HomeMy WebLinkAbout061305PCJointminCITY OF BURLINGAME
MINUTES
JOINT CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA
June 13, 2005
Conference Room A
I. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Galligan called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
II. ROLL CALL Present:
Councilmembers: Baylock, O'Mahony, Nagel; Mayor Galligan
Commissioners: Brownrigg, Cauchi (arrived at 6:05 p.m.) Deal,
Keighran, Osterling, Vistica (arrived at 6:30 p.m.); Chair Auran
Absent: Councilman Coffey
Staff Present: City Manager, Jim Nantell; City Planner, Margaret
Monroe; City Attorney, Larry Anderson.
III. FROM THE FLOOR It was noted that if there is not sufficient time at this meeting for
public comment, the Planning Commission will be meeting
immediately following and the public is welcome to make any
comments they wish at the From the Floor at the beginning of the
Planning Commission meeting.
IV. DISCUSSION
ITEM 1: UPDATE ON THE COMMISSION'S PROGRESS ON DEVELOPING IMPLEMENTING
ZONING FO RHTE BAYFRONT AND NORTH BURLINGAME/ROLLINS ROAD
SPECIFIC PLANS AND ON THE MAJOR REVISON TO THE SIGN CODE.
CP Monroe reviewed the briefing paper she handed out on this issue summarizing the status of the
work of the three Subcommittees of the Planning Commission assigned to work on the zoning
implementation for the two Specific Plans and the Sign Code. The briefing paper included the
currently projected public review schedule for the zoning amendment and sign code which will come
to the Planning Commission and City Council for study and action. She asked if the Council and
Commission wanted to schedule a study meeting in September for presentation of the new sign code.
Mayor Galligan asked Councilmembers Baylock and Nagel if they would agree to join the Planning
Commission subcommittee working on the sign code. If , after they come up to speed on the proposed
changes, they agree with the commissioners on the subcommittee that a joint meeting is needed they
should report back to the Council with a proposal.
Members of the subcommittees on zoning noted that the proposed zoning, especially for the North
Burlingame area is also taking a new approach which will result in a dramatic change in the
appearance of the area. A Councilmember noted that it would be good to encourage more height in
the El Camino Real area close to BART.
CITY OF BURLINGAME
MINUTES JOINT CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
June 13, 2005
2
ITEM 2: FUTURE LONG TERM PLANNING FOR THE BULINGAME AVENUE
COMMERCIAL AREA.
CP Monroe referred to the briefing paper for this item noting that it was divided into two related
topics: (1), the economic study for the downtown area; and (2), proposals for future downtown vision
and development presentations.
Economic study: it was noted by the CP that City Council had directed staff in April to prepare an
economic study which could be a precursor to preparing a Specific Area Plan for the downtown area
of Burlingame and would provide an opportunity to look at the economics of mixed use in the
Burlingame Avenue Commercial Area. The downtown area was defined as the area bounded by
Peninsula Avenue (south side), El Camino Real (west side), the rear of the properties along Oak Grove
Avenue (north side) and the railroad tracks (east side). In April the council set out two general
purposes for the economic study: (1), to develop a baseline for the economy of the downtown area, to
determine the "attraction" capacity by land use and type of business for the area, and to project the
demand by use for the next 20 years or so; and (2), as a subset, to evaluate the alternatives for the mix
and density of uses appropriate for future development of the combined lots at El Camino Real,
Howard Avenue, Primrose Road and Fox Plaza Lane. Staff has been directed to bring a proposal for
how to proceed with the economic study to the City Council at their meeting on June 20, 2005.
Discussion points made by one or more participants regarding the economic study of the Downtown
Area:
• In the interest of time let the Planning Commission prepare the RFP and involve the
community when the consultant has started.
• A key interest expressed in the discussion about the economic study was evaluation of
the viability of a mixed use (scale and size) on the Safeway site so may need a broader
based committee to prepare the RFP to get credibility for the study.
• Need to determine what is an economically viable use on the Safeway site.
