HomeMy WebLinkAboutASAC Minutes 02-20-1975CITY OF CUPERTINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino
Telephone: 252-4505
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE
APPROVAL COMI4ITTEE HELD ON FEBRUARY 20, 1975, IN THE COUNCIL
CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA
SALUTE TO THE FLAG
The meeting was opened at 7:12 p.m. by Chairwoman Sallan with the
Salute to the flag.
ROLL CALL
Members present:
Members absent:
Staff present:
Dressler, Koenitzer, Rogers, Weinstein (7:26)
Chairwoman Sallan
None
Assistant Planner Toby Kramer
INFORMAL REVIEW OF PLANNED DEVELOPMENT USE PERMIT APPLICATION: None
UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
The Assistant Planner answered Member Dressler that the Urich sign
was approved as submitted, but that live landscaping was required.
In relationship to this application, Chairwoman Sallan inquired if
there had been correspondence between Mr. Brower and the City; if
so, she would appreciate receiving copies of same.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Page 4, paragraph 5, first line should read "...that the colors were
those of.....".
Page 4, paragraph 2, line 2 should read "...plants once a week when
they pick up the papers and other trash".
On line 3 of same paragraph, delete the word "also" between "He" and
"pointed".
Member Koenitzer moved, seconded by Member Dressler, to approve the
Minutes of February 6, 1975 as corrected.
Motion carried, 3-0-1
Abstain: Sallan
HC -132
Page 1
Minutes of
2/6/75
approved as
corrected
,[C-132
Page 2 MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 20, 1975 H -CONTROL MEETING
POSTPONEMENTS: None
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: None
ORAL COII�1UNICATIONS : None
Chairwoman Sallan announced that no item would be initiated after
11:30 p.m.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
HC -51,075.40
Regional
Shopping
Center
1. Application HC -51,075.40 - Vallco Regional Shopping Center
requesting approval of the landscaping and lighting plan and
the modification of site and architecture for the portion of
the shopping center on the western side of Wolfe Road north
of Sears.
Staff report: The Assistant Planner noted the modification in site,
architecture and landscaping will be on the western side of Wolfe
Road only; any decisions made on the western side with regard to
overall landscaping and lighting will of course apply to the eastern
side.
With regard to improvements to be made on Sears site, the applicant
is not prepared at this time to present plans that have been agreed
to by both parties. Lighting exhibits have not been prepared either
so both of these items will be presented at a later date.
Member Koenitzer said it was hard to find lighting when it was
included in the landscaping. He would like drawings or plans marked
with the lighting. The Assistant Planner said there would be draw-
ings showing light patterns,making them easy to find.
Assistant Planner Kramer referred to Exhibit C-7, showing the modifi-
cation proposed at the western parking lot adjacent to the mall area.
The access to the perimeter road has been closed off so the perimeter
road does not feed into the parking lot at the northeast corner of
the lot. This isolates the lot and makes for a better circulation
of traffic on the perimeter road.
The Assistant Planner also referred to the proposal for a perimeter
road at the Portal Plaza and Sears driveway. Although agreements
have not been reached between the three parties involved, the committee
could review the proposal to give the developers input as to what would
be acceptable for the landscaping adjacent to the proposed bank.
Chairwoman Sallan asked for a copy of the resolution of approval
on the bank. Ms. Kramer said that staff felt since negotiations
were not finishe , this could e considered a er. Chairwoman- ttn
MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 20, 1975 H -CONTROL MEETING
said she wanted to be sure the resolution spoke to Sears' landscap-
ing being done. Ms. Kramer read the conditions on the ASAC resolu-
tion and the Council resolution. Chairwoman Sallan noted she did
not want to approve something until this criteria had been satisfied
Mr. Walter Ward, General Manager of Vallco Park, explained a tenta-
tive plan had been submitted to Sears and they were close to a
conclusion of negotiations with Sears including landscaping of
parking lot on two sides. Vallco will do landscaping on Sears
property. It can be a contingency of this review tonight. It
was his understanding a revised and complete plan would be pre-
sented on the 6th and the Sears landscaping and entrance of
Portal Plaza on the 20th of March. He felt it was inopportune
at this time since the negotiations were not completed.
