Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutASAC Minutes 04-17-1974CITV OF CUPERTINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA HC -106 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino Page 1 Telephone: 252-4505 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE APPROVAL C0.14ITTEE HELD ON APRIL 17, 1974 IN THE COUNCIL CHAIIBERS, CITY HALL, CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA SALUTE TO THE FLAG The meeting was opened at 7:38 p.m. by Vice -Chairman Sallan with the Salute to the Flag. ROLL CALL Members present: Koenitzer, Weinstein, Vice -Chairman Sallan Members absent: Dressler Staff present: Associate Planner Robert Cowan Senior Planning Technician Toby Kramer. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Minutes of regular meeting of April 3, 1974 Member Koenitzer noted that on page 3, paragraph 3, the third ling, "residence" should be chanced to "lot". On page 4, last paragraph, the last sentence should read '...which is about 10' to 20' high and doesn't....". Member Koenitzer wished the minutes to show lie had left the meeting during the discussion on page 13 and returned during discussion on pave 1.5. On page 16, condition (3), line 3, the last word should be parallel. Vice -Chairman Sallan noted on page 9 and 10, the word "meeting" should be replaced with "hearing". On page 11, paragraph 7, the word "long" should be replaced with "wide". On page 15, paragraph 8, the fourth line should read "planted wit plants of similar. heighth. She pointed out.....". d HC -106 Page 2 Minutes of 4/3/74 approv as corrected Minutes of 4/4/74 approved as amended Sign Ordinan Amendment MINUTES OF THE APRIL 17, 1974 H -CONTROL MEETING Member Koenitzer moved, seconded by Member Weinstein, to accept minutes of April 3, 1974, as corrected. Motion carried, 3-0 Minutes of adjourned meeting of April 4, 1974 On page 5, paragraph 7, Member Koenitzer noted the fourth line should read "...30 letters 12" high 500' away....." Member Koenitzer moved, seconded by Member Weinstein, to approve minutes of April 4, 1974 as amended. Motion carried, 3-0 POSTPONEMENTS - None WRITTEN COMMON I CAT IONS The Associate Planner referred to a letter received from Fay Jones, president of Cupertino Chamber of Commerce, requesting postponement of public hearings on proposed revisions to the sign ordinance for at least a one month period. Mr. Jones had been advised this was not the only hearing that would be held on this matter. Mr. Cowan noted a letter received regarding Ralph's Market's temporary sign. The committee agreed to discuss this under New Business. The Associate Planner said the City Council had had first reading of new PD ordinance which provides for ASAC review prior to Planning Commission review for use permit. An application has been filed for a restaurant at 1280 and Highway 9. He planned to review this tonight- to see how new process would work. This was placed under New Business also. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Amendment to Sign Ordinance Vice -Chairman Sallan set a time frame of 9:00 p.m. for discussion of sign ordinance. At this time the hearing would be continued. to next regularly scheduled meeting and thereafter until all public input had beer.. heard. MINUTES OF THE APRIL 17, 1974 H -CONTROL MEETING The fifth draft of sign ordinance amendment dated March 27, 1974 was distributed to members of the audience. Vice —Chairman Sallan then made several preliminary comments noting the last ordinance revision was in 1967. Since that time there have been changes in aesthetics. It is reasonable at this time to update ordinance; this to be in two stages. The first stage is the fifth draft which is being presented not as a concrete statement but as a starting point. This covers areas that have proved troublesome. The committee has singled out major concerns to address first. This is not an interim ordinance. After this first stage is resolved, the remainder of ordinance will be considered. She then turned the discussion over to staff. The Senior Planning Technician went through amended sections briefly explaining changes being proposed. A graph was dis- played and explained. Slides were shown of signs that meet new criteria and add to aesthetics of the City. Slides of signs that would be non -conforming were also shown. It was noted the City would like uniformity to signs in a center. Vice -Chairman Sallan then opened the hearing for comments from the audience. Mr. Walter Ward, General Manager of Vallco Park, then introduced; a letter which he would be filing with the City and distributed material covered in his letter. The letter contained comments on present and/or proposed sign criteria under several cate- gories. Mr. Ward felt the sign ordinance should specifically cover developments such as Vallco Park and West Valley Industrial Park. He felt political signs should not be in City. There should be consideration given to projects that are multi -tenant. Signs should not be too low: ground water rots them, cars parked in front hide them and they are subject to vandalism. It is necessary to have construction signs but these should be controlled. There should be adequate signs for leasing. Mr. Ward commented on signs for major thought it would be unwise to require fied. Size of letters should relate ordinance should be flexible enough t of any regulatory commission or body. shopping centers. He all tenants to be identi- to bulk of building. The o allow for requirements HC -106 Page 3 r. II C-106 MINUTES OF THE APRIL 17, 1.974 H -CONTROL MEETING Page 4 Member Koenitzer noted entrance signs are not being changed at this time. The committee's concern is with sign size and how it is to be determined. Member Koenitzer said his basic comment on small indication of services was that they are not readable at more than 20 mph. Most streets have limits of 30 mph or 40 mph. Anything less than 10 'or 12' high will not be seen in time. He would like to find some basis in fact for selecting maximum sign size. This must be specific in ordinance. Vice -Chairman Sallan asked for clarification from staff on change of copy. Ms. Kramer said this was usually left up to discretion of staff. If sign still conformed it would be approved, otherwise it would be brought back to committee. Member Weinstein commented if entire City had sign plan similar to Vallco Park, they would not be considering new ordinance now. He questioned one sign and alternatives were discussed. Mr. Ward explained process under which signs in Vallco Park are considered. He noted signs should be aesthetic but also large enough to help public. Mr. Frank P. Mulkern, 20800 Homestead, Cupertino, representing Chamber of Commerce, asked to have letter from Chamber