HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - CC - 1976.04.1991
Burlingame, California
April 19, L976
CALL TO OPOER
A regular meeting of the Burlingame City Council was heId. on the above date
in the City Hall Council Chambers. The meetj-ng was called to order at B:12 p.m.
by Mayor Victor A. Mangini.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGTANCE TO THE FLAG:Led by Wayne M. Swan, City Planner.
ROLL CALL
Council Members Present:
Council Members Absent:
&ns tnrp-Crosby-Harri son-Mangini -!{artin
None
I
MINTIIES: The minutes of the regnrlar meeting of April 5, L976, previously
submitted to the City Counc-tl, were ap.oroved and adopted.
COMMIJNICATIONS
25 MPH SPEED LIMIT SIGNS ON OAK GROVE AVENUE WHERE TRAFFTC ENTERS FRO},I
EL CAMINO REAL AI{D FROM CALIFORNTA DPJVE
Ivlr. John H. Kockos, 133 Pepper Avenue, requested the above posting in a
letter to Mayor Mangini dated April 10, 1976.
The Director of Fublic Works reporteil that the signs were considered warranted
and a work order written requesting installation. There were no objections
from the City Council. Mayor Mangini requested the City Manager to so inform
Mr. Kockos and, as a matter of courtesy, Traffic, Safety and Parking Commission.
POLICE STATION PROJECT - CAROLAN AVENUE SITE PLANNfNG DELAYED FOR 90
DAYS
In a letter dated April 13, L976, Joan Chase, President, Chamber of Cortrnerce,
reported that the Board of Directors of the Chamber of Commerce voted to ask
the City Council to declare a 90 day moratorium before proceeding with plans
for the new police station. The conununication requested City Council support
of the Boardrs action.
Councilman Harrison initiated the discussion, reading from a prepared statement:
rrMr. Mayor: I propose that on Wednesday, April 7th, the majority of
this council was boondoggled by a presentation that was puroortedly
representative of and adopted by the Burlingame Progress Association,
when in fact, the proposal, as presented for a combination police station
and parking structure with retail stores, was not even adopted by the
membership or board of directors of the BPA by motion or vote at any
time prior to its presentation to this council.
"Tliisproposal, by the President of the BPA presented with the implication
of BPA endorsement, a questionable inference in itself, is obviously a
delaying and stalling tactic to accomplish onl1z one thing - that is to
get this council, with funds already committed to a police station, to
use those funds to provide for parking, parking that this council unani-
mously agrees is needed. This tactic, along with the questions of
credibility relative to its presentation, cause me to wonder about the
immediate availability of the post office property as reported by the
President of the BPA. Were these 'guess-tjmatesr factual or wishful
thinking: t'six weeks, sixty d.ays, ninety days.'' Others of us who have
contacted the postal service in San Francisco have been told a much
Ionger time indeed, from as short a time as six months to possibly 14
months or even two years. L
2
L
92
"This plan r.rould certainly be in the special interest of the individual
who purported this to be an adopted proposal of the BPA, which he supposedly
represents, the individual who conunitted the Progress Association to
provide the funding of the feasibility study, a study which experts tell
me will cost between $5,000 and $7,500.
"I4r. Mayor, I propose that this ill-conceived and. i}I-timed plan, and
I'1I refer to it as the Blumberg Plan, not the BPA Plan, will decrease
the efficiency and security of the BurlingElme Police Department. It
will add conjestion to an already developing traffic, as weII as parking
problem, and will-, as presented, since no mention was made regarding
financial contributions by the merchants, place an undesired tax burden
on the citizens of Burlingame to help - what this plan, in fact was in-
tended to do - a single large property owner in the immediate area of
the proposal.
"This plan was not conceived with the adequacy of a modern, up-to-date
and efficient police station and police department in mind, rather the
police station, according to this plan, is to be the vehicle to get
city monies to support a special interest's desires. For this, the
citizens of Burlingame should not stand stil1.
"Mr. Mayor, your committee, after determining, since July 1973, the
obvious need for a new police facility, held ten meetings atri ttris council
on 24 occasions addressed itself publicly to the needs and satisfactions
of these needs regarding the police facility. The committee considered
all aspects of the present site, as well as eight other potential sites
and eliminated from further consideration the renovation, addition to
and remodeling of the Howard Street site. fn its wisdom, the committee
selected a location that will allow the construction of a modern police
facility that will provide the services to our citizens that we've be-
come accustomed to and expect.
I'Mr. Mayor, members of the Councif, I submit that we should abandon this
folly of a hodge-podge for a combination police station, parking struc-
ture-retail store complex as suggested by I4r. B1umberg, and I thoughf,
apparently sold to r the Burlingame Chamber of Commerce, another special
interest group, interested in the promotion of business in our community
and the obvious need for parking. I therefore question the motives of
the Chamber in undertaking this delaying tactic. Their letter offers
no rhyme or reason or plan. I suggest that we have the greatest interest
of all the citizens of Burlingame in mind and that this step-child
of a narrow segiment of our community be laid to rest.
"I certainly think that the proponent should continue with his proposal
if approved by the Progress Association, for a parking structure, and
maybe even the feasibility of retail stores. But gentlemen, we have
the property for the police station, we have the architect, we have
the p1ans, we have the money, and we have the priority as established
by this council, and I for one EIm hoping we proceed with the new police
station on Carolan Avenue now!"
Mayor Mangini announced procedures available to the Council: either accede
or not accede to the request as presented, or accede to a delay for a lesser
time.
