MAI.IGINI , PAGLIARO
STAFF
PRESENT: ARGYRES, COLEMAN, KIRKUP, MONROE, QUADRI
COMM]SSfONERS
PRESENT: CHAIRPERSONS OF PLANNING & BEAUTIFICATION COMMISSfON, AND
VARIOUS MEMBERS OF THEIR COMMISSIONS
Councilfirst.agreed to revise the order of the agenda to consider item 2
2. BEAUTIFfCATfON COMMfSSfON REQUEST TO DISCUSS PRQLIEEEAEIQN QE
NEWSPAPER RACKS
Jeannie Gilmore, Chairman of the Beautification Commission,
addressed the City Council concerningt the problems which nelisracks
are causing in Burlingame. Her commission feels they are a dangerto the public!s health and safety and unsightly in appearance. Shepresented Council with pictures of newsracks which her commission
had taken on Burlingame Avenue, Broadvray, and other areas of thecity. She felt the City should consider an ordinance regulating
newsracks similar to vrhat the City of Carme1 had adopted. In the
Carmel case, the City met with all of the newspapers and arrived ata ordinance which regul-ates the appearance and location of
newsracks and ca1ls for the City and the newspapers to share the
cost of modular newsracks. She indicated that the Burlinqame post
master and representatives of the Broadway merchants were also
anxious to help in addressing this problem. She did not want to
hinder access to the racks but feel-s that hte should have racks of
uniform appearance in designated safe locations.
The Mayor asked the City Attorney to address the ]egal j-ssues
involved. city Attorney indicated that the Supreme Court is cur-rently considering a case concerning newsrack regulation and thatwe may have more definitive guidelines in the near future.
Currently, he felt the City could regulate the time, place, and
manner in the placement of ne\"rsracks as these pertain to health and
safety issues. He felt that the Carmel ordinance had a number of
legaI problem areas.
Councilman Lembi indicated that the City has been reviewing this
matter for a number of years. He suggested we take a look at thepertinent parts of the carmel ordinance. Mayor Pagliaro stated he
felt that parts of the Carmel ordinance were possibly iIIegaI.
Councilwoman Barton suggested that the City try to put public pres-
sure on the newspaper and seek their cooperation. After additional
discussion, it was the Council consensus to ask that two members of
the Beautifj-cation Commission meet with the City Attorney and City
Manager to try and address this issue by meeting htith the newspaper
interests and possibly proposing a new ordinance for future Council
consideration.
1. REVI EW OF SINGTE FA}IIILY DEVELOPMENT STA}IDARDS
The City Planner reviewed her staff report listing the alternativesfor addressing problems of air, Iight, and privacy as they relate
to bulk and mass in new single family construction and in substan-
tial remodets of single family homes. Staff has reviewed the pos-
sible causes of the problem, Iooked at what other cities had been
doing, and made suggestions for possible review of our code con-
L62
CITY OF BURLINGAME
CITY COUNCIL STUDY MEET]NG
January 20, 1988, 7:30 p.m.
City HaII Conference Room B
cerning parking, setbacks, and lot coverage.
Councilman Amstrup stated that he felt that the current regulations
and actions are creating problems for the appearance of some neigh-
borhoods and for the people next door. He felt we shoul-d set the
rules for deveLopment and then stick by them as we have done in the
Anza area and with residential condominiums. He said that there is
a need for adequate on-site parking in the single family residen-
tial areas and that we should address this concern. If there is
more dwelling unit, he felt we should have more parking. Council-
man Mangini indicated that regulation was a complicated area that
we needed flexibility, he was not ready to take any action at this
ti-me.
Mayor Pagliaro stated that one problem was that the City is unwill-
ing to enforce its current parking regulations for on streetparking. He also felt that a four bedroom home needed more than
two covered parking spaces. He believed that the daylight plane
may be a way of addressing some of the mass and bulk issues. coun-
cilwoman Barton agreed but agreed it was unrealistic to try and get
the cars off the street. She thought that we need to increase our
parking requirements for remodeling and that the daylight plane was
worth investigating.
Councilman Amstrup stated that we needed to look at more than just
bedrooms since dens can be converted to bedrooms. He also agreed
that we need to look at the daylight plane concept. Councilman
tembi indicated that he felt that flexibility was very important in
regulation since there were so many older existing structures. In
oui congested areas, we needed to be very careful not to legislate
away peoplets ability to enhance their living standard and maintain
the quality of their property. fn some of our older areas, it is
simply not feasible to add parking in many cases. He noted that we
need Lo allow for improvement of older houses, and he felt that in
the past tvro years since he has been on the Council we have handled
the matter weII. Councilwoman Barton agreed that hre needed to be
very careful in deal-ing with the older areas of town.
After additional discussion, it was the consensus of the Council
that staff should try to develop proposals for code amendment to
address increased on-site parking in single famj-Iy areas and to
review how the daylight plane concept might be applied; Council
also noted the need to continue to have flexibility in the
application. Staff will develop additional information for the
Planning cornmission to consider on this matter.
3. UNLfCENSED CONTRACTORS AND BU]LDfNG PERMIT EXP]RAT]ON LIMITS
The Public Works Director reviewed his staff report on this matter
and the problem the City faces with work being done lvithout a
building permit which may not meet city code standards. He indi-
cated that the new state reaf estate disclosure laws reqarding
residential property seems to have increased the number of problems
being reported to the city. Councilman Lembi revie$red the require-
ments of the disclosure l-ar"rs f or Council.
Council discussed the problems of the lack of public understanding
for the need of permits and the difficulty in tracking down un-
Ij-censed contractors who most often are low bidders because they
donrt have insurance and meet other licensing requirements. coun-
ciI also questioned the City Attorney on our current civil course
of action against unlicensed contractors and what assistance the
City can provide the property owner in dealing with problems. Thecity Attorney agreed to provide Council with additional information
on what our current code allcoirs ccrneerning penalties on unlicensed
contractors and our ability to force them to correct illegal
construction.
163
The Public Works Director then reviewed the time limits in our cur-
rent code for building construction with a building permit. Timesvary from 3 to 36 months depending on the value of the permitted
construction. Council felt that there vras a problem because !.reprovided no incentive for the property owner or contractor to com-
plete the work in a timely manner. It was suggested that the staff
review revising our building permit code to increase the penaltiesfor renewal of building permits to provide an incentive for com-pleting the work. It was also suggested that through the recrea-tion brochure the City increase its public relations effort toprovide public information concerning the need to acquire buildingpermits.
4, REVIEW OF CHILD CARE TASK FORCE FUNDING REOUEST
Councilman Lembi felt that child care is becoming a significantproblem throughout the area and we should be contributing in some
manner to assisting with solutions. Councilwoman Barton agreedthat child care was a problem but could not support the proposal toprovide funds to hire staff to do another study. Councilman Man-gini felt that we lacked data and needed more information to reviewthe problem. He felt we should also see what other cities are con-tributing to the child care task force. Mayor Pagliaro felt thatthe proposal we had received lacked substance.
After additional discussion, the Council decided to take no actionon this matter.
Mayor Pagliaro indicated that he had visited many of the city halIsin the county in recent months. He suggested that we needed tolook at city ha1I and the council chambers and make someimprovements. He asked that we discuss this at a future meeting.
7.FROM THE FLOOR
There were no public colunents.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adj ourned at 9:54 p.m.
],
udith A. MalfaCity Cl.erk
l
vmy
L61
5. STATUS BAYFRONT BIKE PATH DEVELOPMENT
City Council accepted the staff report that had been prepared onthis matter.
6. COI'NCIL COMMENTS