Loading...
PC 11-22-1993 CITY OF CUPERTINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA. 95014 (408) 252 -4505 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION HELD ON NOVEMBER 22, 1993 SALUTE TO THE FLAG: ROLL CALL: Commissioners Present: Vice Chairperson Mahoney Commissioner Doyle Commissioner Bautista Commissioner Roberts Commissioners Absent: Chr. Austin Staff Present: Robert Cowan, Director of Community Development Ciddy Wordell, City Planner Thomas Robillard, Planner II APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Com. Roberts commented on item 2. He noted they did not have the opportunity to vote separately on the church and day care center. He believes there was a misunderstanding and two Commissioners were opposed to the day care and one Commissioner against the entire project. He noted he does not want to change the minutes at this time, but would like clarification as to how to vote on separate issues in one use permit. MOTION: Com. Doyle moved to approve the minutes, as presented. SECOND: Com. Bautista VOTE: Passed 4 -0 -1 ABSENT: Chr. Austin POSTPONEMENTS OR NEW AGENDA ITEMS: Item 4: Application 11 -U -93 and. 10 -EA -93 - Fit & Healthy Spa Continued to the Planning Commission Meeting of December 13, 1993. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: - None ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: Ms. Lydia Beall, 22437 St. Andrews, stated she is here representing a majority of residents on St. Andrews. She noted they are asking the Planning Commission to revisit the interpretation of the Ordinance regarding impervious coverage and parking in the front yard. Ms. Beall presented photos reviewing the property owner who completely covered his yard with concrete and noted this disrupts the continuity of the street. Mr. Cowan stated there is a conflict in the Ordinance and this will be on the agenda on December 13, 1993. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of November 22 , 1993 Page 2 CONSENT CALENDAR: 1. Cancellation of December 27, 1993 Planning Commission Meeting. MOTION: Com. Roberts moved to approve the consent calendar. SECOND: Com. Doyle VOTE: Passed 4 -0 -1 ABSENT: Chr. Austin ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW: 2. Application No(s): 2- ASA -93 Applicant: Gerald Kawamoto, MPA Design Property Owner: Hewlett Packard Co. Location: Wolfe and Homestead Roads Review landscape plan for perimeter along Wolfe and Homestead Roads. Com. Mahoney stated he will abstain from this item as he is an employee of Hewlett Packard. Staff Presentation: Mr. Bob Cowan, Director of Community Development, presented the staff report noting this is the replacement of landscaping lost in the freeze of 1989. He stated the landscaping will be more efficient and drought tolerant. He stated the landscaping will also screen the parking lot. Mr. Gerald Kawamoto, Hewlett Packard, presented an aerial of the site outlining the landscaping proposed. He stated the landscaping will screen the fence and the parking lot and drought tolerant plants will be added. Com. Doyle questioned #13 on the Landscape Architect Compliance Statement? Mr. Kawamoto stated this was a response from the irrigation consultant. Planner Robillard stated, what he interpreted from this response was, that it does not matter if the requirements were met for the precipitation rates, because it would not protect the landscaping from run-off. Mr. Cowan stated they have to maintain a water budget requirement and staff will work out the correct wording. In response to Com. Bautista's question, Mr. Kawamoto stated they have no intentions of removing or adding any ash trees. MOTION: Com. Bautista moved to approve 2- ASA -93 subject to the PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of November 22 , 1993 Page 3 findings and subconclusions of the hearing. SECOND: Com. Roberts VOTE: Passed 3 -1 -1 ABSTAIN: Com. Mahoney ABSENT: Chr. Austin 3. Application No(s): 4- ASA -93 Applicant: Victor Mandella Property Owner: Victor Mandella Location: 20128 Stevens Creek Boulevard Paint selection for an existing restaurant. Staff Presentation: Planner Robillard presented the staff report noting the Adobe Inn /Lounge was painted without approval. He stated after notifying the applicant an application was filed. He stated staff looked at this project and asked if it had not been painted, should these colors be approved? Staff determined that these colors would not have been approved and recommends that the applicant choose new colors. He noted the green color is not used extensively, but the body color is not acceptable. Com. Bautista stated this building now blends in with the Townhomes in the area. Mr. Cowan stated the question is, is the color chosen for the building sympathetic with the natural adobe materials? He noted there has been controversy in the community regarding these colors. Planner Robillard stated staff's position is that the main body color is out of character and the green color used is minimal. Com. Roberts stated he would support staff's recommendation. Com. Bautista stated colors are regulated and property owners should comply and follow the correct procedures, he would support staff's recommendation. Com. Bautista asked what the next step is if the applicant does not comply with the City? Planner Robillard stated staff will work with the applicant and give a certain number of days to comply. If the applicant does not comply civil charges can be filed. Com. Doyle stated that property owners should adhere to City codes. MOTION: Com. Roberts moved to deny application 