of Commerce read as part of record. This was done. He said this was to show their reasons for requesting delay. He noted many in the audience were looking at proposed changes for first time. They needed time to study proposed revisions to provide meaningful input. Mr. Mulkern asked that information be provided news media as public service announcement. Changes on proposed revision might be more _acceptable if they were aware that a committee of their own fellow businessmen had had input in final ordinance. Vice -Chairman Sallan pointed out this is the very first meeting of many. Between now and next meeting there would be additional publicity. Mr. Mulkern emphasized wish of Chamber of Commerce to give input. Mr. Carl Heymann, California Electrical Sign Association, asked if the City of Cupertino is prepared to compensate the businesses that will be affected by the amendments of this ordinance. Vice - Chairman Sallan ascertained that by compensate, Mr. Heymann meant dollars and cents. The Associate Planner said the normal procedure would be to establish an abatement period; a very normal technique used by cities. Mr. Heymann said they were talking about something that might be subjective and unreasonable and have a direct bearing on the businesses' economics without due reason and regard for existing sign. A radical rather than a reasonable change based strictly on aesthetics. He noted again this could be a legal question. MINUTES OF THE APRIL 17, 1974 H -CONTROL MEETING Vice -Chairman Sallan suggested perhaps this should be submitted to the City Attorney. The only thing covering this would be the abatement period. She asked Mr. Heymann if he felt Section 511. 2 on page 1 was in line with other ordinances or if it was too restrictive. Mr. Heymann said it was in line with other ordinances but he felt it was only for the removal of clutter. Vice -Chairman Sallan asked if this would mitigate the "sudden" or "drastic" effect. Mr. Heymann said in listening to comments from the business community he had the impression there was quite a bit of discrimination and irrelevant.: caprice in sanctioning some of the businesses that would be affected. Member Wein, correlating Mr. Heymann established right to be out to give problem. 3tein asked if there was any way quantitatively of a failure of a business with a change in sign. said yes. This was a legal matter and had been in court. Each business would have to prove its compensated. Mr. Heymann said he was bringing this the committee food for thought: on this coming In answer to Member Koenitzer, Mr. Heymann said the Association was willing to give technical input with regard to determination of height and size of sign to the staff. He informed Vice - Chairman Sallan that he had brought guidelines by CESA and would leave them with staff. At 9:05 p.m. Member Koenitzer moved to continue Public Hearing on sign ordinance revision to next meeting. Vice -Chairman Sallan recognized Mr. Ron Shenkman who said he was not addressing sign ordinance per se. He was a former City Councilman in Fountain Valley. He complimented the committee for continuing public hearings and getting input of Chamber of Commerce. He spoke of Fountain Valley's ordinance, noting they had retained aesthetic approach but still not made some businesses suffer. He suggested the committee contact Mr. James Neal, City Manager, 10200 Slater Avenue, Fountain Valley, California, and ask for a copy of their sign ordinance. Member Weinstein said he hoped staff would get ordinances from Fountain Valley and Sacramento. He then seconded the motion to continue discussion to next regular meeting' as noted by Vice -Chairwoman Sallan. HC -106 Page 5 U HC -106 Page 6 Sign Ordinance revision con- tinued to 5/22/74 HC -51,259.81 Edwin J. Myers Portal Plaza J MINUTES OF THE APRIL 17, 1974 H -CONTROL MEETING Member Weinstein said he would not be in town for the next meeting of May 8, 1974 and since Member Dressler was in the hospital there would perhaps not be the necessary quorum of three members present. After discussion it was decided to continue the hearings on the sign ordinance until May 22, 1974 to insure there would be five members. Member Koenitzer moved, seconded by Member Weinstein to continue hearings to May 22, 1974. Motion carried, 3-0 Member Koenitzer asked that sign ordinance be requested from Carmel, California and Santa Barbara, California. At 9:12 p.m. the meeting was .:_djourned for a recess, reconvening at 9:28 p.m. 2. Application.HC-51,259.81 of Edwin J. Myers requesting 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 April 3, 1974 meeting. Staff report: The Associate Planner pointed to former plan which was not satisfactory because of circulation problems. He pointed to site plan revision which alleviated this problem and provided a better on site situation. He referred to access point to Stevens Creek Boulevard which would expand landscaping area between Sears and Portal Plaza. Minimum landscaping should be extended westerly to service station driveway apron. Mr. Cowan referred to new architectural plan being submitted. There had been a question whether bank building should relate to Sears or Portal Plaza center. A discussion was held as to how the plan related to the two with regard to materials and colors. Slides were shown of the site and adjacent areas. The 12' of landscaping on Portal Avenue was discussed. Landscap- ing would extend from fire plug to the rear of property. Slides were shown of front of stores and present landscaping. Member Koenitzer noted the importance of seeing proposed signs along with building plans. The committee needs to see sign with site and architecture in future applications. Vice -Chairman Sallan agreed, suggesting applicants bring along preliminary sign program to show how it will work with building. MINUTES OF THE APRIL 17, 1974 H -CONTROL MEETING Mr. Edwin J. Myers, 10101 S. Highway 9, Cupertino, explained traffic flow in answer to a request from Member Weinstein. Member Weinstein noted it was a definite improvement. Member Koenitzer said it answered the objections he had raised to previous scheme. Vice -Chairman Sallan asked if Mr. Myers had given any thought to integrating walkways in shopping center. Mr. Myers said if he had a new site, this could be a potential but because of increased parking requirements it would be difficult to do on this site. Vice -Chairman Sallan asked him to consider it before going to City Council. Mr. Myers said he did not have the necessary inches to work with, much less feet. In answer to Member Koenitzer, Mr. Myers said that by ordinance provision is included for handicapped persons. Vice -Chairman Sallan referred to staff's recommendation for continuation of landscaping to