Councilman Martin suggested another procedure - not build a new police station
Commenting that the Council discussed the project at length at a special
study meeting on April 7, Councilman Martin stated it was his understanding
that there was an agreement, as a result of that discussion, to delay for
90 days. He advised he was not at the meeting when the Progress Association's
vote was taken, but he spoke to several people who were - Joan Chase,
paul Constantino, Clrrus McMillan, Robert Thompson. A11 gave the impression
they supported the moratorium and he had heard nothing contrary since.
Councilman Amstrup remarked that, suddenly, a number of new issued have
been raised. The import appears to be that the Council agreed to delay
because of statements made by Mr. Blumberg. Councilman Amstrup stated he
understood the Council decided to delay to allow time for investigation of
all elements of the project, including availability of the post office site,
and that he found it difficult to comprehend opposition to that approach. i',
ffi.Fl.'!
93
Councilman Crosby, stating he was "the one who r^rent over the fetrce" in
supporting the tlelay, pointeal out that the committee naned. for the sole
purpose of j-nvestigating police station needs recolrnended. a new building,
funds were allocated to purchase the Carolan Avenue properties, architects
were retained to prepare schematics. He annourced he was not wedded
to that proposition, nor did he support the concept of a police station
in the downtown area, especially as part of a parking structure, but
felt the proponents should be granted the opportunity of a presentation.
Councilman Crosby stated there have been accusations he " f1ip-floppetl. ,,
He discounted this, stating he has reflected. seriously and at length on thepolice station matter, has had scrne telephone calls from citizens who
expressed their views that the people had not had sufficient opportunitiesto comnent. Further, upon receiving the copy of the Chamber of Corflnerce
letter, he called that office and was informed there appeared to be a
feeling in the community that there had not been enough public input.
Because the inference of that corment bothered him, because the people
seem to be of the opinion, more and more, that they have nothing to say
about what happens in government, and, because people seem to be losing
confidence in their elected officials, he d.ecitletl to support the 90 day
moratorium and will vote for it this evening. If the proponents of tlle
net, plan fail to present an acceptable proposal at the end of 90 alays, he
wil}, again, declare publicly in favor of the Carolan Avenue proposal.
Counci-lman Haffison stated it hras his understanding direction was made at
the study meeting that, in the event of a consensus this evening, the
Burlingame Progrcess Association would r:ndertake a study in terms of
whether or not a police station is feasible \dith a parking structure and
retail stores on a site encompassing the present police station, the city's
parking lot and the post office property. councilman Harrison stated he
understood, too, that the proponents intlicated they vrould undertake the
financing of the feasibility study. He asked who will make the study, who
will do the design work, what credence is there in their dossier as to
structures they have built, what kinal of financing do they contemplate?
Councilman Harrison remarked, if a delay is approved, he preferred it to
coincide with the 45 days the city granted its architects to prepare a
design.
councj-han Amstrup asked why the Progress Association is so predominant in
the discussion. He pointed out that the city council cannot hand the subject
of a new police station to that group. The people rrho appeared before the
council were told they would have 90 days. councilman Amstrup pointed out
that, if the City decides to buy the post office lot, there must be a deter-
mination as tq the feasibility of a police station on that Lot, but no
parking structure. The Progress Associ-ation should not determine that.
A $5 million deveLopment is one proposal by one groupr there is another
plan whereby the city would buy the post office site anal build a builtling
wi,th surface .:arking. These are some of the things to be addressed. by the
Council.
Mayor l4angini asked Councilman Harrison if he intended that the Progress
Association pay for the plan. councilman Harrison responded in the affirma-
tive, stating that was his impression from conunents made by the proponents
when appearing before the council at the study meeting.
Mayor Mangj,ni recalled one of Mr, Blunberg's ccfltrnents, when he indicated
they vrould pay for the stualy, to the effect they were prepareal to sink or
swim in 90 days.
councilman Martin moved to instruct the architects to cease work on the pre-
Iirninary plans for 90 alays. Motion seconded by Couircilman Anstrup. On the
question. Councilman Martin explained that 90 days is, in fact, a short time
to attempt to put a proposal together,
Financing a loan, as an example' wil1 probably be a slow process. Stating
he was not overly impressed wj-th the plan, councj-Iman Martin concurred \,rith.
94
I
2
3
4
5
Councilman Amstrup to pursue the post office property as a potential site,
with or without the parking structure. Qouncil$an Martin recalled that the
downtown business community financed the su:vetz-r#€,n--the €i+s+ Pa=l+iag District
was being considered. Perhaps the Progress Association will be able to raise
funds. It was his position that it be allowed the opportunity to put the
proposal in form for Council review. In the meantime, the City Council, staff,
peopler any interested group or individual should try for more input. A11
that is being asked now is wait 90 days for input.
The motion carried on the following roll call:
Council Members Aye: Amstrup-Crosby-Martin
Council Members No: Harrison-Mangini
PROCLAMATIONS
Mayor Mangini declared the following:
May I, L9'76 "LAW DAY U.S.A."
Month of May "OLDER AI{ERICA\IS| MONTH."
Week of April L8-24, 1976 "ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH WEEK.'l
Month of May "MEI\tlIAf, HEALTH MONTH."
May 15 to May 22, 1975 TTNATIONAL INSURANCE WOMENTS WEEK.rr
UNIT #1, INC., 2394 30th AVENUE, SAt{ FRANCTSCO
REQT]EST TO OPERATE A D]SCCTTHEQUE AT 1316 BROADWAY
The application for the above license, dated April 6, L976, recited as follows.
