HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - CC - 1967.04.17at?
BurlingaDe, California
April 1?, 1967
A regular Beeting of the Burlingane City Council was held on the above
given date. Ueeting called to order at 8:O5 p.m., - ltayor Diederidreenin the Chair.
PLEDGE OF AI.LEG I A}ICE
At word fron ttre Chair, all in the Council Chamber arose and gave the
P1edge of Allegiance to the Flag.
Preaent - Councilmen:
Absent - councilmen:
Cro sby-Diede rich aen-George-alohnson-I{artin .
None.
Bragato Paving conpany
Loqrrie Pavi:rg Company
Kunz Paving Co8lPany
t. C. snith Conpany
Fisk, Firenze & IilclJean
Engineer'8 Estimate
lrhe minutes of the regular meeting of April L7, L967, submitted to Council
previously, were approved and adopted.
BIDS - RESURFACING }IISCELLANEOUS STREETS
Contractora' bids received and opened at lO:00 a.n., on April 13, 1967,
for the "Reaurfacing of l,tiscellaneous City streeta" in compliance with
published notice, were recorded aa follows:
TOTAI BID SCIIEDULES A.B
$s7, 110.00
57,895. OO
57, 961. O0
58, 030 .00
65, 465 .00
$66, 170 . O0
A comunication from ttre Director of Public worka, dated April L3, L967,
requested that a contract be awarded to the Bragato Paving Company, the
Iouest responsible bidder. A memo from the City ltanager, footnoted on
the comnunication, recmended that Council award the lmr bid in the sum
of $57,11O.OO to the Bragato Paving Company.
RESOLUTION NO. 25-67 "Ar,rard ing contract for Resurfacing Miscellaneous
city street8 - 1966-1967 - Job. No. 66-22 - s. s. No. 120" Bragato Pav in9
conpany, $57,11O.OO) was introduced for passage on motion of Councilman
crosby, seconded by Councilman Johnson and unaninouely adopted uPon Roll
call.
HEARINGS (a)OUR I.ADY OF NIGETS CHT'RCH
SPECIAI., PERI{IT APPEAL
t{ayor Diederic}rsen announced ttrat information received by council con-
cerning a revision in the building plans of our IJady of Angel.s Church
indLcate a change in ttre status of the appeal before council .
ur. Robert :Ihornpson, representing the appellants, advised that the Church
ha8 consented to a minor ctrange in its building planning prograat of
sufficient interest that the appellants have nqr withdrawn their objection.
I.tr. Hugh connolly, Attorney. repreaenting the interests of the Church,
advi3ed that when ttre subject was before the Planning comission, it
rras evident ttrat the only objection was a proposed park5.ng lot and a
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CAI.I,
I,TINI'TES
BIDDER
118
vehicular driveway leading into the Church property from Cabrillo
Avenue r the approval of the Special Penmit included a driveway andthe appeal was filed opposing the parking lot and the driveway, that
subsequently, in the interest of harrnony in the neighborhood, the
applicant now proposee to abandon the plan for the driveway on Cabrillo
Avenue, to install (a) a fence acroaa the lot, (2) a pedeetrian gate-
way, (3) a cyclone fence along eactr side of the private residences andin place of a parking facility, to convert the lot into a recreational
area.
l,lr. Connolly advised that on the basis of the foregoing stipulations,
Council was requested to acknffIedge the sithdrawal of the appeal.
!tr. Tho[0pson concurred and in reply to an inquiry from t]re Chair, con-
firmed that within his knovledge, hie Office represented all of the
appellants.
An inquiry from the Chair directed to those in attendance drow no
further objection.
Referring to an entry in the minutea of the Planning Commission on the
occasion of the hearing, wherein Commissioner Brauner and Comissioner
Norberg "agreed, in the intereats of sound planning, that additional
off-street parking and improved traffic circulation should not be
abandoned " Councir man llartin suggested that it may be upon thie point
that tlre Planning Comnisgion approved ttre Special Permit.
The city Attorney, in reply to Councilman uartin, explained the position
of Council on the subject appeal, advising that Council may approve,
disapprove or nodify the action of the Planning Commission and that
it ie within its prerogative to proceed sith the public hearing.
P lanning comlissioner Brauner, in attendance, clarified that his state-
ment wa8 a peraonal preference that the site be inproved as an off-
atreet parking facility rather than an alternately proposed playground
area and not intended as a " condition" to the approval of the perinit.
Councilman llartin's obaervation that a concession has been agreed upon
without full knowledge of circumatances, initiated aome diacuaaion.
with Council thereafter clncluding to proceed sith the hearing to
formalize action with respect to the amended agreement.
