Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - CC - 1977.03.21315 CALL TO ORDER A regularthe abovecalled to meeting of the Burlingame City Council was held ondate in the City Ha11 Council Chambers. The meeting wasorder at 8:25 P.M. by Mayor A.C. "Bud" Harrison. BURLINGA.IqE, CALIT'ORNIA March 21 , 1977 Amstrup , Crosby ,Harrison , Mangini , Martin None PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG:Led by Jerome F. Coleman, CityAttorney. ROLL CALL Counc i 1 Counci 1 Menbe r s Membe rs Present: Absent: MINUTES The minutes of theregular meeting of regular meeting of March 9, 1977 were March 7, L977 and the adjourned approved and adopted. HEARINGS CITY COUNCIL REVIEW OF SPECIAL PERMITS APPROVED BY PLANNING COMMISSION I TO CONSTRUCT HENRY HORN & A THREE STORY OFFICE BUILDING AT 405 PRIMROSE ROAD. soNS, 1633 OCEAN AVENUE, SAN FRANCISCO, APPLICANT Mayor Harrison requested conment from City planner. City planner reviewed the facts of this special permit presented in his reportof March l-7, 1977. The building will have an outside elevator andfenced tennis court on the roof, Total height of building withroof fence will be 44r. Conditions of Planning Commission approvalwere that tennis court use be limited to occupants of the building;and that lights therefor be limited to no later than 9:00 p.M. Thisl-atter restriction is to be reviewed in six months after first use ofthe building. Councilman Mangini had questions: t. Would office workers whocustomarily get off work at 5:00 P.M. remain to play tennis?2. Is el-evator on Primrose side? 3. Agreement to reimburseCity for damage to street trees? 4. Is it possible to put acyclone type fence on top of the roof? Mr. Bertram M. Horn, 620 Sharon Avenue, Hilfsborough, projectedhis plans for this building which include moving his own iirm fromSan Francisco to occupy the top floor of the structure. He spokeof the advantage to the City of the payrotl engend.ered by thebusinesses in the building; and of the novel- design of the buildingwith its recreational area, a concept which is becoming increasingiyevident in business structures. He did think there would be use ofthe tennis court after working hours by tenants and their guests. Mr.Horn stated Mr. Murray Cohn, owner of adjacent property on cornerof Primrose and Chapin, plans to develop another office buildingon his fot. Mr. Horn and Mr. Murray have been working togetherto make their two structures appear compatible. He pointad out thatthe 44r height of the building i-s due to the tennis tence, which will-be cyclone fencing, extending 8!t above the parapet. The parapet it-seff is within the 35' height limit. He agreed to assume resptnsibirityfor damage to street trees. A courtyard will be built around thel-32r redwood on the rear of the lot. Councilman trlangj-ni asked if Mr. Horn would agree to put cycl-onefencing.over the top of the tennis court. This would prole"tpedestrians and motorists from tennis ba11s. He gave ixamples of some buildings in large cities having recreational areas on the roof where this is done. Mayor Harrison questioned if this woutd be practical , suggesting that a return of some kind could be designed for the street frontaqe. Mr. Horn stated he had measured tennis court fences in other City locations and in neighboring cities. This fence would be the highest in the area. Councilman Mangini pointed out that the courts measured were aII at gror:nd level where impact of a ball coming from the roof to ground level was not a consideration. Mayor Harrison opened the meeting to public connent. Mr. Harry Lehrfeld, Burlingame Realty, spoke in favor of theproject. He noted the need for office space now that the Crocker Bank building is fu11y occupied. Mr. Murray Cohn, P.O. Box 454, Millbrae, who proposes to build on the lot next to Horn's, stated he foresaw no problems with the tennis baIls. There were no further cornments and the publj-c hearing was declared cfosed. Council-man Amstrup questioned the Cityrs liability in relation to damage caused by tennis bal-ls. City Attorney replied he thought that the 12' fence on the roof is a reasonable stipulation, and this City restrj-ction would be defensible. Councilman Amstrup decfared his purpose in setting this proposal for Council review was not as an objection to the project but as a policy determination on a new concept. Councilman Martin stated he would approve the project in consideration of the six month review. Councj-lman Crosby noted that in the restriction covering tennis court useage Mr. Horn had included tenants "and guests. " Mr. Horn confirmed he would like to have "guests" included. He added that d.oors to the roof would be locked, and only tenants would have keys. Mayor llarrison had no objection to the project. Councj-lman Crosby moved that the decision of the Planning Commlssion be upheld, with the addition to one of the conditions that use of the tennis court be limited to tenants "and guests. " Second by Councilman lvlartin, all aye roll call vote. 2. CHILD CARE CENTER AND NURSERY SCHOOL AT COOLIDGE SCHOOL. COIJNTRY CLUB DAY CARE & CULTURAL CENTER, INC., 14OO PALOMA AVENUE, APPLICANT. At the request of Mayor Harrison, City Planner reviewed this special permit approved by the Plannj-ng Commission. This was a iointapplication with the Burlj-ngame School District. The applicant leases floor area of 2,000 SI' from the Burlingame Efementary School District on a month to month rental of $500.00 per month. Use of the building is untit 10:00 P.M., and special permit is to be co-extensive with the length of the fease. Lease could be made for a longer period of time or the School District may dispose of the property. City Planner mentioned a concern as being specific times for "non-exclusive" use of the playground. offstreet parking could be provided on the Laguna Avenue side of the play- ground, but permit was approved with on street parking since there are few employees. Three pedestrian gates shoufd be fenced if playground is to be safe for children. 