Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - CC - 2000.06.05BTIRLINGAME, CALIFORNIA June 5,2000 1. CALL TO ORDER A duly noticed regular meeting of the Burlingame City Council was held on the above date in the City Hall Council Chambers. Mayor Rosalie O'Mahony called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG Led by Mike Blondino, Parks and Recreation Supervisor 3. ROLL CALL MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: COFFEY, GALLIGAN, JANNEY, SPINELLI, O'MAHONY NONE 4. MINUTES Councilman Spinelli made a motion to approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of May 15,2000; seconded by Councilwoman Janney. Motion approved unanimously by voice vote, 5-0. 5. CEREMONIAL MATTERS Parks and Recreation Director John Williams introduced the key staff for the new Burlingame Aquatic Center, which includes Randy Schwartz, Recreation Superintendent, Mike Blondino and Jordana Schneiderman, Recreation Supervisors, and Swim Coach, Walt Cannon. The dedication celebration will be held on Saturday, June 17'h at 10:00 a.m. at Burlingame High School. Mayor O'Mahony welcomed the staff and wished them luck with this new project. The second ceremonial event was honoring Ms. Mary Soares as the Outstanding Crossing Guard of the Year 2000. Mayor O'Mahony read a Proclamation noting the accomplishments of Ms. Soares while serving as a crossing guard for the Burlingame community for the last 16 years. A Burlingame resident for 39 years, Mary is the mother of two children, enjoys gardening, and also visits sick children in hospitals, sharing with them her caring spirit. She has a deep love of children and desire to keep them safe by providing a safe crossing at busy intersections. 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS a. APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DENIAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE OF A NEGATIYE DECLARATION AND FOUR PARIilNG VARIAI\CES FOR A NEW TWO STORY OFFICE BUILDING AT 1411 CHAPIN AVENUE. ZONED C.1, SUBAREA B-1. City Planner Monroe referred to her staff report dated June 5, 2000, stating this is an 8,301 squffe foot office June 5, 20fi)140 Burlingame City Council building at l4l1 Chapin Avenue that was denied without prejudice at the Planning Commission meeting held on January 24,2000. The applicant appealed the denial without prejudice to the City Council and continued the item until this evening. During the appeal period, a downtown parking study and an evaluation by the Public Works Department of requirements for the reconstruction of lot B-1 were completed. As a result, the applicant submitted a revised site plan dated May 17 that reflects these requirements. It also shows the adjustment to the encroachment permit to the Burlingame Garden Center that Mr. Chiapelone is willing to agree to if the project is approved. The site plan shows the addition of one standard parking space to the west side of Lot Bl, an addition of 2-ll2' foot wide sidewalks and parking meters on the east and west sides of Lot B-1. The proposed project is to allow construction of a two story, 8,301 square foot office building. A parking variance is requested for on-site dimension for 15 parking spaces ranging 17' to 13' in depth when 20' in depth is required. The second requirement is a parking variance for dimension for no on-site backup area for 15 of the 20 parking spaces where 24-foot backup isle is required; also a parking variance for providing three compact parking stalls at the rear of the building where one compact stall is allowed and for dimensions for 24' back up isle where only 4' is provided on site. This project would require the demolition of the eight residential units presently on the site. The applicant is proposing to retain ownership but to convey to the City by way of a public easement a portion of his property on which 15 parking spaces are located. These spaces would then be used as a part of public parking Lot B- 1, allowing the lot to be reconfigured with a central isle. This would make the parking spaces on the west side of the lot perpendicular, allowing two spaces to be added resulting in I I spaces on the west side of Lot B-1. The office building requires 28 parking spaces on site to meet current code requirement. The applicant is providing 20 spaces in Lot B-1 and three on-site. Since he has paid into the assessment district for parking, he is requesting to carry forward to the new project the 8 parking spaces currently on the site. Policy issues that are associated with this application include allowing future development to use public parking, an exemption for parking spaces provided by existing development which participated in the assessment district, and private development receiving on-site parking exemption for spaces added by them to a public parking lot. These issues have been discussed over time, but a project has not yet come forward where a determination needed to be made regarding the policy of intensifuing land use without replacing the existing number of public parking spaces before meeting the requirement of the new use. The other two issues are expanding a public parking lot on privately owned land and requiring a private property owner to make all improvements to a public lot. In the past, when on-site parking was discussed, it has been set aside for that particular use. In this