Itre public hearing was thereafter declared open by l.tayor Diederichsen.
I{r. A. Seyranian, Architect for the new construction, displayed plans
indicating the position of the Church, the Rectory and the Convent,
the location, type and elevationa of the neu multi-purpose building,
the ingreas and egreas system and the dwelling oned by the Church on
cabrillo Avenue proposed to be removed to provide an off-street parking
facility with a one-vray ingress from Cabrillo Avenue.
t{r. connolly identified the parking and drivflay areaa that had been
objected to by adjacent property ownera, Btating that it is now
proposed to pave the lot for recreational functions, wittr a gateway
construction exclusively for pedestrian usage.
Irtr. Seyr.rnian, in reply to Councilman ilohnson, advieed that the new
plan will elininate appro:rimately trelve or thirteen parking sPacea.
In reply to councilman ltartin's inquiries pertaining to the copronised
agreerent, tttr. Connolly stated that the current ProPosal i5 to abandon
the uae of the Iot aa an off-Etreet parking facility and to elininate
ingress and egreas therefrom.
The City Planner, ansoering an inquiry from the Chair, advised that
the parking "formula" for churchee ie lmi however, in thie instance,
the legal requirements are more than adequately coplied with.
119
I{r. fhompson advised that a poII taken .rmong the appellants revealed
there is no opposition to the current plan and that the applicant, therefore,
is of the opinion that the modifj.cation is proper.
To inquiriea froEr Council, the City Planner stated that as nuch parking
space aa possible is advisable but his office had no objection to the
plan now proposed; that a fifty-foot lot is considered inferior for
parking purposes and that a ten-foot wide strip, betereen the tr^ro parcels
of the drurdr, is publicly owned as a utility easement.
An inquiry from l.tr. cordon l{ackin, 1325 Cabrillo Avenue, concerning thepossibility of church properties conaenting to widening cabrillo Avenue
to accomtrodate the demands of its complex project, initiated discussion
on the merits of elininating parking to one side of the street or to
establish Cabrillo Avenue as a one-hray street.
Council concurred with a r€ conmendat ion from the Chair that ttre City
tilanager instigate a study on way8 and ueans to improve traffic conditions
in the North Broadnray area.
lIhe hearing was thereafter declared closed and Councilman uartin moved
that the decision of the Planning Coramission approving the Special Permit
be upheld with a modification that Lot 20 (Blod< 41, Easton #3) be closed
to vehicular traffic. lltre notion \ras aeconded I Councilman ceorge and
unanimously carried.
HEARINGS cb)JA}TES POPIN VARIANCE
I.tayor Diederidrsen announced that this was the tiltre and place scheduled
to conduct a public hearing before Council on a request from !lr. James
Popin, 760 walnut Avenue, appealing the decision of the Planning Com-
mission il denying a variance to subdivide his property.
At the request of the Chair, the City Planner advi8ed that the property
is located on walnut Avenue with the rear portion extending to properties
on El Camino Real, the applicant orrns tt,o lots, yith a one hundred fifty
foot frontage and approximately two hundred feet in depth; improveDents
consist of a single-family residence, with a portico extending over the
driveway area into the second parcel and a one-car garage on the rear
portion of the lot extending also into the second parcel; the applicant
propoeed a resubdivieion to permit the present building to remain in i.tg
present poaition and to create a second lot that conforma to required
land area but will not meet street frontage or average width reguirements i
the driveway area lies on the prop€rty line and the City is not in favorof the eEtablishment of a " corunon driveuay"; under the proposal one of
the lots would be over the fifty-foot frontage and the other under thefifty-foot frontage requirements; the problem ha8 been that l.tr. popin did not
present a plan to the Planning Conmiseion to properly indicate his intention
and pernission was denied thereafter by reason of the lack of a plan.
llhe City Planner distributed copies of a plan to council preaented in hisoffice by the applicant on this date.
!lr. Popin, in reply to ttre Chair, advised that he norr proposes to remove
the garage and a portion of the canopy to eliminate extenaion3 into the
second parcel; under the no p1an, the frontagea rould meaaure forty-fivefeet and fifty-five feet and the request is that Council permit the
connotr uaage of the driveryay area.
lfhere were no reaponaes to the Chair's request for comrents from thosein the audience in favor.