ingress point of service station. Mr. Myers said this would be on Standard Oil property. The Associate Planner pointed out the property is owned by Mr. Yamamoto, and leased by Standard Oil. The staff is suggesting another 8' or 9' of landscaping to round off frontage. Mr. Myers said with approval of tenant they would make every effort to see this is done. He hoped this wouldn't be required officially since he could not offer Standard Oil approval. Vice -Chairman Sallan pointed out that while the service station is separately leased, for purposes of total planning it is not isolated in fact. She is concerned with this area and does want it to be treated as a part of the center. She added that on Portal side, the only section not being landscaped in entire center is that section of service station. She did not think it was arbitrary to say it is reasonable to make entire shopping center aesthetically compatible by landscaping this area. It is vital aesthetically to the entire center. It is evident from slides that on Stevens Creek frontage there is no room between sidewalk and pump for landscaping. But the continuation to the apron on Stevens Creek and the insertion of landscaping strip the same as on Lumberjack facility makes the whole site look outstanding. Mr. Myers said the Standard Oil lease expires in three years. He did not think Standard Oil would renew lease without doing landscaping. Hopefully it could be done before, but definitely in three years when lease expires. Vice -Chairman Sallan noted her preference for having it done now as opposed to later. HC -106 Page 7 IIC -106 Page 8 Architecture Public Hear- ing closed HC -51,259.81 approved w/ conditions MINUTES OF THE APRIL 17, 1974 H -CONTROL MEETING Vice -Chairman Sallan pointed out the need for a tree well behind the bank. Mr. Myers said the revised plan was more in keeping with thoughts he had heard from the committee. He explained the design, noting he had tried to tie in with both areas, using tile that went with Sears and color that went with Portal Plaza. Member Weinstein said this was an improvement over first design of the bank building. He asked for description of windows. Mr. Myers said the windows are solar bronze; they face south and need the colored glass control for that purpose. Member Koenitzer ascertained the canopy would be cream colored. It was noted that parking is allowed now on Stevens Creek Boulevard but in the future might be restriped for eight lanes of traffic. Mr. Myers pointed out main entrances and oriented elevations on the site plan. He answered Vice -Chairman Sallan that the side facing Sears would be heavily landscaped. Mr. Myers referred to staff's recommendation that owner be required t.o sign a blank check to improve some road widening. He did not feelthis was fair. The Associate Planner explained there were tentative plans for potential street and landscaping modification but in no case would the owner of Portal Plaza be required to landscape off his property. After discussion, the Associate Planner noted a suitable guarantee could be bonding rather than cash. This would be 1% of construction cost. This was agreeable with Mr. Myers. Vice -Chairman Sallan asked for comments from the audience. There were none. Member Koenitzer moved, seconded by Member Weinstein, to close Public Hearings. Motion carried, 3-O Member Weinstein moved to approve Application HC -51,259.81 subject to standard conditions and following specific conditions: (1) Landscape planter on Stevens Creek Boulevard be extended to the easterlymost driveway approach to the service station. (2) A bond or other vehicle or mechanism subject to the approval of staff be posted or otherwise agreed by such as when or if shopping center is approved and MINUTES OF THE APRIL 17, 1974 H -CONTROL MEETING the necessity arises for a large driveway to be placed there so that a large gap in the concrete would exist that Portal Plaza would be required to landscape that area not to exceed their property line. (3) That a tree will be added northerly of bank itself. (4) That the landscaping on Portal Street side would include the service station area. Seconded by Member Koenitzer. Vice -Chairman Sallan noted the intent of the last condition was for landscaping to be the same as landscaping strip already approved. AYES: Members Koenitzer, Weinstein, Vice -Chairman Sallan NOES: None Motion carried, 3-0 Vice -Chairman Sallan notified Mr. Myers the application had been approved and would be heard by City Council on May 6, 1974. 3. Application HC -51,259.8 of Edwin J. Myers requesting approval of lighting for the Lumberjack facility located at the northeast corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and Portal Avenue in the Portal Plaza Shopping Center. Staff report: The Associate Planner referred to diagram of outdoor retail area describing light pattern from lighting fixtures being proposed. Member Weinstein asked Mr. Myers if it would be possible to demonstrate that despite low illumination residences will not be bothered by line of sight to 20' poles. Mr. Myers referred to lighting in Crossroads Center. Fixture has eyelid so that light will not be seen at property line even when it is on. He suggested review after installation. Vice -Chairman Sallan asked for commnnts from the audience. There were none. Member Koenitzer moved, seconded by Member Weinstein, to close Public Hearing. Motion carried, 3-0 HC -106 Page 9 HC -51,259.8 Edwin J. Myers Lumberj ack Public Hearin; closed IIC-106 Page 10 HC -51,259.8 approved w/ conditions HC -51,259.82 Lumberjack MINUTES OF THE APRIL 17, 1974 H -CONTROL MEETING Member Koenitzer moved to recommend approval to the City Council of application HC -51,259.8 with standard conditions, Exhibits E, E-1, E-2, E-3, E-4 and E-5, and with the additional condition that the lights be subject to review by the Architectural and Site Approval Committee upon installation to ensure that the intensity of illumination does not cause a nuisance to the adjoining single- family homes and that the light source is not visible from those homes. Seconded by Member Weinstein. Motion carried, 3-0 Vice -Chairman Sallan informed the applicant of approval and it would be heard by the City Council at its May 6, 1974 meeting. 