2 316 377 Mayor Harrison questj-oned the lack of verification of Cj-ty Planner replied that he had today received phone from State licensing office that application had beenlast week but was not yet processed. State permits. veri fication re ce ived Councilman Mangini questioned the legafity of operation withouta state license. The City Planner advised that this organizationdid have a license at their previous location in South SanFrancisco. However, Ij-censes do not transfer to new locations and another application must be made, with inspectj-on. He had been advised by a State license office that as long as an application had been received, there was not violation of the State LicensingAct. Ms. Diane dePeralta, representatj-ve of the applicant, r4ra s invitedto ad.d.ress Council". Mayor Harrison, voicing concern about liability and negligence,questioned specifically the arrangements for the playground gates. Ms. dePeral-ta replied this was presently being discussed with the School Dj-strict representative. Intention was to put up gates which would prevent children from the school from getting intothe streets, with catches which would be beyond the reach of smallchildren. However, gates would not be locked, so tha! neighborhoodchildren would not be kept out. Weekend use of the building probably would be Saturday morning classes for cultural center. Mayor Harrison noted that the school was in operation, with an agreement with the School Board, on the 9th of February, 1977.At this time no license had been obtained and no permit fromthe City. I{s.de Peralta cited a 30-day notice to move from their South San Francisco location, and difficulty of finding schoollocations. She had been unable to get on the February I agendafor the Burlingame School Board and had obtained an extensionfor her South San Francisco locatj-on through that date. She had contacted the Planning Departrnent, however, since she knewpermit was necessary. Councifman Amstrup questioned the "non-profit" status of the school.Ms. dePeral-ta explained that "Country Club Day Care and CulturalCenter" is a non-profit organization, recognized as such by theState, and it j-s leasing space in the schoof. It is hiring anotherorganization cal1ed "Young Wor]d" to carry on the service of runningthe day care center. Councilman Amstrup questj-oned the situationof one group, which is non-profit, hiring another group whichoperates for profit. Ms. dePeralta stated "Young World" was beinghired because child care services in some non-profit organizationsare questionable. So far, the operation is running at a loss.The Councilman pointed out that. if this is a profit organization,then a private business is being run in an R-1 zone. Only anon-profit school is a conditional use. He stated that this pieceof property has the potential for 8 residential tots. Ms. deperaltareplied that Young World has not declared itself as being a profit organi zation . Councilman Mangini stated he r^ras in favor of this school, butquestJ-oned the areas for "non-exclusive use." Would Mrs. deperaltaagree that other people 1n the area could continue to use the school-yard as a playground? Ms. dePeralta agreed. The Councilman thenquestioned whose insurance would cover this use. The City Attorneynoted that under the terms of Ms. dePeralta's contract her insuranceagrees to name the School District as co-insuror. In response to question from Mayor Harrison, Ms. dePeraltastated there were no contemplated changes. Councilman Martin voiced annoyance i,rith the fact that when the School- Board could no longer l-ease the school- to the Cj_ty for $12,000 a year, they leased it to a private individual for 93,000 ) 318 a year. The applicant noted that they are leasing only 12,000 SF. The Councilman then questioned the practlcality of the "non-exclusive use" which would mean that anybody could use the schoolyard at any time without any restri-ctions. This coufd conflict with the activj-ties of the children at the school. Also, if the School District sold the school, the City would be faced i^/ith the problem of a private enterprise in a residential district. He stated that, non-profj-t organizatj-on or not, somebody is making money. He did not want business in an R-1 zone. Ms. dePeralta repeated no money j-s bej-ng made yet, and the School Dj-strict faces a long process in sel-lj-ng the school . Councilman Martin remarked that j-f she were given the opportunj-ty to make money now, the same opportunity would have to be given u,hen the School Board sold the school. Councilman Mangini commented that the fact of people making money from a non-profit organization did not bother him. Many people make their living working for non-profit businesses. Hj.s concerns had been the summertime use of the school- yard, which had been answered to his satisfaction, and the gates in the schoolyard. City Planner said the gates would be secured by some typeof keeper out of reach of the smaff children. Councilman Amstrup pointed out that since only part was rented, the School Board could wefl al1ow other business in the same building. of the building tenants, other The meeting was opened to pubfic comment. Ms. dePeral-ta told Councj-l- this was a day-care center for pre- school age children. They are sma11 children and very impression-able. Most of their parents work and a good percentage live inapartments. By and large, the children do not have the opportunityto be in a residential area. Having a day care center in a nice neighborhood would give the children a better opportunity. Shequestioned what type of property would be available for a daycare center. Councilman Martin stated there were other areas in the city, suchas commerc j-al-, f or the schooJ-. IIe repeated his displeasure with a business in a residential zone. He noted the Moore