With regard to site modification, Member Koenitzer said he had no
objection to modification itself but wondered what traffic control
provision was being made at intersection of perimeter road and
Vallco Parkway. Member Weinstein asked to have the traffic flow
explained.
Mr. Ralph Butterfield and Mr. Ward explained the various traffic
patterns. Mr. Painter said there would be a three way stop sign
at Vallco Parkway and the perimeter road.
Mr. Ralph Butterfield explained the reason for closing access was
to provide more of a pedestrian motif. Mr. Painter explained how
it would be for pedestrian safety and convenience. Member Dressler
asked about removing road entirely. Mr. Butterfield said it was
an internal road and explained its use.
Member Rogers asked to have bike paths traced. Mr. Painter did so,
noting bike parking areas were conveniently located at entrances to
shops.
Member Dressler asked about putting a barrier at both parking lots,
forcing traffic to go to perimeter roads. Mr. Butterfield explained
people should be able to circulate within the secondary system.
Mr. Ward said that Sears was insistent that area be kept open and
explained why. Ms. Kramer said the circulation system had undergone
serious consideration and the Traffic Engineer felt this modifica-
tion was better.
Member Dressler said he was in favor of closing off and forcing
existing traffic to use perimeter road. Chairwoman Sallan said
taking people in cars from front area was an interesting idea
and worth considering. Mr. Butterfield pointed out there are
existing Sears roads, light systems, etc. This whole internal
and onsite circulation system had had close scrutiny from the City
and Vallco Park Traffic Engineers and this is felt to be the
ultimate answer. Final grading permit was based on this solution.
HC -132
Page 3
HC -132
Page 4
Architecture
MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 20, 1975 H -CONTROL MEETING
Mr. Ward pointed out where the greenhouse and nursery would be
placed for Member Rogers.
Chairwoman Sallan summarized that the feedback essentially was
negative in closing off any other piece of road. Mr. Ward agreed.
ft
Mr. Butterfield explained the differences in west elevation and the
present proposal, using drawings of original and proposed plans.
He explained the skylight system. Slides were shown of models
which had been made in New York. Mr. Painter explained what trees
would be used in the different indoor landscaped areas.
Member Weinstein questioned the necessity of having extra height in
skylight area. Mr. Butterfield explained the need for directing
sun rays and allowing room for trees to grow. Member Weinstein said
a better solution would be to lower everything, not make the sky
lights higher.
Mr. Ward said the elevation drawings are misleading. The skylights
are set back 140 ft. The lighting engineer has stated this will be
one of the lowest cost energy -wise centers in the country because
direct sunlight is screened out by this method. This method also
fits the tree situation best. Mr. Ward said it was difficult to
look at external drawings and relate internal quality without
models.
Member Koenitzer said it was 15 ft. from floor to ceiling in store
with 4 ft. thick roof structure. 2 in. baffles could be used if
they were placed close enough together. Mr. Butterfield said the
8 ft. baffles will let the sky be seen.
Member Weinstein referred to the view of roof from future high rise
buildings. He has nothing against the concept but felt the same
thing could be accomplished without going higher.
Chairwoman Sallan ascertained they are talking about an actual
difference of 4 ft. Member Weinstein said the difference is that
before it was glass and now it is concrete, giving it a much more
massive appearance.
The angle of vision was discussed.
Member Rogers said she felt the applicants had tried to speak to the
different aspects and she had no problem with it.
In answer to Member Weinstein, Mr. Painter explained what trees
would be used that would grow to 25 ft. Mr. Painter said the trees
will cost as much as $2500.00 a piece and will be full grown when
they are put in. They will be in raised planters, adding additional
height.
MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 20, 1975 ii -CONTROL MEETING
Member Koenitzer said he was amazed to see proposals for additional
height in light of the committee's comments on original proposal.
He felt the "egg crates" looked like left over battle ship turrets.
They did not fit in with linear planes of rest of the building and
he did not feel they needed to be that high.