case, all the required parking for this site, except three spaces, would be in the public pool. Included in the staff report is an initial study and a mitigated negative declaration, which were prepared in September and October,1999, and posted in Novernbei prior to the Planning Commission's initial review of this project. The preparation of this document and its posting occurred prior to completion of the City's downtown parking study in February, 1999. The Planning Commission did not act on the mitigated negative declaration so they made no recommendation to Council on the suitability of the document in terms of how effective the proposed mitigation measures were in reducing the identified environmental effects caused by the project. Since the Planning Commission did not take action on the mitigated negative declaration, the Council must making findings for accepting the declaration before acting on the project. If Council cannot make the findings or it is determined that significant issues are not adequately addressed, those should be identified and an Environmental Impact Report would need to be prepared. Burlingame City Council L41 June 5, 2000 Vice Mayor Galligan asked CP Monroe if the first three parking variances will be negated if the cunent public parking lot is utilized since they will be able to back into the current public parking lot. If the City grants the easement, we will be giving the applicant dimension variances on the first three. CP Monroe stated that the way the code reads, the parking has to be provided on site to code or a variance must be granted. Even if an easement is granted, those 15 parking spaces are not wholly on the applicant's site. Vice Mayor Galligan asked what the purpose was for lowering the dimensions so three compact parking stalls can be installed where only one would be allowed and how many spaces would actually be allowed if the variance wasn't granted. Under the code, the applicant is allowed one compact parking space and is providing three. Two standard spaces would not fit since the backup dimension is24'. Vice Mayor Galligan inquired about condition #2,the property owner shall replace the sidewalk in front of their property consistent with the streetscape plan; was this a normal condition for a developer to fix the area in front of their location. CP Monroe stated normally they would be required to do curb, gutter and sidewalk work, in the area affected by the City's streetscape plans all are required to have their improvements meet that standard. CP Monroe confirmed that in reference to condition #5, the applicant pays for the entire reconstruction of Lot B-1, the l9 additional spaces as well as the restriping, repaving and improvements of the current nine spaces, at a cost of approximately $135,000 for the public property and the easement area. Mayor O'Mahony asked what the ratio was of cost sharing when Mollie Stones teamed with the City to install new sidewalks. City Manager Argyres stated he would need to review that specific project, but noted this project had a longer length of sidewalk than the proposed project at l4ll Chapin as well as the sidewalk on El Camino Real . Councilman Spinelli asked if the parking was intended to be short term or long term. Director of Public Works Bagdon noted that the TSP Committee was going to look into what the length of time would be as well as cost per hour. The existing nine spaces are currently two hour parking. Mayor O'Mahony opened the public hearing. Mark Hudak, Attomey representing the applicant, spoke regarding the project. He stated the site is currently occupied by two apartment buildings that aren't really suitable to the ongoing development of Chapin Avenue. He noted the lot doesn't have any expansion potential; can't build to the right because the City owns Lot B-1; to the left is a parking lot that serves 1420 Burlingame Avenue, which must remain by law. Feels the revised project is the best that can be designed under the circumstances and a good project for the City and the surrounding neighbors on Chapin Avenue. If the applicant is able to redevelop this lot and put a building with a parking lot next to it, they feel it would improve Chapin Avenue and encourage the owner of 1420 Burlingame Avenue to improve his parking lot and make a nice rear entrance to their building, thereby improving the entire streetscape on Chapin Avenue. This is a relatively small, modest building. The FAR for this building is 1.07, when 3.0 would be allowed. Originally the building reflected Spanish style architecture. The Planning Commission requested the building be redesigned to mirror the architecture of the garden center, which has been done. With these directives in mind, Lot B-1 was redesigned to meet all the design criteria the City has requested the applicant to meet. June 5, 2000 L42 Burlingame City Council Mr. Hudak stated that instead ofjust asking for a variance, the applicant is attempting to give something to the City, which is in the form of a dedicated easement for parking. An easement can be worked out so that it will be the functional equivalent of actually giving the City the land; it is nearly 1/3 of the lot and is going to provide l7 new spaces that will be dedicated to the City. Because of building code requirements, the property owner cannot give this parking area to the City. If he did, there