HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - CC - 1979.03.19317
BUR].INGAME, CALIFORNIA
March 19, 1979
CALL TO ORDER
A regufar meeting of the Burlingame City Council was held on
the above date in the City Hall Council Chambers. Meeting was
ca11ed to order at 8:00 P.I4. by Mayor Irving S. Amstrup.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
Led by Jerome F. Coleman, City Attorney.
ROLL CALL
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: AMSTRUP, BARTON, MARTIN
COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT :CROSBY,MANGINI (Both excused because of
conflicting meeting. )
MI NUTES
BIDS: CONSIDERATION OF:
1. WASHINGTON PARK LIGHTING JOB NO. 822
Director of Public Works reviewed staff report dated March 14,
1979 as submitted by him and Senior Civil Engineer. Copies of
correspondence, various dates, various sources, documented state-
ments in report. Report indicated that in response to Council-
direction of December 4, 1979 for rebid on this project, plans
and specifications had been revised to a1l-ow bid on either Enersave
or General Electric prod.ucts, or substitution bid with no time
qualifications. Specifications also provided that Projected cost
of maintenance, lamp replacement and energy consumed over the next
ten years be included.
Report listed bids received and their disposition:
1. C.V. E. Corporation, bid
product Muscatine. None ofBid consiilered invali-d.
on Enersave, G. 8., and substitute
required product information included.
2. Corunercial Lighting.
documented. Request to
Bid invali-d.
Bid on cleco Products. Not
Cleco to test product refused
sufficiently
pending award.
3. Pacific Recreational Lighting. Bid Enersave products. Enersave
recommended by several cities, but long term predictions must be
based on two years of actual performance. Low bid. Director of
Public Works noted electrical consultant Robert Stern was engaged
to review Cleco and Enersave products. Mr. Stern had requested the
Cleco testing and had recommended Enersave not be accepted because
it has not been ful1y tested. He also recommended that a consulting
engineer be retained to develop plans and specification.
Director of Public works defined necessity for decision on:
1. Should the Enersave bid be rejected on basis of unknown per-
formance? 2. If rejected should City proceed with project since
funding is insufficient to instal-l- redesigned system employing a
con sultant?
Mr. Raymond Levy, attorney for San Mateo County Electric
Trust, addressed Council. He stated this organization'swith fair. bidding practices as established by covernmentwhich precludes proprj-etary specifications, and reporteddates of November 23, L978, February 28 and March 2 , I-979
Indus try
concern
de 4380at under
e had
Co
th
h
Minutes of the regular meeting of March 5, 1979 \i/ere approved
and adopted.
318
requested an opportunity to go over ilata involved, but these
requests were ignored. After further detail he stated that the
City had bids which were "stacked" at the inceptj-on of bj-dding,
and this was a proprietary specification for which only oneproduct would quali fy.
Mayor Amstrup objected to the statement regarding "stacked" bids
and emphasized his befief in the honesty of the staff.
Councilman Martin stated he had sympathized with local contractors
at the time of the first bid; but there had been a rebid, he saw
nothing wrong with the bidding procedures, and every contractor
had an equal opportunity to bid. He suggested the Efectrical Trust
file suit if they thought the bidding was wrong.
In response to question from the Mayor, City Attorney decl-ared the
bid process had been gone over thoroughty and he saw nothing wrong
with the bid. Councilwoman Barton stated she too was sympathetic
with other contractors previously, but now considered they had had
a fair chance. Senior Civil engineer reported that during rebid
process a1I previous bidders were given free bid plans. Nine were
given out and there was only one valid bid'
John Buchanan, General Electric Company, addressed Councif on
details of c. E. installation. Councilman Martin moved that bid
be awarded to Pacific Recreation second by Councilwoman Barton.
Wayne Thomas, Business Manager for International Electrj-cal
Workers in San Mateo addressed Council, questioning how the low
bidder could move his tabor 400 miles when bid is $13,000 less
in December. He stated this would be watched carefully.
than
Jim Thorpe, representative, Electrical Industry Trust, told Council
there was no imptication that staff was dishonest, but the Trust
believed a mistake had been made, and if the bid is awarded topacific Recreation they would have no alternative but to take lega1
action.