In answer to Member Dressler, Mr. Butterfield used models to show
changes being proposed.
Member Rogers noted the sky light structure affected many aspects
of the mall. She wondered if some change could be made to keep it
from looking so massive. Mr. Butterfield said he was not sure how
they could; perhaps the sides could be planed off. He reiterated ii
was a long way back into center of roof area. He reminded the
committee these areas were the result of their trying to initiate
innovative outside landscaping into inside of building. He also
pointed out they are more than 400 ft. from Stevens Creek Boulevard
and from other streets.
Mr. Ward said it was unfair to judge so severely from elevation
drawings. He had seen the working model and wished they had slides
showing exterior of model. Chairwoman Sallan suggested perhaps it
would be better to wait until this perspective could be presented.
Member Koenitzer said he was very much concerned with the radical
change in architectural style between rest of building and the
skylights. Chairwoman Sallan said this was her concern also.
She said she could handle the height if this was necessary for the
landscaping but would like to see the interior working model as
mentioned by Mr. Ward. She suggested continuing this portion of the
application. Member Weinstein concurred.
Mr. Butterfield then explained the other architectural modification:
being proposed which involved the main entrances -to the mall area.
He pointed out the three entrances on the models.
Member Koenitzer said the south entrance next to Sears was an
improvement. Of the two next to Bullock's, particularly the one
to the west, he would like to see something in the structure to
come more closely to matching Bullock's. It doesn't harmonize
with the linear architecture of the project or the specific
architecture of Bullock's entrances. The sky light on the north
side does not fit in with the previous architectural plan.
Member Rogers asked if were possible to redesign so it didn't have
a "tacked on" appearance. Mr. Butterfield said it takes something
breaking that line to call attention to the entry. This was dis-
cussed with several changes being suggested.
A recess was taken at 9:00 p.m. with the meeting reconvening at
9:13 p.m.
HC -132
Page 5
IIC-132 I MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 20, 1975 II -CONTROL MEETING
Page 6
Chairwoman Sallan reviewed the committee's concern with the
angularity of the skylights at entrances. Mr. Butterfield said
they would come back with further proposals. He then turned the
presentation over to Mr. Painter to present the landscaping portion.
Mr. Painter explained intent to get more attractive and broader
entrances to shopping center mall area and stores and to create
people spaces outdoors in the sunshine. He described an entrance
area.
Chairwoman Sallan expressed her concern about the scarcity of green-
ery in area by Sears. Mr. Painter explained the space was not as
large as it appeared. The landscaping of the courtyard is also a
part of this area., There will be large trees in area below walk-
way.
Chairwoman Sallan asked Mr. Painter to explain landscaping in
relationship to visibility of cars in parking areas. Member Rogers
asked him to speak to public safety in relationship to dense land-
scaping. Mr. Painter explained section drawing, noting it will not
be a thicket of shrubs, but there will not be a view into parking
area from autos on Wolfe Road.
The committee agreed that retaining wall at terrace to Bullock's
north entrance should be made of redwood or railroad ties.
Mr. Painter explained the coarser textured aggregate was for trim
and would not be walked on. He assured Member Rogers there would
not be any loose aggregate.
Mr. Painter- explained the parking area planting.
Member Rogers asked Mr. Painter about availability of seating in
front of Bullock's. Mr. Painter said some benches could be added
to the open area. There would also be bicycle parking at entrances.
Member Rogers asked if some roses could be included in the plantings.
Mr. Painter noted no other center has as much greenery in relationship
to concrete as this one. He then explained the fountain area. The
fountains will be softly lighted at night. Member Koenitzer mentioned
the possibility of pranksters adding soap to fountain; Mr. Painter
explained use of cobblestone slope would preclude this.
Member Rogers asked to have the truck circulation explained. She also
ascertained there will be sidewalks on both sides of Wolfe Road.
MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 20, 1975 H -CONTROL MEETING
Mr. Painter referred to treatment of Vallco Parkway underneath the
building. There will be a cobbled mound with pockets on back sides
for trees which will be rotated with other potted plants. Trees
will have to be rotated approximately twice a year. Chairwoman
Sallan pointed out this would need to be monitored.