760 WAIdUT AVENI'E
L20
CoEounications received in protest were acjknovledged from crace H. and
Arthur ltt. Bishop, 24O1 Valdivia Way, dated April 12, L967, referring
to a similar circumstance in their neighborhood, Buel c. Proffitt and
Uyrt1e ar. Beasett, 825 Wa1nut Avenue, dated April 10, 1967; Ruby C.
and George A. IOoIl, irr., 1508 Arc Way, dated April 15, 1967, and
l.{r. A. G. westcott, President, Suburban Protective Association of
Burlingane, 843 walnut Avenue, dated April L7, 1967. A petition,
dated uarch 25, 1967, bearing the signatures of thirty-seven property
oerners residing within the i.mediate vicinity protestirlg the granting
of the variance was also acknorrrledged.
1rhe City Planner, in reply to Councilman Johnson's inquiry concerning
the five-foot to ten-foot frontage dfunensional shortage, advised that
the current plan no$ establishes forty-five and fifty-foot lot frontages
and such plan was aot in evidence at the Planning Conmission hearings.
Councilman Johnson, referring to the material preaented to Council
indicating a lacik of approximately five feet, suggested the relocation
of the stain ay from the side of the houae to the front and the removal
of trees to create additional footage.
fhe City Planner Etated that there would still remain the problem of
the drivesay area and fron an architectural standpoint, it would be
undesirable to attach a modern garage to a Victorian-era home.
Councilman Crosby questioned the footage neceasary to establish a
legal driveway, with the City Planner advising approxirnately five feet.
Councilman crosby, referring to a driveway easement located on his
property, questioned the validity of establishing a conmon driveway
by permitting a five-foot restrictive easement on the ad j oi.ning parcel.
lltre City Planner, advising that it would be legally possible, atated
he would prefer the establiahnent of fifty-five and forty-five foot
lota and avoid conmon driveways in the intereat of foreatalli.ng
future probl.ems.
councilnan Uartin questioned tlre city Attorney on wlhether the variance
requeat before Council is within the interpretation of the zoning code,
who replied in the affirmative.
!rr. Popin, in reply to Councilman ltartin, advised that he has mai,ntained
ownership of the property for three years and that he was unaware that
the property cdnprised a double lot until he received a property tax
bilt.
Referring to requisites to qualify for variance approval, Councilman
l,tartin questioned and waa answered by both applicants on the following:
(a) undue property loss; that in their opinion there is sufficient area
to create a second 1ot; @) Preservation and enjoyment of property
rights; the extent of the property reguires a period of six hourg a
day to maintain; property valuea have increased and the sale of the
second parcel would pe:mit the property upon which the home is located
to be upgraded; and (c) Detrirnental or injurious to surrounding propertyt
the entire neighborhood will be enhanced with the improvements proposed.
with respect to condition No. 4, affecting the corprehensive zoning
plan of the city, Councilman uartin referred to statements of the
City Planner who has advised that to pemit less than required footages
would establish a sub-standard lot.
I{rs. Ramona I{. Uartinez, 709 Walnut Avenue and Mrs. Beatrice lt. I.tarino,
75O Walnut Avenue each verbally spoke in opposition to a variance that
would permit property subdivided into parcels less than legal. di.rnensions.
12L
A brief discussion following was concluded by the Chair who declared
the public hearing closed.
A motion was introduced by Councilman Uartin, that the action of the
Planning Coroission in denying the eubject variance be upheld, seconded
by Councilman ceorge and unaninously carried.
RECESS
A recess was called by the Chair at 10:10 p.m.
CALL 1!O ORDER
The meeting reconvened at l0:2O p.m.
COUMI'NICATIONS
1 DRAINAGE PROBLEtit - 1785 Sebastian vlav
A couurunication from the City Uanager, dated April 13, 1967. referring
to a comlunication received from !lr. ceorge F. Neel, concerni.ng a drainage
and earth-slippage problem occurring on his property at 1785 Sebastian way,
suggested that the responsibility of the City be determined by the leqal
department and to the ineurance carrier if a liability is evident.
The subject conununication, dated April 10, 1967, was acloowledged wtre rein
it was reguested that the City advise: (1) what imnediate steps are
intended to eliminate the danger to property Bhould further slippage occur
and (2) wlrat corrective action is intended to petmanently correct the
slide condition.
The city Attorney, at the request of the Chair, verbally reported that
an examination of facts indicates there is no liability on the part of
the City; that at the time the subdivision wag being developed in the
Hilla region, the City engineer was insistent that the aurface drainage
channels rrere not to be dedicated to nor accepted by the City; if water
is seeping through. it is the problem of the wrter and that it was his
recomnendation that the property owner file a clairo for referral to the
city'B insurance carrier.