Officers and directors of the corporation: William M. Cutcomb, President;
H. A. Poley, Secretary, both of the San Francisco address noted abovei Stephen
L. Pasguan, Vice-President, 1600 Easton Drive. The premises at 1316 Broadway
are presently leased to Ber-Rich, Inc., dba "Abbey Road," a tavern licensed
for band performances and dancing by patrons. Upon approval of transfer of
the liquor license by the California Department of A1coholic Beverage Con-
trol, Unit #1, fnc. will take possession of the premises. With permission
of the City Council, recorded music from tapes and records will be played
daily from approximately 4:00 p.m. to 2200 a.m. for dancing.
The Eire Department report dated April 13, L976, offered no objection to
issuance of a dance permit, nor did the Police Department report of the same
date. The latter report included two suggestions for the Council's consider-
ation: (I) "The applicants be advised of noise factors and complaints against
past operation of Abbey Road, " (2) "Live music and operation of the establish-
ment during entertainment should be accomplished without the rear exit in
open position. "
Cor:ncilman Martin considered 4:00 p.m. startinq time too early on Broadway
because of impact on parking.
Mr. Poley offered no objection to a later hour, explaining they did not want
to cause traffic problems.
Councilman Crosby asked I{r. Poley to comment on the Police Department's
suggestion concerning the rear door being closed during operating hours.
Mr. Poley agreed, stating group control can become difficult where people
are allowed to come through two entrances. Further, in response to Council-
man Crosbyr Mr. Poley agreed to accept that as a condition to the permit.
IvIr. Po1ey informed the Council he and his associates had considered band
music and entertainment on some holidays and on Saturdays and Sundays occa-
sionally. If this were done, the Police Department would be consulted re-
garding traffic
APPLICETION FOR A}4US-EI{ENT LICENSE
95
Councilnan Amstrup stateal it has been the Councilts policy not to allow
dancing before 7:00 p.m. at the earliest. He objected to making an exception
here because most of the businesses on Broadr,ray remain open for business
unti-l 6:00 p.m., and some later than that. It was his position that dancing
should not be allowed until 7:00 and, preferably, 7:30.
l4r. Poley reported the plan is to use tapes rather than juke-box, to create
a continuous low-level sor:nd during any operating hours. He stated that
most bars without entertainment have music available, usually juke-box.
Their proposal is low-alecible music to create an atmosphere that will enter-
tain but still allow patrons to carry on conversations in normal tones.
He stated that the tapes will not be playeal at any higher decible than occurs
i-n any tavern in Burlingame. He informed the Council. further, that there
would be no objection to starrting patron dancing at either 7:OO or 7:30,
but there will be tape music during operating hours. councilman Anstrup
stated he was not concerned about the music but about the dancing.
Council menbers agreed that the hours the tapes vrere played was not the
subject of the application, that the tapes can be played at the owners I
discretion.
A motion by CounciLman Crosby to approve the request of Unit +1, Inc., for
a dalce permit applicable to the prernises at 1316 Broadway for a period of
six months, conditioned upon patron dancing being restricted to the hours
of 7:30 p.m. to 1:30 a.m., daily, rear door to remain closed during operating
hours, no professional entertainment allot ed, renewal of the permit subject
to council approval. The motion was seconded by councilman llarrison, unani-
mous Iy carried on roll call. Councilman Amstrup stated he voted for the
permit because it will be limited to six months anal subject to Council review
prior to renewal.
Following a recess at 8:55 p.m.' Iqayor Mangini reconvened the meeting at
9:03 p.m.
STAI'F MEMORANDA
I. TRA]N]NG PROGRAM THROUGH INTERGOVERNMENTAL MANAGEI'{ENT DEVEIOPMENT
INSTITUTE (IMD]),
Under date of April L4, L976, the City Manager for} arded "Proposal For A
Management Development Program For cities of Burlingame Anal Millbrae" dated
March, 1976, prepared by IMDI, Oakland at a cost to the City of S1,500 for
training 42 employees. At Mayor Mangini's invitation, the city Manager
discussed the program brLefly, stating he considered it economically sound,
advantageous to the city's operation and to the employees.
councilman Harrison prefaced a motion to authorize the expenditure with
a coment that, presumably, the $750 remains unexpended in departmental
bualgets, as reporEed in the City Manager's memorandum of March 5, L976-
The motion was seconded by council-nan crosby, unanimously carried on voice
vote.
councilman Amstrup asked that the council be furnished an evaluation of the
program upon its conclusion in six months.
2. DONATION OF MEMORTAL BENCH IN I{ERITAGE PARK
RECONVENE
In a memorandum dateal April L2, L976t the Park Director informed the city
Manager of an offer by George L. Barnett to donate a bench to be placed in
Heritage Park inscribed 'rln Memory of Bernice Barnett. " (Ms. Barnett was
the owner of the property that is noor the Cityrs Heritage Park.) The Park
Directorrs rcecornmendation that the bench be accepted was concurred in by the
city Manager. councilman Martin's motion authorizing installation of the
bench was seconded by councilman Harrison, all aye on voice vote'
96
3. SALE OF SURPLUS MATERIAL AT{D EOUfPMENT
rn a memorandun dated April 8, 1976, to the City l"lanager, the Director of
Public works submitted an inventory of material and equipment considered
surplus by the Department of Pub1ic works and requested permission to advertise
for sealed bids as a method of disposal. In an addendum to the communication,
dated April L5, 1976, the City Manager confirmed that the material is no
longer used or needed by the Departnent.
A motion by Council-man Crosby. second by Councilman Harrison, unanimously
carried on voice vote author.ized the Director of Public Works to proceed.