school i-sin a commercial zone, and cofiunented that most of Ms. dePera]-tars clients were from South San Francisco. There were no comments from the audience and was declared closed. the pubfic hearing Ms. dePerafta disclaimed this as a profit business - they are struggling to make expenses and the rent was twice that of theirprevious location. rt is difficult to find outdoor play area in a commercial zone. Buildings often have just enough parking for tenants. Council-man Amstrup noted the possibility of yet another school being closed in Burlingame. The city would be faced with another problem such as this. He would fike to see the School District make some money for return to the taxpayers, but he thought the onl-y way money could be made out of this property was to sel1 the 8 lots underlyinq it, a considerable piece of property. If a business were allowed in this area, it wou]d therefore be a dis- service to the taxpayers. Mayor Harrison fel-t that the nursery school performed a needed service but he was concerned with parking, a business in the R-I area, and particularly with the fact the School Board participated in this without first making sure proper permits and licensing had been accomplished. Mr. Glenn Stewart, Director, Business Services, Burlingame r-r!Ei-+-\ { 319 School District, protested school authorities did contact the Stateregarding licensing. They were advised that until the lease had been completed and the orqanization was ready to occupy, State l-icense could not be granted. The school admin j-strati.on contacted the planning department and made preliminary j-nquirj-es. Obviouslythe city department could not make final commitment. Tentativeinquiries in both directions had been made prj-or to the fact. Council-man Mangini moved the Council sustain the action of thePlanning Commission. The motion failed for lack of a second. Councilman Amstrup moved this special permit be denied. Second by Councilman Martin. Motion carried on following roll- call vote: AYES :COUNCILMEN: AMSTRUP , CROSBY, HARRISON, MARTIN NAYES : COUNCILI,IEN: MANGINI RE CES S After a short recess at 9:20 P.M. the meeting reconvened. COMMUNI CAT IONS 1. REQUEST OF TERRENCE O'NEILL, COUNCIL CONCERNING MORATORIUM ON DI STRI CT AVENUE, TO ADDRESS CONSTRUCTION TN C-3 1586 15TH APARTMENT STAFF 1. CITY MANAGER: DIRECTION FOR ARCHITECTS POLICE STATION PLANS f. City Manager memo of March 16, 1-977 transmitted for Councilconsideration and action agreement \^7ith the architectural firm ofEhrlich,Helft and Rominger and Resolution No. 24-77, authorizinqexecution of such agreement. City Manager's memo stated Councitpreviously directed preliminary plans for schematic Plan C,Phase 3, and that the architects would be present to report on and receive directions for the preliminary pIans. Mr. Joseph Ehrlich, president of Ehrlich, Helft and Rominger, addressed the Council. He said that the previous contract has been reviewed, and his staff had conferred with the City Attorneyon it. Two signed copies of proposed contract have been presentedto the City CLerk. His firm is currently reviewing the schematics, and while the schematj-cs will look basically the same, enoughftexibility is desired to make some minor internal rearrangements.There is no intention of enlarging the square footage and therewill be no significant budgetary changes. Mayor Harrison questioned if this could be done with the present schematics as they proceed with preliminary p1ans. Mr. Ehrlichagreed. Councilman Amstrup asked if the intention was to proceed with20,000 SF as the schematic exists, with no consideration of reduction.Mr. Ehrlich replied that working with City staff to determinethe program woul-d result in a conclusion. It hras his impressionthat there was an approved schematic by Council, and his firm hadconsidered working off this schematic. Council_man Amstrup notedthat not aI1 of the Council had approved the schematic. Mayor Harrison commented that the selection of the schematic hadbeen by majority vote . f Mayor Harrison acknowledged receipt of memorandum from City Clerkdated March 21 , 1977 advising of Mr. OrNeillrs request this betaken off agenda. Mayor Harrison noted moratorium ordinancewill be consj-dered by Planning Commission March 28, 1977 withreport back to Council. Councilman Martin remarked that Council minority reserves the right to question the action. He stated there was a difference between Plan C, Phase 3 and the original schematic presented by Gumbinger, DeWolf and ,fohnson. He asked if Mr. Ehrlich's firm had considered and compared both p1ans. Mr. Ehrlich replied they had not because they do not yet have a contract. Council-man Martin questioned if they did get a contract, would they consider the difference between the two. He consi-dered this architectural firm was chosen because Mr. Gumbinger was part of it. To his knowledge, Mr. cunbinger had never seen Plan C, Phase 3. Mr. Ehrlich stated his reaction would be to devefop the best plan possible within confines of budgetary and other considerations. He stated it j-s not his intention to get involved in the pol-itical tensions of any political body, and his firm must abide by their bestprofessional judgments. Councilman Martin noted that a police station of 20,000 SF, assuming a cost of $70.00 per SF, would cost $1,400,000. He questioned if Mr. Ehrlich had seen the twop1ans. Mr. Ehrlich stated they had seen them, but had not studied or evaluated them, so they coul-d not make a recommendation one way or the other. Mayor Harrison stated that since Council based all action taken in the past in recommending Plan C, Phase 3, Mr. Ehrlich t/rould have to be livj-ng with that schematic. Mr. Ehrlich agreed, stating Mr. Gumbinger obviously would be involved, but their decision and recommendation would be based on their judgment of what is the best functional layout. Decisions would be made on aprofessional