Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - CC - 1972.04.17zol Burlingame, California April 17, 1972 CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the Burlingame above date. The meeting was called i'Iayor Irving S. tunstrup presiding. CJ,ty Council to order at held on the P.R., was 8 :05 The to PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE City Planner led the assemblage in the Pledge of Allegiance the FIag. ROLL CALL Present Absent Counci lmen : Councilmen: 1{ms trup-Cro sby -Johnson-Mang in i -Mar t in llone MI NUTES The mj.nutes of the meeting of April 3, 1972, previously sub- mitted to Council, vrere approved and adoPted. ACKNOWLE DGMENTS The Chair acknohrledged the Presence of Mrs. Dorothy cusick' cessful candidate with the incumbents, Irving S. AmstruP and V.A."Vic" Mangini, for the office of Councilman in the recent electj-on and Harry S. Graham, A.c."Bud" Ilarrison and Thomas who were also candidates. POLICE PERSONNEL suc - W.Sine, Police Captain Nordstrom introduced the newest members department, Mrs. Carol A. Harm, dispatcher. and Police Peter V. Nedwick, who were welcomed by Mayor Amstrup. VARIANCE APPROVED EOR APARTMENT (1131 CAPUCHINO AVENUE ) of theOfficer CONSTRUCTION IN R-2 DISTRICT HEARI NGS I ;,tayor Amstrup announced that this was the time and place scheduled to conduct a hearing in the matter of an apPeal from the PJ-anning Commission's grant of variance on March 27, 1972, for multi- famity use of duplex property at 1131 Capuchino Avenue. The appeal was filed by S.F. and C.P. Childers, 1139 Capuchino Avenue. At the Chair's request, the City Planner reviewed the background of the application, explaining that the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on February 28, L972, and, by a vote of three in favor to four oPposed, denied the variancei subse- quently, the matter was brought to the City Council on appeal by the applicants who requested that it be returned to the Com- mission for reevaluation because of modifications in the plans, which the Cornmission had not seen; Council acceded to the request, the Commission held a second hearing and, on the basis of the modified plans, voted unanimously to approve at its meeting of I,larch 27 , 197 2 . The City Planner furnished Councj,l with copies of a map marked to indicate properties improved with apartment buildings and nrrrober of units in each on both sides of Capuchino Avenue betlveen Broadway and Carmelita Avenue. He pointed out that since 1959, when the first variance was granted for a six-unit building at 1127, there have been 1l varj.ances approved for multi-family dwellings. 238 The City Planner referred to his statement dated revised Aprit 17, 1972, concerning the issues of requirements for variance grants, lot coverage, parking and to a copy of a letter dated October in support of an application for variance for a at 1112 Capuchino Avenue . February 24,1972, precedent, code density and 28, 1963, filed six-unit building The City Planner reported that in the area bounded by El- Camino and California Drive, Broadway and Carmelita Avenue, Capuchino is the only street not zoned for apartment use, that the precedent does prevail as policy for use of properties on the block. He stated that 1ot coverage conforms to that approved on other properties on the street and that the application meets the four conditions for a variance; furthermore, in R-l a building height of 35 feet $rith five feet of side setback is permitted--the proposed building will approximate 21 feet in height with a side yard in excess of six feet adjacent to the duplex building; there should be little if any impact on light and air where the two residences are located. The City Pl-anner stated that the block is multi-family in use, that the building on the subject property is the remaining singlc- family dwe11ing, and that it is within the property right of the owner to enjoy a variance for the reason there have been 11 similar variances during the past 12 years. He reported that theplans for the property meet aII regulations of the ordinance. Declaring the speak . hearing open, the Chair invited proponents to Mr. Fiory A. Olivolo, owner of an apartment building at 1129 capu- chino Avenue, stated that the proposed improvement will conform to existing improvements and, by reason of the common driveway which he and the applicant intend to arrange, both buildings willbenefit to the extent of improved access and parking. Mr. Lex Alexander, principal in the application, referred to hisletter to the Council of April L4, L972, stated that the Letter and the City Planner's comments appear to summarize the facts accurate ly . There hrere no other speakers to support the application. Mayor Amstrup acknowledged