HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - CC - 1973.12.1792
Burlingame, California
DecernJcer 17, L973
CALL TO ORDER
A regular meeting of the Burlingame City Council was called to order on
the above date at 8:10 p.m., Mayor R. D. Martin presiding.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The City Clerk led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT:
ABSENI .
COUNCILMEN:
COI]NCILMEN:
Amstrup-Crosby-Cus ick-Iv1angi ni-Mart in
None
MINT]ITES
The minutes of the meeting of December 3 t L973, previously submitted to
membersrwere approved and adopted.
COMMUNICATlONS
1. },IILLBRAE AVENUE/OLD BAYSHORE HfGHWAY TRAFFIC STUDY
Under d.ates of December 13 and 14, L973, the City Manager submitted corres-
pondence from the City of ivlillbrae concerning a proposed traffic engineering
study by the firm of JHK & Associates at the intersection of Millbrae
Avenue and Old Bayshore Highway, cost to be shared one-third each by the
cities of Millbrae and Burlingame and City and County of San Francisco.
A copy of the Letter of Agreement to be executed by the three agencies was
included.
The Council heard a report from Robert Davidson, Director of Publ-ic Works.
He explained that he, VaI Padovan, Millbrae City Engineer, and a traffic
engineer representing the Airport fixed the scope of the study. The con-
sultants have been asked to supply recommend.ations on existing problems
at the intersection and to project five years hence to additional improve-
ments that may be required because of the contemplated Airport expansion.
He stated that the study should be of value to Burlingame in analyzing its
Iong-range needs on OId Bayshore. The Chair asked the Director of Public
Works to point out to the consultants that the Airport, in compiling its
traffic data, is making assumptions, not necessarity true, that there will
be mass transit,. Further, in response to Councilmen Amstrup and Cusick,
t"Ir. Davidson stated that the study is not intended to justify warrants for
traffic signals but to provide advice on what will- be best for the area,
and that a signal system at the location probably would be far more sophis-
ticated and more costly than signals recently contracted for by Burlingame
at old Bayshore,/Mahler Road.
On a motion introduced by Council-man tunstrup, second by Councilman Crosby
and unanimously carried, the City Manager was authorized to proceed with the
City of Millbrae and. the City and County of San Francisco in a traffic
engineering study at the intersection of Millbrae Avenue and OId Bayshore (JHK
& Associates), cost to Burlingame not to exceed one-third of $S1000.00.
2. JOI}flT USE OUTFALL LINE
In a conununication dated December L3, L973, the City Manager presented for
the Council's consideration a detailed report from Jenks & Adamson, Consulting
Sanitary e Civil Engineers, on the route selection for the Joint Use Outfall
Line through lands owned and controlled by the City and County of San Francisco
Airports Commission. In a supplemental report to the Director of Public Works,
Blaine Harrison of the engineering firm submitted construction cost comparison
,
93
between the "Design Route" and the "service Road Route" through the Airport,
indicating that the former would be the least costly of the two. ft was
the recommendation of the engineers that (1) The City of Burlingame should
open negotiations directly with the City of San Francisco in order to (a)
secure an immediate permit to allow for construction of the Outfall Line,
and (b) following agreement upon a fair and reasonable value, secure a
permanent easement. (2) The City of Burlingame should advertise the project
units during the week of December L7, t973, and receive bids for construction
about January 23, t974. The specifications allow for a 60-day hotding
period following the opening of bids, a period in which no bid may be with-
d.rawn by the contractor. (3) The City of Burlingame may award the contracts
for construction of the facilities, upon approval by Federal- and State grant
agencies, when the necessary permit/easement has been secured from the City
of San Francisco.
The Council raised questions about the cost for the permanent easement and
why it was not listed in the original cost estjmate. There appeared to be
agreement that Burlingame should accept the engineersr procedural recommenda-
tions outlined in their letter of December 7. Accordingly, the Chair, with
Council concurrence, directed staff to proceed with invitation to bidders
and to initiate negotiations with the Airport.