basis. Councilman Martin quoted City Manager's memorandum, "CounciIpreviously directed preliminary plans for Schematic Plan C, Phase 3." Ile questioned if Mr. Ehrlich woufd look at all the plans, and not just Plan C, Phase 3, since Council in effect had curtailed the architect from considering any other plan by their action. Ivlr. Ehrlich rhplied that a start must be made somewhere, and it is the intention to start with the previously approved plan rather than point zero. Councilman Amstrup voiced confusion with the fact that Council had approved a schematic, then suddenly voted it out. Architects were changed so there was no schematj-c. He questioned if the architect could look at the plans and come in with a reducedplan that would work. Was Councj-I simply saying to the architect, go with that schematic? Councilman Amstrup questioned if he was to one p1an. saying the City is bound Mayor Harrison replied the City has a contract based on that p1an. Councilman Manginj- remarked that from his standpoint he thought Council was dealing in semantics. Council had hired a professionally competent firm and had gone beyond point zero. He was sure no competent architect woul-d do anythj-ng but what he thought was best for his clients, and he was willing to have the architect l-ook at any pIan. whether Plan C, Phase 2, or Phase 3 was immaterial-. He was confident that if the architect saw problems they would advise the Ci ty. Councilman Martin reviewed that the original plan was PIan A. Plan C, Phase 2, an incremental project, woul-d have been feasible. Plan C, Phase 3, is not incremental-. If the architect starts c 320 Mayor Harrison decl-ared that Council had had over a year plus of looking at schematics. Then Council voted in favor of Plan C, Phase 3. He dj-d not recall voting it out. Action was taken on the architect, but Council- did not rescind their satisfaction with the plan. The City advertised for action based on that plan. with it, the City is corunitted to a building of $1,400,000. He emphasized that he was questioning only where the architect is being directed to start. This should be made clear and should be on record. Councitman Crosby commented that several months ago he and the Council had heard much input from proponents of other plans whj-ch involved the post offj-ce and parkj-ng structure. Everybody was given the opportunity to come up with plans. As far as he was concerned, Plan C, Phase 3 had been considered the best. Mayor Harrison pointed out that Resolution 24-77 avth,ori z ing the agreement was before the Council for action. RESOLUTION 2A-TT"AIJTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT FOR ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES - POLICE STATION - WTTH EHRLICH,HEFT & ROMINGER,ARCHITECTS '' was introduced by Councilman Crosby who moved its adoption. Second by Councilman Mangini . Councilman Martin stated that one of the criteria raised in previous Council discussions was could the City buil-d an incrementalpolice station, part now and part later. He thought Plan C, Phase 2 indicated this could be done. He considered Phase 1 poor because it wasn't rea1ly an increment. Council did not choose to take action on the incremental Phase 2, but went instead to Phase 3, which was basically the same as the original proposal. He thought iL was wrong to limit the architect by this actiontonight to Plan C, Phase 3 as a starting point. This limits the integrity of the architect. He noted he had no qualms about Mr.Ehrlichrs ability to develop a plan he consid.ered good for the City. However, Councifman Martin thought that Council is moving too fast and is telling the architect what to do without askingfor consultation. Councilman Mangini questioned City Attorney if a would have the effect of directinq the architect Plan C, Phase 3. City Attorney replied it would vote on the resolution to start from not. Mayor Harrison restated the motion at theMartj-n. It carried on the following roll request of Counc ilman cal-l vote : NAYES: COUNCILMEN: AMSTRUP,MARTIN Councilman Amstrup stated he had hoped that the majority of the Council would strive somehow to bring about unanimity, and he would like to state for public dissemination the fact that he thought both Councilman Martin and himself had tried hard to indicate there were ways to bring them into agreement. But it seemed therest of the Council wished to bypass them. He stiIl thought thepolice station did not have to be so grandiose, but the majorityof Council had unfortunatel-y found it fit to approve a 20,000 SFstation. He thought it would have been better for common agreement. Mayor Harrison, reading from a prepared statement, declared: "In connection with this resolution and contract I believe it isappropriate to straighten out some misconceptions. I believeby passing this resofution for these architectural services weare acting in the best interests of Burlingame. I further believethat those who have delayed this police statj-on construction have not,in view of the inflationary costs of a 14-month de1ay, approximating some $l-50,000 pl-us, acted in the best interests of Burlingame. "This delay will cost the city more; this delay caused the lossof architectural services whj-ch is now being corrected. If we had not had the delays, we would have the original architecturalfirm intact and would have the station under construction at l-esscost. We are acting in the best interests of Burlingame when we QOIa) 4 _l_ AYES: COUNCILMEN: CROSBY , HARRISON , MANGINI 7 322 "look at the best architectural firms and retain them to do ajob which must last us for many years. Now, fortunately, in spite of the delay and losses, we are back on the track; fet's all work together and eliminate these divisive, delaying and costlytactics; it has hurt the city and no other reasonable conclusion can be made . " Councilman Amstrup retorted he took umbrage at the statement thatthis