Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - CC - 1987.01.1019,3 CITY OF BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSTON STUDY MEETING January 10, 1,987, 9 a.m. Holiday Inn Crowne Plaza Board Room Mayor Gloria Barton convened the joint study session of the Burlin- game city council and Planning Commission on the above date in the Board Room of the Holiday Inn crowne Plaza at 9:05 a.m. PRESENT: COUNCILMEIIBERS AI.,ISTRUP, BARTON, LEMBI , MANGINI , PAGLIARO PLANNING COMMISS]ONERS PRESENT: GARCIA, GIOMI , H SCI{\^lAtM GRAHAM, S. GRAHAIVI, JACOBS, LEAHY, STAFF PRESENT: ARGYRES, COIEMAN, MONROE DISCUSSION OF REGULATIONS A}iID POTICIES Staff reviewed sunmary data of City council agenda items which have been called up or appealed from the Planning Commission in recentyears. In 1986, 78t of all Planning commission items were final with the Planning Commission. of the 30 reviews/appeals heard by the City Council, 77\ of the Planning Commission actions were upheld by the Council. Of the seven items which were reversed by the City Council, three involved code enforcement items. commissioner Jacobs indicated that she felt we had a consistencyproblem concerning residential parking with fourth bedroom additions. Councilman Lembi stated that he felt that the cars would be there whether it is 3-bedroom or -bedroom house, and that "a family is a family." He felt we could not control the number of cars by controlling bedrooms. Councilman Amstrup noted he felt our code is becoming more of a guideline rather than the law. He felt that if we continue to grant exceptions, we should revise the code so that everyone is treated equally. Councilman Pagliaro agreed with councilman Lembi concerning the relationship of number of cars to number of bedrooms. Comnissioner Giomi felt that the definition of a typical family is changing. In her neighborhood, there are four different individuals sharing one house. She felt that our codes were good and that we needed to protect them. Commissioner H. craham thought it was acceptable to add bedrooms and he felt our current codes were good and served as a check on new construction.He indicated that he did not like the additional 1-foot setback on Commissioner Giomi thought that the Planning Commission and Council decision on the bowling alley parking variance indicated a problem. She felt that the property owners might get the message that if you Iet your property run down, the City would, therefore, approve a parking variance. other council and Cornmissioners felt that given that specific situation, the City had no choice in the matter. Councilman Pagliaro agreed with Councilman Amstrup that our codes are now becoming guidelines. Councilman Amstrup felt that we needto uphold the code even it forces people to tear down i).legalstructures. Commissioner Jacobs felt that the code shouldn't bejust a guideline. For example, the sign code allows 200 squarefeet of signage for auto dealers, whereas 600 square feet has beenapproved. She stated that we needed to change the code in thisarea. Councilman Amstrup agreed. Commissioner H. Graham indicatedthat the car business is changing and that maybe we needed to allowso much square footage per dealership since multiple dealerships are now at the same location. Mayor Barton stated that she felt that government needs to be flexible and asked the question of the group as to whether they the second floor of single family additions. Mayor Barton indi- cated that she felt society was chanqing whereas a family used to have one car, it is now typicaf to have three and this was increas- ing our parking problem. commissioner Schwalm indicated that in the past, the city has been against higher density and that we need to be careful. He fett the senior citizen housing problem did jus- tify some higher density. 494 felt $re are becoming permissive? Councilmen Mangini and Lembiresponded that they felt we are being fair hrith the proper amountof flexibility. Commissioner S. craham indicated that she fettBurlingame was much fairer than some other neighboring cities. Commissioner Leahy indicated that he felt the variance approach wasa good one, but that we needed to look very carefully at whether atrue hardship exists. Councilman Lembi said that the decision- makers need to project a humane attitude toward the public, and weshould not remove the human element from our decisions. He feltthere will be exceptions to the code when justified to the planning Commission and Council- . Commissioner Jacobs asked the question whetherpolicy we felt that it was important to havespace in each single-family residential property.the group was that yes, this was important. as a matter of an enclosed garage The consensus of Councilman Amstrup indicated that he felt in the past, we have beenstrict on returning a matter for Planning Commission reconsidera-tion if a different structure is presented to the Council onappeal. Mayor Barton stated that if there was a major change inthe facts from the presentation at the planning commission 1evel tothat of the Council, that it should be returned aIso. City planner indicated that she will try in the staff report to advise Councilif the project has changed in any significant manner from what washeard by the Planning Commission, but ultimately, to return it tothe Commission was Council decision. Commissioner Giomi asked the Council what items they wished theCommissj-on to Iook at. councilman Amstrup indicated that he feltthe intensification of certain office uses, such as the impacts onparking on Chapin, needed Commission review. He pointed out whereour standard may be 300 sguare feet of office use for every parkingplace, that in reality this may not be enough. Commercial recrea-tion which has no separate requirement was also a problem. Commis-sioner Jacobs indicated that she felt we needed to review our M-1zone uses with a more thorough plan and study. Councilman pagliaro indicated that he would like to see staff $rork on extending theBurlingame Avenue overlay zone to include specific uses outside theexisting area which require additional parking. For instance,around the main Iibrary area, v!,e may want to restrict the amount ofreal estate and insurance offices which have excess parkingrequirements. He hoped that this study could be actea on byspring. There was a general consensus of the Council and Commis-sion that this item should be undertaken. Mayor Barton stated thatshe felt that we are becoming more regulatory, but that it seems tobe working in the Burlingame Avenue area. Council and Commission also reached the consensus that we need toreview our sign code in the auto area and that athletic club park-ing and valet parking are something which needed to be reviewed.Council noted that the landscaping requirements for R-1 and parkingin front setbacks of R-1 uses are already scheduled for Councilstudy. Commissioner S. Graham indicated that she felt we had a processing problem concerning condominiums and final occupancy approvals.Currently, condos may be sold before receiving final building per-mit approval from the City. She felt this presented numerousproblems and that we need in some $ray to protect the homeowner.Staff will discuss this with the building department. CommissionerGiomi fel-t that lre also are receiving complaints about contractorsoperating businesses in the R-1 zones. Staff pointed out thatregulation of contractors home offices is covered by our home oc-cupation ordinance; complaints should be referred to Planning. Toabate these operations, a great deal of staff time is required. Councilman Amstrup expressed concern that \"re needed to be clearerin disclosing to the public any conflict of interest that Commis-sioners or Council members may have. After discussing the matterwith the city attorney if any one does have a conflict, he feltthat this needed to be disclosed publicly so that it is on therecord. Commissioner H. Graham also felt that !,re needed to get 495 more information to the realtors and the public about our se\rerl-ateral testing ordinance. Staff reviewed the attempts to date,but agreed that additional efforts are needed. Mayor Barton and other Council members thanked the Planning Commis-sion for their comments and suggestions and feLa that it had been aproductive study meeting. Staff $ras asked to follow up on theitems previously indicated. ADJOURNMENT With A. MalCity C1erk vmy rl The meeting was adjourned at 11:05 a.m.