Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - CC - 1972.12.04354 Burlingame, December CaIi forni a 4, 1972 CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the Burlingame above date. The meeting was called Mayor Victor A. Mangini . City CounciL wasto order at 8: I0 held on the P.m., bY PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The City Planner led the assemblage in the Pledge of ALtegianceto the F1ag. ROLL CALL Pre sent Ab sent Counci Imen : Councilmen: Ams trup-Cro sby-Cus ick-Mangini -Martin None MINUTES CITY HALL LIGHTING AWARD On behalf of the City Council, Mayor Mangini accepted a plaque from Mr. A.W. Hard, Trust Coordinator, Electrical Industry Trustof San Mateo County, inscribed "1972 Lighting Award Presented ToCity Of Burlingame for City Ha1l Exterior Lighting--ElectricalIndustry Trust Of San Mateo County." Mr. Hard informed theCouncil that in 1971 the Trust implemented a program for thepurpose of recognj.zing outstanding lighting of buildings in the County and that the City of Burlingame, Marion-Cerbatos & Tomasi,designer for the lighting, and Arc Electric Company, ElectricalContractors, Robert J. Menj.cucci, President, were selected torecei.ve the 1972 award. HEARINGS BAYSIDE IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 4 Mayor Mangini announced that this was the time and place scheduledto conduct pubJ.ic hearings on a series of resolutions concerningBayside Inprovement District No. 4-Reclamation District No. 2097. Mayor Manginj. recognized Mr. Kenneth Jones, bond counsel for thecity, who explained that the four resolutj.ons requiring an action by the Council j.nvolve satisfaction of conditions established inthe agreement between the State of California and Anza Pacific Corporation, .whereby a determination was made that a substantial percentage of the property thought to be o$/ned by the ReclamationDistrict actually was owned by the State. Mr. Jones referred toprior discussions on the matter when Council was informed of the terms of the agreement, resulting in lease-back by the State to Anza of State land for a period of 66 years, subject to a specific development plan approved by both of the parties. Mr. Jonesstated that the present proceedings are required to accomplish amendment of certain initial assessments against underwater areas and reassessment of t,hose assessments against the leaseholdgranted by the agreementi and to rescind prior Iegislation ofthe Council dealing with a proposed public service easement (set up as part of the Anza initial development to allow pedestrian access to the bay) and with a public streeti these areas are Stateproperty and will remain lrrater areas by reason of the settlement agreement and resultant change in development plans. The minutes of the meeting of November 20, L972, previously submitted to Council, were approved and adopted. ,));) RESOLUTION NO. 89-72 "A ResoLution Confirming Amended Assessment aayside Improvement D istrict No. 4,Assessment Nos. 24-A, 24-B, ncilman Amstrup, who moved its n and unanimously carried on Mayor Mangini decl-ared the hearing open posed amended assessment. There were no The hearing was declared closed. 25-A And 25-B" was introduced by Cou adoption, second by Councilman l{arti roLl cal1. Mayor Mangini declared the hearing open posed partial reassessment. There r^Ierefi1ed. The hearing was declared closed. 24 And 25" was introduced by counci adoption, second by Councilman Amst ro11 ca11. in the matter of the pro- protests heard nor filed. in the matter of the Pro- no protests heard nor RESoLUTIoN No. 90-72 "A Resolution Confirming Partial Reassessment Bayside Improvement D istrict No. 4,Portions of Assessment Nos. 23, Lman Crosby, who moved its rup and unanimously carried on lic Service Easement, Bays ide Improvement District No. 4"was Mayor Mangini declared the hearing open in the matter of a public service easement. There were no protests heard nor fi1ed. The hearing was declared closed. RESOLUTION NO. 91-72 "A Resolution Ordering The Vacation of A Pub- introduced by Councilman cusick, who moved its adoPtion, second by Councilman Crosby and unanimously carried on ro11 caLl. Mayor Mangini decLared the hearing open in the matter of an offer of dedication of property for public street purposes. There were no protests heard nor filed. The hearing was ileclared closed. RESOLUTION NO. 92-72 "A Resolution ordering The Termination Of A Said Portion of Said offer, Bayside ImProvement District No. 4" was introduced by Councilman Martin, t ho moveal its adoption, Second by councilman crosby and unanimously carried on ro11 call. Portion of An offer of Ded ication And Abandonment of Right To Accept COMMUNICATIONS 1. PETITION TO PRESERVE SINGLE-FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS. Mayor Manglni accorded the privilege of the floor to Mrs. John Barton, 734 winchester Drive, who filed with the City Clerk petitions reciting "We, the undersigned residents of Burlingame urge you to retain its residential nature. Any change in zoning laws which aLl,ows for more apartment development will upset the