HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - CC - 1980.01.094A&
48 BURLINGAI.{E, CALIFORNIA
CIIY COI'NCIL STUDY UEETING
and
ADiIOURNED REGI'LAR I{EETING
January 9, 1980
tjtayor tunstrup convened a study Meeting of the Burlingame city council
in Conference Room B, of the Burlingame City HaI1, at 8:I0 P.m., on
Wednesday, ilanuary 9, 1980, following an executive session of the
Council .
PRESENT: COT NCILMEMBERS AIITSTRUP, BARTON, CROSBY,MANGINI,
Argyre6 ,
MARTIN
Fricke ,
I
sTAfF: Schwalm, Coleman,
Wagner
Kirkup, Yost,
MIXED LAIID USE DEVEIOP}IENT
PLAN FOR AIIZA BAYFRONT AREA
City Planner Yost reviewed a proposed development plan for uees
including hotel, restaurant, retail waterf,ront related sales, and
office uses for sites 16 and 17 of the Anza Bayfront, designated
for restaurant use in the development plan adopted by Council .
Drawings of the proposed cluster of one-, ;sts-, atrd three-story
buildings demonstrated height graduationE from loet buildings at the
t aterfront to taller buildings near the highway, and proposed under-
ground parking. !lr. Yost outlined the issues to be considered in
connection with the proposal as set forth in hi6 memorandun of
January 4, 1980.
Mr. David Keyston introduced the manager and architect for Zerimar
Investment company who have requested conunent s on Council's attitude
tor^rard this concept before pursuing more costly studies and detailed
plans. He corunented on the advantage of a waterfront development
with specialty shops similar to those of "Ports of CaI1" in san Pedro
and "Mission Bay" in San Diego. He felt retail specialty 6hops vrould
result in more foot traffic in the area and thereby the traffic
criteria of the Drachman Report would not be adversely affected, even
with the proposed off,ice development. llhe intent of the developers
is to construct the entire project at one time, not in phases.
In response to council concern about conversion of ehop space to
other uses, !1r. Keyston commented that specialty shops would be in
hotel buildings and would normally be converted to more acceptable
hotel use, not office use. Specialty shops in office buildings would
be limited to office supply and office related sales, to which
comparatively sma11 space would be allocated.
Council voiced concern about the impact upon downtown Burlingame of
retail sales in the Bayfront area, the impact upon the Drachman
traffic coefficient by such a development, and the effect of BcDc's
possible disapproval of the propo6ed f reehray off-ramp connection to
Airport Boulevard. !tr. Keyston reported his observations at the
BCDC meeting and his feeling that an equivalent trade-off of restored
rraterfront land might be acceptable to BcDc for approval of the
connecting road. IIe stated that the proposed development would not
advereely affect traffic until redevelopment of the airport parking
lot and drive-in. fhe sparcity of view corri.dors in the project was
questioned by Councll. AIso, it would like to have a detailed
definition of the proposed retail sales use and the traffic impact
of intended office use on all intersections. Mr. Keyston said he
beLieved the developer hroufd be willing to conmit to a maximum amount
of office use and that the questions raised by Council will be inves-
tigated by the developer, who will come back to Council with more
specific information. The effect of retail sales in the waterf,ront
area will be discuseed with the Chamber of Commerce to determine if
it would be objeetionable to the comnunity.
4t$)
46
Mr. Coleman pointed out the location of the Easton Easements, their
history and the legal status of the ten-foot strips of right-of-way
as equivalent to that of unimproved roadr.rrays. Encroachment permits
may, and on occasion have been, granted by the City for specific use
of portions of the alIeys. It vras suggested that encroachment be
allowed only by permit granted after Council review of individual
applications.
Council questioned additional co6t to the City if portions of a
right-of-way are privately improved and it become s necessary for City
cretra to remove paving or landscaping to service aewer or rrater lines-
It was recommended that encroadment permits provi.de that the permittee
will repair and replace property conditions disturbed by necessary city
work to utilities. Council questioned whether granting an encroachment
permit to one property owner would create a precedent requiring future
granting of similar encroachments. Staff stated that encroachment
permits may be granted on an individual set of facts without commitment
to similar future action. !tr. Kirkup said that in situations where
encroachment permits have included fencing, unlocked gates have been
required to keep the ri.ght-of-way accessible to City crews.
After council discussion it was decided that use of City rights-of-
way should be granted only after application to council for a special
permit, aII permits to include the requirement that permittee assumes
the cost of restoring the right-of-way to its former condition when
city crews perform gervices to underJ,ying utilities.
