Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutASAC Minutes 03-20-1974CITY OF CUPERTINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino Telephone: 252-4505 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE APPROVAL COMMITTEE OF MARCH 20, 1974, HELD IN THE LIBRARY CONFERENCE ROOM, CITY HALL, CUPERTINO CALIFORNIA SALUTE TO THE FLAG The meeting was opened at 7:35 p.m. by Vice -Chairman Sallan with the Salute to the Flag. ROLL CALL Members present: Dressler, Koenitzer, Weinstein, Vice -Chairman Sallan Members absent: McLaren Staff present: Associate Planner Cowan APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Minutes of March 6, 1974 On page 2, paragraph 3, Member Koenitzer said the first word in the second line should be "responsibilities". He also wished the word "responsibilities" added after "lapping" in the third line. On page 6, paragraph 2, Member Dressler pointed out the following should be added. "The consensus of the H -Control committee was to go along with section 7.2 as per City Council recommendation in the hopes that this would be a satisfactory solution to the aesthetic overlapping responsibilities of Planning Commission and H -Control." There being no further corrections, Member Koenitzer moved, seconded by Member Dressler, to approve the Minutes of March 6, 1974, as amended. Motion carried, 4-0 POSTPONEMENTS The Associate Planner advised the committee that Mr. Myers had requested Application HC -51,259.81, item 1 on agenda, be postponed HC -103 Page 1 Minutes of 3/6/74 approve as amended HC -103 Page 2 HC -51,259.81 Edwin J. Myers - post poned as per applicant's request Portal Plaza Shopping Center sign program - postponed MINUTES OF THE MARCH 20,1974 H -CONTROL MEETING for two weeks to allow him to prepare new design for the bank building. Member Koenitzer so moved, seconded by Member Dre3sler. Motion carried, 4-0 A discussion ensued regarding landscaping on the site. Vice - Chairman Sallan pointed out the committee is concerned about entire site and landscaping on periphery is crucial. The Associate Planner said the City Attorney had said if the committee felt: the site could not function the service station could be forced to landscape. It was a judgmental consideration H -Control must make; must evaluate in terms of adequacy. Member Koenitzer noted the service station is a separate parcel and while he would like to get as much landscaping as possible, this would have to be cin- sidered. The Associate Planner was asked to write a letter to the applicant giving him the opinion of the committee that this applicatio_i would be looked at in terms of the entire site, including th:3 service station. A copy of the letter was to go to the owner. The Associate Planner then noted that in view of postponement of item 1, item 2 on the agenda would also be postponed. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: None ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. Application HC -51,259.81 of Edwin J. Myers requestin-, approval of site and architecture for a proposed bank facility located in the Portal Plaza Shopping Center at the northeast corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and Portal Avenue. Continued from H -Control meeting of March 6, 1974. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: 2. Discussion of sign program for the Portal Plaza Shopping Centar. The Associate Planner said that in view of Application HC -51,259.81 postponement, discussion of sign program for the center should be postponed also. The committee agreed. MINUTES OF THE MARCH 2O,. 1974 H -CONTROL MEETING 3. Application HC -51,318.1 requesting modification of Condition 5, relative to the Fisherman's Village Restaurant parking lot. Staff report. The Associate Planner read Condition 5: "That concrete berms shall be installed around all parking areas completely enclosing all landscaped areas except where they abut a building." He said there had evidently been a misunderstanding and the applicant had used a series of concrete bumper stops rather than the extruded concrete curb. The applicant had elected to come to H -Control for modification. Although the staff was not happy with existing treatment, in view of the loose wording of the condition, there might be a compromise with front portion in view of public being redone. Slides were shown of the treatment of the site in question and treatment in similar projects throughout the city. Mr. R. Vanderyacht of the Bay Parking Lot of bumper was not used with the intent of He had used heavy-duty bumpers spiked int, much sturdier than poured concrete berm. pointed out that the concrete curb serves the cars from going into landscaped areas aesthetics. Service said'.this type getting around rules. asphalt. They are The Associate Planner two purposes; it keeps and adds to the Member Koenitzer noted there was nothing to keep cars from straddling two spaces, going past bumper guard and driving over plants. Member Weinstein said he could not see how this condition could be misconstrued, noting there had not been any misunderstanding by many other developers. Mr. Chris Foundas,manager of Fisherman's Village, said he was representing the tenant and asked to see the overall plan. It was displayed. He said the staff should have had somebody on site checking the job before it was done. If there is a fault it was because the contractor failed to follow diagram. It is between the contractor and person who owns the property. If it is on diagram, the contractor must answer to why it wasn't done. Vice -Chairman Sallan told the applicant that whenever the H-Contro approved an application, it is with standard conditions plus any other conditions. If the