4. Application HC -51,259.82 of Lumberjack's True -Value Home Center requesting approval of a sign plan for a commercial building located at 19765 Stevens Creek Boulevard in the Portal Plaza Shopping Center. Staff report: The Associate Planner noted the total sign area is approximately 330 sq. ft. The signing consists of wall sign on wood parapet and change of copy for existing pole sign on property. There are limitations as to what can be done with existing pole sign. The only review for pole sign is design of change of copy. The sign on fascia is approximately 153 sq. ft. and the pole sign is approximately 175 sq. ft. The concern is relationship of this particular sign plan to the overall sign plan of Portal Plaza Shopping Center. ASAC had approved sign plan for smaller shops in the center. The sign was located on top of canopy in a sign can supported by short legs. The intent was to require new tenants to adhere to an overall sign plan as change in tenants occurred. Mr. Cowan referred to colored renderings of signs on board. Member Weinstein asked to see slides of Azuma Restaurant sign. In answer to Vice -Chairman Sallan, Ms. Kramer said this plan had been approved in March of 1972. The City has had trouble with people putting in signs without permits. Letters have been sent and the staff is waiting for responses to them. Vice -Chairman Sallan noted it doesn't make much sense to make overall plans and have people install signs without approval. Slides were shown of existing pole sign. MINUTES OF THE APRIL 17, 1974 H -CONTROL MEETING In response to Member Weinstein, the Associate Planner clarified that the structure is safe. Sign area is matter for review by committee on pole sign. Reader board cannot be disallowed. The staff would like to see a Minute Order adopted which would reflect approved plan. Mr. Jerry Pettibone, 15 Joies Way, Santa Cruz, said his company had designed sign. They were not aware of criteria for canopy section of shopping center. This particular building is quite a bit higher. Mr. Pettibone said they had used the individual letters as they would be less glaring. If entire background were lighted, sign would look much larger. Oval True Value is trade- mark. Signs could be furnished but the tenant changed colors to blend in with overall scheme of building. Member Weinstein asked why the letters had to be 3' high. Mr. Pettibone said this was a good size for building setback., The tenant had wanted signs on two other elevations. Member Weinsteir said the sign was aesthetically pleasing. Also the pole sign ever thought it is quite high. He has not been happy with fluctuating reader boards. It cheapens what is a good looking sign. The onl} problem is size of sign being proposed. He felt it could be cut down and still fit in with size of parapet. Member Koenitzer said he would like to saw the top off the pole sign and he does not care for reader boards. His major complaint on building sign is that it is too busy. He would like to see simplification by-elirninating some of wording. Mr. Pettibone sai( the True Value is legal dba filed with. the State... Vice -Chairman Sallan noted these are subjective type areas, but she did not feel True Value was necessary, did not care for circles, change in letter style and felt the Home Center was not needed. Her other concern was coloring. She is sceptical about approving colors on paper. Mr. Pettibone said the background is almost a black. He had samples of letters. The letters are illuminated, but the colors are similar both day and night. Mr. Lyle Schafer, sales manager for Santa Cruz Lumber, said they had used logo True Value which is a national franchise name. They had been requested to use it. Member Koenitzer said he felt the ground sign with True Value gave satisfactory exposure. HC -106 Page 11 HC -106 MINUTES OF THE APRIL 17, 1974 H -CONTROL MEETING Page 12 A discussion was held on the concept of individual letters versus letters in cans as on rest of shopping center. Mr. Pettibone commented the lighting was more subdued with individual letters and the difference in the height of the building would be break enough so that it would not upset the aesthetic balance. He displayed samples of letters being proposed. They will be of neon tubing. After discussion, the committee agreed on the individual letters. Vice -Chairman Sallan asked if sign could be a 3' x 30' configura- tion as opposed to 3' x 51'. Mr. Pettibone said if the True Value were eliminated, this could cut out approximately 11 ft. Vice -Chairman Sallan asked if letters could be 2-1/2' high. Mr. Pettibone said if it were a lower building he would agree, but on the higher building the 3' letters would not appear too large. The hearing was opened to comments from the audience. Mr. Carl Heymann, C.E.S.A., said he had witnessed something he had never seen before. Even though it conforms to legalities of exist- ing ordinance, it is being discussed whether or not it can be allowed. What criteria are they using? What about the businessman who has to expose name? What about visibility of driver from behind windshield? Why is the legislation being opposed on the businessman based on subjective, arbitrary decisions by this committee? There is nothing written down, there is no criteria being followed. He wanted to know what basis, what conclusions, what legal rights this committee had to pick apart something as arbitrary and capricious as this. Vice -Chairman Sallan said these questions were ones the committee members had long wrestled with. Member Weinstein said the ASAC is living with ordinance which they feel is outdated. They are trying to give the business community precisely the points he had made. After further discussion, Vice - Chairman Sallan noted it was the responsibility in the last analysis of the City Council to decide whether advice and recommenda- tions of ASAC are consistent with original intent of ordinance. The committee is trying to make them less arbitrary in new ordinance. Member Weinstein asked if applicant wanted sign denied, continued or would he like to horse -trade. Vice -Chairman Sallan explained to applicant the committee's feelings were to remove the logo making the sign less in length and the possibility of reducing size of letters. Mr. Pettibone suggested eliminating True Value on wall sign and using smaller letters, but the spacing of letters should be left to their discretion. Anything smaller than 30" letters at that setback would not be adequate. MINUTES OF THE APRIL 17, 1974 H -CONTROL MEETING Member Weinstein moved to close Public Hearings. Seconded by Member Koenitzer. Motion carried, 3-0 Member Weinstein moved to approve application HC -51,259.82 subject to standard conditions and with the following additional conditions: (1) That the ground sign be approved as per Exhibit F. (2) That the wall sign be approved with following exception; ..True Value logo be removed. ..Lumberjack letters be reduced to 30' maximum. ..Home Center be retained and reduced proportionately to those of Lumberjack ..The color 2016 is acceptable. Seconded by Member Koenitzer. AYES: Members Koenitzer, Weinstein, Vice -Chairman Sallan NOES: None Motion carried, 3-0 It was noted the application had been