4- ASA -93 as recommended by staff. SECOND: Com. Doyle VOTE: Passed 3 -1 -1 ABSTAIN: Com. Bautista ABSENT: Chr. Austin PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of November 22 , 1993 Page 4 _ NEW BUSINESS: 5. Application 3- ASA -93 - Sign Designs, Inc.: Appeal of Director's decision to deny sign program in accordance with Section 17.24.020 of the Municipal Code. Staff Presentation: Planner Robillard presented the staff report noting that prior to adopting the new sign ordinance, ASAC reviewed and denied this sign request because the red color is incompatible with the red brick facade of the.building. He noted the action was appealed to the City Council, who upheld ASAC's decision. He stated once the new sign ordinance was adopted the applicant resubmitted his application and staff found the proposed signs were incompatible with the building and other signs in the center. Application Presentation: Mr. Thom Bingham, Sign Design, Inc. reviewed the sign proposed noting they are proposing a white background with red and blue letters. He added this is Pepsico's new trademark for new colors and pointed out that a registered trademark is protected by Federal law. Mr. Bingham stated the sign proposed is smaller than existing. The Commissioners discussed the lettering and the coloring, Mr. Bingham stated Pepsico dictate this. Com. Bautista suggested a white background on the ground sign and white /ivory lettering on the building sign. Mr. Bingham stated Pepsico would have objection to this. In response to Com. Mahoney's question, Mr. Bingham stated the letters and logo are flush into the brick. He also noted other tenants have the ivory signs on the brick. Mr. Cowan stated if the trademark issue drives the decision of the Commission they may want to hear t City Attorney's opinion before making a decision. Planner Robillard stated even if the sign came in with a white background the sign would still be incompatible with the sign program for the building. Com. Bautista stated there is a strong case for the white lettering on the building and the ground sign compatible with the trademark desires. He stated the Commission should consider the architectural conformity of the other tenants. In response to Com. Doyle's question, Planner Robillard stated ASAC denied the sign because they considered the red colors on the building conflicted with the brick color. They also stated the red on the monument sign should be the same red used by other tenants. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of November 22 , 1993 Page 5 Com. Roberts stated he would like to see color displays when considering applications such as this and would support continuing this application at this time. Com. Doyle spoke in support of Com. Bautista's suggestion. The Commissioners discussed the trademark and if it protects colors? Com. Mahoney stated they do have some control over the sign, regardless of the trademark. Andy Swords, representing Harman Management, stated if there are other red signs within the City, why limit the color if chosen for their identity. He stated there are only three tenants in this building and they are asking the main tenant, and owner of the building, to conform to the smaller tenants. He stated times change and the new direction for KFC is changing too. He stated the colors are advertised and promoted as part of their trademark and are just as important as other parts of their logo. Mr. Swords stated in other communities were this is presented the major concern is size and not color. He stated they would like to resolve this at this time. In response to Com. Bautista's question, Planner Robillard stated there are approved red signs throughout the City. Com. Bautista stated he does not want Cupertino to be viewed as being unfriendly to business and the applicant made a compelling argument for him to change his mind. He stated this is a corporate wide logo, and he does not want to impose burdens. MOTION: Com. Bautista moved to approve 3- ASA -93 as proposed by the applicant. SECOND: Com. Roberts VOTE: Denied 2 -2 -1 NOES: Com. Mahoney, Com. Doyle ABSENT: Chr. Austin Com. Doyle stated there is a sign program in place and this should be adhered to. Com. Bautista stated that most major companies signs are reasonable and does not believe this will be a blight on the City. He believes the most significant concern is the size of the sign. MOTION: Com. Bautista moved to approve 3- ASA -93 subject to the building sign being white or ivory letters and the blue and red colors on the monument sign to staff's approval. SECOND: Com. Roberts VOTE: Passed 4 -0 -1 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of November 22 , 1993 Page 6 VOTE: Passed 4 -0 -1 ABSENT: Chr. Austin 6. Selection of new Environmental Review Committee representative. Vice Chair Mahoney suggested selecting an interim ERC representative as a new Commissioner will be on the Commission in January and Chr. Austin is absent at this hearing. Chr. Mahoney volunteered to serve on the ERC until the end of January. REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION: - None REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: - None DISCUSSION OF NEWSPAPER CLIPPINGS: - None ADJOURNMENT: Having concluded business, the Planning Commission adjourned at 8:00 P.M. to the next Regular Meeting of December 13, 1993 at 6:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, • Cat erine M. Ro.i ar•, Recording Secretary Approved by the Planning Commission at the Regular Meeting of December 13, 1993 Donna Austin, Chairwoman Attest: Kim Smith, City