Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - PC - 1974.08.26THE CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 26, 1974 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT COMMISSIONERS ABSENT OTHERS PRESENT Francard None City Planner Swan Jacobs Asst,. City Planner Yost Kindig Asst,. City Engr. Rebarchik Mink City Attorney Karmel Norberg Sine Taylor CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the Burlingame Planning Commission was called to order on the above date at 7:40 P.M. by Chairman Mink. ROLL CALL The above named members were present. MINUTES The minutes of the July 22 regular meeting were approved and adopted with the following correction suggested by Commissioner Jacobs: add under Item 10,"A portion of the accessory building is a patio or garden room." The minutes of the July 29 special study meeting and August 12 study meeting were approved and adopted as mailed. WRARTMag 1. ANZA MASTER PLAN - DRAFT TENTATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT EIR-28P - LAND USE AND CIRCULATION Chairman Mink announced consideration of EIR-28P, explaining to the audience the reason for an EIR is to establish facts in regard to a development, not to determine whether a development should proceed. This includes what impacts will be felt and the mitigating measures which would lead to modification of the proposal as submitted by a developer. The topics for this meeting were land use and circulation, presented in Section 3 by Ribera & Sue and Section 7 by JHK & Associates, respectively. He noted that the Commission had a copy of two special study meeting minutes covering previous discussions of these topics, and Supplement #1 by Anza Pacific. In addition, Commission had received City staff report on this item listing five issues and mitigation measures, and copy of Evaluation of this EIR prepared for the City by Charles D. Bigelow of Menlo Park. Chairman Mink further advised that the EIR eventually adopted must state what the City believes is fact. It is indeed the City's report. The Chairman then turned the meeting over to City Planner Swan. Mr. Swan highlighted five basic issues: (1) moving people in and out which requires -2 - transportation; (2) intensity of land use with tall buildings; the taller the building, the more intense the land use; (3) uncertain land use of surrounding property; (4) useable open space on public land; (5) economic effects on the City of Burlingame. The City Planner then discussed these points with the use of diagrams, pointing out that San Mateo County is a subregional area, Burlingame is merely part of a much larger area, and the impacts of the project on circulation must tie seen from the outside as well as the inside. To mitigate intensity of land use it would be desirable to require a special permit from the City Council for each building that exceeded 50 feet in height. Land. uses had been illustrated with overlay maps showing that the oldest uses in this waterfront area were perhaps light industrial, with the addition in. subsequent years of office/light warehouse uses and, more recently, office buildings. Projects for the future were also in such as a restaurant, tennis court recreational use and an office building at 533 Airport Boulevard. Land uses of proposed Anza project were shown with restaurants along the shoreline, office buildings, motels, hotel, et cetera. The Planner described subregional accessibility. He explained a diagram showing how far you can drive in 10 minutes of travel time. A local accessibility diagram was presented to show travel times from the Anza project area. Diagrams R and S, showing existing and proposed transpor- tation routes, were discussed. The Bayside Line for BART with Bayshore Station at Millbrae Avenue and Lagoon Station in the Anza project site was mentioned. Alternative means of street access included the improve- ments at Peninsula Avenue, opposite Oak Grove and a new connection between Airport Boulevard and Bayshore Highway. With diagrams T, U, V, W, the Planner indicated four alternatives to get from Airport Boulevard to the end of Bayshore Highway. The area outside the Anza property line could be treated either as uncommitted or fixed land use. The City needs to know where the right-of-way will be located if it is to improve accessibility to this project. The Planner concluded his comments by reiterating the five basic issues. In response to a question from Chairman Mink, City Planner Swan advised that all of the uses shown on the Anza Master Plan are types of uses included in the C-4 District and proper uses; there is a stipulation that buildings of a certain height would require a special permit from the City Council. Chairman Mink commented that a percentage breakdown of total area committed to each type of land use would be quite useful to the Commission as well as some approximation of the rooms in the hotels that may be contemplated and information as to the amount of area being used for parking. Mr. Swan replied to a question from Commissioner Taylor that the uses on the south side of Airport Boulevard are nearly all office uses; however, there may be a variation in the uses on the north side. Len McVicar of Ribera & Sue indicated that the intent had been essentially that the south side would be almost exclusively office while the north would include other uses. With