HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - CC - 1987.04.22CITY OF BURLINGAIUE
CITY COUNCfL STUDY MEETINGApril 22, 1987, 7:30 p.m.
City Ha1l, Conference Room B
Mayor Gloria Barton convened the study session of the BurlingameCity Council on the above date in Conference Room B of BurlingameCity HaIl at 7:30 p.m.
PRESENT: COUNCILMEMBERS AMSTRUP, BARTON, MAI.,.IGINI , PAGLfARO
ABSENT: LEMBI
STAFF
PRESENT:ARGYRES, COLEMAN, KIRKUP, MONROE
1. SMOKfNG CONTROL ORDINA}ICE.
The City council reviewed the staff prepared draft of a smokingcontrol ordinance. They suggested various revisions includingclarification of the definition of convention halI and limiting nosmoking in doctors offices to the public areas onIy. Councilman
Pagliaro proposed a revision so that any person knowingly permit-ting the violation of the ordinance would be subject to enforcementaction. Council supported this idea. He also suggested that the
50 percent provision of nonsmoking areas in restaurants r^ras too1ow. The council consensus was to leave that numbeIn restaurants and health establishments, he suggeste
be limited to cigarettes only and not to allow pipe
The Council agreed with this suggestion.
rasdrhso
proposed.
at smokingr cigars.
Councilman Pagliaro also questioned $rhy restaurants of 50 or less
could be either smoking or nonsmoking and suggested that this num-ber was too Iarge. Staff agreed to provide the Council with the
number of seats in various restaurants from our Broadway and Bur-
lingame Avenue surveys. Councilman Amstrup suggested that in
hallway and lobby areas of hotels the language should be revised to
aI1ow smoking. city Attorney agreed to revise the language similarto the section pertaining to city facilities. There was general
Council consensus that the ordinance with the suggested revisions
should be prepared for a public hearing as soon as possible.
2. DISCUSSION OF ZONTNG CODE REVIS]ONS -- SUBAREA A B C
The City Planner reviewed her report on the land use study concern-ing Subareas A, B, and C. It was staff's opinion that areas A and
B seem to be working weII. If we are to consider expanding A alongPrimrose, we would increase the number of nonconforming uses in
Subarea A. Subarea C tended to be an area with the most pressureto convert old residential units to commercj.al uses. Staff sug-gested that we should look at this area very closely. CouncilmanPagliaro indicated that he favored expanding Subarea A along Prim-rose to Be11evue. This would be north of Burlingame Avenue andwould not include California Drive. Mayor Barton indicated that
she thought that retail has not worked well in the past in thisarea. councilman Arnstrup indicated that he felt the real issue wasthe intensification of the office uses so that they exceed ourparking requirements. He felt that if a business does intensifyover our parking standards, that they should be required to pay foradditional parking in some manner. The City Planner suggested thatCouncil may vrant to limit businesses with high intensity parking
uses such as insurance, financial, and real- estate operations in
Subarea B. She cautioned that we must provide some location in thecity for these businesses.
After some general discussion, it was the consensus of the Councilthat we should look at creating a new area within Subarea B alongPrimrose where real estate, financial, and insurance uses wouldrequire a conditional use permit. Council directed staff toprepare such a zone for Planning Commission review. They also sug-gested that the matter of what to do with Subarea C be referred to
45
46
the Planning Commission for further study and suggestion to
CounciI.
3 ACQUTSITTON OF STREET LIGHTS FROM pG&E.
The City Manager reviewed his report concerning the pros and.of acquiring approximately 800 street Iights from PG&E. He rthat seven cities are proceeding to form a JPA and hire anpraiser and legal counsel to condemn street lights from PG&E.
economic feasibility of this approach seems to depend on receia favorable court decision of the value of the lights. Theback of the initial i-nvestment is dependent upon the futureset by PG&E for electricity for street lighting use.
Councilman Pagliaro questioned whether the seven year pay back
marginal given the long term possibility of benefit. Mayor B
expressed. a concern about the need to hire additional Cityshould the City acquire these lights. It was the general co:sion of the Council that we would not proceed to purchaselights and join the JPA at this time.
S
4. PROPOSED BROADWAY/CALIFORNIA INTERSECTION I}'IPROVEMENTS.
The Public Works Director reviewed. the plans for the p,
Broadway/California traffic improvements including the needright of way acquisition and the loss of some trees aCalifornia. Councilman Pagliaro questioned the maximum siIight. waiting time that would be necessary under the p
signalization. Public Works Director answered that we wouldlooking for a 90-L20 second cycle. Councilman Pagliaro fel
need for a left turn movement into the Bekins project and
tioned what would occur to the signals during a train interrupAfter review of the plans, staff was directed to proceed withproject as quickly as possible. It was noted that due to righ
way acquisition and construction, this project could take at
two or more years.
COUNCIL COMMENTS.
FROM THE FLOOR.
5
6
There were no additional Council comments or
the floor.
public comment f
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 8:45 p.m.
vmy
Judith A. MaIf a ri
City Clerk
te
f
or
be
no
of