In reply to uayor Diederichsen's inquiries, the City Engineer advised
that his office required the suHivider to construct horizontal benches
along the slope to contain drainage gutters for the collection of waters
floing from above the slope and that the drainage problem referred to
is created by rraters emanating from the privately-orned propertiea.
Ttle city Engineer further advised that, as in similar circumstances, a
repreaentative from his office inspects the condition to advise the
owner of energencl, meaaurea that may be taken.
llhe City ltanager was requeated by Council to reply to ur. Neel'a comuni-
cation and that the subject natter be referred to the City's insurance
carrier.
2. GRAIIAI{ Tv & SERVICE CO.
A memo from the City uanager, dated April 13, 1967, advised that Bub-
sequent to conferring with members of the Planning Corunission, llr. Earry
S. Graham, Jr., orfirer of Grahan T\r & Service Co., located on "Burlingame
Lane" has withdrawn his requeat to establish a "public lane."
Tllle City H:rnager advised Council that in the interim, Ittr. Graham, in
attendance, has requeated further attention to his request i that the
lane in question, considered private property, has been deemed othen ise
by ur. Gralram and it sas auggested that !tr. cralram reveal his aource of
inf,ormation.
RE: BIIRLINGAME LANE
122
llhe City lrlanager advieed that hi5 office has questioned the statua of
the subject property through l.tr. John Lyndr, previously engaged by
the City on matters of property.
Mr. crahar informed council that his knorledge that the lane is other
than private property was baged on "hearaay" inf otmation.
A brief discussion cgncluded with the City l.tanager requested to
investigate and report to Council.
3. DR,,AINAGE PROBLEIII @RRECTED
A memo frqn the City [anager, dated Agrit 13, 1967, advised that t]re
flood conditions at th€ end of Burlingame Avenue, created \, inprove-
ments underway in the Anza Pacific Subdivision, are nos nonexistent.
The report was acknowledged for filing.
4. STATEIT{ENT POLItr RE: BAY FITLING
A conEunication frm the San llateo Branctt, Anerican Aasociation of
Irniversity women, dated April 6, 1967, submitting its reaffirmation
of policy with respect to the preservati,on of the Bay, was ac)oowledged
and placed on file.
'APPORUONI.{ENT STATE HIGHWAY PlrNDS"
A cormunication from the City of Fresno, forwarding a copy of its
Resolution No. 67-27, concerning Assernbly Bill No. 3, and requesting
Council support in opposing a measure to revise the apportionment
of State Highway Funda, was acknorsledged with a few comments f,rom
Council indicating that the issue may be controversiaL.
6. COT'NIY OF SAN?A CLARA POLICY RE:
.,REGIONAL GOVERNUENT CONCEPT"
A conununication from the Board of Supervisors, County of Santa Clara,
dated April 5, L967, announcing its poliq; statement with reapect to
" Regional covernment " and urging local governnenta to cloaely follosr
hearings proposed by the California Legislature on "regional governnent
proposals for the Bay Area" \,ras acloowledged.
Councilman llartin, ABAG liaison, advised that a special ABAG aaaembly
meeting will be soon announced.
7 ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES OFFERED
A conununication from Mogens Hogensen, A.I.A., Architect, dated April 5,
1967, requesting favorable consideration to the selection of hia firm
in perfoming architectural services in connection with the design of
the proposed ner, city Eall. structure, was acknowledged and placed on file.
RESoLUtIoN No. 26-67 "Chan9in9 Name of Vallejo Drive to Frontera Way"
was introduced by Councilman Johnson, qrho moved ite passage, aeconded
t'}' Councilman ceorge and adopted unanimously upon RolI Ca1l.
RESOLUrIoN No. 27-67 "Authoriz ing E<ecution of Agreement By and Between
the City of Burl ingame, a l.lunicipal Corporation, and william Spangle &
Asaociates, Providing for the Preparation of Stage I Of A General Plan
for the City of Burlingame " waa introduced for passage on motion of
Councilman irohnaon and seconded by Councilm.rn &lartin.
on tlre question, and in reply to Councilman ceorge'B inguiry, conc€rning
financing, CouncilBan llartin advised that current budgeted allocations
5. CIIY OF FRESNO RE: ASSEIttBtY BII,L
RESOLI'TIONS
hrill finance t'stage I" and that it had been his euggestion that funds
to complete "stage II" and "stage III" be allocated in the 1967-1958
budget. Itre motion, folloring a RoIl Call vote, was unaninously adopted.
None.
