Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - CC - 1993.07.2110 CITY OF BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL STUDY MEETING Wednesday, July 21, 1993,7:30 p.m. City Hall Conference Room A Mayor Bud Harrison convened the study session of the Burlingame City Council on the above date in Conference Room A at 7:33 p.m. PRrspn-r: CouNcItuEMBERs HeRRtsoN, Ktucm, LEMBI, O'MngoNY, PecLnRo Srerr PnBsrNt: ARoYnrs, CoLrueN, EscorrIsR, KIRKUP, MoNnos OrnsRs Pnrsrut:RgpnBspxtATIVES oF THE CHaMsrR or CouurRCE OFFICe CouNc[, AND LmReRy BonRN MTN,ISBRS 1. PROPOSED CHANGES TO ZONING USES IN M-1 ZONE Mayor Harrison thanked the representatives of the Office Council for their work and briefly reviewed the history of the committee to review the M-l zone. City planner reviewed the staff report. She indicated that the major pu{pose of the review was to reduce the number of conditional use permits required in the area, to improve the interface between our hotel development and the M- 1, and upgrade the image of the area so that it is more competitive in the office market. The proposal would be that in the M-l (light industrial) district on the east side of 101, office and research and development would be emphasized with supporting limited retail, and businesses with airport orientation will continue to be encouraged. On the west side of 101, the M-1 zone would emphasize industrial uses. She went on to review the proposed changes in uses suggested in the staff report. Councilwoman Knight indicated that she favored a number of the concepts outlined including a designation of C-5, heavy commercial rather than industrial. She stated that the Traffic Safety Parking Commission was reviewing the problems in the M-l zone caused by industrial uses versus commercial parking needs. She did not favor any housing in the area east of 101. Councilman Lembi thought there were three main items which summarized his review of the material: that we should continue to try and maximize our water orientation, we should try and maximize the benefits to the hotel, and we should maintain the maximum revenue generation for the city from the M-1 area. He felt the city needed to look at more fast tracking of applications in the area and that the changes in parking requirements for buildings of over 20,000 square feet were acceptable. He favored some type of limited retail in the area but noted that we needed to be very careful about traffic. He would not favor the area becoming all office because of the traffic impact. He stated that while he'd like to have a condominium near the drive-in site, he agreed with Councilwoman Knight that no residential should be allowed in the area east of 101. Councilwoman O'Mahony commented that she liked the core ideas presented but was concerned that the city needed to protect the revenue generated from the area. She also wished to maintain the city's flexibility. She favored the current auto rental regulations and agreed that no residential should be allowed in the area. She would like to see more data concerning the west side proposal and felt that more input was needed from the property owners in the Rollins Road area. Council- man Pagliaro thought that there was some contradiction presented in trying to protect the hotel area as well as encourage office. He felt that we should be focusing on trying to help existing office space become and stay occupied but should not necessarily encourage more offices. He agreed that 11 no housing should be allowed in the area. He also stated that the parking changes concerning recommended for medical uses should only affect this area and not be city wide. Councilman Lembi commented that the objective should be to try and fill the existing office space but not necessarily encourage new. He also felt that we needed more landscaping in the area; and because of their appearance and traffic, would like to restrict fast food establishments. Mayor Harrison agreed that there should be no residential uses in the area and that we needed to protect the auto rental business because of its revenue generation for the city. Overall, he thought the work presented was very positive. He asked for comments from Office Council representatives present in the audience. Dick Lauenstein, representing the warehouse use, indicated that warehouse office is still the biggest use in the area. Many of these buildings are attractive and well landscaped but have vacancies close to 25 percent. He indicated that we needed to move more quickly, develop a time frame, and work on helping the area. Jerry Winges thanked the city planner for the work she has done. They view this as a positive step towards a new vision for the area. He felt there still needed to be a long-term study of the area and suggested that the American Institute of Architects (AIA) be invited to do a charette to look at the area and try to link the Anza area with the rest of the city. They have successfully done this in other areas. Ken Housely indicated that the area on the east side of 101 is undergoing rapid change, whereas the Rollins Road area is not. He agreed that a charette of some form may help improve the focus of the area and with the vacancy concerns. Bob Brown felt that this was a good first step and agreed that things in the area could improve. Larry