Councilman l{artin addressed Mr. Thorpe, stating that he tried to
get union labor up to a point, that Pacific Recreation was possibly
non-union, but if the union cannot produce on a bid, it is not the
responsibility of the City to close a contractor out because he is
nonlunion. rf bid is not awarded to Enersave, they have basis for
a suit. He remarked the City is in a position for suit by someone.
It might as well be locaI .
Mayor tunstrup added that staff had advised Councj-l- the bid was
proper, as had the City Attorney.
Motion of Councilman Martin to award bid to Pacific Recreation
carried on unanimous ro11 call vote of members present.
RECESS
short recess r4tas declared at 8:40 P.M. after which meeting resumed.
After some discussion, Counci I
control to be held at 7:30 P.M
limit of 10:00 P.M.
public hearing on rent
1979, with a time
agreed to a
., April f0,
HEARINGS
I. APPEAL OF HOWARD ATKINS
PERMIT FOR HEALTH SPA, 1fO5
FROM PLANNING COMMISSION DENIAL OF
BURI.INGAME AVENI]E.
Assistant City Ptanner's memo of March l-9, L979 _reveiwed circumstances
surrounaing tfris application and Commission action, noting staff
recommendafion thal- such operations continue to be located in M-l or
C-4 Districts with special permits.
Letter of March lg, L97g from Howard Atkins advised Council he was
RENT CONTROL
319
rel-ocating hj-s business to a Bayside location, andwas with-
drawing his appeal.
Council accepted this withdrawal , with reminder to applicant
by City Attorney that a special permit will sti11 be required in
the new location. Applicant stated he understood.
2. APPEAL OF DAVID J. ARATA, ARATA PONTIAC, FROM PI,ANNING COMMISSION
REOUIREMENT FOR ADDITIONAL PARKING SPACES, 2OO CALIFORNIA DRIVE.
Mr. Harry S. Graham, 1555 Alturas Drive, addressed Councif as a
member of the committee that established the parking formula. He
considered the regulations were not intended to cover inutile
extra space such as this, and that they were not directed toward
auto agencies.
There were no more comments and the public hearing was declared
closed,
Councilwoman Barton saw no problem in waiving
would be no new employees, and the reguJ-ations
not apply to this particular type of building.
the fee
in her
since there
opinion did
Councilman Martin agreed, conunenting
Arata moved.
the only problem would be if
Mayor Amstrup concurred
thi s type o f bui Idi.ng .
personnel.
that regulations were not
Also, this atldition would
intended for
not involve more
Councilman Martin moved that condition of special permit requirj-ng
three additional on-site parking spaces or a fee of $9,447 be
waived, second by Councilwoman Barton, carried on unanimous ro11
call vote of members present.
STAFF MEMORANDA
1. ZEV BEN-SIMON PROPERTIES.
COMMISSION DECISION
CITIZENS I PETITION APPEALING PLANNING
Assistant City Planner reviewed his memo of March 19, 1979 which
discussed Planning Commission hearing on this addition to existing
building, and the history of regulations for Downtown Parking Dlstrict
which include formula for contribution of cash or onsite parkj-ng for
construction exceeding 15r000 SF. Special permit was approved at
Planning Commission meeting of February 26, 1979 with two conditions,
one of which was the provision of three additional onsite parking
spaces or a fee of $9,447.
Mayor Amstrup opened public hearing.
Attorney Charles C. Pierpoint III, Thirkell & Pierpoint, San Mateo,
addressed Council as counsel for Arata Pontiac. He noted his re-
view of the parking district regulations and his agreement with the
principles they establish. In his opinion the parking formula con-
tribution is not excessive. However, he asked Council for waiver
of this condition of the permit because, as applied to Aratars pro-
posed addition, it j-s not consistent with the purpose of the reg-
ulatj-ons. Among reasons presented. were:
1. Aratats acquisition of Carofan Avenue Property will provide
additional parking.