already present balance between owner and renter-occupied units. Studies have shown that higher density also brings increased traffic, pollution and sky-rocketing costs for public services. In view of these factors, we petition you to protect our single-family residential nej.ghborhoods from apartment encroachment. Future multi-unit development should be permitted only in those areas noh, zoned for ir. " Mrs. Barton stated that on occasions when she and her neighbors appeared before the Planning Commission and City Council to argue against variances that erould a1low multi-family construction in their area "we have been told that it is not feasible to build duplexes so it must be 4-p1ex or 6; we sympathize with you but itj-s a fact that residents are against increased density in resi- dential areas; hre were told r.re $rere not in the majority but I stand before you with approximately 2500 signatures of residents rrho have signed the petitions; \,re could have carried on for a tonger time but we felt we had enough to prove our point. " Mrs. Barton urged Council's consideration to reassessment of the 356 general plan $rith the thought ofin single-family neighborhoods . acknowledged that the Council isfeelings of the torrnspeople andpetitions were fi led. preventing multi-f amily dwe1l-ingsIn conclusion, Mrs. Barton always receptive to the strongit was in that spirit that the Fol}owing an announcement of ground ru1es, Mayor Mangini declaredthe floor open to the audience. Mr. Robert Delze1l, 1345 Desoto Avenue, addressed his remarks to16-story office building proposed to be constructed on the bayside of OId Bayshore Highway. He stated ,'it is my understandingthat the City of Burlingame has no ordinance that would prohibitthe construction of this building; I think we must do somethingto limit the height of buildings; the City of San Diego imposeda 30 foot height limit in coastal areas and I beLieve it isessential that Burlingame protect its shore line by putting in asimilar ordinance. " a Mr. Charles Nolan, 22I Victoria Road, stated that the area inwhich he lives consj.sts of mostly otder single-family homes, someneglect,ed and deteriorating, that he purchased one of the olderbuildings and spent consj.derable time and money rebuilding becausehe believed the area would stablize. He suggested that ,'past planning functions of the city failed to recognize that people willrebuild older homes." He asked for stricter enforcement of zoning laws as a method of controlLing itlegal dwelling units and rooming houses . Mr. Robert Ohlson, 211 Occidental Avenue, spoke to the point ofrelationship of general plan to existing zoning, stating that "ofpartj.cular concern is the matter of the R-l zones being looked upon as things of the past where they do not read in accord withthe general plan. " He referred to legislation at the State 1evel whereby zoning changes may be mandated that are not acceptable tothe community and asked that staff be directed to determine theappropriate action at the earliest possible date to amend thegeneral plan so that no R-I zone as it now exists will be con-verted to anything e1se, and the resident.ial character of thecity can be maj.ntained. Mr. Anthony Spare, I37 Costa Rica Avenue, commented that the single-family residential quality of Burlingame that has always existed and continues to exist is probably the primary factor bringingpeople into the city. He cautioned that "changes in zoning go one $ray--any changes that will take pl"ace become permanent. " Mrs. Bruce Paton, 317 Chapin Lane, noted that several of the CounciL members made election statements saying they were willing to con-sider keeping Burlingame as it is and to reevaluate plans that were made in the past. She suggested "that the general plan maynot be as suitable now as it might have appeared in 1969." Mr. Paul Hinchcliffe, Sr., 904 Paloma Avenue, stated that "hlsfamily and most of his neighbors oppose destroying $rhat beauty we have in Burlingame. " Mr. Robert Refvem, 527 Almer Road, stated that he has been a resident of the city since 1944, that he was aware that thegeneral plan was adopted only after exhaustive study, that "itmust be recognized that planning is one thing and density quite another and that the city should recognize that people are coming to Burlingame as to all areas of the Peninsul-a and shouldplan accordingly and not be stampeded into changing the general plan . " Mr. Celestino Romolj., 109 Stanley Road, raised the issue of water and sewer services, questioning hrhether existing utilities in an R-l District would be adequate for j.ncreased population densityor rrould homeowners be assessed to finance such improvements. ,JDt The City Engineer, i.n response to the Chair, rePorted that a study and report is made on water and sewer in connection with every reclasii fication and variance application for multi-family use. Mr. Robert Totman, hood probably would but that he "would concrete canyon. " 17f1 Davis Dri.ve, explained that his neiqhbor- not be physically affected by zoning changes not $rant to end up living in the