standard conditions were included in the motion it becomes difficult to say any one of the standard conditions can be omitted. Mr.Foundas repeated it is the owner and the contractor who should be explaining why it wasn't done. HC -103 Page 3 HC -51,318.1 Fisherman's Village i3C-103 MINUTES OF THE MARCH 20, 1974 H -CONTROL MEETING Page 4 Vice -Chairman Sallan asked staff to clarify. The Associate Planner said it was approved with standard conditions. The applicant offered to continue around landscaped areas with same material. He did not want to pull anything out. Member Weinstein said his concern was Stevens Creek Boulevard. He would be willing to go along with upgrading with extruded berm for any view of Stevens Creek and adding additional concrete berming to protect plants in other areas. Member Koenitzer also felt the standard condition should not have been misconstrued. He would not object if bumper stops were extended to abut together to enclose landscaped areas. Member Dressler said the plan shows concrete berm all around land- scaping and wondered why the plan had been deviated from. The Associate Planner pointed out that normally that detail is not put on site plans. Mr. Vanderyacht said this was not his responsi- bility. Vice -Chairman Sallan pointed out it was conceivable an error had been made, noting the applicant has said if the committee wants concrete berm they are willing to do this. She pointed out that standard conditions could be enforced if the committee wished to do so, or they could waive it if they wished. The consensus seemed to be the committee wanted some type of berming. Mr.Foundas said the contractor should give reason why this was not done. Mr. Cowan said he had talked with the general contractor. There seemed to be an argument between the contractor and the sub- contractor. Member Weinstein said it was not up to H -Control to say who was right or wrong; the committee is saying what should be. Mr.Foundas objected to the city not having checked sooner. Mr. Cowan explained the procedure used in inspection of projects. He also pointed out the city had allowed the restaurant to open without parking lot being completed because they had pleaded a hardship. There is a $5,000.00 bond being held by the city. Member Weinstein said he would be able to live with situation as it is with the exception of planting area fronting on Stevens Creek Boulevard which gets most of public exposure. There is a difference in aesthetics between extruded concrete and 4' or 6' berms even though they are very well built and installed. He would be willing to compromise to that extent. MINUTES OF THE MARCH .20, 1974 H -CONTROL MEETING Member Koenitzer said he felt it was necessary to enclose entirely with concrete berm, but he would be willing to accept use of abutted concrete bumper stops as berm if it was continued all way around landscaped areas. Member Dressler said he would prefer to see the poured concrete curb like intent of condition. Vice -Chairman Sallan said she would like to see all the landscaped areas enclosed. She asked if concrete bumper used as berm might not be expensive. She suggested the applicant might want to select less costly of two alternatives. Mr. Foundas said they are a night-time operation and spoke of damage caused by cars bumping into berming. He said he would like to see something permanent that wouldn't be cracked or knocked down by cars. Vice -Chairman Sallan noted this was a Public Hearing and asked for comments from the audience. There were none. Member Koenitzer moved, seconded by Member Weinstein, to close Public Hearings. Motion carried, 4-0 Member Koenitzer moved to approve Minute Order requiring applicant to install continuous berm around all landscaped areas and use of abutted bumper stops as berm would be satisfactory. The motion died for lack of a second. Member Weinstein moved to recommend a Minute Order that landscaped areas fronting Stevens Creek Boulevard be surrounded with continu- ous concrete berm of poured concrete in the spirit of Condition 5. Spirit being that without exception every project in Cupertino hasl put a continuous concrete berm and that remaining portion of land- scaped areas on side be also surrounded but that the4' 6' bumper type berm could be used for surrounding these area. In addition that the bumper strips already in place for parking areas remain there so that bumpers surrounding landscaping are further protected from automobiles, particularly at night. Seconded by Vice -Chairman Sallan. AYES: Members Dressler, Weinstein, Vice -Chairman Sallan NOES: Member Koenitzer Motion carried, 3-1 HC -103 Page 5 Public Hearin closed MINUTE ORDER HC -103 Page 6 H -Control Rules and Ordinance Carefree Wash and Dry Bob's Big Boy Signing and Lighting; MINUTES OF THE MARCH 20, 1974 H -CONTROL MEETING Vice -Chairman Sallan ascertained the applicant understood the intent of the Minute Order. A recess was called at 8:45 p.m. with the meeting reconvening at 8:55 p.m. Noting it had been brought out in discussion with the Planning Commission that the H -Control Rules and Ordinance were not in conformance, Member Koenitzer asked to have a copy of the Rules for next meeting. Vice -Chairman Sallan asked staff to check with the Assistant City Attorney to determine what changes should be considered. The Associate Planner referred to staff memo regarding the sign on the Carefree Wash and Dry. He pointed out there had been no exhibit, but the discussion relative to the placing of the sign indicated the committee wanted the sign placed against the build- ing. No condition to this effect was included in the resolution however. The committee agreed this had been their intent and