Clerk CITY OF CUPERTINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA. 95014 (408) 252 -4505 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION HELD ON NOVEMBER 22, 1993 SALUTE TO THE FLAG: ROLL CALL: Commissioners Present: Vice Chairperson Mahoney Commissioner Doyle Commissioner Bautista Commissioner Roberts Commissioners Absent: Chr. Austin Staff Present: Robert Cowan, Director of Community Development Ciddy Wardell, City Planner Thomas Robillard, Planner II APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Com. Roberts commented on item 2. He noted they did not have the opportunity to vote separately on the church and day care center. He believes there was a misunderstanding and two Commissioners were opposed to the day care and one Commissioner against the entire project. He noted he does not want to change the minutes at this time, but would like clarification as to how to vote on separate issues in one use permit. MOTION: Com. Doyle moved to approve the minutes, as presented. SECOND: Com. Bautista VOTE: Passed 4 -0 -1 ABSENT: Chr. Austin POSTPONEMENTS OR NEW AGENDA ITEMS: Item 4: Application 11 -U -93 and 10 -EA -93 - Fit & Healthy Spa Continued to the Planning Commission Meeting of December 13, 1993. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: - None ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: Ms. Lydia Beall, 22437 St. Andrews, stated she is here representing a majority of residents on St. Andrews. She noted they are asking the Planning Commission to revisit the interpretation of the Ordinance regarding impervious coverage and parking in the front yard. Ms. Beall presented photos reviewing the property owner who completely covered his yard with concrete and noted this disrupts the continuity of the street. Mr. Cowan stated there is a conflict in the Ordinance and this will be on the agenda on December 13, 1993. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of November 22 , 1993 Page 2 CONSENT CALENDAR: 1. Cancellation of December 27, 1993 Planning Commission Meeting. MOTION: Com. Roberts moved to approve the consent calendar. SECOND: Com. Doyle VOTE: Passed 4 -0 -1 ABSENT: Chr. Austin ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW: 2. Application No(s): 2- ASA -93 Applicant: Gerald Kawamoto, MPA Design Property Owner: Hewlett Packard Co. Location: Wolfe and Homestead Roads Review landscape plan for perimeter along Wolfe and Homestead Roads. Com. Mahoney stated he will abstain from this item as he is an employee of Hewlett Packard. Staff Presentation: Mr. Bob Cowan, Director of Community Development, presented the staff report noting this is the replacement of landscaping lost in the freeze of 1989. He stated the landscaping will be more efficient and drought tolerant. He stated the landscaping will also screen the parking lot. Mr. Gerald Kawamoto, Hewlett Packard, presented an aerial of the site outlining the landscaping proposed. He stated the landscaping will screen the fence and the parking lot and drought tolerant plants will be added. Com. Doyle questioned #13 on the Landscape Architect Compliance Statement? Mr. Kawamoto stated this was a response from the irrigation consultant. Planner Robillard stated, what he interpreted from this response was, that it does not matter if the requirements were met for the precipitation rates, because it would not protect the landscaping from run -off. Mr. Cowan stated they have to maintain a water budget requirement and staff will work out the correct wording. In response to Com. Bautista's question, Mr. Kawamoto stated they have no intentions of removing or adding any ash trees. MOTION: Com. Bautista moved to approve 2- ASA -93 subject to the PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of November 22 , 1993 Page 3 findings and subconclusions of the hearing. SECOND: Com. Roberts VOTE: Passed 3 -1 -1 ABSTAIN: Com. Mahoney ABSENT: Chr. Austin 3. Application No(s): 4- ASA -93 Applicant: Victor Mandella Property Owner: Victor M:andella Location: 20128 Stevens Creek Boulevard Paint selection for an existing restaurant. Staff Presentation: Planner Robillard presented the staff report noting the Adobe Inn /Lounge was painted without approval. He stated after notifying the applicant an application was filed. He stated staff looked at this project and asked if it had not been painted, should these colors be approved? Staff determined that these colors would not have been approved and recommends that the applicant choose new colors. He noted the green color is not used extensively, but the body color is not acceptable. Com. Bautista stated this building_ now blends in with the Townhomes in the area. Mr. Cowan stated the question is, is the color chosen for the building sympathetic with the natural adobe materials? He noted there has been controversy in the community regarding these colors. Planner Robillard stated staff's position is that the main body color is out of character and the green color used is minimal. Com. Roberts stated he would support staff's recommendation. Com. Bautista stated colors are regulated and property owners should comply and follow the correct procedures, he would support staff's recommendation. Com. Bautista asked what the next step is if the applicant does not comply with the City? Planner Robillard stated staff will work with the applicant and give a certain number of days to comply. If the applicant does not comply civil charges can be filed. Com. Doyle stated that property owners should adhere to City codes. MOTION: Com. Roberts moved to deny application 4- ASA -93 as recommended