was a delaying tactic. As far as he was concerned.r thematter of the police station could have been resolved a year ago. He pointed out that in action late last year architects were appointed at one meetj-ng and dismissed. the next. He emphasizedit has never been clarified whether or not the post office isavailable. The statement was made that it would not be availablefor 3-4 years. However, when he had checked with officials, he was told that the Government was studying it at present. Inhis opinion, most of the costliness had come because the Councilvaciflated on the architects. He asserted no one was going to accuse either him or Councilman Martin of the high cost factor, and as far as he was concerned, such accusations were insulting. Councilman Martin stated that i"rhether a decision is in the bestinterests of the City or not is only in the mind of the Councilman who makes the decision. He had been making decisions on the Councilfor many years, but no one, until tonight, had ever accused himof not making up his own mind in what he thought was the bestinterests of the City of Burlingame. He pointed out to Mr. Ehrfich that he had no lack of confidence in him because he voted no onthe resolution. He had some lack of confidence in his associate. To the Mayor he asserted that he really resented the implicationthat he did not act in the best interests of the City, and he would argue the point any time. At this point, Councilman Mangj-nj- remarked he thought Council wasgetting histrionic. He did not believe that anyone woufd ever thj-nk that anyone on the Council had not voted in the best interestsof the City. IIe compared the vote on this matter to his voteagainst the majority of Council on an action earlier in the evening wheren he thought he was making the best judgrment, but fourothers though! they were. He went on to say some people assumethe City is locked into this particular plan, but the architects have an assignment to recommend the way to go, and they couldpossibly conclude with a recommendation of something different. Hopeful-ly, the Councif would come to unanimity. He emphasized that Council had taken an action, and urged that they go forward with it. Mayor Harrison, referring to his statement that the delay cost thousands of do1lars, stated he was talking about the actj-on,not people. If his statement was taken personally, he apologized. He noted that in his Mayor's statement of March 7,1977 he hadpointed out that Council was composed of five people, al1 verydifferent, but all comnitted to service to the City and all dedicated. He did feel- that this action was, dollarwise, in t.hebest interests of the City. He stated Council had approved acontract. Did they wish to qo further? In response to question from Council-man Crosby, City Manager statedsoils report must be approved under any circumstances. Thendirection should be given to the architect. Mr. Ehrlich told Council that in any project an architect has to Councilman Crosby agreed with Councilman Mangi-ni's opinions, remarking that right decisions are in the eye of the beholder. He did not think the Mayorrs statement implied that anyone was not doing his besti and declared the time had come to go forward withthe matter at hand - the police station. He repeated he did notbelieve anyone was accusing anyone eIse. e 323 Councilman Mangini asked if he was asking for specific direction asto Plan C, Phase 3. Mr. Ehrlich replied he was not, but was askingfor an understanding that Council- is talking about approximately 20,000 SF based on Plan C, Phase 3. Councilman Mangini gave his opinion that the Police Station committeehad some good direction for either Phase 2 or Phase 3, Plan C. The Police Department had indicated they coul-d work well withej-ther. A point of departure could be given and the architectcould have some flexibility. Councilman Martin suggested the architects be given direction thatthey keep the pol-ice station under 20,000 SF at $70.00 per SF. Hestated he might vote no, but this is a method of developing specifics and the architect woufd have something to operate with. Councilman Mangini moved that soils report be procured and thatthe architects proceed with some kind of a prelj-minary plan thatis reasonable and functional and which is less than 20,000 SFwith cost at $70.00 per SF. Second by Councilman Crosby. Motioncarried on the following ro11 call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN: CROSBY , HARRI SON, I{ANGfNI NAYES: COUNCILMEN: AMSTRUP,MARTIN Council received informational memo dated March L7, l-977 from City Manager attaching copy of San Mateo Councy Countywj-de BoatingFacilities Plan - Preliminary Engineering Study. City Managerexplained the Harbor District is not only going to build majorboating facilities at Pj-lar Point, but they also have tentativeplans to build more boating facilities throughout the county. 3. PROPERTY TAX RELIEF MEASURES C.ity Managerrs memo of March 17, 1977 attached League of CaliforniaCities Principles for Property Tax Reform and their request forcitiesr support of their stand. Cj-ty Manager explained that Assemblyman Papan is on the Revenue and Taxation Committee, andhe is ia co-sponsor of the Petris Bill supported by the League. 4. APPLICATION TO FILE LATE CLAIM OF GARY BRANCHAUD City Attorney's memo of March L5, 1977 attached subject claim.City Attorney explained application to file a fate claim wasreceived with reasons of misinformation from the City andallegedly incorrect lega1 advice from an attorney. City Attorneystated the matter had been discussed with the insurance company,and they are in agreement that this applicatj_on should be denied. Councilman Mangini moved that this application to file a late claimbe denied, second by Councilman Martin. A11 aye voice vote. CONSENT CALENDAR 'rrq@r4'|.