Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutASAC Minutes 04-01-1976CITY OF CUPERTINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino , Calif. 95014 Telephone: 252-4505 MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE APPROVAL COMMITTEE HELD ON APRIL 1, 1976 IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA SALUTE TO THE FLAG The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Chairman Koenitzer with the Salute to the Flag. ROLL CALL Members present: Blaine, Irvine, Sallan (7:40), Chairman Koenitzez Members absent: Dressler Staff present: Assistant Planner Steve Piasecki Chairman Koenitzer announced this was a special meeting to hear two items only. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. Application HC -51,075.40 - Vallco Fashion Park requesting approval for modification of architecture relative to the southerly facing bay window structures on the Wolfe Road overcrossing. The request is to replace glass panels with steel panels on the roof element of said southerly facing bay windows. The shopping center is located easterly and westerly of Wolfe Road between Rt. 280 and Stevens Creek Boulevard. Assistant Planner Piasecki said there had been a misunderstanding in that Vallco felt when they received past approval for modification of skylights and entry canopies they had received approval for this modification. However the City's records did not indicate this. Mr. Walter Ward, General Manager, Vallco Park, showed slides from earlier hearings and then some taken of present construction. He said the modification was due to energy and heating problems. HC -161 Page 1 HC -51,075.40 Vallco Fashior Park HC -161 Page 2 PUBLIC HEAR- ING CLOSED MINUTES OF THE APRIL 1, 1976 SPECIAL H -CONTROL MEETING Mr. Ralph Butterfield, architect for Vallco Park, displayed a cross- section showing modification and explained the problem in more detail. He said the south facing sun was so fierce they could not get any kind of system to handle heat generated on this southerly exposure. He described how the modification would alleviate problem. He said they were not aware of any concern by the City until about a week ago. It was submitted this way on the working drawings and the building permit was issued on the basis of these drawings. He said the problem was a very severe one and they had solved it in the best way possible. Mr. Butterfield said they felt it carried out the intent of the design and when it was in place, it would be hard to tell that one was opague and one was glass. Member Blaine ascertained the glass on the vertical surface was solar- ized bronze and the metal was anodized bronze aluminum. On the northerly side it is glass on both surfaces. Member Blaine said the slides had indicated the glass would reflect whatever the sky was. Mr. Butterfield said he was not sure this was a fair representation of what the glass would appear to be. The metal would give a similar, but muted, reflection. Member Irvine said this was a good solution and one he had used himself. He ascertained it was a sheet aluminum with aluminum batten at 2 ft. on center and would be flat. Mr. Piasecki answered Member Sallan that this was not what the committee had approved based on the City's records. Committee and staff felt they were approving glass on both sides. Mr. Butterfield said they had gotten the building permit based on working drawings but he was not certain whether or not they had stated definitely how the problem would be handled before the working drawings were approved. Chairman Koenitzer noted he had expressed concern at prior hearing regarding reflection of sun into the eyes of drivers. He asked if a study had been done on this. Mr. Butterfield said he could not see that the sun would be reflecting down from the roof, it would reflect up. Chairman Koenitzer again asked to have the angle calculated to make sure that the sun would not reflect onto Wolfe Road or overpass traffic. Mr. Butterfield agreed. Chairman Koenitzer said he had been to the site and looked at both sides of the elevation. He felt it blended into building quite well. The meeting was then opened for public comments. There were none. Member Sallan moved to close Public Hearings. Seconded by Member Irvine. Motion carried, 4-0 MINUTES OF THE APRIL 1, 1976 SPECIAL H -CONTROL MEETING Member Sallan recommended that they approve modification on Applicatic HC -51,075.40 relative to the chage from the glass window structure to steel panels on the roof element of the southerly facing bay windows. The applicant is required at this time to show to the satisfaction of the City staff that the reflective metals they are going to be placin€ up there on the structure will not in any way provide a hazard to motorists or pedestrians that will be coming in either direction on the Wolfe Road, including the overpass. Seconded by Member Blaine. AYES: Members Blaine, Irvine, Sallan, Chairman Koenitzer NOES: None Motion carried, 4-0 Chairman Koenitzer announced this would be before the City Council on April 5, 1976. 2. Application HC -51,002.11 - Stephen Sanborn requesting approval for modification of architecture relative to the deletion of two northerly facing balconies and replace- ment of a shingle exterior siding with cedar plywood siding for a four (4) unit apartment building located on the north side of Alpine Drive approximately 100 feet east of Foothill Boulevard. Staff report: Mr. Piasecki noted the changes were self-explanatory and he would leave the explanation to the applicant. Mr. Stephen Sanborn, P. 0. Box 552, Los Altos, said changes made were due entirely to cost. He described the changes as exhibited in the drawings . Member Sallan ascertained there were still two balconies on the back. Member Blaine ascertained the neighbors had not been notified of this hearing. Mr. Piasecki pointed out they had been present at the meet- ing when the four balconies were approved. Mr. Sanborn answered Member Blaine the landscaping would remain the same. Member Blaine wondered if the landscaping plan would be adequate in relation to changed texture of building and smaller windows. HC -161 Page 3 HC -51,075 .40 approved w/ condition HC -51,002.11 Stephen Sanborn -161 Lge 4 iblic Hear- ig closed 51,002.11 ,proved w/ Dndition MINUTES OF THE APRIL 1, 1976 SPECIAL H -CONTROL MEETING Mr. Sanborn explained his intent regarding landscaping. Member Blaine noted oleanders were subject to freezing and he might want to consider this before using it along the rear property line as a screen. She suggested ceanothus as a possible substitute. The meeting was opened to public comment. There were none. Member Sallan moved, seconded by Member Irvine, to close Public Hearings. Motion carried, 4-0 Member Sallan moved to recommend approval of HC -51,002.11, the modifica- tion of architecture as proposed on Exhibits A -4th Revision and B -3rd Revision. The additional condition tonight would be that on the rear portion of the property the screening landscaping which was originally oleanders would be replaced by some shrub that will grow to a similar height or taller that would be nct likely to freeze in any event. Seconded by Member Blaine. AYES: Members Blaine, Irvine, Sallan and Chairman Koenitzer NOES: None Motion carried, 4-0 Chairman Koenitzer noted the application would now be heard by the City Council at its April 5, 1976 meeting. ADJOURNMENT At 8:30 p.m. Member Sallan moved to adjourn to the next regular meeting on April 8,1976 at 7:00 p.m. Seconded by Member Blaine. ATTEST: Is! Wm. E. Ryder City Clerk Motion carried, 4-0 APPROVED: Is/ C. Nancy Sallan Chairwoman