Councilman Anstruprs request that the Navl, Signal Blinker Lights be offered
fj-rst to the local Sea Scout group received City Council support.
4 PROPOSAL TO INCREASE COSTS OF TENNIS LIGHTS AT WASHINGTON PARK FOR
EVENING PLAYERS
In a corununication dated April 2, 1976, the Di-rector of Recreation proposetl
an increase in the hourly rate from 50+ to $f.00, thereby providing for the
people using the courts at night to contribute toward maintenance costs.
The proposed incxease will be the first since some time during the 194Os.
In a me$orandrm dated April L4, L976, the Cj-ty Manager reconunended approval.
Councilman Martin noted that the letter from the Director of Recreation
indicates that revenue will be collected and deposited by the Recreation
Departnent. Councilman Martin considered this "ear-marking" of funds.
He had no objection to the increase but preferred that revenues be deposited
i-n the General Fund.
Councilman Harison stated the Recreation Department is doing an excellent
job in offering activities to the comnunity on a self-sustaining basis. In
the present circumstances, he felt the fee should not be raised as the city
does have an obligation to provide services.
Mayor Mangini agreed the City is not a profit-making operation. Horlrever,
many of the people who use the courts at night are non-residents. Eor that
reason, the higher fee seems appropriate.
Councilrnan Crosby asked. where the money to maintain the courts is budgeteal
presently. The Director of Recreation responded. in the Park Department and
city Electrician bualgets. He advised that maintenance improvements would be
budgeted and paid for out of revenues collected.,
councilman l,lartin's motion to approve the i-ncrease was conditioned upon re-
venue being deposited in the General Funal. Motion seconded by Councilman
Amstrup. on voice vote, the motion carried four to one, Councilman Harrison
voting no.
5. COI,F COURSE DEVELOPMENT
The city Managerr s memorandum of April L4. L976, reconunended tha above matter
be scheduled for in-depth review soon. counci-Iman Amstrup's recommendation to
discuss it at the May 1 special study meeting was accepted by Council members.
6. SELF-INSURED WORKER'S COMPENSATION
Under date of April L5, L976, the City Manager forwarded a report from the
firm of Mund-Mclaurin, the city's insurance consultants. concerning the above
program. The city l'ranager. in his communication, noted the following advan-
tages to a self-insured arrangement: (I) Savings because the City can invest
the money now paid to the State Compensation Fund. (2) Better control of /
The Director of Public Works addresseal the City Council, reporting that
bids were the first appr.oach. Later, it was learned that the County was
holding an auction and arangements were made to joi-n in that sale. To do
this, the material must be delivered to the Eairgrounds by Thuxsday, April 22.
97
individual cases. (3) Better service than State Compensation provides. He
reconmended, because of savings available, that Council approve of soliciting
bials fron a&ninistrators i after tabulation, self-insurance programs, with
excess j,nsurance provided, can be acted upon.
Councilman llartin noted that the consultant anticipates
vested funds in his analysis and. commented the City is
present.
a rate of 8g on in-
far fr.om that rate at
The City Treasurer r,ras in the audience. He indicated the rate woulal probably
be 5 to 6t. Councj,lman t"Iartin stated he would like to see figures from the
consultant on a more realistic return. Whether self-insurance is good for.
the City depends upon the rate of return on invested. funds.
Councilman Harrisonrs motion authorizing the City tfanager to seek bj-ds was
seconded by Councilnan Martin. all aye voice vote.
7. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS INTERVIEWS
PT'BL]C EMPI,OYEES I RETIREMENT SYSTEM VAIUATION OF I5A INCREASE,
MISCELI,ANEOUS RETIREES PRIOR TO JULY 1, 197I
Under date of April 15, L976, the city Manager forwarded for the councilrs
considerati-on material relative to the above. He advised that the annual
added cost to the city to provide the benefit wiLl be approxitnately 93,700
annuaIly.
Councilnan Harrison's motion to authorize implementation of the benefit re-
quested by miscellaneous employees lrho retired prior to JuIy 1, 1971, was
seconded by Councilman Crosby, unanimously carried on voice vote.
In a conmunication dated April 15, 1976. the City l{anager commented on a
report prepared by ReginaLtl E. I.4oorby, Chief of the Eire Department' relative
to implementation of the above program on a county-wide basis, The chief's
comprehensive report h'as presented in a conununication dated April 13, 1976r
forwarded to the City Council by the City Manager. It vras the City Managerrs
recorunendation, after analysis of the materialr that the City of Burlingame
not undertake to proviale the services under the County program, ratherf the
services should be left to private enterpxise. The City Manager pointed out
in his corununication that the formal presentatj-on has not been received from
the county, but the chief received sufficient information to comnent on the
general approach.
Chief Moorby r4'as present. Invited by Mayor Mangini to comment, the Chief
reported that, some tj-me ago, at the request of the City l/tanager, he accepted
the assignnent of liaison between the County and the City of Burlingame on
Bner.gency Metlical Services. In that caPacity, he received information regular-
ly from the county and, early in January, asked the Di,rector of Bnergency
Medj-cal services to inform him when the Paramedical,/Transportation Services
came to a firm proposal. He advised that he was assured the City would be
alerted in sufficient time to make an analysis that could be presented to
the city council. Just recently, he became aware he had not been receiving
information from the county anal, upon calling there, Iearned that the proPosal
was in form to be presented to the Board. of Supervisors. County representatives
dial call on him to revierl, the pxoposal. chief Moorby informed the council
members that the proposal will be before the Board of supervisors in the
morning.
