Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutASAC Minutes 04-08-1976CITY OF CUPERTINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10 300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino Telephone: 252-4505 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE APPROVAL COMMITTEE HELD ON APRIL 8, 1976 IN THE LIBRARY CONFERENCE ROOM, CITY HALL, CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA SALUTE TO THE FLAG Chairman Koenitzer opened the meeting at 7:20 p.m. with the Salute to the Flag. ROLL CALL Members present: Blaine, Irvine, Chairman Koenitzer Members absent: Dressler, Sallan Staff present: Assistant Planner Piasecki Senior Planning Technician Caughey INFORMAL REVIEW OF PLANNED DEVELOPMENT USE PERMIT APPLICATION: None UNFINISHED BUSINESS: None APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Minutes of March 4, 1976 There being no corrections or amendments, Member Blaine moved to accept the Minutes of March 4, 1976 as presented. Seconded by Member Irvine. Motion carried, 3-0 POSTPONEMENTS: None WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: None ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None HC -162 Page 1 Minutes of 3-4-76 approved HC -162 Page 2 HC -51,377.1 John W. Hay Site Architecture MINUTES OF THE APRIL 8, 1976 H -CONTROL MEETING Chairman Koenitzer announced that no item would be initiated after 11:30 p.m. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. Application HC -51,377.1 - John W. Haynes requesting approval of site, architecture, landscaping and grading for a triplex located at the southeasterly corner of Lomita Avenue and Pasadena Avenue. Staff report: Assistant Planner Piasecki said the proposed plan complied with the ordinance requirements relative to building coverage, parking, and setbacks. He referred to elevations as exhibited. Slides were shown of the site and surrounding area. Referring to drawings, Mr. Piasecki said the staff recommended the use of concrete for the driveway. He also noted a pepper tree on the site which should be preserved. Member Irvine ascertained it had been plotted and would not be encroached on by any building. Mr. Piasecki referred to staff's concern about privacy for yard #2 since the third bedroom for the upper level of Unit #1 looked down into it. He also referred to stairway to Unit #3, suggesting that perhaps the porch could be moved. Mr. John E. Haynes, 832 Terrace Drive, Los Altos, answered Member Irvine that there were no improvements in the area. Member Irvine suggested a bond to cover future improvements. Mr. Piasecki answered 'Chairman Koenitzer that he did not know just when these improvements 'would be scheduled. :Member Irvine said he could not get excited about the privacy intrusion into yard #2. Member Blaine agreed that she was not too concerned about privacy either. She liked having two stairways to upper floor as a safety measure. Member Blaine noted the upper area could be switched if privacy was really a problem. Member Irvine said this would be an economical move for the applicant since it would lessen the cost of plumbing. . Haynes said when people moved into this type of building they rent too concerned about privacy. MINUTES OF THE APRIL 8, 1976 H -CONTROL MEETING Chairman Koenitzer ascertained the windows on the ground floor facing the yard area would be of opaque glass. It was noted that plants in front of these windows were of a large and dense growing variety. Member Blaine referred to one area where the plantings were of a low growing nature. Since the building was two stories at that point, she felt there should be more varied plantings. The area where future improvements would be placed was discussed. Mr. Haynes said there was a 3ft. chain fence on the property line which he would like to keep. The slide showing this fence was re-examined. The meeting was then opened for public comments. There were none. Member Irvine moved to close Public Hearings. Seconded by Member Blame. Motion carried, 3-0 Member Blaine moved to recommend approval of Application HC -51,377.1 to the City Council, standard H -Control conditions, as well as the following conditions: (1) Large tree at rear of property line be saved and incorporated into landscaping plans. (2) That the paving of the driveway be concrete to the property line and asphalt on remainder. Seconded by Member Irvine. AYES: Members Blaine, Irvine, Chairman Koenitzer NOES: None Motion carried, 3-0 Chairman Koenitzer advised the applicant of approval for request and that it would be heard by the City Council at its April 19, 1976 meeting. HC -162 Page 3 Landscaping Public Hear- ing