could be no windows on the west side of the new building. Mr. Hudak noted this project has the complete support of Mr. Chiapelone, owner of the Burlingame Garden Center who has agreed to modifu his encroachment permit to remove the l5' of display area. Because of the way the parking district was created, one of the remaining few benefits left to lots within Sub- Area B is an exemption for current use. If a lot is going to be redeveloped, historically the City has allowed the developer to take an exemption for the existing use and then provide parking on-site, or elsewhere, for the intensification of use or for the additional square footage. Mr. Hudak stated another issue that has been discussed in the past is whether a developer would receive credit for providing additional public parking in a municipal lot. Mr. Hudak asked what portion of the redevelopment cost for Lot B-1 should the applicant bear, considering they are donating almost $500,000 worth of parking spaces to the City. The City should share the improvement costs. In the staff report, it is recommended that the developer indemnify the City for potential damage to the buildings from the use of Lot B-1. Mr. Hudak noted the applicant cannot insure the Burlingame Garden Center's building; doesn't feel it is fair to ask the developer to bear that burden. That part of the parking lot will be improved and if something happens in the lot, it isn't within the developer's control. The applicant is willing to give half the indemnity, but can't give the full indemnity on both sides. Mr. John Chiapelone, owner of Burlingame Garden Center, stepped forward to state he does support the project as they will benefit by having additional parking in Lot B-l for customers. He stated he was concerned that a 20' redwood tree that he planted was not showing on the plans and requested that it not be damaged during construction of Lot B-1. Mr. Hudak stated not showing it on the plans was unintentional and they intended to protect the redwood tree. There were no further comments and Mayor O'Mahony closed the public hearing. Mayor O'Mahony asked the Council about removing housing and replacing it with commercial. Councilman Coffey confirmed that he believed the overlay of Subarea B directs commercial and/or business office and is in favor of the change. The rest of the Council agreed that a commercial project would be best for this area. Mayor O'Mahony then asked the Council if they were concerned about the request for an exemption for the on-site parking provided when a new use of greater density is planned. Councilman Spinelli felt the City is benefiting in this case and approves of the exemption. Vice Mayor Galligan stated it gives the City a great opportunity to see government and the private sector working together to develop something that works for everybody. Councilwoman Janney agreed with both Councilman Spinelli and Vice Mayor Galligan. Mayor O'Mahony then wanted to know if the Council was ready to permit the applicant to build 15 parking spaces partially on City property to be used to meet the new building's parking requirements. Councilwoman Janney stated she was ready to make a positive decision and the rest of the Council concurred. Mayor O'Mahony noted approval of the project would mean a policy change to allow enhancement of a City parking lot for the benefit of a private d.eveloper. Vice Mayor Galligan felt that the building design is going to compliment the Garden Center and tie the commercial properties together as well Burlingame City Council 143 June 5, 2000 as enhancing the neighborhood and benefit the parking. Councilwoman Janney concurred. Mayor O'Mahony felt the information in the parking study presented by the applicant is outdated, as it was 1987 data; wants to keep in mind what the City's parking requirements demand for this office use. Noted in the prime hours of use between 1 1:00 a.m. and 1:00 p.m., the downtown parking study showed that there was 96oh occupancy in Lot B-1. In the RKH study, it was less than 90%. Mayor O'Mahony noted that item #4 of DPW Bagdon's letter dated March 9tr', states the applicant shall be responsible for undertaking all parking improvements, material or parts acquisition, design and construction and this should be incorporated into the conditions of approval; would like to see the developer carry all the costs. Councilman Spinelli agreed that even though this parking lot does need some repairs, the City wouldn't be reconstructing it if it weren't for this project. Councilman Coffey concurred that the developer should pay for the reconstruction of the lot, but feels it should be acknowledged that the developer is providing the City with valuable land that the City will benefit from using it Mayor O'Mahony stated she was uncomfortable with the parking exemption for the current use and cost, and that there will still be eight spaces lacking which should be required to pay a parking in-lieu fee. Vice Mayor Galligan noted that the applicant has already paid into the district for the eight spaces; he noted that the City will financially benefit from the parking revenue from the bigger Lot B-1. He is comfortable with an in-lieu fee for exemption; concerned that three compact spaces are being squeezed into the back in an attempt to get under the 28 space requirement, without that the applicant would be one or