RESOLUTIONS: RESOLUIION NO. 88-73 "Ordering And CaIIing A General Municipal
Election To Be HeId fn The City of Burlingame On March 5, L974; Providing
Voting Places And Designating Election Officers" was introduced by Councilman
Crosby, who moved its adoption, second by Councilman Amstrup and unanimously
carried on roll call.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS: Tentative parcel map resubdividing Lot 8, Viewlands
Estates, Florin Rhoad.s, applicant.
This matter was continued to the meeting of January 7, L974, when it was
determined that neither the applicant nor his representative was present.
STAFF REPORTS
1. JOI}TT POWERS AGREEMENT WITH CITY OF SAN MATEO FOR BUS SERVICE: A dTAft
of document was sent to the City Counc by City Manager who
reported, in his memo of December 14, L973, that San Mateo is requesting
approval in principle of the concept of an inter-city bus route, as discussed
at the study meeting on December 5. In recommending approval, the City
Ivlanager stated. that signing of the agreement can be consumrnated after the Council
has had an opportunity to review it.
During a period of Council comment, Mayor Martin noted there is no provision
for cancellation by either city unilaterally. ft was the City Attorney's
opinion that the agreement was drafted with this thought in mind but that it
was not made clear, perhaps because the draft was prepared in haste. He
pointed out that the language can be modified. Councilman Cusiclc asked
that paragraph 5 be expanded by the addition of the phrase "by resolution of
both cities. "
Richard Hopper, traffic engineer with the City of San Mateo, stated that
the buses will probably not be in operation much before this time next
year and it would appear that the agreement need not be executed until the
two cities are ready to operate the inter-city route. For the moment,
the City of San Mateo needs some indication from the City of Burlingame as
to whether the two cities will agree to operate the bus once it is received;
otherwise, San Mateo would. not go to the Urban Mass Transportation Administra-
tion and ask for the additi-onal bus.
The Councif voiced approval in principle of an inter-city bus route between
San Mateo and Burlinga.rne, servj-ce to commence when the bus is delivered, and
under the terms of an appropriate agreement to be prepared by the attorneys
for the two cities.
report to the City Manager under date of December 4, L973. The Managerrs
recommendation that this be held for review at the next study meeting was
accepted by the Council.
2. POLICE STATION SPACE NEEDS: Al-bert W. Kahl-, Architect, submitted his
g1
3. COMMISSIOI{ APPOINTMEMS: Under date of December 13, 1973 , the City
Manager reported that the following persons have indicated willingness to
serve another term and no other nominations have been received: Parking
Commission: Paul J. Constantino and Alfred A. Kirk, Civil- Service Commission:
Mrs. Dorothea W. Hughes and Michael R. Nave. With respect to the two vacancies
existing on Health, Safety e Traffic Commission, the City Manager submitted
a list of names of persons previously interviewed and their interests.
Councilman Amstrup recommended that vacancies on Health, Safety & Traffic be
discussed at the next study meeting in an effort to expedite appointments.
The Commission is operating with five members and, at the moment, having
quorum problems.
4. BREWER RESERVOfR: Under date of December 13, 1973, the City Manager
requested an action by the Council on this matter. On a motion introduced
by Councilman Amstrup, second by Councilman Crosby and unanimously carried,
acceptance of the conditional offer of Ronal-d L. Marl-in, et af, for purchase
of Assessorrs parcel #031-025-030 (Brewer Reservoir) was confirmed.
5. HEIGHT LIMIT-BUILDINGS IN R-I DISTRICT: ln a report dated December 13,
L973, the City Planner stated that the Planning Commission considered this
topic at its December 10 study meeting. The consensus was that for l-ots
that slope upward or downward toward the rear from street line by more than
5% the 35 foot maximum height should be measured from original ground level
l-5 feet from front property line. Where there is a cross slope, the
average original ground level l-5 feet from front property line shall be used.
The Planner asked for input for Commission consideration in preparing a
draft amendment to Code Section 25.28.070 "Height Limitations."
Councilman Amstrup pointed out that the Planning Commission is suggesting
the same height limitation on both upward and downward slope lots. He
recalled that on the last subdivision in the Mills Estate on the canyon
side there were a nudber of conditions, including a restriction on overall
height to maintain a l-ow profile at street level. He thought that 35 feet
may be too high where the slope is down and offered a 20 foot maximum for
consideration.