approved and would be heard before the City Council on May 6, 1974. MINUTE ORDER Vice -Chairman Sallan noted she would like intent shown that the committee is not interested in dramatic changes in colors, letters and intensity. Member Koenitzer recommended a Minute Order to incorporate the following: That the sign program for the smaller tenants of Portal Plaza Shopping Center be 2'6" x 13' on size in a black sign can with a white sign face. The colors of the letters and logo can fluctuate with each tenant subject to the approval of staff. The prototype to this sign is the sign for the Azuma Restaurant. Seconded by Member Weinstein. Motion carried, 3-0 HC -106 Page 13 Public Hearing closed HC -106 Page 14 HC -51,331.2 Firmino J. Michelis MINUTES OF THE APRIL 17, 1974 H -CONTROL MEETING 5. Application HC -51,331.2 of Firmino J. Michelis requesting approval of site, architecture, landscaping and grading for two duplex units located at the south side of Rodrigues between Blaney Avenue and Torre Avenue. Staff report: The Associate Planner said there are two properties involved situated across from Biltmore Apartments on Rodrigues. There may have to be some adjustment of the fence to get area for rear yard of one unit. The landscaping on board represented - plan for both units. Grading is satisfactory. Vice -Chairman Sallan asked how many trees would be removed. Mr. John Gatto, architect, said there are six trees on the two proper- ties. Five are in the building area but there is the possibility that one apple tree could be saved. All the trees are old and in bad condition as area has been vacant for several years. These trees are not aesthetically worth saving. Mr. Gatto explained architecture of two duplexes. One is of Spanish motif and the other of a more traditional design. In answer to Member Koenitzer, Mr. Gatto explained stripe between garage doors was wall between the two units. There is wood siding on elevation A. Standard house colors will be used. Member Koenitzer said the antique gold is all right if it tends toward the brown side. Mr. Gatto noted he had picked up the discrepency on site and the building had been moved over 2'. With regard to landscaping, Vice -Chairman Sallan ascertained the entire site would be surrounded by redwood fence up to front of units similar to R-1 type approach. She thought something taller than juniper could be used on the side. Mr. Gatto explained when the two units come together that group will form a large clump. He had introduced planting strip in middle of driveway with higher plantings, preferring this to be the division of property lines. Mr. Gatto said the junipers are a hardy plant that fares well and is attractive. He would rather have free flowing look •of junipers than cropped appearance of box hedge. Vice -Chairman Sallan questioned removal of trees, saying she would like to see some kind of replacement; a certain percentage of trees being replaced. She noted they are proposing two flowering deciduous trees of 15 -gallon size. Mr. Gatto pointed out this will be a replacement of 4 trees in kind in front. Additional trees will be planted in back. One advantage of a duplex is being able to plant backyard. He said there is a row of trees on property line. The fence will be installed as part of this project. MINUTES OF THE APRIL 17, 1974 H -CONTROL MEETING Mr. Gatto noted that trees to be removed would probably not last another six. months anyway. Vice -Chairman Sallan asked for comments from the audience. There were none. Member Koenitzer moved, seconded by Member Weinstein, to close Public Hearings. Motion carried, 3-0 Member Weinstein said he would like the minutes to show in this case there is a duplex and this application gave them very litt trouble. The main reason is that it is a duplex and not a triplex in an area that is principally single level homes. He referred to application on Alpine Drive. Member Koenitzer noted there were special conditions on Alpine with extensive changes in elevations which aren't present here. A discussion followed. The Associate Planner noted the planning commission does look at surrounding land use. He explained zoning conditions. Member Koenitzer moved to recommend approval of application HC -51,331.2 to the City Council with standard conditions, Exhibits A, B, B -1, and C and with the additional condition that every reasonable effort be made to save as many of existing trees as possible. Seconded by Member Weinstein. Motion carried, 3-0 At 11:30 p.m., a five minute break was called with the meeting reconvening at 11:35 p.m. 6. Application HC -51,334.1 of Mercury Savings requesting approval of site, architecture and landscaping for a bank facility located west of Calabazas Creek south on Stevens Creek Boulevard. Staff report: The Associate Planner referred to staff report indicating some problems with regard to flood control and amount of dedication they would need to be able to properly maintain Calabazas Creek. Plan reflects flood control requirements for future dedication of property. He pointed out area on east facing property line that the Flood District would like to maintain the creek. Flood Control was unsure of ability to provide some type of landscaping screen on that line. Mr. Cowan asked for a continuance on landscaping portion of plan to further study this point. HC -106 Page 15 Public Hearing closed HC -51,331.2 approved w/ condition HC -51,334.1 Mercury Savings HC -106 Page 16 MINUTES OF THE APRIL 17, 1974 11 -CONTROL MEETING Mr. Cowan said the tentative Flood Control plan is to construct an access road with concrete line channel. It would be helpful to get some relief on that property line. Vice -Chairman Sallan asked what would the proper mechanism be to handle this type of thing. Does the Flood Control design the landscaping? She had attended a conference where it was said that flood channels have potential in design. It doesn't have to be concrete channels. She would like to pursue that. The Associate Planner said Flood Control had adopted a policy several years ago if at all possible to develop modification or natural flood plain for creeks. Have limited options in this area. It will be some type of improvement project rather than natural situation. Would like to explore possibility of tree wells, etc. The Associate Planner then noted the revised plan had been modified to reflect correct placement of sidewalks. City Council and Planning Commission were interested in 50' setback area from curb on Stevens Creek Boulevard and Highway 9 if possible to create landscaping area and provide for future bike path at some point in future. He noted on Stevens Creek the properties are rather fragmented and there are very small parcels where it would be impossible