the letter of March 29, 1972, filed by S.E. and C.P. ChiLders, 1139 Capuchino Avenue, who initiated the appeal, inviting their comments. Mr. Childers stated that there are five six-unit buildings onthe west side of the street--the proposal will make six--andsix five-unit buildings on the opposj.te side; additionally, there are duplex dwellings and one property with three units, resultingin excessively high density, heavy traffic and congestion. Mr. Childers stated that his property is immediately adjacent to the lot vrhere the apartment building is proposed, that approval of the variance will constitute a violation of his rights as a property owner--his property values will depreciate; there will be loss of sunshine and light during the winter months; the garden and patio will be visible to tenants in the apartment building and his tenants, who are daytime sleepers, may be forced to move because of noise when the building is under construction. Referring to the zon.j"ng ordinance, Section 25.54.020, and to the four conditions recited therein requisite to variance grants, Mr. Childers cited areas vrhere the application fails to comply:there are no unusual circumstances j.n the property--the buildingj.s in excellent condition and will bring market price at any time as a single-family dwelling or duplex. if someone wished to con- vert; the owner is not entitled to a variance for multi-family use--his rights are limited to single-family or duplex; public health, safety and $relfare can be affected--where there is over- crowding, the more likelihood of incidents, dj.sorder and danger. -''1 2iu Mr. Childers stated that the city does not need to crowd six- family buildings on lots designed for single-family and duplex and protested t,he variance procedure as a method of accomplishing spot zoning; if the city intends to change zoning uses in an area, it should be done by reclassi fication. Councilman Martinrs reference to a statement in the Childerb letter of March 29 to the effect that the Planning Commission gave tacit approval to the variance at a private meetinq, prior to the public hearing, initiated a period of discussion during which it was determined there was a misunderstanding regarding study meetings held by the city Council and the Commission. In response to Mr. Childer's explanation that it was his and his wife's impression the meetings r^rere not open to the public, he was informed that visitors are welcome but do not participate in the discussion except by invitation. There \,re!e no further speakers declared closed. from the floor. The hearing was Councilman Martin recalled that he was a member of the Planning Commission in 1959 when the decision was made to study the R-2 block on Capuchino Avenuei the corunission was ah,are that duplex construction had slowed considerably after Ray Park was completed and there appeared to be 1ittIe reason to anticipate any great change. He stated that at the time there were a number of single-family dwellings on the street in various stages of disrepair and the city staff vras ar,rare that there was some interest in redevelopment of the properties to multi-family use' with the result that the Commissj-on decided not to reclassify to R-3, because of the potential for reconversion, \,rith its resultant problems, but to adopt the variance procedure whereby the city can maintain control of anything that is built, including architectural control and the system has been in effect since. Councilman l4artin stated that, because of the policy that was adopted 13 years ago for the purpose of accomplishing the redevelopment that has taken place and his close association with its history, he would find it difficult to vote no in thepresent situation. In response to Councilman Johnson, the City Planner confirmed that a single-family dwelling in an R-I District can be 35 feet in height and that it was his recollection that the proposed building was estimated to be 21 feet in height. Councilman Johnsonrs conunent that it be any effect as far as light on thet1rs. Childers to explain that their 1 lot--the building there hri1l be locat u1d not appear there wouldplex dwelling prompted is lower than the adjacent on a small kno11. wo du ot ed A motion introduced by Councilman Martin to approve the Planning Commissionrs action in granting a variance to Les Alexander for construction of a six-unit apartment building at 1131 Capuchino was seconded by Councilman Crosby. On the question, Councilman Johnson asked when the Childers pur- chasecl the home and if they were alrrare that the street !.rasprimarily apartment. They reported they purchased in 1958 from a broker and knerr, tl:e zoning was duplex but, at that time, there were three single-family dwellings in close proximity to theirproperty . The motion was thereafter unanimously carried on ro11 cal1. 