Mayor Martin stated that the freeze on building permits in R-l District for
three-story buildings on hillside lots will continue in effect until the
Council receives and consj-ders the Planning Commission's recommendations.
Councilman Mangini suggested that a simple sketch accompanying correspondence
of this nature would be helpful.
EXPIRATION OF EMERGENCY ORDINANCE REGUI,ATING ISSUANCE OF BUfLDING PERM]TS,
BURLfNGAME AVENUE AREA OFFSTREET PARKING DISTRICT:
fn a corununication to the City Council dated December L2, L973, the City Attorney
advised that, pursuant to Government Code Section 65858, Interim Urgency
Ordinance No. 959, as twice extended. by ordinances Nos. 950 and 981, can no
Ionger be extended and will expire on March 20, L974.
Councilman Amstrup reported he was informed by the City Attorney that the
alternative to the emergency ordinance procedure is adoption of a pennanent
ordinance. Councilman Amstrup recommended that the Council consider adoption
of such ordinance whereby it will be mandatory for any develoSxnent over 35
feet in height in the downtown area to come to the Council, not with the idea
of attempting to limit construction but to al1ow for Council evaluation.
The City Attorney stated there are zoning matters involved here necessitating
review and recoilunendation by the Planning Commission. A new ordinance wiII
involve two noticed public hearings, one each before Planning Conrnission
and City Council.
Fo1lowing discussion, the Council agreed that (I) the Planning Commission
shall consider an amendment to the zoning code applicable to new construction
and reconstruction within the Burlingame Avenue Area Parking District; (2)
the Council suggests to the Commission the following guidel-ines: building
height not to exceed 35 feet, Iot coverage 75e", gross floor area I5r000 square
feet; (3) a special use permit, subject to final approval by the Council, shall
be required where there is a proposal to exceed. any one of the recited maxjmums.
6
95
The Council agreed further that the Planning Cormnission shall take into
consideration offstreet parking requirements in relation to reconstruction
of an existing building or construction of a new building and recommend a
criteria for determining whether or not an owner or developer shall be required
to furnish parking as a condition to the use permit.
PROPOSED SAN MATEO COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT
Councilman Cusick referred to the recommendation that the Board of Control of
the San Mateo County Transit Development Project intends to send to the Board
of Supervisors whereby legislation may be enacted for a proposition to be
placed on the June, L974, primary baIlot for creation of a transit district
to provide a bus system in the County. Councilman Cusick stated that it
is her understanding that the enabling legislation may not only give to the
proposed transit agency the 1ega1 power to implement a,county-wide bus
system but this could al-so be the same agency for BART in the future. She
asked the Council to place itself on record with the Board of Supervisors
that the language of the proposition on the June ballot be explicit so that
the voters will know whether or not they are voting for a four million
do1lar bus system or a billion dollars for BART. She stated that people
opposed to BART would probably vote "no" on the transit district, unless
they were absolutely certain that there was no commitment to BART. Additionally,
she recomlended that the City Council request that the enabling legislation
include a provision that the electorate of this County shal1 have the opportunity
to vote on BART.
Councilman Amstrup reported that he and David Keyston, a member of the Transit
Development Project Citizens Advisory Committee, attended the meeting on
Friday, December L4, where the recommendation for the transit district was
presented. He stated that, apparently, this has been under study for several
months but there appears to be some reason for haste now to present it to
the legislature for inclusion on the June ballot. Presumably, all of the
cities in the County wilt have the opportunity of input prior to JanuarY 15, L974.
The Council heard a detailed report from Mr. Keyston on the December 14
meeting. He stated that he made the following comments at the meeting:
1. He supported the concept of the transit district. 2. If the district had
any commitment to BART, he would oppose it and the people who were proposing
it. 3. Untess the district is completely independent and objective, and
subject to local control, it would not pass at the election. Mr. Keyston
advised that five or six organized groups, including the San Mateo County
Development Assocj-ation and the Goverrunent Research Council, favored formation
of the district but, in each case, there was a specific recommendation that
there shoul-d be legislation introduced that there would be no compatibility
with nor financial obligation to BART without a vote of the people, and that
any provision to the contrary should be deleted from the legislation. He
stated that, basically, the recommendations to be stated to the Board of
Supervisiors by the Board of Control were that a transit district be formed,
that transit be financed from transit funds or general funds at the present
time, and. that operation and maintenance of the system be contracted out.