The chief discussed estimated fi-guxes showing costs of implementing such a
proqram and anticipated rcevenues. He outlined some of the implications on ,/
In a mernorandum dated April 15, 1976, the City Manager reported that the final
list of applicants will be sent to the Councll by l,londay, April 19. He re-
comnended that interviews be scheduled on Thursday, ApriL 22. The hour of
5:00 p.m. was selected as most convenient. Mayor Mangi-ni announced that this
evening's meeting wiII be adjourned to Thursday the 22ntl.
9. PARAMEpTCAT/TRANSPORTATTON SERVICE
98
Councilman Amstrup askeal if the program will be financed by the taxpayers.
The Chief advised it will be combined useriltaxpayer cost, except the County
will subsidize a.mbulance trips rrhere the patient is unable to pay.
The Chief stated, further, that he had no qualms in saying he could find. no
advantage to Burlingame enterin g the program. Costs could exceed revenue,
citizens of Burlingame would be providing services to three other entities,
there is no way of knowi,ng that these costs would be recovered. In South
San Francisco alone, without any transporting, one unit is costing $2,500
annually for gas and repairs. There would be considerable clerical work,
as the agency that operates the services does all of the billing. If
Burlingame elects not to join, its residents wiII not be denied paranedical
treatment or transportation, because the county plan includes a full time
ambulance stationed in Burlingame.
Councilman Harrison moved to accept the City Managerrs and Fire Chiefrs
recommendation that the City of Burlingame not undertake Paramedic/Trans-
portation Services program advanced by the County. Councilman Harrison
stated that literature furnished the Council, the Chiefrs presentation,
availability of two hospitals and Burlingamers efficient fire department
were sufficient grounds, in his estimation, to not participate. The motion
was seconded by Councilman Anstrup, unanimously carried on roLl call.
10. SPRING CLEAN-UP PRG,ECT
11. JOSEPH D. GELLER, APPLICAIiIT:
ENVIRONMENTAI ]MPAET REPORT AND SPECIAI PERMIT FOR PROPOSED THREE-
STORY OFF]CE BUILDING 120 3 HOWARD AVENUE
A comnunj,cation from the City Planner dated April ].5, 1976, transmitted for
City Council review and consideration, copies of the Draft EIR anal minutes
of Planning Corunission hear.ing on Apri J. L2, 1976. Also, there rr'as a letter
dated March le, L976, from Frank B. Ingersoll, Attorney at Law, 216 park
Road, recornrrending that "Mr. celler be required to make an equitable con-
tribution to the Parking Fund (if his project is approved), as should other
people who have recently made builtling improvenents in the same area. " The
Plannerrs communication reported that the planning Comnission accepted the
Draft EIR and recommended it to City Council for certification. The Comnis-
sion expressed concerns about ambiguities of the Code dealing with parking
District issues and approved a special permit to aIIor,i, a buittling that will
exceed 75t lot coverage.
The City Planner, at the Chairrs request, discussed the project, atlvising
it is the first to be located within the Burlingame Avenue Area parking
District that exceeds one of the review lines, established by ordinance:
as proposed, the building would cover more than 75? of lot area. The
Planning Commission considered the application on March 22, continued the
hearing to April 12 to gain a more complete EIR. At the April 12 meeti-ng,
the EIR vras accepted unanimously and the special perm.it approved four to one.
his department if the program was initiated. It was his recomnendation that,
at the present tilne anal for the imnealiate future, the city of Burlingame
not enter into the paramedic program as presented by the county of san Mateo.
In a memorandrm dated April 6, L976, to the City t"lanager, the Director of
Public Works outlined parameters of the above project to be provid.ed resi-
dents as a method of disposing of rubbish. The test section was identified
as the area bounded generally by Hunboldt Road, PeninsuLa Avenue, I4yrtle
Road and Burlingame Avenue, approximately 850 resid.ences. In an addendum
to the communication, the City Manager requested approval of the test area
and the revised date of pickup, l4ay 10, 1976.
Councilman Harrisonrs motion to approve was seconded by Mayor l4angini, all
aye voice vote.
In response to inquiries frorn l,[ayor Mangini and councilman Amstrup, the city
Attorney confirmed. that Iot coverage exceeding 75t in the Burlingane AYenue f
Area Parking District requires a special permit from the City Council.
Envirorunental Impact Reports come to City Council r.outinely for certification.
Councilman Martin stated the propositj-on appears to be, shall the Council
a1low 10o? lot coverage to a Aeveloper who has made no provision for parking
spaces. He recalled that developers were asked to make contributj-ons to the
Parking District in other similar situations.
The City Attorney stated the EIR addressed. the matter of impact. Whatever
the council's decision on the special Permit, the ErR is certifi.ed.
Joseph D. celler, 1113 Barroilhet Avenue r Hil1sborough, applicant, was present.
one involved up to now has said - The EIR is an information docunent. He
stated j-t was his i,mpression that everybody considered the EIR gave sufficient
information. He stated that any builtling, any development where an old building
is demolished and replaced by a new one, will have visual impact and impact
on Barking. He pointed out that the property is in the Parking District,
parking assessments were levied, there were no credits taken agai,nst the
assessmentsi to that extent the property is paying for parking. Mr. Geller
stated it may be felt at this time that there is a parking problem in down-
town Burlingane and any new building \^ritl attal to it. That is a problem of
the Parking District. It was his position it is discriminatory, unlawful
and wrong to say that a certain property should Pay for parking.