bottom of a Mr. Robert Anderson, 113 Crescent Avenue, explained he was a mem- ber of the citizens cororittee that worked with staff on the general plan and, at the t.ime, he expressed objection to some of the ihanges vrith respect to higher density in R-l Districts, but accepted the irguments that the plan was intended to establish guide lines only. He asked if an attempt is being made to force the general plan on the people and urged temporary amendment of the Plan to.protect R-I areis;- after thaLr "the plan shoul-d be studied with a view to redevelopment only, since there are some areas $rhere people favor rezoning . " In response to Councilman AmstruPrs reference to a recent news- paper article concerning a proPosed condominium development in lhe downtown area, the City Attorney reported he was not acquainted with the article,but had received an inquiry from a rePresentat,ive of the paper concerning an opinion exPressed by the develoPer that the urgency ordinance affecting construction within the parking distriat hid application onJ.y to commercial and not residential. The City Attorney stated he explained to the newsPaPer rePorter that this was not the case; the ordinance applied to every struc- ture. Councilman Cusick advised that she was not present when the general plan was adopted; however, during her election campaign and during the variance procedures that she and her neighbors argued against, it was her impression that the general plan tras a statement of policy for future development; but Iegislation enacted j.n Sacra- mento makes the general plan absolute and planning experts have stated that cities can be sued if the Plan is not implemented. Councilman Cusick stated "changes appear to be in order, tj-mes have changed since work on the city's plan was first undertaken in 1967; five years is like 50 years with respect to pollution, density, environment; everything has changed drastically." Councilman Cusick stated she was informed that density changes were proposed in the general plan as a method of accomplishing redevelopment; it would appear now that rejuvenation of older areas is taking place, people are buying and remodeling older homes. Councilman Cusick asked that the City Attorney prepare a reso- lution for Councilrs consideration whereby the general plan shal1 be made to conform to density criteria of the zoning ordinance in R-I and R-2 Districts. Councilman Martin and the City Attorney pointed out that legisla- tion proposed in Sacramento would delay from January 1 to July 1, 1973, the date by which cities and counties must conform zoning ordinances to general plans. At Councilman Arnstruprs reguest, the City Attorney reported that at the last Planning Commisslon meeting a resolution was adopted settj.ng forth guide lines with respect to R-2A Districts after extensive discussion. The City Attorney explained that it should be made very clear to the Council, the Commission and to thepublic that the action that was taken was not to undertake an R-2A District, lrhich necessarily requires legislation and can be done only by the City Council; nor did the Commission recommend the legislation, but merely set out for itself, and for prospective applicants, conditions which the commission felt rightfully should be required of any variance applicant to meet before he could expect, his variance to be granted, 358 RECONVENE Following a recess at 9:I0 p.m., the Chair reconvened the meetingat 9:30 p.m. ACKNOWLEDGMENT Mayor Mangini acknowledged the presence of former Councilman and Mayor Charlotte Johnson and her husband, "8i11." PLANNING COWISSION R-2A RESOLUTION NO. 11-72 Councilman Amstrup recommended that R-2A District regulati,onsnot be implemented until the City Council has had time to explore the matter fu1ly; additionally, the scope of the r,rork on the general pLan should include review of aIl residential areas. 2. DANCE PERMIT "THE FISHERMAN.II A communicatj.on from Richard S. Patane, General Manager, The Fisherman Restaurant, lnc., 1492 OId Bayshore Highlray, requested permission to provide facilities for public dancing betvreen the hours of 8:45 p.m., to approximately 1:30 a.m., music to be sup-plied by the same three piece band that has been appearing atthe restaurant for the past three months. Reports filed by the County Health Department and Police and Fire Departments were favorable. The CounciL unanimously concurred hrith Councilman Amstrup that thepermit be approved for a period of six months from December !,L972, subject to the conditions outlined in the applicantrs communication, renewal to depend upon satisfactory reports from staff. The City Manager was requested to inform the applicant accordingJ.y. 3. PROPOSED SHERATON fNN. A second letter from the architects, under the same date, requested the council's approval to the basic plan for the project. The communication noted that the Council authorized the use permit on December f6, 1968, and approved the Environmental Impact RePort on November 20, \972. A large mounted drawing pLan were furnished for of the proposed improvement and the