the exception of the property belonging to Mr. Wm. Purdy, the rest of the area would consist of motels, etc. and public oriented uses. It was determined that it would be fair to suggest that the bulk of the public oriented space would be on the north side. MCC Commissioner Kindig stated it appeared there was going to be quite a bit of open space south of Airport Boulevard and he was hopeful there would be more open space on the north side also. Mr. McVicar commented that the middle third of the property would be open space and, answering a question from Commissioner Francard, he said it was intended to have a .convention facility in the hotel, not a large convention arena. At this point in the meeting Chairman Mink advised this was a public hearing which is to be a continued public hearing over several months. He then asked for statements from the audience restricted to the exhibits presented and the two topics: land use and circulation. The Chairman recognized the presence in the audience of Councilman Cusick and Council- man Mangini. There were no comments from the audience at this time. Chairman Mink stated, referring to the requirements of an EIR, that in regard to circulation it is the obligation of the City to determine the impact of the project outside of the specific property. The City Planner said it is the responsibility of the City staff to evaluate an EIR, and he felt it was the responsibility of those preparing the EIR to indicate how far the impact will.travel. He advised that the City of San Mateo wished to have figures of the impact on their city as far south as Third Avenue. They are presently investigating a project in San Mateo which will have an impact on Burlingame. Chairman Mink inquired if there was a means to measure the extent of reasonable impact; and City Planner Swan suggested that if it were known where the bulk of the people might be living, an estimate could be made as to where the bulk of the impact would end. Discussion followed regarding available housing, where this housing might be, and the additional support services that might be necessary. Commissioner Sine felt that the bulk of the people would go where more economical housing is located, south to San Jose area or west to Half Moon Bay; as there is no tract room left in the City of Burlingame, those people who want to own a house will have to move south or west. George Keyston thought that there would be quite a mix of types of tenants in the project and advised Anza is doing studies on its employees at the present time. These figures should be available at the next meeting. Chairman Mink noted that the object of this hearing was to determine if the information in the EIR is accurate with regard to land use; City Planner Swan commented this topic could be pursued in depth with Charles Bigelow, who had made this point in his evaluation. Mr. Bigelow stated that the scope of his evaluation covered the demographic, housing, trans- portation, economic and financial impacts which wereall related to land use. Chairman Mink brought up the topic of taller buildings, and Mr. McVicar commented that it was felt the clustering of taller buildings did give more open space. Commissioner Jacobs inquired about the possibility of a -project somewhere in between the two that had been proposed, and Mr. McVicar advised that they had prepared a plan that is less a Chinese wall and less high with some amount of open space. Chairman Mink stated it was his understanding that the Commission is attempting, section by section, to agree on those areas which are sub- stantially accurate and efficient, and also to point: up those areas where -4 - further information is needed. City Planner Swan read a paragraph from the State Guidelines summarizing the need for balance between land use and circulation. The intensity of land use determines the number of people that might have to be moved and circulated. He did not think an office building needed to be close to San Francisco Bay, but stated it's a good land use; the Commission might consider how much office use would be in balance. The City Planner suggested that the cluster of office buildings between Airport Boulevard and the existing waste disposal area might be deferred until a later time. He stated that illustrates incremental land use planning rather than long range: comprehensive planning for all areas of the project at this time. Chairman Mink commented that to help the developer in incremental growth it would seem appropriate for the Commission to stage when the developer reaches a certain amount of cars per hour, or a certain number of cars moving on and off the property, that building would have to stop until access streets were improved. The Commission should state very clearly that it will use incremental growth as one method of mitigating the problem. In further discussion Commissioner Taylor felt that the north side traffic could be handled with present streets; therefore, he suggested taking this side as the starting increment.. Commissioner Francard believed the question of Airport Boulevard location should be decided and if it were necessary to go to BCDC, the time to do this was the present. Chairman Mink stated the purpose of the Commission is to' determine the facts, and then suggest to City Council certain solutions. Several Commissioners wondered how