Councilman Marti,n commented that the precedent has been set. l4r. Geller
countered that in trrro situations where contributions were made by developers r
cred.its \,rere taj<en against the assessments and, in one instance, the property
vras not in the District.
Mr. Ge11er informed the City Council that the ovrner of Rorkes, 26I Park
Road, submitted an application for special permit to the Planning Commission
to enlarge his building by constructing an addition. The special permit
was granted on unanimous vote of the corunission \,rj-th the result that the Rorke
building now exceeds 75* lot coverage. Mr. Geller stated that during the
Rorke heaxing one objector protested that the new construction would eliminate
on-site parking spaces. I,lr. Geller stated that the Planning Commission advised
the objector that the properEy \.vas in the Parking District, there were no
credits taken, that at1 the parking provialed r{ras private parkj-ng and that the
ovrner could legally cover 1o0B of the lot. Mr. Ge1ler questioned why his
project shoulat be on the city councilrs agenda rrhen 1,1r. Ebner's (owner of
Rorkers) was noti circumstances appear to be the same. Mr. Geller stated
it was his unalerstanding, from comnents of the city Attorney at the Planning
Com[ission meeting, that applications of this nature are sent to the Planning
corurission for hearing, that the Planning comnission takes an action, and
that action is final if not appealed. I"1r. Geller stated there was no appeal
to Planning Conunission approval of his special permit, but the matter is on
the City Council's agenda this evening. Mx. Geller stated that Comnissioner
Mink made some extensive remarks on Parking District problems during the course
of the Planning Conu[ission hearing and asked that his corunents, in general,
be forwarded to the city Council.
l,lr. Geller posed a series of questions concerning contributions to the District.
He askeal, among others, if there is to be a contiibution, how much hrould it
be? What would the CitY do with the money? What has been done with
i/
99
councilman Martj-n asked Mr. Galler his intentions as far as impact on the
Parking District. councilman Martin pointed out that the EIR makes several
statements relating to inpact - removal of two trees, decrease in light and
air to exi-sting apartment units at 137 Lorton Avenue, visual change and
possible loss of sight alistance rarith a building constructed to the property
line along Lorton Avenue, aalditional pedestrian and vehicular traffic, all-
alay parking by employees of the proposed building having significant impact
on the Parking District.
Mr. ce11er explained he could only repeat what the city Attorney indicated,
what the minutes of the Planning Comnission meeting reflect and what every-
100
other monies collected on the three other projects? Would the City buy a
particular nunber of spaces vri th the money he would. pay? Is there property
available for purchase to provide parking if he ditl make a contribution?
If he paid for 9 spaces, where would the City buy the 9 spaces? If he paial
for parking spaces would he own them? If not, rrhat interest rrould he have?
councilman Anstrup asked why the Rorke application was not brought to the
city council,
The City Planner stated that Rorkers was a two-story atlalition to enlarge
storage and office space to accomnodate existing personnel. The impact
was solely theirs by reduction of about four parking spacesr lot coverage
was 848- That compares with the additi.on of about 54 occupants based on
occupancy load of Mr. cellerrs proposed development. A Negative Declara-
tion vras written for Rorkers project.
Councilman Crosby recalled that the Rorke project came to the City Council
in connection with an opening at the side of the building. The city
Attorney confirmed that the Council executed a docrment approving a waIl
opening to allow a window where a window is ordinarily prohibited.
Councilman Martin stated that the Ordinance regulating construction in the
Burlingame Avenue Area Parking District r^ras enacted to ease parking problems
within the boundaries of the District. I,1r. celler proposes to move in 54
people, creating a tremendous impact on parking. With respect to the Rorke
project, the impact would appear to be considerably less on the Parking
District. l,!I. ce1ler has come to the City asking for something that the
City does not have to grant, i.e., increased lot coverage from 75t to I00s.
When the ordinance was adopted, everyone agreed it $ras reasonable legislation.
lihenever anyone comes to the City asking for a special privilege, it has
been the Cityrs approach to ask for something in return. Councilman Martin
reminded Mr. celler that if he reduced. 1ot coverage to 759 he will gain four
parking spaces, reduce impact on the Parking District and have fewer people
in the buj-lding. There will be less impact on the adjoining residential
use. These are the kj"nals of things the City must consider. If Mr. celler
was not required to seek a permit from the Council, he could obtain a
builaling permit wj,thout dlifficulty. Since Mr. Geller must obtain the
special permit, Councilman Martin stated he believed. the city council was
within its rights in asking for a contribution to the Parking District.
councilman Harrison agreed with councilman l,lartin, stating that the Council
has the discretion in this matter. In the past, the Council has held in
abeyance additions to existing build.ings pending acquisition of additional
parking. The council, in the present situation, is operating on a precedent.
He stated. he \ras willing to hear conunents on what the Council should request
in terms of dollars and cents.
Mayor Mangini asketl will Mr. celler be required to pay immedj,ately if the
Council approves 1O0g coverage?
Councilman Martin suggested that !,1r. celler should be informed that he is
to provide "X" number of spaces as a condition to 100* Iot coverage, and he
is to pay for the spaces at "xI rate, all of thj-s to be agreed upon by the
City Council. Further, if there is not aaLlitional parking within the District
within five years, Mr. cellerrs money should be refunded or the bond termi-
nated. councilman Martin also pointed out that Mr. ce1ler will not be
granted specific spaces, nor is there ownership in fee.
Mr.. celler stated. if this process were to be initiated, the only equitable
method of fixing his contribution would be to prorate the square footage
of his parcel in relation to the square footage of the total District.
/,..