it was their recollection that the applicant had agreed. Staff was to check and to send a letter advising Carefree Wash and Dry of the committee's understanding. The staff memo reported that the lighting for the building was approved :in Resolution No. 235. The lighting for the parking lot was -approved at a later date. No condition was included in Resolution No. 235 relating to light intensity for the wall lights. Member Weinstein thought there was a provision in approval for inspection after installation. After research, The Associate Planner said the resolution approving pole lights had included this inspection. Staff was asked to write a letter to applicant requesting lighting of a lesser intensity. Member Koenitzer reported the spot lights in the shrubbery were very intense also. After discussion, it was the committee's feeling these spot lights had not been included in application. Staff was to check this. The sign was also discussed. The sign is the same colors as approved. It was noted that exact samples of materials would be beneficial in preventing tais sort of situation. Member Weinstein pointed out the lighting inside the sign might be brighter than intended and lesser bulbs could be requested. MINUTES OF THE MARCH 20, 1974 H -CONTROL MEETING Member Koenitzer said as part of sign ordinance revision, experts on measuring lighting intensity should be consulted so the committee could come up with standards and maximum intensity to put in ordinance. Member Dressler said they should always be subject to review and inspection as part of each approval. The staff was asked to request Bob's Big Boy to reduce the intensity of brightness in the sign also. Vice -Chairman Sallan thanked the staff for their written review of items requested from March 6, 1974 meeting. 4. Discussion of Sign Ordinance The Associate Planner referred to staff memo on sampling of signs in Cupertino. Member Koenitzer pointed out two errors in ratio column. The Associate Planner said the staff was working on finding out how many signs in the City are non -conforming. Member -Weinstein said the revised January 22, 1974 proposal was acceptable but it lacked definition of precisely what areas were being dealt with. He proposed the committee agree on a slope or equation that gives square footage for sign, agree on date for hearing and who will attend meeting. Member Koenitzer said it was his understanding that the Planning Commission had asked them to talk to people from the sign industry and businessmen who might be affected by changes in ordinance. He suggested talking to technically cognizant people to get viewpoint of sign industry, and then holding public hearing for businessmen and general public. Vice -Chairman Sallan suggested giving copies of ordinance to sign company representatives and asking them if good signs could be designed to conform to these ordinances. This would provide additional rationale to present to businessmen and public. She noted the City Council would want to know the committee had done everything possible in being open and getting expert information. After further discussion, it was agreed to set April 4, 1974 as date for meeting with technical people, and April 17 or 18 for public hearing. Member Koenitzer asked that a copy of his memo of January 3, 1974 be given the technical representatives prior to the meeting. He said this gave his philosophy and background for proposed ordinance. HC -103 Page 7 UC-103 J MINUTES OF THE MARCH 20, 1974 11 -CONTROL MEETING Page S Member Weinstein said his problem with the proposed revision carne down to section 7.021. They had talked about a minimum of 20' and a proposed maximum of 135'. The problem is the ll�% line low end has almost every sign in city as non -conforming. He gave his equation which would make the low end signs conforming. He suggested changing section 7.021 to establish a different curve and 7.022 to give a different maximum square foot area. Member Weinstein's equation was adopted. Vices -Chairman Sallan said the question also was is the committee comfortable with an ordinance that would put many signs into the non -conforming category. She pointed out there would be considerable resistance and the committee must have rationale to support proposal. The reasons for their choices of numbers should be documented. She suggested the committee members should bring to next meeting their reasoning for the slope to start at 20' and end at 120' and of aesthetics in regard to signing, taking into account the role of advertising, if any. After discussion, it was agreed 7.021. The area to be allowed etc. was discussed. NEW BUSINESS to eliminate a and b of section service stations, used.car lots, The Associate Planner said Mr. Coleman will be prepared with drawings for the committee to look at within the next few weeks on the conceptual plan of Highway 9, Stevens Creek Boulevard, Bandley Drive, Alves Drive, etc. Member Koenitzer pointed out there were stacks of boxes against fence and dumpster sitting against fence in back of Measurex and Nitron on McClellan Road. Dumpster should be housed in enclosure. Staff was to check on this. Further discussion was held on getting copies of Rules and Regulations for possible revision to bring into conformance with ordinance.. Vice -Chairman Sallan asked that a copy of Planning Commissioner Gatto's merio on Planned Development ordinance be distributed to the committee. djournment I ADJOURNMENT At 10:45 p.m. Member Koenitzer moved to adjourn the meeting to the next regularly scheduled meeting. Member i•7einstein seconded the motion. ATTEST: Motion carried, 4-0 APPRQVED:_ . . 1s/. C Nancy Sallan Vice -Chairman ! _ LL Wm. E. Ryder City Clerk. -