two spaces short. If the compact wasn't allowed, they could get one car in the rear area versus three cars; comfonable making the spaces compact and letting them backup into the easement. Vice Mayor Galligan noted the current condition of the parking lot is not that good; wondered if the City should absorb some of the costs. Councilwoman Janney noted that as a part of the decision, staff is requesting Council determine if this approach should remain a City practice; she stated doesn't feel we can change the rules when the project is before them. How these determinations apply to future development is a separate issue. City Attorney noted in this case, the applicant is asking for an 8 space exemption and staff is asking Council for a policy direction that would apply to future projects; is this a fair resolution of the Sub-Area B problem where there is an increase in use, should there be some exemption given for the existing on-site parking provided because that existed back when the parking district was created and the assessment was paid. However, the applicant is also asking for City property to be used to support a private use. For example, when sharing parking for expansion, the Doubletree Hotel paid for all the improvements to the parking lot as well as building 150 extra parking spaces. In this case there is some ongoing revenue from the parking meters, and a question of balance of that revenue with how much benefit this is going to create for the Garden Center and Chapin Avenue in coming up with a fair partnership between City and a private property owner. Councilman Coffey asked the applicant if the $135,000 fee for the parking lot would be acceptable. Mr. Hudak came forward to state the applicant was prepared to pay some but did not feel it was fair for them to pay all the costs. This would mean improving the existing area of Lot B-1 which is already in need of repair; feels applicant has given up a substantial portion of their land and the building is a small building to begin with. Wants this to be a partnership with the City, which was why they had proposed to pay in some ratio. DPW Bagdon wanted to clariff that if the City is going to pay any portion of the improvements, the City will pay the developer to do the work rather than have them pay the City to do the work. It was intended that one June 5, 2000 144 Burlingame City Council contractor would be doing all the work, the building on the private property and also the parking lot adjacent to it. Vice Mayor Galligan asked City Attorney Anderson if the Lot B-l was indemnified against the Garden Center, which he stated it was not; believes what Mr. Hudak is proposing is to leave it as is, but in the new lot there would be additional curbing to protect the Garden Center and would better meet some standards and specifications to protect the structure. Vice Mayor Galligan made a motion to overtum the appeal of the Planning Commission with the added condition that the property owner does not have to indemni$ the garden center side of the parking lot, seconded by Councilwoman Janney; motion carried unanimously, 5-0. CA Anderson noted he would prepare a Resolution to formalize this action and put it on the agenda for the June 19, 2000 Council meeting. BAR, BEHATI'S IRrSH PUB,BENIHANA OF TOKYO, BOBBY MCGEE'S, BURLINGAME STATION BREWERY, CALIFORNIA BAR AND GRILL.CARIBBEAN GARDENS.DICEY RILEYS' IRISH PUB, FOUR GREEN FIELDS. GOLDEN CHINA, GRANDVIEW. TTYATT HOTEL, MAX'S OPERA CAFE. MOON MCSHANE'S. PARAGON. PARK PLAZA HOTEL, SHERATON GATEWAY HOTEL,FANNY AND ALEXANDER, ALIBI CLUB, AND EL TORITO City Attorney Anderson stated this was an annual review of amusement permits that are proposed for renewal. The City has issued approximately 20 amusement permits. The Police Department has reviewed the past year's history on these permits and has made recommendations in the sunmary. Most of the amusement permits are recommended for renewal on the same terms and conditions that they were granted or have been amended in the recent past. The changes are that Fanny and dlexander's be renewed for only six months because they are not scheduled to open until the end of June. Secondly, the Aiibi Club is only recommended for six months because they have had a difficult time in the last few months with unruly patrons and the Police Department has received a large number of calls from them this past year. El Torito and Benihana both have requested their amusement permit be dropped since they no longer have use for the permit. Councilman Spinelli asked if anyone could pinpoint why the Alibi Club was having problems with their patrons. CA Anderson noted that he believed it was behavior problems and forceful management. The Police Department has been working with the management to come up with better security programs. Councilman Spinelli asked why there were a large number ot calls for service at the California Bar and Grill, but only four were disruptive. CA Anderson felt that when there are a large number of calls, the problem is being resolved before it develops into an uruuly situation. Mayor O'Mahony opened the public hearing. There were no comments and the hearing was closed. Vice Mayor Galligan made a motion to approve the renewal of the annual amusement permits as recommended, seconded by Councilwoman Janney; motion carried unanimously, 5-0. At this time, Councilwoman Janney commended Mr. Jones, owner of American Bull, for the hard work on changing his establishment into a very family oriented restaurant. 