HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - CC - 1987.10.21L29
CITY OF BURLINGAME
CITY COUNCIT STUDY MEETING
october 2L, t987, 7:30 p.m.
city HaII, conference Room B
Mayor Gloria Barton convened thecity Council on the above datecity HaII at 7:30 p.m.
study session of the Burlingamein Conference Room B of Burlingame
1. PARKING STRUCTURE FEASIBILITY STUDY.
The City Manager gave a brief overview of the parking study and
some staff conunents. He then introduced George Winnacker and Jack
Kemp of Mv{M Architects who prepared the parking structure feasi-bility study. Councilman Pagliaro questioned the architects aboutthe proposal for below grade parking on Lot A. Mayor Barton indi-cated that the study did not address the issue of disruption ofcurrent parking during the construction period. The architectsstated that the construction period for a one level structure could
be six to elght months.
The architects stated their opinion that they do not feel that t e
should remove the bowling alley only to address the spaces it wouldnot need if used because removal would also be eliminating poten-tiaIly viable commercial space that $rouId generate income. Longterm, they felt the City needed to look at various locations.
Councilman Amstrup reminded the Council that to start eminent
domain proceedings at the bowling a1Iey, four votes were needed.
Councilman Pagliaro did not favor the bowling alley because of thehigh cost of $16,000 per space gained. He favored Lot A at theLibrary which was cheaper. Mayor Barton felt that you needed toconsider the parking variance granted to the bowling alley in con-sidering the parking gain. Councilman Lembi thought that the bowl-ing alley was too expensive and that he no$, favored the LibraryIot. He thought that we should do both. Mayor Barton felt thatthis was a good idea because parking would be provided on two dif-ferent sides of Burlingame Avenue. Councilman Pagliaro agreed thatthis was desirable. The City Manager indicated that if the Councilpriority for these projects is high enough, funds could be raisedto accomplish both projects by interfund borrowing or lease pur-
chase bonds using the current revenue stream from the parking fundfor repayment. In the architectsr opinion, their favorite lots areLot A and Lot J. They also proposed that it would be possible todeck over the existing portion of Lot J which was not outlined intheir report.
After additional discussion it was the council consensus to proceedwith procedure for purchase of the bowling a1ley property and withproviding one additional parking deck on Lot A by going dolvn threeor four feet on the Donnelly frontage. Staff was directed to dis-cuss with legal counsel commencing eminent domain proceedings onthe bowling alley property and securing a proposal for a conceptualstudy of a parking deck on Lot A from ryfi^llq Architects.
2. PARKING FEE COLLECTION/LONG TERM LOTS.
The Pub1ic Works D l-rec tor reviewed his memo on this matter includ-
PRESENT: COUNCILMEMBERS AMSTRUP, BARTON, LEMBI , MANGINI , PAGLfARO
STAFF PRESENT: ARGYRESI COLEMAN, KIRKUP, MONROE
Councilman Mangini felt that only one site, the Bowling A1ley, didnot displace any current parking during construction. Councilman
Amstrup also questioned whether the water table had been consideredin proposing below grade parking. The architects indicated thatthis would need to be considered during the preliminary designproposals for any construction; and that construction should be
timed to the less busy commercial seasons. Councilman Lembi feltthat the merchants would be considerate of any interuption of park-ing during construction since they knew that additional parking
would be the final outcome.
I
I
ing the history and the Traffic Safety Parking recornmendat j.on, The
130
various alternatives reviewed included replacing the current ]ock
box system with meters or new ticket dispensers. The cost of
changes would be between $30,000 to over $100,000 for installingmeters. Staff indicated that we receive very few complaints onthis matter. Council consensus was to continue with our current
Iock box system.
3. A}IIMAL CONTROL ORDINANCE--DANGEROUS ANIMALS.City nty and PauI GaI-Ioway of the Humane Society to review the proposed County wide or-
dinance on this matter. Councilman Pagliaro indicated that his
concern was identifying a dangerous animal and allowing that ani-malto stay in Burlingame with a permit. Mr. Galloway responded giving
the background on the proposed ordinance and the current procedures
for impoundment of dangerous animals. Councilman Pagliaro ques-
tioned the Cityrs liability in such cases if a permit is issued toa dangerous animal.
The County and Humane Society representatives discussed how theproposed ordinance more broadly defines dangerous animal and thenallows more discretion than our current code. Mayor Barton in-dicted that she saw no problems with the proposed ordinance nowthat it had been explained.. The majority of the Council concurred.with the Mayor, although Councilman Pagliaro stated that he st,illcould not support the ordinance as proposed.
4. MARRIOTT HOTEL PARKING IMPACT.City history of the entertainment per-
mit granted to the Marriott Hotel and the subsequent letter from
Joe Ge11er, an adjacent property owner, indicating the problems
that are occurrS-ng at his office building with parking from Mar-riott patrons. Councilman Pagliaro felt there was a problem andquestioned Mr. GeIIer and Steve Sharple, General Manager of theMarriott, about how they thought it might be worked out. Mr. GeI-Ier indicated that he did not wish to limit access to his parking
Iot since this would be expensive and cause problems with thetenants. He also felt there was a legal issue involved and that
entertainment permits should be required to be publicly noticed asa variance and a public hearing heId. Steve Sharple replied thathis property also had problems on weekends with trash generated byteenagers. He indicated to Mr. Geller that the valet parking adds
L50 spaces and is fuII during peak perJ-ods. The City Planner indi-
cated that it is possible to amend the BCDC permits to enhance con-trol of the after hours abuse of the public shoreline.
After considerable discussion it was agreed that the City willnotify Mr. Geller when the Marriottrs entertainment permit is upfor its annual renewal, generally in July.
5. COUNCIL COMMENTS.
Mayor Barton stated that she had received a caII from the MillbraeMayor asking our Council to consider a feasibility study withMillbrae on possible consolidation or contracting for fireservices. The Mayor asked Council to think about this matter.
Councilman Lembi asked that the recent letter from Belinda Burns
concerning a school warning sign be referred to the Traffic Safety
Parking Commission. The Pub1ic Works Director responded that staffwas reviewing this matter. Councilman Lembi also asked that thepainting of a yellow cross walk on California near Kerwins be
reviewed.
6. FROM THE FLOOR.
There were no public comments from the floor.
AD,JOURNMENT
TEe@eeting was adjourned. at 9225 p.m.
Judith A. MalCity Clerk
vmy
fti