this could be done without more studies. Commissioner Taylor inquired of Charles Bigelow if facts could be developed to determine what could be developed now with existing facilities, and what steps must be taken before further development could be approved. Mr. Bigelow's answer was "yes", it is possible from a physical standpoint to determine the limit of development the City could. live with. The development itself will involve impacts - demographic, circulation, number of people, number of vehicles, and type of power needed for a specific facility. Certain types of development generate more traffic than others. George Keyston stated that he believed it unwise to limit development to the north or south as supply and demand and economics enter into it; there is a need to be flexible with a balance between the commercial and office uses. Commissioner Taylor felt it would be necessary to know the impact of circulation at each stage in the development. Chairman Mink summarized this part of the discussion, stating that the general consensus of the Commission was that the land uses as proposed are appropriate for that zone and that the intensity of land use as proposed is going to develop traffic problems that must be solved. The EIR should include mitigating circumstances in the immediate surrounding area and subregional impacts of the project. He further stated he would like to have the Commission, City Engineer and the developer request City Council for a substantive study of the traffic in the subregional area to be completed at the earliest possible moment in order to determine geographical extent and demographic and economic impacts. -5 - The Chairman next asked for comments from the audience. Councilman Mangini was concerned as to where the money would come from for the traffic study. Harry Graham of 1555 Alturas Drive asked about the traffic facilities up to 45% of development of the project. Mr. Keyston confirmed that Anza Pacific's studies had been primarily on their property only. In negotiations between Burlingame's City Engineer and Anza's consultant, a figure of $15,000 had been arrived at for a traffic study. Anza would be happy to contribute to this traffic study, but Mr. Keyston pointed out that a more comprehensive study such as that proposed would involve traffic from other areas such as East Millsdale and would involve other property owners. Commissioner Norberg felt that the important thing at the present time was the traffic situation within the area; Chairman Mink advised that the Commission does have an obligation under the Guidelines to look beyond the boundary of the project, considering impacts that extend beyond the property lines. He reminded these must be included in the EIR, and the developer has offered to contribute to a subregional study. The Chairman summarized again the consensus of the Commission. There is general agreement that (1) the proposed land uses are appropriate for the Waterfront Commercial District, (2) intensity of land use and traffic generated may be mitigated by establishing incremental growth policies, (3) the City Council is urged to pursue a subregional traffic study, (4) determine geographic extent of traffic impact, (5) determine extent of demographic impact. Commissioner Taylor made the motion that the Commission accept this summary as a general statement of Commission policy and conditions at the present time. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Jacobs and passed unanimously by voice vote. Chairman Mink declared that the hearings on EIR-28P would be continued for one month, the next topics being height, bulk, coverage of buildings, landscaping, and general appearance. A recess was announced at 9:15 P.M. and the meeting reconvened at 9:30 P.M. 2. PARCEL MAP, BEING A RESUBDIVISION OF A PORTION OF LOT 2 OF EDWARDS INDUSTRIAL PARK OFF EDWARDS COURT, ZONED M-1, BY WM. B. WRIGHT FOR FRANK EDWARDS CO. (APN 026-102-090) City Planner Swan told the Commission a letter had been received at 4:55 P.M. the day of the meeting. Commissioner Kindig read letter of August 26, 1974 from Dennis C. Hession of the law offices of Hession, Creedon, Hamlin, Kelly, Hanson & Farbstein, San Mateo, California on behalf of the property owners asking that this application be withdrawn. Chairman Mink declared the item withdrawn from the agenda at the request of the property owner. 3. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP, RESUBDIVISION INTO ONE LOU' OF A PORTION OF LOT 14, BLOCK 7, MAP NO. 2 BURLINGAME LAND CO., BEING 619-623 ANSEL AVE., ZONED R-3, BY ROBERT BERRYMAN The Assistant City Engineer distributed maps to the Commission, and recommended approval, stating the purpose is to combine two existing residential properties into a single parcel. There were no Public Works requirements, but before approval of final parcel map, in order to meet zoning requirements, one of the residential structures should be removed. Mr. Robert Berryman stated that before submitting final parcel map the aM. intent was to have one or both of the structures removed. It was established that at the present time the use of the property had not been determined, whether for rental or condominium. The property is zoned R-3. Mrs. Robison who stated she was the owner of adjacent property inquired as to the probable date of development of this property. Mr. Berryman