I'NFINISHED BUSINESS
SELE TION OF RAPID TR.NISIT REPRESENTATIVE
In reply to a report from Councilman ceorge, concerning the San Hateo
County Council of l{ayors' selection of a repreeentative to the "Westbay
Rapid Transit Comnittee" Council unanimoualy endorsed the appointment
of nominee Daniel G. l{into.
2. C0NTRACTS RE: RECREATION CE!fltER
WATERFRONT AREA III{PROVEI{ENTS
llhe City Attorney, in repJ.y to Councilman Croaby, advised that the contract
for the glaterfront Area Improvenent has been eigned and the contract for
the Recreation Center Improv€menta has not as yet been returned. fhe
City ltanager rras requested to investigate the atatus of the latter contract.
3. BURLI}IGAII{E HILLS .ANNEKATION"
councilman uartin reported that the Burlingame Hill8 Association has
indicated that a nurber of meetings within the Association will be heldprior to seeking an audience with council on the subject of "annexation. "
PROPERT:T TA]( COLLECTIONS
uayor ceorge, referring to recent publicity reporting the consolidation
of tlre Office of tlre county Treasurer and the Office of the County Tax
collector, que stioned and expressed concern uj.th ttre i,ntention of the
County to deposit property tax receipts, retaining the interest therefron
and fonrarding the City's ghare of the collections at a later date.
Follovihg a brief discuseion on the Bubject, Couneilman ceorge was
authorized to inveEtigate and report his findings to Council.
OVERPAS S IN:PERIJI{ III{PROVEIiENTS
the City Engineer announced that his office has received confirmation
that the State Division of Eighways has approved an allocation to proceed
with interim improveuents in the area of the Broadway Overpass.
1 COI,II{ISSION E'(PIRATIONS
lr}re City Planner advised that the terms of tero Planning Conunissionerswill soon expire and that both have indicated their willingness to
continue to serve. Council, to conply with prior procedure, withheld
action until the next regular meeting.
2. COI'NCIL COU}TITTEE APPO INTUEIITS
councilman ilohnson: sister cit y, Chamber of Commerce, Planning Comnission
and North county council of Cities;
councilman t{artin:Budget, PACC Task Force, ABAG, Burlingame Eills liaison;
128
ORDINANCES
1.
NEW BUSINESS
Councilman Crosbys Downtorrn uerchanta, Finance, Bayfront Recreation Site
and City Eall Acguisition;
124
l,tayor Diederictr sen !ereater Eighways, West Bay Rapid Transit, San ltateo
ABAG alternate, San t{ateo County Council of l'tayors
liaison.
Regional Planning,
and city Enployee
CONFIRI,IATION RE: PLANNING @II{UISSIONERS
Everett Xind ig and .rohn iI. Braun6r, Planning Comnissionerg to the
Regional Planning Comission.
ACKNOWLEDGUENTS
fhe Chair acknowledged receipt of reports frora the Police and Fire
Departments, the Burlingane Chamber of Comerce "expenditure and budget"
report, Burlingaroe Park Corynission minutes, a meeting of the San Uateo
county council of uayora, on April 28, a program sponsored \z the san
ltateo County Development Association, Friday, April 28, cormunications
fr@ supervigor Robert St. Clair, dated April 5, concerning the hotel-
motel tax, Urs. Henry Boos, dated April 15. regarding the current
"anti-litter" campaigm and from the Coca-Cola BottLing Cdrpany of
san Uateo, dated april 14, thanking council members for their recent
visitation to their aew plant.
Councilman ltartin further announced that the next regular neeting of
the North County Council of lrlayors has been ldleduled on May 4, L967,
with details to be announced later.
warranta, Nos. 8177-8360, in the total amount of $125,390.82, nonth
of A5rril, 1967, duly audited, were approved for palment on motion of
Counci.lman crosby and seconded by Councilroan Johnson.
Payroll warrants, Nos. 1202-1722, L^ the total amount of $139,368.40,for the month of l.larch, 1967, were approved on motion of Councilman
Crosby and seconded by Councilman Johnaon.
ADJOURNMENT
Ttrere be ing no further business, the neeting was regularly adj ourned
at 1l:25 p.m.
Respectfully submitted.
HERBERT K. IIEITE, CIry CLBRX
APPROVED:
WERNER H. DIEDERICHSEN, I,IAYOR
Councilman Georqe: Co-Chainnan, Budget, Civil Defense-Diaaater Prepared-
neaa, sewer and city HaLl financing t
WARRANT APP ROVAT
PAYROLL APPROVAL
-/.t/z* ' ,.{- 1 -,o u