HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 09/26/1966
- 1 -
26,
M I UTE
meet
Francisco Planning Commission.
Time:
8:00 P..M..
Place:
September 26, 1966
Council Chambers, City Hall, South San Francisco,
Californ
Members:
Present:
Vice Chairman Mammini, Commiss
Rosati, Zlatunich Chairman Raffaelli
ent:
ent: City Planner
Daniel M.
to
Planning Commission,
Building Ins
tin Lynch
istant City Engineer Joseph E.. Nevil
Planning Assistant Franc VanSteen
MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING
es
meet
of September
, 1966
Mammini moved that minutes of the meeting
12, be approved; seconded by Commissioner Zlatunich
following roll call vote:
t, Gardner, Rosati, Zlatunich and Raffaelli
ent:
-49-
- 2 -
26,
ing Company to permit the
, x 47' at El Camino
, a continuation the
's report and recommendat
City Planner Daniel M. Pass read the f lowing report:
1.. El Camino Real one of South San co f s most rtant
entrance arteries.. tead characterized
grace, it manifests an aura commercialism. Signs
shapes and s for the the motorist..
2.. Signs
notice of
not advocate that this
to billboards, which are general
not advertise specific businesses
The Planning Office feels that bil
in those areas where business signs are
ion of profuse business signs and
confusion, d and unattract
the approval of the
a detriment to the
Beach
Commiss the
three reasons
the present sign, (2) the
and (3) the near future
on lands recently sold to
sign as a detriment to the community..
McNear had
any
enlarged
could be
a matter
an excellent entation,
reason why present 300
ft.., an almost
maintenance,
ory erection..
not
one one..
one
26",
company had
community and
.. Pass answered
at what s
matter of planning it not
, erected or personally benefited by
dedicated to general advertis
point to a spec business..
have proven to needed on behalf the local merchants, he
saw it as improper planning to allow advertisements without
benefit to the community often costly
business signs by erecting oversi billboards..
Commissioner Rosati thought
was sufficient and did not see any reason to
Mr& McNear there were two sizes
ter sign - , painted bullet
made.. These sizes were nat standardized..
could however poster signs
bul
to speak or against the request
none of the. Commissioners to give further comment,
Bobl t moved, seconded by Commissioner Mammini, to
ion as requested and cs recommended by the Planning
motion was passed by following roll call vote:
, Boblitt,
i, Zlatunich and Raffae i
~ 5
3 =
26,
(#700
hearing
i tp permit continued use
to the use of the
northeasterly corner of
Linden Avenue) in the C-2 District,
Sept 12, 1966.
City Planner's report and recommendat
City Planner Daniel M. Pass
the
r~port:
The subject directional sign years, not
constituted a detriment to the area during this period..
The Planning Office feels that the involved s will continue
to be non-detrimental to said area.
that
Since there
for
reques
approved without
the subject s
placement of a one-year
would serve no useful purpose.
a time limite
w not
time
applicant, of 421 Cypress Avenue, South
no one else who wished to speak for or against the
none of the Commissioners wished to cOlument, Commiss
, seconded by Commiss Gardner, to approve the
as requested and as recommended by the Planning
was passed by the following roll call vote:
Mammini, Boblitt, Gardner,
i, Zlatunich
Noes:
Absent:
"'" 4 <='
26,
Said s
City Planner's report and recommendat
City Planner Daniel M.
the
ice:
The proposed large s
subject parcel - seven acres.
than 200 . per acre and
to the heavy
isco-at It is
appl
-Way Agent for the
? Calif ornia.
a field
Bayshore
that the sign would
from the southern arm
there were actually two
were two large and one
would carry the
t about the use
no one else
none of the Commiss
moved,
ion as reques
mot passed
i,
t,
i, Zlatuni
1
- 5 -
26,
66
construct
advert es the
, at southeasterly
Freeway, opposite
City Planner's report and recommendat
City Planner
1 Me> Pass
the following report:
1. The proposed s supported the exist
municipality's tri.al tri.ct. Several
signs are situated therein.