advised this was dependent upon many conditions: the City's concurrence in the request for the tentative map, economic conditions, analysis of conditions in Burlingame as to apartments and condominiums. They would hope to have construction under way within a year, but might accelerate this if the economic picture improved. Chairman Mink declared the public hearing closed. In response to a question from Commissioner Sine, the applicant advised the homes are occupied by tenants at the present time, two families on a month-to-month basis, and 60 days notice will be given them. Commissioner Sine moved approval of this tentative parcel map, with the condition that the final map be subject to removal of one building. Commissioner Jacobs seconded the motion and it carried on the following roll call. vote: AYES: FRANCARD, JACOBS, KINDIG, MINK, NORBERG, SINE: NAYES: TAYLOR 4. PARCEL MAP, PARK PLAZA TOWERS, AN AMENDED RESUBDIVISION OF A CONDOMINIUM PROJECT AT 110 PARK ROAD, BY FRAHM.EDLER.CANNIS FOR PACIFIC WESTERN CONTRACTORS Chairman Mink announced this item on the agenda was conditional upon action of the City Council at their next meeting. There being no objection, it was continued one month with approval of the applicant. 5. PARCEL MAP, TO COMBINE PROPERTY FOR PROJECT AT 545 ALMER ROAD, LOT 12 AND PORTION OF LOTS 11 AND 13, BLOCK 8, MAP NO. 2 BURLINGAME LAND CO., ZONED R-3, BY PACIFIC WESTERN CONTRACTORS The Assistant City Engineer distributed maps and explained this map proposed to combine several properties into a single lot for a large development, all property contained within this resubdivision has one owner, the map meets all requirements, and he would recommend it. There being no audience questions, Chairman Mink declared the public hearing closed. Commission discussion determined the map was actually eliminating four lot lines and clearing up a hodgepodge that had resulted from deed lines that did not coincide with original subdivision lines; all present lots are zoned R-3; Commissioner Taylor was concerned about losing control by eliminating lot lines without seeing construction. Commissioner Sine moved adoption of this parcel map, it was seconded by Commissioner Kindig and unanimously approved by roll call vote. Sometime later Mrs. Walter C. Schafer, 1517 Floribunda requested if she might look at the parcel map for the project at 545 Almer Road, stating that she owned a portion of Lot 10 and Lot 11 (100 ft. across the front of Lot 10 and 68 ft. of Lot 11). She was advised by the Assistant City Engineer that the boundaries of her property are fixed by her deed. IZ 6. VARIANCE FROM REAR YARD REQUIREMENTS IN R-1 DISTRICT AT 2989 DOLORES WAY, BY JONATHAN B. HOROWITZ City Planner Swan explained this application, stating Mr. Horowitz wished to add on to his existing home in an R-1 District. The addition does project into the required rear yard by about two feet. Mr. Swan said that technically a variance is required but functionally he believed it could be approved as a minor variance in the R-1 District. Discussion established that with the addition the lot coverage is still within legal requirements, there was sufficient space in the backyard to maintain a concept of open space and that it was a level backyard. There were no questions from the audience and Chairman Mink declared the public hearing closed. Mr. Horowitz had no further comments to mare, and Commissioner Jacobs moved approval of this variance according to the exhibits submitted. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Sine and unanimously approved by roll call vote. Chairman Mink advised the appli- cant that this application is subject to appeal to City Council and will become effective on the 4th of September if no appeal is received. 7. SPECIAL PERMIT FOR ADDITIONAL COMMERCIAL RECREATION FACILITIES IN M-1 DISTRICT AT 1730 ROLLINS ROAD, BY PENINSULA SPORTS CENTER Chairman Mink announced a communication had been received from this applicant. Commissioner Kindig read a letter from Ann Mori of Peninsula Sports Center, dated August 22, 1974, requesting a continuance to the September 23 hearing of the Planning Commission. There was no objection and the Chairman advised this application would be carried over for one month. 8. SPECIAL PERMIT TO ALLOW SEE -M -SEE, INC., AN ESTABLISHMENT FOR SALE OF GOODS AND SERVICES AT RETAIL, IN M-1 DISTRICT, AT 1616 ROLLINS ROAD, BY MIKE H. T. CHU, APPLICANT; ELIZABETH C. KUHN, OWNER The Chairman announced receipt of a letter dated August 20, 1974 from the property owner, Elizabeth C. Kuhn of Guadalajara, Jal., Mexico. This letter was read for the record by Commissioner Kindig and gave the applicant permission to conduct retail sales at the Rollins Road location contingent upon the necessary permits being issued by the City of Burlingame. The applicant was represented by Julian N. Basin, a general contractor from Menlo Park, California. Mr. Basin read letter received by Mr. Chu from the property owner giving permission for retail sales, and indicated a special permit for retail sales for the short term of 90 days would be sufficient. City Planner Swan wished there were more information to comment upon; there was a lack of the amount of area to be devoted to retail sales. He felt a temporary permit such as this would probably not be subject to any environmental impact type of