2. WEED ABATEMENT 1972-1973 Mayor Amstrup announced that this hras the time and place scheduledto hear objections to the proposed removal of noxious and dangerous weeds in connection with the L972-J-973 Weed Abatement Program. 240 The hearing was declared open and cornments invited from the audience. There being neither proPosed removal of closed. nor written protests filed to h,eeds, the Chai-r declared the oral such the hear ing RESOLUTION No. 24-72 "ordering Destruction Of Noxious And Dangerous weeds And Rub bish A Nuisance In The city of Burlingame" Johnson, erho moved its adoPtion,was introduced by Counci lman seconded by Councilman Martin and unanimously carried on roll cal1. COMMUNICATIONS 1. DRAINAGE PROBLEMS MILLS ESTATE LOT Acknowledgment was made of a l-etter dated April 16, L972, from ceorge F. NeeI, 1785 Sebastian Drive, requesting the city to accept an easement for maintenance purposes for a new drainage system he intends to install on his property according to the study made by soils engineers. There was also a copy of ithe proposal prepared for Mr. Neel by Shannon & Wilson, Inc., Soil- Mechanics and Engineers. To a1loe, time for study and evaluation Councj,l continued the matter to the mee ting of ivlay I , L97 2 . 2. JOINT OUTFALL CONSTRUCTION In a cornmunication dated April 13, 1972, the City Manager sug- gested that council and staff meet with the city of Millbrae City Council and staff, John Jenks and representatives from the Regional Water Quality Control Board on May 23,1972, at 7:30 p.m., in the Burlingame City HaIl for purposes of discus- sing joint construction of an outfall segrer. CounciL accepted the suggestion with the exception that water Quality Board representatives not be present and requested that arrangements be made by the City Manager. 3. GARDENER AUTHORIZED A recommendation from the City Manager under date of April 13,1972, that appointment of an additional gardener in the Park Department be authorized to assist in bhe r.rork of maintenance at Bayfront Park T{as concurred in unanimously by the Council. 4. PARKING STUDY PROPOSALS In a corununication dated April 14, 1972, the City l'tanaqer submitted a tabulation of fees prepared by firms interested in undertaking the Burlingame Avenue off-Street Parking study and recommended that the matter be referred to staff and the citizens study com- mit.tee or sub-cofiunittee to examine the proposals and submit three to Council for final choice. Following comments from Mr. wilLiar[ Hauser, General Manager of the chamber of Co[unerce, Mayor Amstrup asked that staff work with the Chamber's conunittee to select three proposals for Council's consideration at the meeting of May L' 1972. RE SOLUT IONS RESoLUTIoN NO. 25-72 "Requesting The Use Of EI Camino Rea1, A State H hway, For E Parade "rrras introduced by Councilman l4an- seconded. by Councilman Johnson and 1ggini, who moved its adoption, unanimously approved on ro11 call. 24r U}iFINISHED BUSINESS RESOLUTION NO. 26-72 "Accepting Construction Improvements To Job No. 71-8" was introduced by Council- its adoption, and seconded by Councilman Baysfde Park man Johnson, Crosby. - Phase I, who moved Mr. Celestino Romoli, 109 Stanley Road, protested that the park is not ready to be accepted because of drainage problems andpoor turf. The City Engineer reported that the contractor has completed al-I of the work according to the original plans and specifications on which he bid and has satisfied all parts of the contract; furthermore, Park and Recreation Departments have sanctioned acceptance and the architectrs certification that the work is complete has been filed. The motion was thereafter unanimously approved on roll caII. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS -- Communications 1. SIERRA CLUB RE: SOUTIIERN CROSSING A letter dated March 3L, 1972, from the Sierra CIub, San Francisco, signed by Daniel R. Rosenberg, reguested a statement of policy from the city wj.th respect to the proposed construction of the Southern Crossing.bridge between San Francisco and Alameda. Councilman Mangini recalled that the Council took a stand on the issue in response to a request from the Commandant, U.S. Coast Guard in Washington. His recommendation that a copy of Council's action be forwarded to the Sierra Club \^ra s accepted. The matter was referred to the City Manager. 