7. PUBLIC COMMENTS Burlingame City Council 145 June 5, 2000 6b. ANNUAL REVIEW AND RENEWAL OF AMUSEMENT PERMITS - AMERICAN BULL 8. a. Mr. Angelo Dela Casa came forward to show Council photos and to express concem about his neighbor to the rear who does not tend to her overgrown grass; the neighbor's fence came down and hasn't repaired it; fears rats will result from the condition of the yard. Randy Atkins, 479 ChathamAvenue, spoke regarding the Burlingame Aquatic Center; he has occupied this home for over 20 years, coached many sports in Burlingame, is a volunteer and Board Member of Burlingame AYSO. Mr. Atkins stated he has significant familiarity with Burlingame sports programs and the day-to-day association with Burlingame High School. When the pool lights were erected in late April, Mrs. Susie Allison of 475 Chatham sent a letter to Council regarding this matter. She received a response from John Williams, Parks and Recreation Director, that states, "This is a school pool and replaces an existing pool in the Burlingame High School campus. The design process was conducted by the San Mateo Union High School District and no City review of the plans or construction process was required. I am not certain what, if any, review processes are required of Califomia schools for school construction process". Mr. Atkins stated it was his understanding that these statements are not totally correct. The Council Members had knowledge of the design and were instrumental in the request for lighting; feels it was the Council's intention for the residents to use this facility. Mr. Atkins stated what was particularly disturbing to him is the fact that there was never any intention to inform the neighbors directly affected by the pool of these plans. Furthermore, the only public information regarding the pool that Mr. Atkins has seen were articles in the local Independent Newspaper. Felt with the scope of this project, the Council should have endeavored to contact those directly adjacent to it to solicit their input. STAFF REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS REQUEST FOR FUNDS, "SUMMER OF 2OOO POLICE, F'IRE AND RECREATION NIGHT" Director of Parks and Recreation John Williams introduced the representatives from the three departments that coordinate the "PFRN" program, Jeff Kim, Heather Rambaugh, Todd Chase, and Tim Barry. This program has been a cooperative event and a trust account has been set up to which all revenues from the program are deposited; he explained that the individual City departments budgets do not allocate money for the program. Firefighter Jeff Kim briefly explained the program, which began three years ago with donations from Fire, Police and the City Council and requested that the Council consider donating some funds for the coming summer program. 100 students are expected to attend the events this year. It has been a very successful progrirm and would like to continue it, however the balance in the fund is approximately $200. The cost to each student for the six-week program is $20.00, which includes a t-shirt and all expenses. This $20.00 does not begin to cover all the expenses of the program. In the past, Olympian Day Care has donated transportation. Firefighter Kim suggested he would meet with the coordinators and submit a written request to Council requesting funds. He also wished to thank John Williams, Randy Schwartz, and Tim Barry of the Recreation Department for their support of the program and help in making it successful. 9" CONSENT CALENDAR June 5, 2000 r46 Burlingame City Council ^. REJECT CLAIM OF CLAY HERMAN REALTORS T'OR SEWER BACKUP ON DECEMBER 20, 1999 City Attomey Anderson recommending rejecting claim of Clay Herman Realtors for sewer backup occurring on December 20,1999. b. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING GRANT APPLICATION FOR BEVERAGE CONTAINER RECYCLING Assistant City Manager Rahn Becker recommended approval of the resolution authorizing l) the South Bayside Waste Management Authority (SBWMA) to submir a funding request form to the State Department of Conservation for a grant to promote beverage container recycling and litter cleanup and2) authorizing the SBWMA recycling programs manager to administer the grant. c.RESOL UTION AMENDING AGREEMENT WITH CONSTRUCTION TESTING SERVICES FOR BROADWAY STREETSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS - FROM CHULA VISTA TO LAGUNA AVENUE City Engineer Frank Erbacher recommended that City Council approve the attached resolution amending the agreement with Construction Testing Services for construction management services for Broadway Streetscape Improvements increasing the amount of $83,743. REAL.LOT 2 AND A PORTION OF LOT 1, MAP OF BURLINGAME HEIGHTS City Engineer Frank Erbacher recommended approval of the final condominium map for 107 El Camino Real. I RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THREE.YEAR ANIMAL AGREEMENT, (2) RESOLUTION TRANSFERRING FUNDS FOR ADDED 1999-2000 e. PROGRAM COSTS Assistant City Manager Rahn Becker recommended approval of the resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute the agreement with San Mateo County to provide animal control services via contract with the Peninsula Humane