• The study will be funded from the Parking Enterprise Fund because of its focus on
integrating public and private activities in the BACA.
• A wider area than the Safeway site needs to be evaluated in the economic study.
• Would like to incorporate different combinations of land uses on the Safeway site and
what is necessary for a reasonable project for the developer.
• Important to remember the broader vision for the area, and not get too focuses on the
Safeway site.
• Include an evaluation of the revenues to the city from proposed uses and the "costs" to
the city for maintaining the infrastructure based on the impacts of different mixes and
uses.
• Determine the critical mass necessary for mixed use on a site and how the public spaces
work into that.
• Determine the role of the land value of the parking lots and how to arrive at that value.
• How should parking work with mix of residential and commercial uses, should it be
shared., and how much parking is really needed.
CITY OF BURLINGAME
MINUTES JOINT CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
June 13, 2005
3
• Look at land uses which will bring people into the downtown area, such as movie
theater, boutique hotel or bed and breakfast, etc.
• The current location of parking lot location in the downtown area is haphazard.
• What is the cost of below grade parking, above grade structure parking, what is the
appropriate mix?
• The economic study will need to listen to the public and provide education for the
public.
• The economic study should give some idea about the size and economic impact of a
project and whether we should allow a use at that size at a given site. So if the study
says OK can come back with a project.
• Hate to see large land use decisions made only on a financial analysis, such decisions
should be based on goals set by planning for the entire area .
• Should shorten time to prepare RFP so can get going.
Staff noted that some of these issues identified may go beyond the economic study; and these concerns
will be carried over to the Specific Plan study for the downtown area.
Discussion about Proposals for Visions and Future Projects in the Downtown Area: Many of the land
use density issues and allocations are part of the downtown vision which will be a focus of the
Downtown Plan to be undertaken in a year and a half from now. If the idea is to proceed with the
economic study now, should we tell applicants to wait for submittal for a year and a half to three
years? It was generally noted that an education component is key for both the economic and specific
plan. Points made in the discussion were:
• It might be best to wait for these public presentations until the economist is hired so s/he
can listen as well.
• Feel the more presentations the better.
• Educate the public, good to see the previous Ionescu and Dreiling presentations
together.
• Could make presentations at the first 30 minutes of Council meetings so would be
televised and repeatable (video taped for rebroadcast).
• Could do developer presentations in group forums.
• Where does an AIA design charrette fit into this?
• Feel that a design charrette is a part of the planning program. Needs some lead time to
plan since these opportunities book up a year in advance.
Beyond the thought that it would be useful for the public and city officials to hear from architects and
developers with "visions" or proposals for the downtown area, the group arrived at no specific decision
about how to do it. There seemed to be consensus that having public presentations before the city
embarked on a specific plan for the downtown area was appropriate.
ITEM 3: PLANNING WORK PROGRAM FOR FY 2005-2006
CP Monroe referred to her third briefing paper noting that the city's planning activities are divided into
current and advanced planning She commented that there are a significant number of current planning
projects in the pipe line for Commission action and the present advanced planning zoning program to
CITY OF BURLINGAME
MINUTES JOINT CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
June 13, 2005
4
implement the specific plans adopted in 2004 will not be completed until the December/January time
frame.
Commissioner Auran suggested that another item be added to the department's work program for
2005-2006; tweaking the design guidelines and bringing the R-1 zoning district into more consistency
with the residential design guidelines. This would speed up project reviews. It was suggested that a
commission subcommittee be appointed to look at the R-1 zoning district; and that it would be
appropriate for the subcommittee to include representation by the design reviewers. There was
general consensus on this item.
Mayor Galligan noted that the Commissioners needed to get to their meeting and encouraged any
members of the audience who wished to comment on the discussion at the joint meeting to attend the
Planning Commission meeting and speak from the floor at the beginning of the commission's agenda.
Mayor Galligan adjourned the Joint City Council/Planning Commission meeting to the Planning
Commission meeting at 7:00 p.m.