Member Rogers questioned supports in underground parking. Mr.
Butterfield said they would be concrete columns with each column
having a cluster of up -lights at about 9 ft. The columns will be
quite far apart.
Member Dressler ascertained the building wall surface will be
brick and the roof of the tunnel will be concrete ribbed with
plaster sofat on bridge portion.
Mr. Painter said there would be benches at bus stop areas. Mr.
Butterfield explained provisions for mass transit if and when it
becomes available.
Mr. Painter pointed out there will be a broad area of planting
along chain link fence when exit from 280 is modified. Mr. Ward
answered Member Roger's concern about safety by advising there
will probably be TV security. He noted a worse problem was the
basement parking. Chairwoman Sallan ascertained enough access
would be provided for security vehicles.
Chairwoman Sallan asked Member Rogers to communicate to Public
Safety Commission that it might be well to study the question of
landscaping and visibility in relationship to security.
The Assistant Planner said the Engineering Department had asked
who would take care of landscaping in median, particularly at
fountains. Mr. Ward said they would maintain the fountains; the
median landscaping would be the responsibility of the City.
Member Weinstein said he thought the applicant had made a real
attempt on outside areas and he felt the landscaping was superb.
Mr. Painter answered Chairwoman Sallan that the columns of trellises
are concrete and the top is wood. If the columns were wood, it would)
look rustic and foreign to rest of the center. The concrete will be
of warm tone.
The hearing was then opened to comments from the public. There
were none.
Member Rogers moved, seconded by Member Koenitzer, to close Public
Hearings.
Motion carried, 5-0
HC -132
Page 7
Public Hear-
ings closed
HC -132
MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 20, 1.975 H -CONTROL MEETING
Page 8
Member Dressler felt the whole thing should be continued until the
Sears application was tied into it. There was 70% of landscaping,
it didn't have the lighting, it was adjoining Sears and since there
was an indication they would have Sears soon, he would prefer to
wait.
A discussion followed. Ms. Kramer advised them that approving this
would be saying the landscaping on east side should be the same.
Public Hear
The hearing was reopened.
ing reopened
Mr. Ward said they needed the modification of site and basic
concept of landscaping approved so they could go on to irrigation
drawings because of Bullock's time schedule. Member Dressler
reiterated his concern of potential problems. Mr. Ward assured the
committee the exterior landscaping of Sears would be comparable.
Public Hear-
Member Dressler moved, seconded by Member Rogers, to reclose Public
ing closed
Hearing.
Motion carried, 5-0
HC -51,075.40
Member Koenitzer moved to recommend approval of the following portions
Portions
of Application HC -51,075.40, namely the modification to site and
approved
landscaping for the western part of the project north of Sears with
the following special condition:
(1) That when the landscaping for Sears and for the eastern
part of the project comes before us., we may or the
applicant may at that time reopen discussion of this
landscaping.
Seconded by Member Rogers.
Member Rogers amended motion that approval for concept of landscaping
would be approval of Exhibits as shown and to include any agreement
reached in conversation tonight between applicant and the committee.
Seconded by Member Koenitzer.
VOTE ON AMENDMENT:
AYES: Members Koenitzer, Rogers, Weinstein, Chairwoman Sallan
NOES: Member Dressler
Amendment carried, 4-1
MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 20, 1975 H -CONTROL MEETING
VOTE ON MOTION:
AYES: Members Koenitzer, Rogers, Weinstein, Chairwoman Sallan
NOES: Member Dressler
Motion carried, 4-1
The applicant was advised of the partial approval of his application
This would be heard by the City Council on March 3, 1975.
Member Weinstein commented that putting in 30 ft. light poles would
detract from the excellent landscaping. Adding more poles and lower-
ing them would give equivalent light and a more aesthetic appearance.
Mr. Ward said he would relay these comments to their lighting
engineer.
The Assistant Planner then referred to the Portal Plaza and Sears
area. Staff would like to have the committee's feelings as to
whether the proposed approach was an acceptable way to go.