The city Attorney stated the Council can phrase conditions in any form it
wishes. The contribution can be required im[etliately. or at some future time,
it can be bonded. The anount and whd.t is to be done with the contribution are
the deteiTlining factors. In the past, such contributions have been deposited
in the Parking District Funds.
101
Following advice from the City Attorney that the Council shouLd act first
on the Environmental Impact Report (he recommended approval) and then on
the Special Permit with such conditions the Council may rrish to impose,
RESOLUTION NO. 35-76
"Certifying Environnental Impact Reports For A Proposed Three-Story Office
Building At 1203 Hor,rrard Avenue, EIR 35-q" was introduced by Council$an Harrison,
who moved adoption, second by Councilman Crosby, unanimously carried on roll
ca11.
RECONVENE
Follovring a recess at IO:30 p.m., llayor Mangini reconvened the meeting at
IO:40 p.m.
GELLER APPLICATION CONTINUED
Mayor l,lanqini referred to Mr. celler's colunent that, in his personal j udgenent
the only equitabLe solution to the contribution factor rrould be to charge his
building a pro-rata share of the entire Parking District. Mr. ceIIer re-
sponded, stating if there was to be a charge, that vroulal be the only fair
way. Mayor Mangini asked was that not an unusual approach? l4r. Geller stated
he did not think So, if everyone else can use the spaces. Mayor Mangini
stated that other people who contributed to the District did not request that
consideration .
In view of the impact report and the City Planner's report that 9 to 16 park-
ing spaces were required. at approximately $5,000 per space, councilman Martin
suggested a compromise figure of $22t5OO. l,lr. Geller stated. he would file
suit and go to court before accepting that figure. He explained he was not
prepared to discuss specifics of the contribution at this time I he had not
expected this.
councilman l4artin suggested that lr!r. celler may be within his rights. He was
not told he would be expected to negotiate this evening. For this reason. a
two week itelay would appear to be entirely proper.
cormcilman crosby stated he had no obj ection to negotiating the prj-ce. During
a p6riod of discussion, l,tr. celler stated he preferred not to meet or negoti-ate
with a staff member who had no authority to comnit the council in the area of
finances. It r,ras decided that councilman Martin would meet with Mr. celler
and be prepared to report to the Council at the May 3ral neeting.
Both Councilman Amstrup and Martin questioned why this proj ect should come
to City Council when Rorke's did not. I',tIe City Manager was requested to in-
vestigate and report to the council. Further discussion was postponed to the
meeting of May 3, 1976.
L2. GARDEN PICKUP AGREEMENT
Under date of April 16, L976, the city Manager informed the City council that
the San Mateo Scavenger Company I s agreement provid.es for a request to increase
compensation under certain conditions. The Company has not requested an in-
crease under the present agreement until now and has presented a statement of
current financial conditions. Apparently, they have been operating at a loss
for a portion of the last five years, and it appears they are seeking a 47?
increase. The current agreement expires June 30, 1976.
Paul F. Kelly, Attorney, represented the Scavenger Company. He stated the
company is not asking to make a profit, but only to recover costs. Presently,
the monthly deficit is $1,284. The requested increase witl do nothing more
than cover existing operating costs noted in the nonthly Profit and Loss
Statement sent to the City Manager. l,lr. Ke1ly stated that, preferably, the
amended agreement would be effective May 1, 1976, rather than July 1. He
//,
L02
mentioned, also, that it will be necessary to truck the refuse to Menlo Park
after the City of Burlingame closes its disposal area at the end of March
next year. The City of Menlo Park charges the Company $4.68 for each ton
that goes through their facility, plus trucking costs. The Company will re-
turn to the City of Burlingame next year for a further adjustment if the City
Council wishes to continue with this privileged service. Mr. Ke11y stated
that the Citlz of Burlingame is the only city where the Company provides this
service.
Following a period of discussion concerning effective dates of the new agree-
ment, Councilman Martin moved to authorize a two-year period, or to the time
when the City's disposal area is no longer operative, whichever comes first.
Motion seconded by Councilman Amstrup, all aye voice vote.
Councilman Harrison moved to authorize May L, L976, as the date the agree-
ment shall be effective. Motion seconded by Councilman Crosby, all aye voice
vote.
The City Attorneln was directed to prepare a form of agreement for Council
consideration.
CONSENT CALENDAR
I Traffic, Safety and Parking Commission endorsed implementation of the
following traffic and parking controls recommended by the Director of
Public Works and the Traffic Engineer:
Chapin Avenue Long-term Parking,
Extension of Red Zone on Gilbreth Road,
Oak Grove and California Drive Traffic Channelization.
Services rendered City of Burlingame by Chamber of Commerce, April 1,
1976 through June 30, L976 - Quarterly Report - in the amount of $3,75O.
The Calendar was accepted on motion of Councilman Harrison, second by Council-
man Crosby, aI1 aye voice vote.
Mayor l,tangini directed the City Attorney to prepare }egislation on the traffic
and parking items for the Councilrs consideration.
RESOLUTIONS
I. RESOLUTION NO. 36-76 "Resolution Sett ing The Fee For The Apportionment
Of Unpaid Assessments Under Division I0 Of The Streets And Highways Code"
was introduced by Councilman Amstrup, who moved adoption, second by Council-
man Harrison, unanimously carried on ro11 caII.
In a memorandum dated April 9, L976, to the City Council, the City Attorney
discussed "splits of 1915 Act Bonds," advising that the resolution will set
the fees for apportionment of assessments, most of which are in the l,lills-
dale Tract.