posting. Replying to Commissioner Kindig, Mr. Basin claimed that up to this point the applicant had done no advertis- ing, would hope to run a small classified ad in the papers, and plans subsequently to ship most of the carpet to Taiwan. Commissioner Kindig was opposed to any blatant type of advertising, and was told nothing of this sort was planned. Mr. Basin said that basically Mr. Chu's business ME will be export and import on a wholesale basis. He also stated, in regard to parking, that there was a large parking lot and at the present time only two cars parked there all day. In reply to Commissioner Taylor's question, Mr. Basin stated he did not believe Mr. Chu would want to sell other goods on a retail basis in the future. Commissioner Sine was opposed to even a 60 or 90 day permit since action of this kind might set a precedent. Chairman Mink asked for audience comment. Mr. Roberts, who stated he owns several warehouses on Rollins Road, objected strenuously to any special permit to conduct retail business in this area. He wondered, if this permit were granted, what would prevent permits being granted for other undesirable uses, such as a used car lot, and he objected to the large sign on the building "Carpet Sale." He also mentioned there had been an ad in the San Mateo papers regarding selling 70,000 yards of carpeting below cost. Mr. Roberts felt it would be a serious mistake to allow the renting of a building in this area for this purpose. Another member of the audience who has property along Rollins Road stated his objection to this application because of the traffic problem which might develop. Cars are parked on the street now and the Chronicle is located there with many cars being used. Commissioner Taylor said he was concerned about controlling this 90 day permit, and the possibility of receiving other presentations; if there was assurance it could be controlled, he would vote for the application. Chairman Mink commented that if a motion for the granting of this permit fails, he would like to have some action regarding removal of the sign immediately. Commissioner Sine moved that this special permit be denied and that the signage be removed immediately. Commissioner Francard seconded, and the motion to deny passed by the following roll call vote: AYES: FRANCARD, JACOBS, KINDIG, MINK, NORBERG, SINE, NAYES: TAYLOR Chairman Mink announced the motion to deny approved and advised the applicant the decision was subject to appeal to City Council at their September 3 meeting. 9. SIGN PERMIT FOR 135 SF WALL SIGN FOR LONG'S DRUG STORE AT.1871 EL CAMINO REAL, BY FEDERAL SIGN & SIGNAL CORP. Chairman Mink advised the Commission had received drawings of a new sign. George Killiam was present as representative of Long's Drugs, and during the ensuing discussion he stated Long's was happy with the proposed sign architecturally and felt the size was appropriate. Long's felt they were accommodating the Commission's objections using red letters and opaque background. The applicant replied to Commissioner Jacobs' question that only the letters are illuminated. Commissioner Jacobs was delighted with the letters but not with the white background. It was noted that there is a 1" white band outlining each letter. Commissioner Sine objected to the size of the sign, outlining his point with references to several other Long's Drug Store signs. Commissioner Taylor commented that the Commission had been attempting over the past couple of years to achieve some consistency in the sign program in the Plaza area. Chairman Mink declared the public hearing closed, there being no questions from the audience. Commissioner Sine asked the applicant if he would be agreeable to coming in with a 20 or 25 ft. sign. The reply was that Long's felt the size is appropriate; if Commission policy does not allow this, that would be ,another matter. Long's felt they were on firm ground architecturally. Commissioner Kindig thought the sign too large, but would be willing to compromise in view of the color. A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs that the sign permit for Long's Drug Store be approved per drawings submitted, and with the condition there would be no other signs on the building. Commissioner Kindig seconded the motion and it passed on the following roll call vote: AYES: FRANCARD, JACOBS, KINDIG, MINK, NORBERG, TAYLOR NAYES: SINE 10. SIGN VARIANCE FOR 42 SF GROUND SIGN IN FRONT SETBACK AT 1633 BAYSHORE HIGHWAY FOR BURLINGAME OFFICE CENTER BY KANE WOOD SIGNS LTD. Dan Ross, representing Woodruff Construction Company, appeared before the Commission. It was explained that the variance was required because the sign extends into the 15 ft. setback along Bayshore Highway. The applicant advised that the letters in the sign will probably be goldleaf with a redwood background. It was determined the top of the sign will be approxi- mately 6 or.7 ft. above street level, the highest posts about 12" above that, it will be located on top of a mounded area in front, in the middle of the lot with no obstruction of views anywhere, sett back 10 ft. from the curb. The area is landscaped at present. As a point of information, City Planner Swan commented that the sign will be about 20 ft. back from the curb; there is an additional 15 ft. setback line! which applies to a ground sign. The applicant stated they were asking it be 10 ft. back from the property line. There being no audience comment, Chairman Mink declared the public hearing closed. Commissioner Taylor moved that this sign variance be approved in accordance with drawings submitted; it was seconded by Commissioner Francard and passed on unanimous roll call vote. Chairman Mink advised the applicant this variance would become effective September 4. 