in some cases to get 50' setbacks. The applicant has designed according to that policy and is proposing that corner project into that 50' area. It was noted that this proposal will be assessed only by the ASAC in terms of design review. Member Koenitzer referred to possibility of access to west in rear to provide communication between parking lots. He asked if any consideration had been given to provide access to east across the creek? Parcel to east has narrow fronting on Stevens Creek and widens out to a larger area in rear. His other question is with the revised requirements of FCD, is it possible to narrow road on east side of building and make it one way out to install additional planting along east side of building. There are no curb cuts so only right turn possible. Slides were shown of the area and site. The Associate Planner pointed out existing trees on bank of creek, noting if FCD puts in concrete channel these trees could not be saved. It was noted this applicant had been requested to agree to some reciprocal agreement so when property develops to the rear some type of internal driveway system be developed. Vice -Chairman Sallan felt the committee should address interface between the properties. She questioned need to wait for second property development rather than first. Mr. Cowan said the staff report suggested 2-1/2' of landscaped area on that side. The other side is much larger. MINUTES OF THE APRIL 17, 1974 H -CONTROL MEETING The Senior Planning Technician said the traffic engineer had made one suggestion for the parking. In order to make turning radius function, a portion should be cut off and additional parking be added. She illustrated this point on sits plan. Since they were unsure how it would work with Flood Control, it was suggested that portion of the property might he subject to review by the traffic engineer. Member Koenitzer suggested further investigation of narrowing driveway on east. Mr. Cowan pointed out median strip in front of property. His comment was if,they were trying to consolidate curb cuts on Stevens Creek Boulevard this driveway might be developed to reach property to east. Vice -Chairman Sallan questioned parking spaces. She noted 45 were required and plans called for 55. Relative to this use, what would be the necessary number. Mr. Cowan said for bank needs on Fridays, the ordinance doesn't provide enough parking spaces. After further discussion, Vice -Chairman Sallan noted that if site portion of application were not continued, it should he incorporated in motion that this would be covered at future time, Mr. Mel Kapson, 70812 Edgington, Huntingdon Beach, said Mercury Savings had been under some pressure to get colored rendering to committee. He described split face block as buff and the plaster as white. Mr. Ron Shenkman, Mercury Savings, distributed a letter from Long Beach. He noted they strived to build compatible with community needs. He addressed the parking situation noting it was always a plus to have a few extra parking spaces. He said they have a "Mercury Room" which is free of charge for community organizations to use. The company will be open on Saturdays so peak hours on Friday are cut down. He noted the cooperation from staff has been tremendous and expressed their appreciation. In answer to Vice -Chairman Sallan, Mr. Shenkman said this build- ing is typical of ones in southern California. The lobby will be the same, and exterior almost identical. It had been found to be attractive and functional. Member Weinstein asked about possibility of turning building. Mr. Kapson said it had been considered but was not practical. They would have to change their whole concept. He explained their operation. Member Weinstein said he could not see any alternative to two signs the way the building was laid out. HC -106 Page 17 Architecture HC -106 MINUTES OF THE APRIL 17, 1974 H -CONTROL MEETING Page 18 Vice -Chairman Sallan noted it was important to raise issue of sign even though it is not being considered at this time. Member Koenitzer asked the applicant if he felt there would be any problem in working with neighbors to east and west for common parking areas. Mr. Kapson responded that of six offices only one doesn't have a common parking agreement with its neighbor. It is to their advantage to have a mutual parking area. He expressed his willingness to cooperate fully in this respect. In answer to Vice -Chairman Sallan, Mr. Kapson said the modification to their site would consist of eliminating a few stalls for driveway; would require no structural modification. Vice -Chairman Sallan then raised the question of pedestrian access between adjoining properties. Mr. Kapson said it would depend on what adjoining development required; it was to their advantage to be accessible. Vice -Chairman Sallan asked if the 2-1/2' landscaping strip is the maximum space. Mr. Cowan said the parking was based on minimum City standards. In answer to Member Koenitzer, Mr. Kapson said if the parking were shifted, the building would have to be shifted to maintain backout space required. He noted they were speaking of a 400' long strip 2-1/2' wide of landscaping backed against a weeded lot. It would not be seen, it would be costly to maintain, and would have to be redeveloped with whatever is put in later. Mr. Kapson said they would rather coordinate with whatever is developed. They would commit themselves to whatever perimeters are necessary to coordinate with what is done adjoining them. with regard to creating a one way drive on easterly side of building, Mr. Kapson said a valid point had been raised by a member of the committee; the question of whether it would make sense to close westerly driveway after development to the west. What if development calls for driveway to be 400' to the west? They would be landlocked to the corner. They have to have the ability for customers to get to them. Member Koenitzer said then the west driveway would be retained. Vice -Chairman Sallan explained they would still have access. The committee submitted it should be the one closer to the center of the two properties. Mr. Kapson asked their architect to point out where they would close parking stalls. He did so, pointing out dangers that might be encountered. This was discussed. Member Koenitzer said if they were talking about narrowing driveway, more landscaping on east side of building should be discussed. MINUTES OF THE APRIL 17, 1974 H -CONTROL MEETING Member Weinstein said the committee doesn't know what will be developed or if road will extend further. Ile was not sure if there would be any visual impact from Stevens Creek Boulevard, especially with proper planter areas. The idea of losing park- ing area does not stack up well in this