Ms. Kramer then reported that Vallco Park had been discussing this
with Sears although no agreement had been reached. She displayed
three plans: (1) existing, (2) approved under bank application,
and (3) proposed. She noted that Sears and Portal Plaza were both
notified of the meeting tonight but neither were present. The
committee was asked to give input before further negotiations.
Mr. Ward then explained the situation as it now stood. He said
Sears had been disturbed by the second plan as it had been settled
without consulting them and it was affecting their property. This
plan wiped out a row of parking that was needed at their automotive
center. Mr. Ward said they would be meeting with Portal Plaza
representatives Tuesday to discuss the third plan. He felt it was
premature to be discussing it tonight since nothing had been
concluded, but he did feel that Sears had a point that plan should
not have been approved without their having been contacted.
Member Koenitzer ascertained the road between Sears and Portal Plaza
is four lanes wide. He was sure the center divider would be nice
but in view of space situation, he was not sure it had to be
expanded that much. Ms. Kramer was not sure just why it was
divided but said part of it could be for circulation and emphasis
as entrance to the center at that point. The possible division of
footage for landscaping, bike path and parking Was discussed.
Mr. Painter explained the proposed landscaping on plan 3.
Mr. Ward explained Sears position. With the center line being moved
18 ft. easterly, they will be going from 52 to 38 parking spaces at
the automotive center.
HC -132
Page 9
HC -132
Page 10
MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 20, 1975 H -CONTROL MEETING
Member Weinstein asked if it was necessary to have two lanes turning
right; perhaps it could b,e a three lane road. This was discussed.
Ms. Kramer said they could recommend traffic engineer look into the
possibility of three lanes.
Chairwoman Sallan noted this is a critical area and this was an
absolutely minimal landscaping approach..
After further discussion, Mr. Ward said he felt it was out of order
to discuss this tonight without Portal Plaza being represented.
Chairwoman Sallan said there should be 20 ft. of landscaping and
they should work out some way this might happen. Mr. Ward said
because of canted angle, he wanted clarification of 20 ft. The
consensus was there should be 20 ft. on easterly portion of bank
building.
Mr. Ward said staff had told him this was not to be discussed
tonight and he was not prepared to do so.
NEW BUSINESS
2. Discussion of Grasscrete
The Assistant Planner reported this product would be on the market
in March. The cost would be approximately $1.75 sq. ft. compared
to 70Q for concrete and 10for grass.
Member Weinstein said he was opposed to plastic. Also he thought
it would cut down on landscaping with the builders claiming it as
landscaping.
Chairwoman Sallan said she had seen it and it looks like grass.
She said if the committee would like to try it, this could be
passed along to the -City Council. She noted the committee would
have to list reasons why. they think it is a reasonable approach.
Associate Planner Cowan noted one thing to be considered was
water quality. One of the biggest problems in water quality
control is run off from parking lots.
Member Koenitzer ascertained the lot in Los Angeles had been in
place since October. It might be better to wait and see how it
makes it through the winter. Member Rogers agreed.
MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 20, 1975 1 1 -CONTROL MEETING
Member Dressler suggested the City of Cupertino run a test area.
The east side of Memorial Park parking lot was suggested as a
possible site. ills. Kramer said she would check and report back
to the committee.
3. Discussion of Tree Ordinance. - Continued
4. Discussion of a Landscaping Maintenance Program. -- Continued
INFORMAL REVIEW OF PLANNED DEVELOPMENT USE PERMIT APPLICATION:
Mr. Cowan presented a modification of the May Investment plan.
The committee felt it was still too dense and not enough open
space between units. There was a lack of continuity of open
space and the individual units do not have through access to it.
It is not a single family and not a cluster. There is too much
concrete.
ADJOURNMENT
At 11:47 p.m. Member Dressler moved to adjourn to the next regular
meeting on March 6, 1975 at 7:00 p.m. Seconded by Member Weinstein.
ATTEST:
/s/ Wm. E. Ryder
City Clerk
Motion carried, 5-0
APPROVED:
/s/ C. Nancy Sallan
Chairwoman
F
HC -132
Page 11