Society; and approve resolution authorizing payment of additional 1999-2000 costs of $32,640 representing city share of state mandated program costs for animal control. f. USAR TASK FORCE 3 AGREEMENT Fire Chief Bill Reilly recommended approval by resolution agreement between the Menlo Park Fire Protection District and the City of Burlingame to participate jn the Califomia Urban Search and Rescue Task Force 3. ob OUT.OF.STATE FOR RE,CREATION Director of Parks and Recreation Williams recommended authorizingRandy Schwartz, Recreation Superintendent, to attend out of state travel to Seattle, Washing to examine synthetic turf surfaces within the Burlingame City Council 147 June 5, 2000 d. FINAL CONDOMINIUM MAP FOR A 17 UNIT CONDOMINIUM AT IO7 EL CAMINO Councilman Coffey met with East Palo Alto City Manager, Monica Hudson, regarding the Peninsula Congestion Relief Alliance Committee, attended the North County Council of Cities meeting, Burlingame Bike Race, met with the police and recreation departments on budget reviews, and participated in the Lion's Golf Tournament. Councilman Spinelli represented the City at the funeral of Vice Mayor Gary Yates of San Mateo. Councilwoman Janney attended the County General Hospital Fundraiser, Chamber of Commerce Trade Show, the Burlingame Aquatic Center Foundation meeting, Council of Cities dinner, North County Council of Cities dinner, Youth in Government Day, Junior Fire Marshal Olympics and Picnic, Convention and Visitors Bureau Executive Committee meeting, CMAC meeting, participated in the Lions Golf Tournament, and attended the funeral of Vice Mayor Yates. Vice Mayor Galligan attended the Council of Cities meeting, North County Council of Cities meeting, participated in the Lions Golf Tournament, and the Burlingame Homeowner's Meeting. Mayor O'Mahony attended the San Mateo County and Chamber of Commerce Trade Show, County Council of Cities meeting, North County Council of Cities meeting, Youth in Government Day, Junior Fire Marshal Olympics and Picnic, met with Ann LeClair, President of the Visitor and Convention Bureau, attended OLA Memorial Day picnic, toured City Hall with the Washington School 3'd graders, presented a Proclamation to the Special Olympic's Runners, and attended the funeral of Vice Mayor Yates. L Councilman Coffey asked City Attorney Anderson if Mr. Ken Castle responded to the letter requesting the public records regarding the Broadway Streetscape. CA Anderson noted he had not and that the documents would be returned to their respective departments if he did not come in to view them by a determined date. It was noted a good deal of staff time was spent gathering the records, however, they were never reviewed by Mr. Castle. Vice Mayor Galligan noted Tuesday, June 6'h, was the City of Burlingame's 92"d birthday. 12. NEW BUSINESS Mayor O'Mahony noted the League of California Cities has sent a request for the City to join in an amicus curea brief with Sonoma on the return of ERAF funds the State has been taking from the cities since 1992. Noted it would be helpful if we could get unanimous agreement of the Council to join in this. Council concurred. Councilwoman Janney noted that she received several comments regarding the bicycle race held in Burlingame on June 4tr'; apparently it tied up a good deal of downtown for most of the day, and that some of the businesses were frustrated. City Manager Argyres stated the application was approved by Council; spoke to Georgette Naylor and requested she put in writing the concerns the business' have about the bike race. next two months Councilwoman Janney made a motion to approve the consent calendar; seconded by Mike Coffey; motion carried unanimously, 5-0. 10. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS June 5, 2000 148 Burlingame City Council 11. OLD BUSINESS Also noted that the Chamber's Farmer's Market is scheduled at the same time as the bike race. Mayor O'Mahony noted that the Council is not allowed to address public comment items and that City Attorney Anderson would be in touch with Mr. Atkins regarding the pool lights; knows it is difficult for the public to understand that the City cannot control what the schools do. 13. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Commission Minutes: Library, March 14 and April 18, 2000; Traffic, Safety and Parking, May 11, 2000; Planning, May 22,2000 a. b. c Department Reports: Police, April 2000 Proclamation Honoring Jai Marino for Outstanding Achievement as Principal of Our Lady of Angels School 14. CLOSED SESSION City Attorney Anderson stated the Council met in closed session at 8:50 p.m. on three different items: a. Conference with Labor Negotiator pursuant to Government Code $ 54957.6: City Negotiator: Dennis Argyres, Labor Organizations: PolicelFire Administrators; AFSCME, Locals 2190 and829; BAMM; Teamsters Local 856; Department Heads and Unrepresented Employees Council instructed the City Manager with regard to hiring a new City Manager; and Council instructed City Auomey with regard to pending litigation in the Worker's Compensation System with Judith Gladysz 15. ADJOURNMENT Mayor O'Mahony asked for a moment of silence in memory of Vice Mayor Gary Yates and Mr. Bob May. The meeting was adjourned at9:28 p.m. b. c. Council returned to open session at 9:26 p.m. CrtrrJ7nuzu: Ann Musso City Clerk Burlingame City Council t49 June 5, 2000