case. Vice -Chairman Sallan said there would be no problem with one-way traffic design. Mr. Kapson said he felt they could live with one-way traffic if the committee felt it does not create a safety hazard. On the question of an additional 5' of planter, if it is something the committee feels is so essential that it will be a requirement to open for business, they would do it. He felt it would be throwing money away to put a planter area where no one would see it unless they happened to drive back there. Member Koenitzer pointed out it would be seen from Finch Avenue across the vacant lot and when that property developed those people would be looking at it. Member Weinstein said there was substantial landscaping in front and the only condition should be that when future development occurs to the west and east, this area can be landscaped. Vice - Chairman Sallan agreed, noting the committee's concern is land- scaping around perimeter of building. The Associate Planner answered her question that there are no plans for adjoining lots at this time. Member Weinstein pointed out with flood control they might want to landscape closer to the creek. Vice -Chairman Sallan suggested continuing portion of landscaping along creek side in accordance with staff's recommendation. Member Koenitzer questioned why the little "dog house" on rear of building. Mr. Kapson said they were required to have exit from second story. It would require 20' of building to move under fascia and inside of building which would take over the employees' lounge. Member Koenitzer said that aesthetically it bothered him even though it was not that visual. It was noted there was a concern that no air conditioning or mechanical equipment on roof show above roof line of building. Mr. Kapson said fascia extended 6' above roof line and nothing would be seen. Mr. Kapson noted that time was of the essence. They needed a commitment tonight as option expires in May. Member Weinstein suggested acting on this landscaping and then ask them to come back with additional landscaping if it is necessary. HC -106 Page 19 Architecture Landscaping ;C -i06 Page 20 Public Hearing closed MINUTES OF THE APRIL 17, 1974 H -CONTROL MEETING Member Weinstein noted Maundo grass is used more in southern California. Mr. Kapson said here again they had been under pressure to present plans. He said their intention was to employ a local landscape architectural firm and whatever they recommended would be used. Vice-Chairman.Sallan said she had no problem with landscape design if rendering would relate to actual landscaping. Vice -Chairman Sallan said she would prefer to see 2-1/2' of land- scaping provided at this point of time in application. It does have visibility from Stevens Creek Boulevard and it would be maintained and would attract attention because it would look better than weeds. Mr. Kapson reiterated that this would leave 26' for backup rather than the 28' required. Member Koenitzer asked if the Water Department would have objections to having easement used as part of driveway. Mr. Cowan said they liked to have own maintenance road free and clear of any other use. It is fenced off. Member Koenitzer noted azaleas around building were shown as being 8' to 10' on center; should be 6' centers. Vice -Chairman Sallan said there could be more plants, particularly shrubs. This would make it look more luxurious. The hearing was then opened for comments from the audience. There were none. Member Koenitzer moved to close Public Hearings. Seconded by Member Weinstein. Motion carried, 3-0 Member Koenitzer moved to recommend approval of application HC -51,334.1 to City Council with standard conditions, Exhibits A, B, C, and the following additional conditions: (1) That the applicant/owner agree to participate in a reciprocal driveway and parking lot easement agreement with the neighboring property owner to the west so as to allow for the inter -connection of both properties into a planned circulation system. (2) That an additional 5' of landscaping he installed along southeast corner of building out to sidewalk. 5' to be taken from driveway changed to one way traffic going out to Stevens Creek Boulevard. MINUTES OF THE APRIL 17, 1974 H -CONTROL MEETING (3) Additional azaleas be planted around building so that they are on approximately 6' centers. (4) That when the property to the west develops the City shall have the ability to close one of the curb cuts on property. Seconded by Member Weinstein. Member Weinstein said with regard to the additional landscaping, $15,000 is being talked about. He thought it was unreasonable to incorporate in motion when everything is so uncertain. Member Weinstein then amended motion as follows: To avoid landscaping of southeast portion of building until it is better defined what use adjoining property will have and what status of Water Department easement will be and at that time to have a review of landscaping plan for that portion of project. Seconded by Vice -Chairman Sallan. It was clarified amendment was speaking to east side only. VOTE ON AMFNI)I ENT AYES: Member Weinstein, Vice -Chairman Sallan NOES: None ABSTAIN: Member Koenitzer Amendment passed, 2-0-1 VOTE ON MOTION AYES: Members Koenitzer, Weinstein, Vice -Chairman Sallan NOES: None Motion carried, 3-0 Vice -Chairman Sallan noted application had been approved and would be heard by City Council on May 6, 1974. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 7. Application HC -51,241.5 and HC -51,2.41.6 of De Anza Oaks requesting modification of the recreation area and landscaping for the condominium project located 1600 feet west of Foothill Expressway on Permanente Road. HC -106 Page 21 Amendment Amendment passed HC -51,334.1 approved w/ con di ti ons HC -106 MINUTES OF THE APRIL 17, 1974 H -CONTROL MEETING Page 22 Vice -Chairman Sallan prefaced the hearing by saying this is an interior mod ificaeionand has minimal effect on community per se. It is of extreme importance to residents. She would have been satisfied to have staff make decision. Member Weinstein said unless owners didn't agree with their elected group, he would suggest approving. The Associate Planner said the Planning Commission would be reviewing this application regarding driveway and circulation problems and parking area. Any motion made tonight would be contingent on approval at next Monday night's Planning Commission meeting. Member Koenitzer noted "total" lot in staff report should read "tot" lot. He remembered the pitch to City Council as being this was to be an adult oriented community and not one being oriented to children. Mr. Cowan said these were quite large units and both City Council and staff realized it would be a family project. The Senior Planning Technician