--__ - q{''l.f'ri?il|Ei?'"rT.7.I,.rffi f.,-E''|a-Fl receive a program. It would be an arrogance on the part of the architect to tell a client what he shoufd have, and he wished to speak directly to the square footage of the project. Regardingthe j-ncremental plan, his advj-ce usually is even though there isin the basic structure more space than necessary, it is more economical to build the space all at once, even if it is onlyshelled out. His firm had taken this project on the assumptionthat the Councj-l had determined the approximate overall size ofthe building. That is the point of departure from which they are s tar ti ng. 2. SAN MATEO COUNTY BOATING FACILITIES PI,AN q 324 ].. PARCEL MAPS RECOMMENDED BY PLANNING COMMISSION PROPERTIES AT 828 AND 850 AI RPORT BOULEVARD AND 33 WITH PARK CONDITIONS: ROAD Assistant copies of Counci- Iman Coun c i lman Amstrup Crosby, City Engineer's memo of March 76, L977 transmitted two parcel maps for Councit approval with conditions: finaf map, resubdj-vision of Lot 1, Block 1, Anza Airport Park Unit No. 4 at 828 and 850 Airport Boulevard, Anza Sharehofders Liquidating Trust. Tentative parcel map, resubdj-vision of 5 lots - Lots 28,2C, 3A,3B and 3D, Block 3, To\"/n of Burlingame, 33 Park Road, Ted Far 1ey. By endorsement of March 17, L977 on memo City Manager recommended approval. moved approval of consent calendar, second by ai-1 aye voice vote. RES OLUTION S ].. RESOLUTION NO. 25-77'AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF INTERACTIVE ACCOUNTING SYSTEMS SERVICE AGREEI4ENT WITH XEROX CORPORATION ACTING THROUGH XEROX COMPUTER SERVICES" was introduced by Council- man Crosby who moved its adoptj-on. Second by Councilman Martin, all aye ro11 call vote. 2. RESOLUTION NO. 26-77 ''AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT CENTER GOLFPROVIDING ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY STUDY - CONVENTION CoURSE" was presented to Councif. Councilman Amstrup requested explanation. City Attorney pointed out that at the first meeting with Mr. Silverton it was stated that input from Mr. Bj-Il- Sherman, GoIf Course Consultant, would be necessary for the feasibility study. In answer to the Councilman's question as to \,/hy National Feasibility could not encompass this, the City Attorney stated they do not have personnel for this specialized area of the feasibility study. He added that the City witl eventually be reimbursed for money for this study. Mayor Harrison confirmed that National Feasj-bility would have had to hire a consultant themselves for this. AYES :COUNCILMEN:AMSTRUP, CROSBY, HARRISON, MANGINI MARTINNAYES: COUNCILMEN: ORDINANCES SECOND READING 1. ORDINANCE NO. ].099 "ESTABLISHING A STOP SIGNAL AT BALBOA liAY APPROACHING DAVIS DRIVE.,' Councilman Martin questioned if there was staff recommend.at ion.. City Engineer assured him staff had reviewed this intersectior. and he did recommend passage of this ordinance. Meeting was openeil to public co[unent. There was none and the public hearing was declared closed. a Councilman Martin questioned trho made the agreement that Mr. Sherman be hired. City Attorney replied he thought it was a matter of understanding at the time. This resolution was introduced by Councilman Mangini who moved its adoption. Second by Councilman Crosby, carrj-ed on following ro11 call vote : ,a.,t 6,j-r^,1- ri"-. ..- . -. ^r-. .. 325 On motion of Councilman Amstrup, second by Councilman Mangini, the ordinance passed its second reading and was adopted on unani- mous ro11 call vote. ORDINANCES INTRODUCTI ON 1. ORDINANCE NO. 11OI ''AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR A WATER SHORTAGE EMERGENCY AND ESTABLISHING PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF" was transmitted to Council by City Manager's memo of March 77, 197'7. Memo also attached detailedreport from Director of Public Works dated March 16, 1977 on water conservation mandatory requirements. He reviewed San Francisco Water Departmentrs expected mandate of 25* reduction in water use,to be effective in April, 1977. He noted Burlingamers voluntary re-duction in water useage was from lO-L22, but stated further action must be taken to achieve the mandatory 252 saving. Reportstated this is the type of ordinance proposed by the Bay Area Water Users Association, put in context for the City of Burlingame, and discussed implementation of various regulations and rationalefor proposed l-imit of 280 gallons per day per dwelling unit.Director of Public Works noted requj-rement of Water Code for apublic hearing and. requested that after ordinance is adopted resolution be adopted declaring water shortage and that an emergency exists.City Managerrs memo concurreil with these recommend.ations . For the benefit of the audience Mayor Harrison discussed the reasonsfor this ordinance and stated a public hearing would be heldAprj-I 4, 1977 at which time proposed regulations, including thelimitatj-on per household, would be open for comment. I,1r. Robert Gillespie, identified as a resident of Burlingame, questioned if the 280 gallon limit would apply to large families.Director of Publ-ic Works replied the limit was based on a figure ofthree people per household. It is possible adjustments would be made for large families, and exceptions wil-f be made for medical and health problems - dialysis machines, etc. Mrs. Ruth Jacobs , 2965 Arguello Drive, questioned how multi-familydwellings $rith one meter would be handled. Director of Pubfic Worksstated survey had been made of a1l- apartment buildings and numberof units in each tabulated. Water would be cal-culated on number ofunits times the unit allowance. Councilman Martin commented he dj-d not approve of the 280 gal1onlimit and would have questions at the hearing meeting. Ordinance No. 1101 was introduced for Ams trup . first reading by Councilman Mayor Harrison acknowledged receipt of letter from the City of San Bruno setting forth their action on the suggestion of the San Mateo Fire Chiefs I Association that a