2. other Arata locations close to 200 California Drive provide
ample parking.
3. Proposed adilition of two offices for agency owners and ex-
panded parts department will not generate more customers.
The fee would act as a penalty for improving the existing
operation, with adverse effect on agency income.
4. Arata has taken a decentralized position with sites, thus
not increasing the need for traffic control in one particul-ar
area.
320
this petition, dated March 13, 1979, contained signatures of nj-ne
f amilies. Mayor Amstrup set hearing on this appeal for meeting
of April 2t 1979.
Memo of March 15, 1979 from City Manager advised of changes in 1aw
apparentty allowing reallocation of previously rejected grant.
Mayor Amstrup set dj-scussion on this item for study meeting of
April .
3. B URL I NGA.IVIE PLAZA OWNE RS ASSOCIATION PROPOSAL T'OR LANDSCAPING
MAINTENANCE.
Mayor l\mstrup set discussion for the April Study meeting.
Mr. Steve Musich, Burlingame P1aza Owners Association, addressed
Councif, stati-ng he would be out of town during that time, and was
given permission to detail this proposal . He stated he would send
a representative to the study meeting.
Mayor Amstrup announced the appointment of Donald Lembi
and Recreation Commissj-on, as selected by the corunittee
commi s si- on .
to the Park
for that
He stated the City Manager had asked for a time limit on the ap-plications for the Planning Commission anil suggested midnight, March
31 , L979. Council concurred.
Mayor Amstrup asked decision of committee on nominee for PLS Advisory
Board, and was informed they haal chosen William Nagle. He confirmed
the appointment of William Nagle to this PLS Advisory Board.
5. PENINSULA EARLY LEARNING CENTER, 7247 EL CAI\,IINO
Assistant City Plannerrs memo of March 19, L979 reminded Council-that in october, 1978 they had discussed complaint received on this
school, wj-th resulting commitment from the school that conditions of
permj-t woufd be carefully observed j.n the future. Memo attachedfetter of March 14, L979 from Sheila Brutoco, Board of Directors of
the Peninsula Learning Center, reporting on compliance with City
regulations during the past six months. Assistant City Planner
stated no further action on the September, 1978 complaj,nt was
necessary.
AMUSEMENT LICENSE RENEWAL
1. BURLINGAME SKATEPARK DISCO
Council discussed apparent lack of activity at this disco and \4rhether
or not the owner even wanted this permit renewed. Mayor Amstrup
announced this item would be postponed until the owner had been con-
tacted.
CONSENT CALENDAR
RESOLUTIONS:
1. RESOLUTION NO. ff-79
THE MEYERS-GEDDES STATE
2. RESOLUTION NO. 12-79 - . REQUESTING EXCLUSION OF
SEWER MAINTENANCE DISTRICT
TERRITORY FROM
(MERCY HIGHTHE BURLINGAI"IE HILLS
scHool, PRoPERTY) "
Council questioned the procedure by which this action had been
presented to the City without prj-or knowledge. City Attorney explained
that initiative such as this for annexation first goes to LAFCo, is
then transmitted to the City, and then goes back to LAFCO. He went
'' FIXING THE
EMPLOYEE . S
EMPLOYEES I CONTRIBUTION UNDER
MEDICAL AND HOSPITAL CARE ACT.,'
2. AVAILABILITY OF URBAN GRANT FUNDS
4. COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS.
321
on to expfain procedural ,'trade-off ,, by which citiesallowed to annex County ',isIands,', but must consentrequested County annexations.
areto other
Director of Public Works commented on bitt in legislature whichwould a1low cities to refuse annexation, and suggested City workon resolution insuring that utilities, streets, and services ofareas being annexed would meet City standards. Council agreedto pursue this matter.
o
3 RESOLUTION NO. 13-79 - IIORDERING THE VACATION AND ABANDONMENTF AN EASEMENT, AND ACEEPTING NEW EASE}4ENT - LANDS OF LILLIBRIDGE.''