gave a brief background and said since landscaping plan is being reviewed tonight, the tot lot should be shown and developer provide adequate equip- ment for it. The Associate Planner referred to staff report noting the original approval of the recreation area included a condi- tion that erosion control measures be taken for the hillside area that was graded. Staff felt a more natural type land- scaping could be approved, using same number of plants but using native type trees. The landscaping can be approved contingent on Monday night's decision. The hearing was then opened for comments from the audience. Mr. Bob Hardesty, Deane Company, said everything had been agreed. They were putting in tot lot. He was concerned about contingency. He gave a. rundown of events and said he was con- cerned about delay. Mr. Cowan explained they were talking of a 3 day delay. There have been so many changes that nobody knows what is built or where it is built. The new map will reflect site as it is built now. The Planning Commission could act on entire plan. Mr. Arthur Anderson, McBain & Associates, said if they didn't get approval Monday night, it could cause a delay of 3 months. They don't want it contingent on parking since it is not in that area. Home owners don't want it delayed. Mr. Cowan explained again that the Planning Commission would be reviewing the entire site plan. MINUTES OF THE APRIL 17, 1974 H -CONTROL MEETING Ms. Pam Hatch, DeAnza Oaks, said they had worked with Deane Co. for workable plans for DeAnza Oaks. She did not see why pool facility should be contingent on way rest of facility is going. Would like to encourage coininittee to accept plan as shown without contingency so it can be moved on now and not wait three days or longer. After further discussion, Vice -Chairman Sallan said perhaps the committee should not get these applications until everything has been approved. Member Koenitzer moved to close Public Hearings, seconded by Member Weinstein. Motion carried, 3-0 Member Weinstein moved to approve applications HC -51,241.5 and HC -51,241.6 in accordance with the proposed modification, Informational enclosures A -1, B --1, B-2, B-3 lot Rev, and the modification of landscaping as proposed by staff. Seconded by Member Koenitzer. Motion carried, 3-0 It was announced the application had been approved. NEW BUSINESS The Senior Planning Technician advised this was a request for a temporary sign of paper type banner across front of store and flags on poles. The period is from April 18 through May 17. The sign that had been placed in front had been removed. Mr. Richard Kester; 13046 Ten Oak Way, Saratoga, said first application is request for porta-panel. At last meeting it was asked to be removed because it had not been asked for. lie explained this had been put on lot without their requesting it. Since it was made up, they would like to display it. The other application is for banner type sign, 12' x 60', saying Ralph's Grand Opening. They would like banner to ,remain from April 29 to May 29. He indicated there would be circulars going out, andj request for a hot air balloon would be made. Member Koenitzer noted there would be a grand opening of Say -On coming up. Vice -Chairman Sallan said she would not be in favor of granting what was requested. Mr. Kester said the banner was requested for one month because people don't know what Ralph's is. He said they would like 3'x5' Welcome to Super Market over doors starting April 29 for two weeks. HC -106 Page 23 Public Hearin: closed HC -51,241.5 HC -51,241.6 approved Ralph's Market HC -106 Page 24 PD Application MINUTES OF THE APRIL 17, 1974 H -CONTROL MEETING Vice -Chairman Sallan ascertained the banner would be 4' x 60' of white canvas with black letters. After further discussion, Member Weinstein moved to approve one canvas sign, 4' x 60' reading "Ralph's Super Grand Opening Ralph's" and a 3' x 5' sign reading "Welcome to Super Market" over each door for the period of two weeks starting April 29. Seconded by Member Koenitzer. Motion carried, 3-0 Staff report: The Associate Planner said the Planning Commission at its last meeting had recommended approval of first PD applica- tion and rejoned to PD Mix based on General Plan. Application is for restaurant, low intensity commercial and rest light industrial. Use permit is for specific part of PD district. The Planning Commission said the setback should be 50' from curb or 40' from property line and further to orient building away from buffer area. The front setback is 40' instead of 50'. The freeway might be widened so there is a need for more setback. Member Koenitzer suggested that flipping building around would make more sense, but then service yard would end in front. Mr. Cowan said restaurant should be oriented towards freeway. Member Koenitzer said he could not buy orientation with entrances away from parking area. Vice -Chairman Sallan noted there should be ample areas left for landscaping in front. Highway 9 is major frontage and it makes sense to have more aesthetic treatment facing major street. Location of building on site was discussed further. Sign was discussed. Vice -Chairman Sallan said they should be providing for break-up of intervals of green giving buffering in parking area. She indicated on drawing. The whole parking lot should be landscaped. She liked the approach of providing landscaping down center. Pedestrian orientation for industrial tenants should be incorporated. It was discussed how many sidewalks would be needed. Member Weinstein said it was really not visible, so landscaping need not be so extensive. Member Koenitzer felt there should be 5' of landscaping along freeway property line. MINUTES OF THE APRIL 17, 1974 H -CONTROL MEETING Mr. Cowan asked how the committee would feel if the applicant said they. wished to switch building rather than modify archi- tecture. Member Weinstein suggested saying entrances should be from parking lot and let their architect worry about implementation. After further discussion, the following points were made: (1) 40' setback from property line (2) Enter from parking lot (3) Incorporate walkways (4) Parking lot landscaping (5) Concern that architectural theme in this building tie in with future adjoining use (6) Eliminate 4 front parking stalls and replace with landscaping It was the committee's feeling that this would set the theme for this block. Vice -Chairman Sallan said she would like the committee to begin developing guide lines along Highway 9 and Stevens Creek Boulevard. ADJOURNMENT At 2:20 a.m. a motion was made to adjourn the meeting to the next regular meeting date. Motion carried, 3-0 APPROVED: /s/C. Nancy Sallan Vice -Chairman ATTEST: /s/ Wm. E. Ryder City Clerk IIC-106 Page 25 I