one-year moratorium be placed on the sa1e, use and possession of safe fireworks becauseof drought condj-tions. At their meeting of March 14, 1977 San Bruno had concurred with this recommendation, provided themajority of San Mateo County cities also declared a moratorium. The Mayor stated he would like City Attorney to tlraft an ordinancefor a one-year moratorium based on the action of the rest of thecities in the County. City Attorney commented that organizations such as service cl-ubsare now in the process of buying fireworks and their contractshave cancellation clauses. This puts them in a difficult position. He stated it may be known by the next Councit meeting what thereaction of other cities is, and suggested an ordinance, simplydeclaring a one-year moratorium, be prepared. Mayor Harrison directed this ordinance be prepared for considerationat the meeting of April 4, 1977. )l 326 Mayor Harrison questioned if be added to this ordinance. a l-ist would be provided. a1I assistantCity Attorney department heads coul-d stated they could and Councifman Martin amended his introduction of this ordinance to include all assistant department heads. WATER Referring to the v/ater problem, Councilman Amstrup comrnented on the City's study to reclaj-m water. City Engineer confirmed the City has been carrying on wastewater reclamation study for several months, and he would be able to report on results at the study meeting of Aprif 6, 1977. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. APPLICATION OF LUCKY LADY,4].0 ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT 2:00 A.M. TO AIRPORT BOULEVARD. 6:00 A.M. DANCE AND Mayor Harrison acknowledged receipt of reports, noting that one more incident been reported. and Fire Departmentparking lot had Po l icein the Ms. Co]leen Johnson stated they plan to have a uniformed security officer in the parking lot between 1:00 and 2:00 A.M. and there woul-d be signs posted. No alcohol wou1d be allowed in or about the Lucky Lady. Councilman Amstrup stated he sti1I objected to the 2:00 - 6:00 A.M. hours. Additional work would be created for the Police Department and undesirable people would be attracted from all over the Bay area. Mayor Harrison agreed with Councilman Amstrup for reasons stated earlier. Councilman Martin stated he had many problems with the 2:00 -6:00 A.M. operatj-on, none of which concerned making the Police Department work harder, since that is their job. However, the Lucky Lady provides a facility for teenagers which seems to be a good operation. The operators obviously cannot keep it going with business only from Friday and Saturday nights. If the 2zOO - 6:00 operation could pay for the teenage facility, he wou]d approve for a trial period of 60 - 90 days. Councilman Mangini pointed out the separation of age groups for the 2:00 - 6:00 A.M. operation and the fact of no a1coho1. He had some concerns about the group under 18 but was willing togrant the permit for a 60 day period based on all the conditions applied in the previous permit. Councilman Crosby, after receivj-ng definite assurance from Ms. ,fohnson that there would be an of fj-cer in the parking lot from 1:00 - 2:00 A.M. stated he would approve the permit for 50 days, for the benefit of the teenage operation. Mayor Harrison pointed out there were two matters before the Council: the application for 2:00 - 6:00 A.M. business and the present permit. City Attorney suggested that motion include both to a given date. Councilman Martin moved both permits be approved to June L, 1977. Second by Councilman Mangini, carried on the followj-ng roll call vote : ia 2. ORDINANCE NO. 1f02 "ORDINANCE AI{ENDING SECTION 3.52.010(a) ADD INE-TEE.-F O5I T I ONS OF ASSISTANT LIBRARIAN AND CHIEF FIRE INSPECTOR TO THE IJNCLASSIFIED SERVICE" was introduced for first reading by Councilman Martin. , a-,--A' i-r-.lrr - & '.-- AYES: COUNCILMEN: NAYES: COUNCILMEN: 2. STATE INVESTMENT CROSBY, MANGfNI , MARTIN AMSTRIJP ,HARRISON Councilman Crosby questioned recent letter from Senator Foran regarding investment of City funds in pool created by the State. City Attorney noted the City has passed 1egisl-ation to this effect and is so investing funds at present. 3. B I CYCLE/PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE City of Burlingame gas tax money (Reserve in bike path fund $16,853.53) Beniha of Tokyo Anza Trust $21,000 $15, 000 $ 5, ooo County contribution from MTC application would be $41,000. City Planner addressed the Council, explainingthis financing, and requested direction.varj-ous aspects of Mayor Harrison questioned availability of gas use. City Engj-neer stated he would research. must be met. tax funds for thisCertain requirements Councilman Mart j-n questioned ifthe budget. Councilman Amstrupto a new expenditure. the $2I,000 from the City was noted City had just committed in i tse 1f Mr. David Keyston, Anza Trust, addressedhis Trust to $5,000 for construction ofof power and lighting for the bridge. the Council. He committed abutment and provision Mayor Harrison suggested this be considered as just a progress report until such time as an ansr^7er is received regardj-ng gastax funds. Councilman Martin questioned the value of an investment of $21,000for benefit of bj-ke path in a city of 28,000 people. Councilman Crosby suggested delay pending gas tax information. Councifman Amstrup suggested report on this data at the next meeting. City Planner indicated application for administratj-ve permit shoul-dbe submitted by the City to BCDC for early action. He noted thatif the bridge is not approved, Beniha of Tokyo must make appficationto the City for a safe path to the highway. NEW BUSINESS 1. REQUEST TO REDUCE AIRPORT PASSENGER FORECASTS. City Planner. memo of March L7, L977 attached letter toMetropolitan Transportation Commission prepared at request ofCouncilman Martin. Councilman Martin explained that Airporttheir March 10, 1977 