Iilayor Amstrup reconvened the Regular lteeting of the City Council
adjourned from January 7, 1980, for consideration of the appeal from
Planning Commission action in granting three variances to Julian
Giuntoli, relating to construction at 1106 and ll10 E1 camino Real .
ur. Yost revlewed the variances granted by the Planning Commission,
the conditions placed upon the variances, and particularly the effect
of the encroachment permit under consideration which would permit use
of the ten-foot easement to the rear of the properties for entrance
to the parking facilities of the project. Council discussed at length
the advantage of reducing the impact of driveway traffic directly onto
El Camj.no Real, and methods to naintain Eafety of the traffic within
the eaaement if the variance is sustained.
CounciLman uangini moved that the city Council sustain the Planning
Commission action in granting three variances to I{r. Giuntoli with
respect to construction at L1O6 and 1ll0 EI Camino Real, subject to
the conditions established by the Planning Commission at its meeting
of November 26, 1979, and the further conditions that:
(b) The property olrner agrees that if it is necessary for the city to
excavate or disturb the paving of the right-of-way f,or the servic-
ing of its utilities, the property owaer will reimburse City for
the additional expense City incurs to cut into the paving and the
expense of restoring the area to repaved condition.
fhe motion was geconded by Couneilman Crosby and passed on the follow-
i.ng roll-call vote:
'a'rf ,r rq,.r--1
2. EASTON EASEMENTS
ADJOURNED RSGI'LAR MEETING
(a) tte property orirner shall supply and maintain "stop" and "Do Not
Enter" signs at the Carrnelita end of the r j.ght-of -way; "One Way"
and "No Parking" signs in the right-of -\rray i and a "No Left Turn"
sign at El camino Real; and
48+
+6'
AYES:
NOES:
COT'NCII.,ITIEI{BERS BARTON, CROSE:T. MANGINI , MARTIN
COT'NCILII{EMBER AI,TSTRUP
Councilmembers emphasized that this action is not to be considered
a precedent and is based primarily on the need to reduce the impact
of driveway turns onto and off El canino Real. Each encroachment
request will continue to be considered by its individual situation.
The City Engineer stated that the conditions established by Council
r.rill be placed on record with the county Recorder in the encroachment
permit .
Mayor Amstrup declared the Regular ueeting of the City Council
adj ourned .
lfhe reconvened Council Study Meeting continued with the discussion
of, Item 2 - Eaaton Easementg.
Mr. Kirkup reported on an application for an encroachment of an
easement by a property ohrner rrho wished to include the ten-foot
strip within a fenced area prior to sale of his property. He stated
that the contiguous o$rner had placed a fence along hi6 property line
some time ago. The city would require an unloclced gate in the fenc-
ing for continuous access to service the City's utilities. Council
discussed hrhether contiguous property owners should be given like
opportunities when encroachment pemits are requested.
Council agreed that the procedure followed by the Dj,rector of Public
Vlorks in granting the encroactrment permit is approved.
3. FAT ABATEUENT
Iilr. Alan J. Irlerrifield of Peninsula Community Services, Inc.,
referred to Council's previous consent to participation in the rat
abatement program to the extent of comnitment of $5,000 of Revenue
Sharing Funds. He reported that the Board of Supervisors had
reduced its partici.pation in the progrErm from 7% of, admi.ni.strative
costs to 1L7o. It has, therefore, become necessary to change the
program to a fee-for- services basis. A charge of $4 will be made
for inspection of property, a written inspeetion report which will
be discussed with the resident, and placement of bait. A thirty-
day follow-up will be offered at a further $2 charge.
Council questioned whether services are elective by the resident
with the clear understanding that a $4 fee is involved. ur.
Merrifield atated that the inspection will be made with the written
permission of the resident and his presence or that of his designee.
In response to council questions, It{r. Merrifield stated that the
cost of the program wiLl be approxi:natety 950,000 for the four
cities of Burlingame, Millbrae, South San Francisco, and the
Fairmont area of Pacifica. Revenue Sharing Funds are necessary to
start up the program. Council pointed out that the city's $5,000of Revenue Sharing Funds, plus fees of 1,500 residential subscribers
for the servLces would result in a profit. and it vras suggested that
any funds over the City's one-quarter share of the total cost of the
program should become a refund of its Revenue Sharing Funds. Mr.l.lerrifield Etated that data will be made available to the City regard-
ing the number of homes serviced and the amounta paid for services.