11. SIGN PERMIT FOR 102 SF WALL SIGN AT 1701 ROLLINS ROAD BY MC CREERY D. SIGN CO. FOR R&K DISTRIBUTORS Jack Riggs was present representing R&K Distributors.. The Commission had received previously a copy of the sign permit and a drawing of the sign. It was determined the sign would be applied to the building, it would be 2" wide, redwood painted black with red and white letters, and be lighted with ground lights. -There was no audience comment and Chairman Mink declared the public hearing closed. Commissioner Kindig was not too happy with the red lettering. Commissioner Sine moved that this sign permit be approved in accordance with the submitted sketch, including approval of the ground lighting. Commissioner Taylor seconded the motion and it passed on unanimous roll call vote. -10- 12. SIGN VARIANCE FOR AWNING ADVERTISING AND SIGN PERMIT FOR 54 SF WALL SIGN ON REAR WALL OF 1390 BURLINGAME AVENUE, BY' MATTHEW A. OLIVER FOR CHARLES OFFICE SUPPLIES & STATIONERY Commissioner Kindig read communication received from Matthew A. Oliver dated August 20, 1974 requesting withdrawal of this application, and Chairman Mink directed that the minutes show this request as being approved. CITY PLANNER REPORT The City Planner reported a letter from the City Manager dated August 21 concerning a Beautification Commission request of August 7 that a study be made regarding unsightly vehicles parking in the front setback of homes. These letters were read to the Commission by Commissioner Kindig. Chairman Mink stated he would like to refer this to staff and pursue the matter at the next study meeting. City Planner Swan commented he felt there was little that staff could do. Public right--of-way seems to be a police problem, and parking on the street is totally outside zoning code regulations. There was Commission discussion as to setback regulations, enforcement regarding parking of recreational vehicles, the Open Space Element of the General Plan which designates streets and front setbacks, and the possibility of an addition to the Ordinance. Commissioner Francard believed that the Beautification Commission are mainly bothered by cars parking in the parking strip (or planting area) which will eventually do damage to the trees. The sidewalk is continuously 'blocked in some areas. Commissioner Sine didn't think it quite fair to tell someone he can't store his camper or boat on his own property after he has saved for years to buy it. It was decided to put this item on the study meeting agenda in September. City Planner Swan announced that the Restaurant Parking Survey was to be presented to the Parking Comz►ission on Wednesday, August 28 for their response. Any feedback from this Commission would be reported back to the Planning Commission at the September study meeting. Mr. Swan also reported the change in name of Charles D. Bigelow's firm which is now Bigelow -Crain Associates in Menlo Park. He advised of the League of California Cities Conference to be held October 20-23 at the Biltmore in Los Angeles which he felt was an opportunity for Planning Commissioners to contact commissioners from other cities, exchanging ideas and learning from other people. Chairman Mink questioned the City Attorney if it would be permissible to make such a request at a study meeting, and the Attorney advised he believed so; this would give Commissioners a chance to check their schedules and. the possibility of attending. Chairman Mink and Commissioners Kindig and Sine expressed their feeling that these conferences were most beneficial. The conflict'in the September study meetings of City Council and Planning Commission was discussed. It was the consensus that since the Council would be using Conference Room B, the Planning Commission would hold their study meeting in the Council Chambers; the City Planner would attend the Council meeting if summoned by a messenger. -11 - The City Planner also reported briefly on his meetings with BCDC where he represented the City relative to the Don the Beachcomber project. He mentioned that Robert S. St. Clair had asked if this had been approved by the City and Mr. Swan replied it had not gone to any official body because it is a ministerial act. He had met again with BCDC staff regarding Burlingame's concern for the shoreline pathway system. It is his hope that BCDC will condition their restaurant permit approval so that the plans will be reviewed by the City of Burlingame, the concern being that there really isn't space for a path in the 25 ft. shoreline strip. Chairman Mink announced the Planning Commission has had three requests from City Council to review items: (1) the matter just reported; (2) R-1 and R-2 zoning districts consistent with the General Plan; (3) zoning of public lands. These items should be kept in mind, as well as an item on exemptions on lot coverage. ADJOURNMENT The meeting regularly adjourned at 10:55 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Ruth E. Jacobs, Secretary