basic Council review. Mr. Merton YolLes was present to represent the architects. He explained that the plan before the council differs from the plan approved 1n 1958 only to the extent that the area of the building has been reduced from 287,000 square feet to 201,000 square feet. A moti.on introduced by Councilman Martin to accept the plans pre- sented by ste$rart and osborne as being in accordance r^rith the original plans for the property was seconded by Councilman Amstrup and carried on the folJ.owing roll call: A letter dated Novemb er 27, L972, fro osborne and Stewart, architects, concerned tree planting and removal required for construction of the Sheraton Inn at 1177 Airport Boulevard. The communication mentioned that construction of the entrance road will require removal from the north end of the wind row eight 12" trunk-diameter large trees and 12 medium to smal-1 treesi however, the Iandscape plan has been modified to provide for planting 40 new 15 gallon eucaJ.ypti in this area, in addition to shrubs and ground cover at the entrance. The communication advised that a total of eight large and 16 medium to small trees will be removed on the entire site and that the total landscape plan calls for planting a minimum of 85 new trees plus the 40 in the wind row. A copy of the modification in the landscape plan accompanied the corununication. 35r) In a colununication dated November 22, L972, Ehe Director of Public Works reported that Ronald A. Perner, Architect, and Jules Fran-card, Park Superintendent, advise that the contract for landscaping on Burlingame Avenue has been satisfactorily completed. His recommendation that the work be formally accepted was concurred inby the City Manager in an addendum to the communication. Councilman Martin noted that correspondence from the Architect andthe Park Superintendent differ as to the date of completion. TheDirector of Public Works confirmed November 16 as the correct date. He stated that the 90 day maintenance period rrill start as of the16th and 5t of the amount due the contractor will be retaineduntil the end of the peiiod. RESOLUTION NO. 93-72 Between El Camfno neal and California Drive, Job No. 5371" "Accepting Landscaping Of Burlingame Avenue hras introduced by Counci.lman Crosby, who moved its adoption, second by Counci lman Amstrup and unanimously carried on ro11 ca11. 5. TRANSFER OF TOPICS TUNDS. Under date of November 22, 1972, the Director of Public Works sub-mitted for Council approval a form of agreement for exchange ofthe City's TOPICS funds for County gas tax funds. In his conrnuni-cation, the Director of Public Works explained in detail the cir- cumstances that led to the County assuming administration of all TOPICS funds rdithin the County in order to assure that no fundswill be lost and returned to the State. In a conununication dated November 29, L972, the City Manager recornmended execution of the agreement. RESOLUTION NO. 94-72 "Authorizing Execution Of Agreement Between County Of san t'lateo and The City Of Burlingame For Transfer Of TOPICS Funds" was introduced by Councilman Cusick, who moved itsadoption, second by Councilman Crosby and unanimousLy carried onroll calI. A communication dated November 27, L972, from the Planning Commission recommendj.ng that signs larger than 32 square feet in face area besubject to Planning Comnissj.on review and approval was referred tothe City Attorney for preparation of legislation for Council con- s ideration . 7 . TAXI SERVICE. In a conununication dated November 30, 1972, the City Managerreported there have been no registered complaints concerningservice in Burlingame, other than two cal1s received several 490 . taxi year s ORDINANCE NO. 977 "An Ordinance Amending Sub-Section D Of Sectionil33.f20-TE-T6e-frunicipal Code of The City of Burlingame AndIncreasing The Rates Of Fare For Transportation In Taxicabs" wasgiven its second reading. On motion of Councilman Martin, secondby Councilman Crosby, said Ordinance passed its second reading and was unanimously adopted on roll call: AYES: COUNCILIIEN: NOES: COUNCILMEN: ABSENT COUNCIWEN: Amstrup-Crosby-Cus ick-Mangin i -Martin None None AYES: COUNCILMEN: Ams trup-Cro sby-Mang in i -Mart in NOES: COUNCILMEN: None ABSTAIN COUNCILMEN: Cusick 4. BURLINGAME AVENUE LANDSCAPING. 6 . S IGN CODE AMENDI{ENT . 360 8. BREWER RT]SERVOIR, Under date of November 30, L972, the City Manager recommended Council's consideration to disposal of t.he old Brevrer Reservoir as surplus to the city's needs and to effect savings in main- tenance and property tax costs. Councilman Amstrup suggested that the Town of Hillsborough may be i.nterested in the site for construction of tennis courts. The city Engineer reported he met with no success when proposing the identical use to the Hillsborough City Manager two years ago. Councilman Martin's recolunendation that a letter be sent directly to Hillsborough Town Council was accepted and the City Manager authorized to proceed accordingly. 