Lyons stated that there needed to be retail in the area since there currently are no banks for the businesses. There is also a need for small retail grocery. He was an advocate of housing as a conditional use in the area and felt this would eventually occur. He felt that mixed use (office/residential) should be studied. He noted that offices should be viewed as an asset to the hotels in assisting with room occupancy. Council directed staff to refine the ordinance proposals and for changing the zoning in the area. The item should return to council for further review as a staff item in September. It was also agreed that the city would cosponsor with the Chamber of Commerce, if they approve, requesting that the AIA do a charette in the area on the east side of 101 in late October. Councilwoman Knight also asked when staff reviews the zoning language, could they consider commercial satellite dishes. Staff indicated that council would be reviewing this in August. Mayor Harrison thanked the committee for its effort and called for a five minute recess. 2. REVIEW LIBRARY RENOVATION SITE OPTIONS Council reconvened at 8:53 p.m. Mayor Harrison commended the Library Board chairman for returning from travel just in time to attend the Library Board meeting. City librarian gave an introduction of the current design process and reviewed the prior studies. There were two major issues of concern for tonight-the cost effectiveness of reconstruction versus replacement of the 1970s wing, and what role the Duncan house property should play in the finished design. He indicated that direction on these items needed to be obtained before schematic design work can continue. The architects had prepared four different alternatives for discussion. Councilman Pagliaro wished to add an additional alternative which would keep the 1970s wing of the library as well as the 1930s area but remove the Duncan building and expand in that direction. Cynthia Ripley, project architect, reviewed with council the various alternatives. She noted that one 12 of the major problems with the 1970s wing was that it was on three different levels that did not match the levels in the rest of the building. The Duncan building is also not in a good location for staff and has major disabled accessibility problems. It was noted that alternative 3, which was an all new building, would cost no more-and possibly less-than the renovation proposals. She noted that there was a major advantage in that the public use areas would be on two levels rather than three as proposed in the reconstruciions. This uies staff more efficiently. She said that although they would try to incorporate many of the architectural features of the existing building that were desirable, an all new building entrance would be at grade, would be different in appearance, and would probably be located closer to the street than the current library. She stated there would be more visual difference than the recent reconstruction of the fire station. If the council desired the building to look the same, then it should keep the 1930s portion of the building. Mayor Harrison stated that his initial preference was to replace both the 1970s and Duncan portion; after review, he favored alternative 3 for an all new building. He is concerned about the historical aspect of the building but is also concerned about the efficiency and cost of the building. He stated he would like see two sets of schematic plans; one alternative 2A which retains the 1930s wing, and alternative 3 which is new construction. Councilman Pagliaro felt it was very important to maintain the "feel" of the existing library. At a minimum, he would recommend keeping the 1930s portion of the building and possibly the 1970s addition but agreed use of the Duncan property should be maximized. Councilwoman O'Mahony stated she also favored alternative 3, replacement, but would like to see two schematic plans pursued. She felt it was important that we copy various features of the existing library into a new structure. Councilman Lembi noted that remodeling contains many unknowns as he has experienced in other projects. He felt we should try and recreate the library but in new construction. Council- woman Knight stated she was very pleased with what we did at the fire station and felt the same approach should be done with the library. She believed the public would support a new library because of concerns about handicap accessibility and the need for computerized library functions. She would also like to see the two schematic plans for alterative 2A and 3. Kris Cannon, Library Board chairman, expressed the opinion of the board that while they were very concerned with the feet of the existing library, they were also concerned with its function. She thought it was a major advantage to have the public areas on two floors versus the alternative that would require three, given the probable limitations on future staff numbers. After additional discussion, the direction to staff and the architect was to prepare schematic plans on alternative 2A, retention of the 1930s wing, and 3, replacement. 3. COUNCIL COMMENTS There were no comments from the council 4. FROM THE FLOOR There were no public comments ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 9:56 p.m. udith A. Malfatti City Clerk