meeting had adopted Land Use Commission atthe position that the 'F r'-!Fr,r!F.rirr{!r!t7.Flr'_ E f-qxrn]t ..1E-rIl! 327 City Planner presented detailed progress report on this project at the mouth of Mil-Is Creek on the shoreline. Included in report was tentatj-ve budget totaling $82,000 for the project. Fiftyper cent share of the cost from local funds could be borne by: Councilman Amstrup questioned if there were a time 1imit. CityPlanner stated there was, although he could not specify the exactdate. t) 328 Metropolitan Transportation Cornmission Regional- Transportation Plan should not be adopted until realistic passenger forecastsare available from studies now being undertaken by the San FranciscoInternational Airport. These may take six months or longer. Passenger forecasts prepared by Regional Airport Planning Commj-ssion were not considered realistic. Airport Land Use Commission had requested support of participating cities. This is the purpose of the l-etter. Councilman Martin stated he approved the fetter and moved its adoption. Second by Councj-Iman Crosby, all aye voice vote, SISTER CITY INVITATION Mayor Harrison announced invitation had been extended, as in the past, by Burlingamers Sister City of Cuernavaca, Mexico to City representativesto attend their festival , March 26 through April 2, 1977. He statedhis intention of going and that of Council-man Crosby; and extended open invitation to any others on the Council- who wj-shed to attend. Councilman Martin stated he considered this a legitimate City expense; and proposed no Iimitations on the expenditures incurred by representatives since they are representing the City and are honorable people. He noted adverse newspaper publicity regardJ-ng "junketing, " but declared he had no difficulty defending this. Mayor Harrison commented the invitation had been extended byphone by the Sister City Corunittee. Council-man Mangini thoughtformal written invitation should have been extended to City Manageror the Mayor. Councilman Amstrup pointed out that Burlingame is comrnj-tted tothe Sister City program, the City should be represented, but there should be a Iimit on the expenditures. Councilman Crosby commented he did not think either Mayor Harrison or himself had requested funds; that actuaf expenses involvedonly air fare, $236.00, and taking Cuernavaca officials to dinner once. There had been no question in the past. Councilman Martin moved that City of Burlingame pay expensesfor any Councilman who wishes to go to Cuernavaca. Councilman Crosby seconded. All "aye" voice vote except Councilman Amstrup, who voted " nay. " APPROVALS : 1. WARRANTS 5576 through 5869, duly audited, in the amount of $457,566.92 were approved for payment on motion of CouncilmanMangini, second by Councilman Martin, all aye vo.ice vote. 2. PAYROLL February, 1977, Check Nos. 3175 through amount of $348,728.90 approved for payment on motion Manginj-, second by Councilman Martin, all aye voice I. Letter dated March lO, L977 Abatement District with request program before the Council. 3874 in theof Councilman vote. from San Mate,f County l4osquitcr to present their public education PROCLAMATI ONS Mayor Harrison proclaimed the week of April 11, 1977 throughApril 17, 1977 as "KQED Week": the month of May, 19'17 as "Anti-Litter Monthr" May 20,1977 through May 26, L977 as "Burlingame Days;" March 26, 1977 through April 2, 1977 as "Tenth Annual Flower Festival- of Mexico, in Sister City of Cuernavaca, Morelos, Me>':ico. " ACKNOWLE DGMENTS City Enqineer report of March t6, 1977 on Bayshore Undergrounding Project )l 2 329 3. Report dated March 15, 1977 from Fire Chief on Roof Rat Drive . 6. Letter of March 1I , 1977 regarding material for inctusionin Recreation Brochure, Sunmer, 1977. Councilman Amstrup suggestedthat the City requlations and suggestions for \"/ater conservationbe included in this brochure. City Manager stated this would be done . 7. City Planner report of 1977 Outlook Conference. 8. City Planner report of Planning Commission meeting, March 14, tgj7. 9. Treasurerrs Report, February 28, 1977. 10. Fire and Police Departments' monthly reports. 11. Minutes: Planning Commission, February 28, 1977 i Traffic,Safety, Parking Commission minutes March 10 , 1977. Mayor Harrison announced Council of Mayors dinner Thursday night, Mar ch 24, 1977 . LIBRARIAN Mayor Harrison noted this was the last Council meeting to be attendedoffj-cially by Paul Lechich, retiring City Librarian. CONVENTION CENTER Counci-lman Martin asked that additionregufar meeting of March.p, 7977, paqe would the amount of bondlbE 'iricreased? t NO. "' 1 be made to minutes of adjourned3: "Councilman Martin askedMr. Sifverton replied, Mayor Harrison recognized Mrs. Charlotte Johnson, former Mayorof Burlingame, who corunented regarding the action taken on lhePolice Station at this evening's meeting. Mrs. ,fohnson thoughtthat Burlj-ngame had an excellent and deserving police Department.She hoped that as the architects vrork with City staff, Councilwoul-d find that they would be able to agree in many instances,and as. tj-me goes by they would find themselves functioning inunanimity, not as individuat members of a Counci1. FROM THE FLOOR ADJOURNMENT Meeting regularly adjourned at 11:20 p.M. Respectfully submitted, e- ,kr;#f.-"J1r7z t L City Clerk 4. Letter of March 8, 1977 from County of San Mateo Administratorof Emergency Services requesting written support of their jointapplication with Marin and San Francisco Counties for fundingfor Emergency Medical Services. No Council support was indicated. 5. Letters of February 23, 19'77 - County of San Mateoi March 6, 1977 - Richard F. Garibaldi, 2308 Easton Drive; March 8, 1977 -Erskine R. Lehr, 52 Val1ey View Court, San Mateoi commendingBurlingame Pofice Inspector Euqene Harris, Sergeant Geral_dMcDonnell, Police Officers cary Missel, Wayne South, MichaelCarro11, and Reserve Officer Stewart Crouse.