ern
"realty"
2. Said sign
or of
constitute a detriment to the
Franc co-at-
area,
tenure
, the
a time
use
upon
request should
<!!l
icant:
of Brosnan Bros., 640 Rocca Avenue,
was present",
San
t asked about
that this sign
contract was s
purpose
a
limit on this s
automatically come
, for after then
was another
the direct future.
irmed
else who
the Commiss
moved, seconded
as reques
mot was
,
to
vote:
i,
t,
i, Zlatunich
t:
- 6 -
26,
66
v - 8
Haem,
, single
to cover
the R-l
an
T S report and
City Planner Daniel Me Pass
the
report:
The requested variance
and area of
the construct a 2400 square
had a standard, 6000 square foot corner lot,
2042 square structure is
if
a
that it supported
would not constitute
, the Camino
Mr..
was
Hoem,
Crestwood Drive, South San Francisco,
one to speak for or the request and none
Commiss wished to make comment, Commiss
ati moved, seconded Commissioner Mammini, to approve the
as reques as recommended by the Planning
sed by the lowing roll 1 vote:
Mammini,
t,
i,
1
e.n t :
26, 19
Po G" & Ee LANDS
t, Pac Gas and Electr . to
vacation of lands for the purpose of
configuration of the Marco v~y cul-de-sac,
City
t S report
recommendation:
City Planner
1 Me Pass read the following report:
The proposed dedicat and
lands located at the westerly
develop said lands in a more
dedication and vacation would not
traffic carrying capacity, or
terminal cul-de-sac thereof.
would enable the owner of the
the Marco -de-sac to
and manner..
adversely affect Marco Way's
vehicular turning on the
dedication, vacation and widen
to the requirements of the Director
should approved, subject
Public Works and the Fire
following report from Director of Public
made to the map titled "Marco Way Industrial s esH
R. Mulberg, Inc.. (UStreet revision Adjacent to
enlargement of the cul-de-sac designed to f
the proposed lessee or owner. This will be sat
office providing a concrete sidewalk
of the -de-sac to Parcel No.1.
concrete curb and gutter, meeting the
co shall be placed on the north, south
-sac, the existing curb and gutter
properly..
shaded on the shall be kept clear for
traff . In the area to cons
report and recommendation shall be
to commencing construction. A
before the area is f
cement treated six inches
asphalt concrete three inches
.
the exist ing 24
with Parcel No. lshall
checked so that the
are any sags
corrected at
it and the slough
unimpaired flow.
- 56 -
263'
it",
Mr El Ae
Market
Senaldi of
for
the and Electric Company, 245
San Francisco, California, applicant, and Mr.. Me
Grand Avenue, isco, Cal
icant, were both present.
City Planner Pass asked
the newly created
the past outcmme
Mr. Senaldi
claim matter between the
to
this slough at
it enters the San
e of California..
Engineer's report
requirement was at least one
, while Mr. Pass noted that
'" mentioned that three
vicinity on Parcell on behalf of the new con-
however that requires such a
Mr.. Senaldi further asked about the
the present stormdrain which was half
not the fault, would they st be charged
stated was a logical recommendat
time to care of correct
to dec to
e
to sett
to
or against the applicat
, Commissioner Rosati
to approve the applica-
Planning Off ,subject,
or of Public , and
the following vote:
, Boblitt, Gardner,
i,
fae
None
- 57 -
- 8 -
26,.
,
to be considered under Good and
communications or other matters interest,
Raffae announced the next regular meeting of the
South San Francisco Planning Commission would be held October 10,
1966 at 8:00 M. the Counc Chambers of City Hall, South San
Franc co, ifornia. The meet was adjourned at 8:48 PeM.
~~.~~
Daniel M. Pass
Planning Commiss Secretary
Mario Raffaelli, Chairman
Planning Commission
- 58 -