2. RESOLUTION NO. 37-76, "Authorizing Execution Of Agreement For Cross-
Connection Inspection Program" (County of San Mateo and City of Burlingame)
was introduced by Councilman Amstrup, who moved adoption, second by Council-
man Crosby, unanimously carried on ro11 call.
In a memorand.um dated April 5, 1976, the City Attorney advised that the
County agreed to certain changes in the draft Agreement to place the trans-
action clearly on a fiscal year basis, and to clarify that County employees
are responsible for results of their testing and inspections and that the
County will defend those results. With respect to a provision that the
agreement be renewed. annually by agreement of the parties, the County stated
this woutd be a considerable problem since they will be dealing with a number
of cities and water agencies in the County. The City Attorney reconunended
/
a
b
C
2
ry4r
103
that the City Council accept the terms of the original draft which provides
for automatic renewal but allows terminati-on upon ninety days' notice.
ORDINANCES - second reading:
1. ORDINANCE NO. 1068 trordinance Establishing No Parking Zone On Carolan
Avenue" was given its second reading.
Declaring the hearing open to the floor, I4ayor Mangini inviteal coflunents.
fhere were none. The hearing was declared closed.
On motion of Councilman Harrison, second by Councilman Amstrup, the Ordinance
passed second reading and was unanimously adopted on roll call.
2. ORDINANCE NO. 1059 "An Ordinance Of The Cit y Of Burlingame Delegating
To The City Treasurer The Authority To Invest City Funds Anal To Deposit
sa+aiPie.s " was given its second reading.
Declaring the hearing open to the floor, Mayor Mangini invite tt cortrnents.
There were none. The hearing was d.eclared closed.
On motion of Councilnan Harrison, seconal by Councilman Crosby, uranimously
carried on roll caII, the Ordinance passed second reading.
ORDINANCES - Introduction 3
1. ORDINANCE NO.1070 "An Ordinance Authorizing An Amendment To The Contract
2. ORDINANCE NO. 1071 "Ordinance Re pealing One-Way Street Desj-gnation On
Highlanal Avenue" was introduceal for first reading by Councilman Amstrup.
3. ORDINANCE NO. IO72 "Ordinance Establishing Stop Intersection On Occidental
Avenue Approaching Eor,rard Av€nue From The South" was introduced forfirst reading by councilman Harrison
T'NFIN]SHED BUSINESS
1. Auxiliary Dinner Meeti ng: In a memorandum dated April 14, 1976, the
City Manager confirmed the alate and place as lltay 13 at Beardsleyrs.
NEW BUSINESS
Director of PubLic Works Ccmnents re3 Stop Sign warants, Occidental
and Howard Avenues
A memorandum dated April 14, L976, to the City t"tanager concerning the above
was read. In addition to corrunents on installation of stop signs at Howaray
Occidental j-ntersection, the Director of Public Works discussed the City's
current stop sign policy, and offered suggestions for j,mprovements.
2. Repr.esentative to San Mateo Count y Development Association
1
, Inc. :
Mayor Mangini requested the City Manager to appoint a representative from staff.
3. Procedure to FiIl Vacancy on Planning ColEnission:
The City Manager was requested to prepare a list of al-I of the applicants
who have not previously been interviewed. Mayor Mangini appointed Council-
men Crosby and Harrison a conmittee to conduct the interviews, to arrange a
suitable schedule through the City Manager and to report the results to City
council' // .-.
Between The City Council Of The City Of Burlingame And The Board Of
Administration Of The California Pitblic Eltployeesr Retj-rement Systern"
(28 at 50 benefit for safety members) was introduceal for first reading
by Councilman Crosby.
104
4
5
Councilman Harrison asked that the form that is used by applicants be revised
to include a date.
APPROVAIS
WARRANTS Nos. 2229 through 2566, aluly audited, in the amount of $478,892.18
were approved for payment on motj-on of Councilman Haffison, second by Council-
man Anstrup, unanimously carried on voice vote.
Councilman Martin referred to a warrant drawn to the account of U. S. Leasing
corporation in the amount of S268.19 for lease of mail room furniture and equip-
ment for Apri1. The City Manager was requested to investigate and inform
the city Council if this is a monthly charge.
PAYFoLL March, 1976, checks Nos. 16994 through L77O4 tn the amount of
$328,190.46, approved for palment of motion of councilman Harrison, second
by councilman Crosby, unanimously carried on voice vote.
ACKI.IOI{IEDGEMENTS
1. Conmunication from Robert Fisse, 3035 Trousdale Drive, to Mayor Mangini
advising he will attend the April 21 meeting of the San Mateo Scenic Roads
Corurittee representing the City of Burlingame.
2. comunication from c. Leonard Diealerichs. Kuhn and company, 330 Prirnrose
Road concerning parking citations issued to one of his employees. Letter
referred to Chief of Police to respond.
3. conmunication from John c. Madalux, certifieal Pub1ic Accountant, concern-
ing special aud.it of city Treasurer records upon expiration of term of office.
City Treasurer's report dated March 3L, 1976.
city Planner report of Planning comtission meeti-ng, Apri- 1 12, 1976.
6, ltinutes: Beautification Corunission, April I, Park & Recreationr April 13,
Planning, yarc}, 22, Traffic, safety & Parking, April 8, 1976.
ADIOURNMENT: At 11:30 p.m. to an Executive Session on Thursday, ApriL 22,
1976, al 5:00 p.m. in conference Room A, City Ha1l, on a personnel matter
concerning selection of a Director of Public Works.
Respectfully suh,mittetl,
Eve H city clerk
/4