Council requested that there be an approved written agreement with
the resident giving permission for the services and stating the
RECONVENED STI'DY MEETING
4fI1
48
amount of fee, and a further agreement bet$reen the City and Peninsula
Community Services, which provides that the Revenue Sharing contribu-
tion will be refunded to the City on a specified basis. City Attorney
Coleman r{ras directed to work with Ur. Merrifield on the forms of the
agreements and return to Council with his recoNnendations.
fire Chief Fri.cke conmented on his understanding that lrlr. Merrifield
stated bait would continue to be supplied by the Pire Department.
He reported that the County has informed him that bait supplies are
very lolv. Mr. Merrifield indicated that he foresees no problem
because he has an adequate supply of bait.
4. CHAMBER OF COIO{ERCE--BURLINGAI.IE DAYS
Counci] questioned the budget for Burl ingame Days presented by the
Chamber of Corunerce. It was the conaenaus that 9400 of the budgeted
$1,700 quarterly payments to the Chadbe r !,ras earmarked for BurlinganeDays. I.lr. Ray Kliewer and Ur. Donal.d Spencer responded to Councilqueries about individual, items of the additional 92,996.74 requested
by the Chamber. Council unanimously recommended elimination of com-plimentary dinners and suggested that an alternate method of handlingthe community dinner be developed, which would involve more citizensof the City. It hras also suggested that more emphasis be provided
for the Miss Burlingame portion of the celebration with possible
increased incentives.
Mr. Kliewer, !1r. Spencer and Ur. and !trs. Campanile advi.sed that
the Lions Club Board of Directors indicated the Club hrould not sponsor
the parade this year, but would assist any group which will undertakeits sponsorship. The conunittee qrould like to pursue groundwork toqualify the parade for future ratings which will attract bands from
areas other than Iocal . For this reason, large printing and postage
sums are included in the budget. It was suggested that the Convention
Bureau might be enlisted in that phase of the promotion.
Council determined an additional sun of 9I,500 will be allocated for
Burlingame Days, and the item should be placed upon the agenda for
action at the next regular meeting. llhe funds are to be desj.gnatedfor banners and to augment the Uiss BurI ingame contest.
Con6ideration of establishment of a fund for advance planning of
Burlingame Days will be taken up in budget discussions later in the year.
Council deferred consideration of the proposed CATV ordinance andstaff memorand a to a future meeting.
6 . FIRE AI,ARM BOX SAI.IE
Chi.ef Fricke reported methods for sale of old fire alarm boxes and
requested permission to use the proceeds for the renovation of an o1dfire engine. Council directed that the f,ire alarm boxea be offeredfirst to Burlingame residents and, if the demand exceeds the boxesavailable for sale, that sales be alLocated by a draw.
Ihe Charnber recotrunendation that fees for booths at Day-In-ttre-Park be
increased was discussed. Mr. Ray Wagner reported that past experienceindicated such an increase would result in reduced Iocal and amateurparticipation. Council approved retention of last yearr s booth fees.
5. CArV
WE
4'- ',..
7. CLEA}IING A}iD GROUTING HILTSIDE
ATiID SI(YLINE RESERVOIRS
There \^ras no Council objection to the program for cleaning and grout-
ing of Hi1lside and Skyline Reservoirs as outlined in lulr. Kirkup's
memorandum of December 31, L979.
8.C.E.O.F RE STT'DY
Council discussed briefly the three proposals in the GRC report on
fire services. Chief Fricke reported with respect to the proposal
for ambulance services, the services called for are similar to those
presently supplied by the I'ire Department in emergencies, but without
the proposed charge. Although an ambulance would be supplied by the
County, in his opinion increased personnel eosts to the City would
result from the progran. Council will give further consideration to
the report.
9. DIRECTIONAI, SIGNS
Council referred the proposed design and locations f,or directional
signs in the Bayfront Area to the Planning Commission for its comments.
10. RESOLUTION OF BURT,INGA}IE AVENUE
PARKING DISTRICT TUNDS
Council approved the recommendations of the Finance Director in his
memorandum of December 3, t979, regarding Burlingame Avenue Off-
Street Parking District assessments-
II. AMENDME}ITS TO BURLINGA}.TE AVENUE
AREA PARKING DISTRICT
This matter was put over to a future meeting.
L2. OTHER
Annexation of propertv on f rousdale Drive
I'lr. Schwalm requested direction concerning the request of property
owners of an area on Trousdale Drive to annex to the City. t{E. Kirkup
estimated that it would cost about $LO,OOO to convert the water and
sevrer for the entire block. Staff was directed to aEsemble cost
figures for conversion of utilities and data previously developed
regarding annexation costs.
AD.IOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 1I:35 p.m-
ilK
City Clerk