Mayor Amstrup proclaimed the month
County Arts Council Month. "
of April , 1979 as "San Mateo
NEW BUSINESS
councilwoman Barton moved approval of the consent calendar, secondby councilman Martin, carried on unanimous vote of members present.
PROCI,AMAT I ON
Councilwoman Barton questioned the status of "handbitIs,, to dogowners in Washington park, City Manager reported program wouldbe instituted. as soon as printing is received. -
INTERSECTION RECONSTRUCTION - BELLEVUE, LORTON, CALIFORNIA DRIVE
Director of Public Works reported traffic problem wouldproved with construction completion, proper signing, and
ACKNOW],EDGMENTS
be im-striping.
1. Letter of March 12, 1979 from Board of Supervisors, San MateoCounty, advising of public hearing March 16 , 1979 on projects tobe considered for addition to 1979 Transportation ImprovementProgram. Mayor Amstrup advised there would be another meeting
Wednesday, March 21, at the Cl-aremont Hotel, Berkeley.
2. Letter of March 5, 1979 from San MateoDistrict requesting support of SB 382.
County Mosquito Abatement
3. Revised Emergency P1an, City of Burlingame, transmittal dated
March 6, 1979.
4. Memo of March 2, 1979 from Director of Recreation listingbusinesses, non-profit organizations, and. service clubs which have
made contributions as co-sponsors of various recreational programs.Council suggested a page in the next Recreation bulletin be de-voted to acknowledgj-ng these contributions.
5. Copy of administrative report from Director of Public Works,
San Mateo, dated March 5, 1979 on subject of Garden pickup Service.
6. Correspondence, various dates, from San Mateo County Board ofSupervisors and State Department of Transportation regarding the
Route 92,/101 interchange in san Mateo.
7. League of California Cities Legislative Bulletins, differentdates.
8. Assistant City Planner: Negative Decl-arations.
1979; Fire and Police9. Reports: Treasurer, February 28,
Departments, month of February.
10. Minutes: Traffic, Safety, Parking
Planning Commj-ssion, March 12, L979.
11. Commission candidate information.
Commission, February 8;
322
WARRANTS
warrant Nos. 708 through 1006, duly audited, in the amount of
$695,903.24, approved for payment on motion of Councilman Martin,
seconil by Councj-Iwoman Barton, carried on unanj-mous vote of members
present.
PAYROLL
Council discussed future consideration of methods of stimulating
further contri-butions to rebuild this fund. Police Chief con-
firmed 4 or 5 incidents of use of money.
? DISCO
Mr. Harry S. Graham, speakj-ng as representative of Burlingame
Business and Professional Association, requested Council permission
for three community events:
Flea market, May 6 , L979,downtown Burlingame.
9, 10, 1979, Burlingame Avenue.
1979, Burlingame Avenue.
but asked for written submittal of
Sidewal-k Art Show, June 8,
Sidevralk Sal-e, August 18,
Council- voiced no objections,
requests.
1
2
3
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting regularly adjourned at 9:45 P.M
8--2,.-- z/ zl/1
Edelyn ,fI. HittCity Clerk
APP ROVALS
Mr. craham also requested Council consideration of Auto Row
dealers' offer to pay for "overstreet" signs advertising Auto Row
at California Drive and the intersections of Peninsula Avenue and
oak Grove. He was advised to confer with staff and return to
Councif.
Payroll for February, L919, Check Nos. 8682 through 9294, totaf
amount of $341,644.42 approved for payment on motion of Councilman
Martin, second. by Councilwoman Barton, carried on unanimous vote
of members present.
BURLINGAME REWARD EUND
City Attorney reported on one-month experimental program which this
establishment will- j-nitiate March 3I, 1979 involving operation as
teen-age disco with no liquor served. Letter of March L5, 1979
from disco's attorney, Scott otBrien, detailed proposal . If pro-
gram becomes permanent, disco will request permit review.
FROM THE FLOOR