9. DRAE'T REPORT OF PARKING STUDY. Under date of November 30, L972, the City Manager submitted com- ments from the Engineering and Planning Departments on De Leuw, cather & Company draft report on Burlingame Avenue Parking Study. In his communj.cation, the City Manager pointed out there are no glaring errors in the report. His recommendation that staff com- ments be brought to the attention of the consultants for review aod they, then, be directed to modify and print the final rePort, was accepted. ORDI NANCES 1. ORDINANCE NO. 976 "Amendin g The Municipal Code By Adding sub- Paragraph (s) to Sect t on 13.36.010 Prohibiting Parking On OId Bayshore Highway" was given its second reading. on motion of Councilman Crosby, second by Councilman Martin, said Ordinance passed its second reading and was unanimously adoPted on ro11 call: Ams trup-crosby-cus ick-Mang ini-Martin None None , continued from the last meeting, was recontinuedf December 18, L972, pending a report from the , Wilson, Jones, Morton & Lynch. The above mat to the meetin bond counsell 2. UPDATING OE GENERAL PLAN. 3. 29 VICTORIA ROAD. AYES: COUNCIWEN: NOES: COUNCILMEN: ABSENT COUNCILMEN: UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1.AI{ENDED ASSESSMENT, EAST MILLSDALE INDUSTRIAL PARK. tergo ors Responding to Councilman Cusick, the City Planner rePorted he met with Williarn Spangle and his associate and their proposal may be avaiLable for Councilts review at the meeting of December 78,L972. The city Manager and City Attorney reported on the above proPerty, at Councj.Lman Crosbyrs request, and discussed measures undertaken in an attempt to gain the obrnerrs cooperatj.on in repairing and maintaining the property. ALLEGED ILLEGAL DWEI.,LING UNITS Council heard a report from Mr. Angelo DelLacasa, 141 Victoria Road, on the above subject. Mr. Dellacasa hras requested by the Chair to 2. ORDINANCE No. 978 "An Ordinance Adding sub-Paragraph 10 To s e ct:[6-][3l7TlT1I-1-one Way Traffic) on Leased San Francj-sco water Land From North Lane To Bellevue Avenue" was introduced for first reading by Councilman Amstrup. 36r furnish the City Manager with specific details in order that staff may investigate. 4. BURLINGAME AVENUE BEAUTIFICATION AND BAYSIDE BAIL PARK. At Councilman Martin's request, the City Engineer reported on the above two projects: on BurLingame Avenue there are several cor- rections to be made before the job can be accepted as complete, the major itemsbeing the condition of some sidewalks, particularly in the LI00 and 1200 blocks on the north side, and severe chipping in one of the brick crosskalks. He stated that the work probably will be delayed until after the first of the year to avoid dis- ruption on the Avenue during christmas shopping period. on the bal1park, work is progressing and should be completed some ti.me this month if the breather remains dry. The city Engineer also reported there are liquidated damages of $50.00 per day on the contract. NEW BUSINESS AIRPORT LAND USE STUDY COMMITTEE. Counci lman l\mstrup conunented on an item in the press concerning the above Comittee (Councilman Martin is chaj.rman) having juris- diction over all construction within an area of two miles bor- dering the airport. Councilman Amstrup noted this could include as much as 3/4 of the City of Burlingame. He suggested that any- one interested in learning more of the conmittee's activities shoutd attend the meeting at 8:00 p.m., Thursday, December 7 in the BurLingame C j.ty Ha1l. Councilman Martin reported that alL buildings or proposed changeswithin the two mile area must come to the CoNnittee, hor.rever, the loca1 governing body has final authority and can overruLe a com- mittee decision. He suggested that the area of jurisdiction probably wj.I1 follow the noi.se patterns rather than a band two mile around the airport boundaries. ACKNOWLEDGMEN?S Communi cations 1. Mrs. Jean P lagTmann, November 25, L972, and Chief of Police, November 30, 1972, concerning parking in alleyway to the rear of stores on south side of 1300 block of Burlingame Avenue and in the adjacent city parking lot. 2. State of California Busi.ness and Transportation Agency, November 22, 1972, announcement of National Transportation Study. 3. City of Menlo Park, November 20, 1972, concerning SouthernPacific Transportation Company application for increase in fares on Peninsula filed with Public Utilities Commission. 4. Chamber of Commerce, November 28, 1972, recorunendations and co[u[ents, De Leu\4r, Cather preliminary parking study. 5. city Planner report of Planning Commission actions and recom- mendations, meeting of November 27, L972. Lon , APPROVED: w COI,MISSION MINUTES : Nove erL Library Board, November 21 and Park & Recrea- 972. ADJOURNMENT: The meetin g was regularly adjourned at 10:15 p.m., to reconvene at 8:00 p.m., Wednesday, December 6, 1972, Conference Room B to consider any action that may be necessary on Envj.ronmental Impact Reports for privately financed construction projects, because of I2O day moratorium enacted by the State Legislature.** RA.I MAYOR Respectfully submitted, Herbert K. White, City Clerk:/{orU*Z<:c.,Zrln meeting was adjourned at 8305 p.m.**There was no action t n. The