Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1994.04.16CITY OF BURLINGAME JOINT CITY COUNCIL / PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY MEETING Saturday, April 16, 1994 Holiday Inn Crowne Plaza Board Room Mayor Rosalie O'Mahony convened the joint study session of the Burlingame City Council and Planning Commission on the above date in the Board Room A at the Holiday Inn Crowne Plaza at 9:00 a.m. COUNCIL PRESENT: HARRISON, KNIGHT, O'MAHONY, PAGLIARO, SPINELLI PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: DEAL, ELLIS, GALLIGAN, GRAHAM, JACOBS, KELLY, MINK STAFF PRESENT: ARGYRES, COLEMAN, KIRKUP, MONROE, PLANNING CONSULTANT BOB IRONSIDE OTHERS PRESENT: REPRESENTATIVES OF BROADWAY AND BURLINGAME AVENUE (GEORGE COREY, KAREN KEY 1. PROPOSED 1990-95 HOUSING ELEMENT The city planner and planning consultant Bob Ironside gave an overview of the proposed housing element. The purpose of the meeting today was to review the contents as recom- mended by planning commission and decide if the element is ready for public hearing before the city council. Planning consultant Bob Ironside stated he felt the; draft element meets all of the state -required elements. He reviewed the goals, policies, and action programs proposed for implementation. He discussed in detail goal C .which was to encourage special purpose housing such as housing for the elderly and physically disadvantaged and how its policies might be implemented. Goal E, to increase affordibility of housing, identified possible sites for additional housing. These were discussed and it Was noted that the Donnelly site description needed to be clarified. State HCD comments on the element to date indicate that the majority of the items are acceptable. The one: exception is that the state would like to see new second units allowed in the city's single family zones. Because the proposed city housing element does not address this state request, it will probably not be certified by HCD. Council and commission discussed the problems with allowing additional new second units. Councilman Harrison questioned where the housing element calls for city funding. Mr. Ironside indicated there were no big ticket funding items required from the city's general fund. Most of the funding is of groups the city is currently funding or existing staff time. Because of the state position on second units, it was felt the city must self certify the element. It was noted that only 30 percent of the cities in the state have certified elements, which indicates there are problems with the law. The state is currently discussing revising the law. Councilwoman Knight noted that on page 16 and 17 the issue of the homeless is addressed. She felt we should list CALL Primrose in Burlingame since it is trying to address this problem. She also stated, that she felt parking for residential condos needed to be reviewed. Councilman Pagliaro stated that in building housing for seniors, we should consider reduced parking requirements. Councilwoman Knight asked that the senior commission be asked for allowing for improvements. Mayor O'Mahony stated her opinion that it would be alright to increase the number of restaurants by a small number due to URMs.. Traffic Commissioner (and Burlingame Avenue property owner) Ron Karp noted that we should look at the problem such as the Bit of England. If the use went with the tenant, the property owner who has made investments for tenant improvements would not be allowed to use them. Planning Commissioner Graham felt we definitely needed to review the issue and that we had definitional problems about the size and character of restaurants which could create enforcement problems. She also favored competition be allowed to set the limits. Planning Commissioner Ellis felt that while the ordinance was adopted for valid reasons, any time you set numerical limitations you will cause problems. He was not in favor of the limits. Planning Commissioner Mink felt we should look at the purpose of the ordinance and whether it was valid; and if we need to, we should review what we want in the various commercial areas. Councilman Spinelli agreed that we need to look at the Burlingame Avenue and Broadway areas, and we needed broad definitions stating what we would like but we needed to be flexible. Georgette Naylor of the Chamber of Commerce noted she would like the opportunity for Chamber input on this issue. Pete Campanile of Broadway Business Improvement District indicated there are other regulations such as the state ADA which cause problems. George Corey stated that there were problems with our existing regulations. He noted you could exchange one table and chair at one location for 30 seats at another location but would not allow a bakery because it had two tables, because this was—by definition— equal to a restaurant. The city needs to provide some flexibility in its regulations. Councilwoman Knight stated that we are allowing take-out permits 'which do not allow tables inside, but under a different regulation do allow tables and chairs on the sidewalk. She felt we needed to review the boundaries for Subarea A and B and merge them for restaurant regulation. Councilman Spinelli felt we needed to review this issue., that the problems of the 1980s may be different than those of today. Planning Commissioner Graham stated that we looked at the number of tables and chairs a number of years ago and it was unenforceable to establish numerical limits. She also felt times have changed from the "mom and pop" store and that now the question was restaurants or various large retail chain outlets. She felt that we should drop the restaurant limitations. After additional discussion, it was the consensus of the council to put this issue to the city council's May 18 study session. 3. REDUCING REGULATIONS: WHERE AND HOW FAR? City planner reviewed with council the three basic levels of legal review in the zoning ordinance: administrative, minor modification, and full public hearing by the planning commission. Noticing requirements and state law dictate much of the processing time for full planning commission review. She asked whether council and commission would like to reduce the review time by revising the number of items that require; full commission/council review. Councilman Harrison stated that a recent San Mateo study shows that processing time hurts businesses and fosters an anti -business image. He favored more over-the-counter administra- tive permits. Planning Commissioner Graham felt the Burlingame time frames do cause Burlingame to have the image of being difficult to build in. She noted that modifications such as the fence exception have greatly reduced the need for planning commission to review 3 Planning Commissioner Galligan stated he would like council to know that the planning commission is available to review code changes that would affect the planning process prior to their implementation. ADJOURNMENT There being no further comments, Mayor O'Mahony adjourned the meeting at 11:43 a.m. Judith A. Malfatti v City Clerk 5