2. BURLII{GAME SCHOOL DISTRICT DOWNTOWN ART DISPLAY A letter dated April L2, 1972, from DaIe Perkins, Art Consultant, Burlingame School District, presented sketches of studentsr art $/orks and showed suggested placement in the city parking 1otparallel to Burlinqame Avenue, running between Primrose and ParkRoads. The communication requested consideration to authorizinginstallation by Public School lrTeek, ApriI 24-28, and also askedfor Councilrs reaction to memorial pJ-aques being placed atvarious locations throughout the city. Council agreed to installation of the displays and the timetableoutlined in Mr, Perkinrs communication; however, there appearedto be a majority opinion that the concept of memorial plaques not be pursued. Mayor Amstrup agreed to inform Mr. Perkins accordingly. 3. A communication from Peninsula Choraliers' advising of itsinterest in the Burlingame Corununity Arts,/Cultural Centerproject continued to the completion of a building. An invitation from the Peninsula Association for Retarded Children and Adults to a "Special Olympics" to be held atMil1s High School on Saturday, April 29, where more than 100 students from throughout the county will participate, opening ceremonies scheduled for 10:00 a.m. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Chamber of Corunerce quarterly report, April 1 through June 30,L972iPolice and Fire Departments monthly reports, March, 1972;Beautification Commission minutes, April 6, 1972. -- Reports 242 TRAFTIC SIGNAL PROJECTS Engineer reported that notification has been received Federal Highway Administration that traffic signaltion at Bays\"rater Avenue and California Drive has been a TOPICS project. He stated that this project and for Park Road and Howard Avenue, which will be gas tax revenue, will be ready to go to bid shortly. horized advertising for bids on both projects as soon d specifications are ready. The City from the installa approved the sign f inanced Council as plans as aIs by aut an SIDEWALK BURLINGAME AVENUE In response to a question raised by Councilman Martin it appeared that none of the Council was avrare that a sample slab of the new sidewalk on Burlingame Avenue had been poured. The City Engineer reported that his department tested the samples for safety factorsi he, staff members and representatives of the Chamber of Commerce and merchants inspected it; there were no unfavorable reactions. APRIL WARRANTS Councilman Martin asked for clarification of an expenditure of $967.23 to K&K Speedometer Electric Service (v{arrant No. 255) . PoIice captain Nordstrom expJ.ained that the amount covers materials ancl installation of new equj.pment, authorized by the Council, in three new vehicles. PUBLIC SCHOOL WEEK Mr. A.C. "Bud" Harrison, teacher at Burlingame High School , extended an invitation to Council and the people of Burlingame to participate in observance of Public Schools lveek, April 24 through 28, 1972. P ROCLAMATI ON Mayor Amstrup, with the Council's concurrence, asked lution be prepared commending William R. tawson upon of his retj.rement as Councilman of the City of Menlo that a reso-the occasion Park. APPROVALS warrants Month of April, 1972, Nos. 101 through 326, in the approved for payment by Councilman Johnsonanount of $]84,821.14, duly audited,were on motion of Councilman Mangini, seconded and unanimously carried. PayroII Month of l'4arch, 1972 , Checks Nos.4337 through 4942, on motion of CounciL-in Che amount o f $213 ,456.49, were apProved man Mangini, seconded by Councilman crosby and unanimously car- ried. ENVI RONMENTAL Q UALITY COORDINATING COUNCIL IUayor Amstrup referred to a draft of resolution to be considered by the Council of Mayors of San Mateo County "recommending to tire Board of Superviiors that the Environmentaf Quality Coordi- nating Council not be staffed or funded by the County.of San Mateo and that the official county Boards and commissions and thc Regional Planning Commission be recognized as the principal adiisory bodies [o the County in the area of Environmental Quality Planning. " Following cornments from councilman Martin that the membership of EQCC is not representative of all of the cities of the County urrA it" studiei appear to duplicate studies that have been made by the Regional flanning Commission, a motion was introduced by 2+;i Councilman crosby, seconded by Councilman Johnson and unanimously carried that the City of Burlingame support the resolution at the forthcoming San Mateo County Council of I'layors meetinq. SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING Mayor Amstrup announced that on Tuesday, April 18, 1972, at 8:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers, the Council l^rill convene in special session to canvass the returns of the recent election, to install new officers and to bid farewell to Councilman Johnson' who will formally retire from the City Council. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was regularly adjourned at 9:30 p.m. Re ectful ly subm i tted er ber t White City Clerk APPROVED I ng s.strup,yor