In response to Councilman Amstrup, Mr. Keyston confirmed that the Board of
Supervisors is proposed to be the governing authority for the district, and
there will be a supervisory committee of l-9 members.
At Councilman Cusickrs request, and with Council concurrence, the City Attorney
and the City Manager were directed to prepare a communication to be hand
delivered to the Board of Supervisors stating, in effect, that either a
transit district be formed for a specific single purpose, or that fixed rail
mass transit in the County not be considered. without a vote of the people.
Councilman Cusick announced her intention of attending the Board of Supervisors
meeting on Tuesday, December 18.
PROPOSED STATE BOND ACT - ACQU]S]TION OF PARK AND OPEN SPACE
Acknowledgment was made of communicatj-ons dated December 13, L973, from the
Beautification Commission and the Park and Recreation Conrnissj-on submitting
corunents and recommendations on disbursement of funds if this measure is successful
96
at the po1ls in June, 1974. The communications were referred to Councilman
Cusick, Burlingame's Representative on the San Mateo County Priority PJ-anning
Committee. On the same subject, the Council acknowledged a copy of a column
that appeared in the South San Francisco Enterprise-Journal, December L4,
L913, and a letter from Aubrey M. Lum1ey, III, Mayor, City of Pacifica, and
the resolution attached.
"THE TREES OF BIIRL]NGAME", PROGRESS REPORT: The City Manager forwarded
copies of this report prepared. by the Park Director at the request of the
Beautification Cormnission that a study be made of the trees found growing
within the city limits of Burlingame. In a memo to the Council-, the City
Manager stated that I{r. Hoffman's first report is excellent reference material
and he is to be commended on his work. The Council agreed wholeheartedly with
The City Manager's comments and asked that Mr. Hoffman be congratuLated.
ACKNOV,]I,EDGMETflIS
t. Police and Fire Departmentsr monthly activity reports, Novemlcer, 1973.
2. San Mateo County Scavenger Company report "Sol-id Waste Management and
the Bay Area Future. "
3. Minutes - Planning Commission, November 26 and Burlingame Civic Arts
Council, Novernber 28, L973.
4. Letters supporting and opposing Trousdale Drive stop signs.
5. Letter supporting mini-bus system.
6. Announcement from Office of the Governor on "19'72 Young American Medals
for Bravery and Servj-ce." Participation in the program was invited by
forwarding names of young people considered deserving of the honor.
APPROVALS: Warrants in the amount of $2321045.43, Nos. 4737 through 49531
duly audited, were approved for payment on motion of Councilman Cusick, second
by Councilman Amstrup and unanimously carried. Payroll for the month of
November, L973, Checks Nos. 17803 through 18613, $2561001.65, was approved
on motion of Councilman Cusick, second by Councilman Amstrup and unanimously
carried.
LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION: fn a communication dated November 30, L973,
LAFCO reported that its meeting of Novenrlcer 2L, L973, it unanimously expressed
opposition to AB882 in its present form.
Mayor Martin's recolrunendation that the Council oppose the bill was accepted.
The City Manager was requested to notify the appropriate Assembly committee,
possibly the Committee on Local Government. Assembllrman Arnett's office
should have this information.
BROADWAY PEDESTRIAN OVERPASS: fn a letter dated December 5, L973, the Board
of Directors of the Burlingame Chamber of Commerce reported it viewed the
plans for an additional Broadway pedestrian overpass as presented by Col.
E. L. Norberg. The City Manager was requested to obtain a copy of the plan
in reduced size for Council- review.
ADJOURNIIENT:The meeting was adjourned at l-0:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
%to,*xznd*-bffi, CrrY ir,um
APPROVED:
R.D MAYOR