by staff. SECOND: Com. Doyle VOTE: Passed 3 -1 -1 ABSTAIN: Com. Bautista ABSENT: Chr. Austin PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of November 22 , 1993 Page 4 NEW BUSINESS: 5. Application 3- ASA -93 - Sign Designs, Inc.: Appeal of Director's decision to deny sign program in accordance with Section 17.24.020 of the Municipal Code. Staff Presentation: Planner Robillard presented the staff report noting that prior to adopting the new sign ordinance, ASAC reviewed and denied this sign request because the red color is incompatible with the red brick facade of the building. He noted the action was appealed to the City Council, who upheld ASAC's decision. He stated once the new sign ordinance was adopted the applicant resubmitted his application and staff found the proposed signs were incompatible with the building and other signs in the center. Application Presentation: Mr. Thom Bingham, Sign Design, Inc. reviewed the sign proposed noting they are proposing a white background with red and blue letters. He added this is Pepsico's new trademark for new colors and pointed out that a registered trademark is protected by Federal law. Mr. Bingham stated the sign proposed is smaller than existing. The Commissioners discussed the lettering and the coloring, Mr. Bingham stated Pepsico dictate this. Com. Bautista suggested a white background on the ground sign and white /ivory lettering on the building sign. Mr. Bingham stated Pepsico would have objection to this. In response to Com. Mahoney's question, Mr. Bingham stated the letters and logo are flush into the brick. He also noted other tenants have the ivory signs on the brick. Mr. Cowan stated if the trademark issue drives the decision of the Commission they may want to hear the City Attorney's opinion before making a decision. Planner Robillard stated even if the sign came in with a white background the sign would still be incompatible with the sign program for the building. Com. Bautista stated there is a strong case for the white lettering on the building and the ground sign compatible with the trademark desires. He stated the Commission should consider the architectural conformity of the other tenants. In response to Com. Doyle's question, Planner Robillard stated ASAC denied the sign because they considered the red colors on the building conflicted with the brick color. They also stated the red on the monument sign should be the same red used by other tenants. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of November 22 , 1993 Page 5 Com. Roberts stated he would l:Lke to see color displays when considering applications such as this and would support continuing this application at this time. Com. Doyle spoke in support of Com. Bautista's suggestion. The Commissioners discussed the trademark and if it protects colors? Com. Mahoney stated they do have some control over the sign, regardless of the trademark. Andy Swords, representing Harman Management, stated if there are other red signs within the City, why limit the color if chosen for their identity. He stated there are only three tenants in this building and they are asking the main tenant, and owner of the building, to conform to the smaller tenants. He stated times change and the new direction for KFC is changing too. He stated the colors are advertised and promoted as part of their trademark and are just as important as other parts of their logo. Mr. Swords stated in other communities were this is presented the major concern is size and not color. He stated they would like to resolve this at this time. In response to Com. Bautista's question, Planner Robillard stated there are approved red signs throughout the City. Com. Bautista stated he does not. want Cupertino to be viewed as being unfriendly to business and the applicant made a compelling argument for him to change his mind. He stated this is a corporate wide logo, and he does not want to impose burdens. MOTION: Com. Bautista moved to approve 3- ASA -93 as proposed by the applicant. SECOND: Com. Roberts VOTE: Denied 2 -2 -1 NOES: Com. Mahoney, Com. Doyle ABSENT: Chr. Austin Com. Doyle stated there is a sign program in place and this should be adhered to. Com. Bautista stated that most ma=jor companies signs are reasonable and does not believe this will be a blight on the City. He believes the most significant concern is the size of the sign. MOTION: Com. Bautista moved to approve 3- ASA -93 subject to the building sign being wh ::te or ivory letters and the blue and red colors on the monument sign to staff's approval. SECOND: Com. Roberts VOTE: Passed 4 -0 -1 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting of November 22 , 1993 Page 6 VOTE: Passed 4 -0 -1 ABSENT: Chr. Austin 6. Selection of new Environmental Review Committee representative. Vice Chair Mahoney suggested selecting an interim ERC representative as a new Commissioner will be on the Commission in January and Chr. Austin is absent at this hearing. Chr. Mahoney volunteered to serve on the ERC until the end of January. REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION: - None REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: - None DISCUSSION OF NEWSPAPER CLIPPINGS: - None ADJOURNMENT: Having concluded business, the Planning Commission adjourned at 8:00 P.M. to the next Regular Meeting of December 13, 1993 at 6:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, • Cat erine M. Ro.i ar., Recording Secretary Approved by the Planning Commission at the Regular Meeting of December 13, 1993 Donna Austin, Chairwoman Attest: /-n Kim Smith, City Clerk