closed HC -51,377.1 approved w/ conditions iC-162 ?age 4 iC-51,299.3 :al Coast Sign : omp any MINUTES OF THE APRIL 8, 1976 H -CONTROL MEETING 2. Application HC -51,299.3 - Cal Coast Sign Company (Stevens Creek Center) requesting approval of a sign plan for an office complex located between Stevens Creek Boulevard and Alves Drive approximately 150 ft. west of Saich Way. Staff report: Assistant Planner Piasecki referred to plans of existing center and pinpointed sign placement. He noted the request was for approval of sign program also. He advised colors of signs should be clarified and it should be restricted to one sign per tenant. Mr. Vern Pitroff, 845 Reed Street, Santa Clara, answered Chairman Koenitzer the signs would be hung right on edge of canopy. Slides were shown of the center. Mr. Pietroff said the sign would be the white band fascia and would extend approximately 8" below it. Chairman Koenitzer ascertained there would be approximately 9'6" from sidewalk to fascia. Mr. Piasecki said there are existing tenants. The approval could be conditioned that they should come in within 60 days, for sign approval. It was noted that the applicant had been informed it would require an exception for a free standing sign. Chairman Koenitzer summarized points of discussion: (1) Sign program shall limit tenant signs to a maximum size of 18" x 10' for a total of 15 sq. ft. (2) Each tenant shall be permitted only one sign with the exception of future bank building. (3) All signs shall be single -faced internally -illuminated and will be allowed variable colors subject to review by staff. (4) All signs shall be mounted below the fascia of the roof. (5) Existing VIP door mounted sign to be removed. (6) All existing tenants conform to sign program within 60 days. MINUTES OF THE APRIL 8, 1976 H -CONTROL MEETING Mr. Pitroff said there are only three businesses facing Stevens Creek Boulevard and right now the applicant is the only business wanting a sign. The other tenants are not likely to want signs. He displayed a color chip of the yellow being proposed for the sign. Member Irvine said he was glad the rest of the tenants would not be wanting signs of this kind as he was turned off by it. He felt the location was bad and would be a bad looking appendage. It breaks the horizontal band. Mr. Pitroff answered this was the only place it could go. Member Irvine said it was a professional business complex and maybe this type of sign should not be in the center. At any rate he felt something better could be done. Elevation and slides of the building were studied. Member Irvine suggested hanging signs under the soffit rather than on the band. Chairman Koenitzer felt the letter heights should be limited to 12" and the total length to 9 ft. He felt too much of the sign area was covered by letters. Member Blaine said she felt the three signs on this building should be of the same color and sane size since it would provide continuity across the front of the building seen from Stevens Creek Boulevard. Chairman Koenitzer summarized additional proposal for sign program. (3)a. The background colors to be the light yellow, #828, with black letters and wood trim. (4)a. Signs be mounted below the soffit and 6" back from the edge. (7) Letters on the sign be no more than 10 inch and total length of the letters be no more than 10 ft. (8) The proposed bank or other free standing building in the front is exempted. Member Irvine said it was of a concern to him that sign program was built around a realtor sign when this is a professional center. He suggested a survey of the tenants be taken. Mr. Pitroff said the owner had approved the proposed sign program. HC -162 Page 5 HC -162 Page 6 HC -51,299.3 continued for 2 weeks Recess HC -51,380.1 Herbert Cuevas; MINUTES OF THE APRIL 8, 1976 H -CONTROL MEETING A discussion was held on the best way to insure a good sign program for the center. Mr. Pitroff suggested using an off-white for all sign faces and any color copy the tenants wanted. He said since the City would tell him what they wanted, there was no use for him to come in with a sign program. Member Irvine said the applicant, VIP, was open, they had identifi- cation and he would opt for a two week delay to see exactly what the owner would want. More thought should be given to it. Member Blaine agreed; she also would like to hear from the owner. Mr. Piasecki suggested possible guide lines that would apply to tenants to the inside of the center. Member Blaine moved to continue Application HC -51,299.3 until the next regularly scheduled meeting. Seconded by Member Irvine. Motion carried, 3-0 A recess was called at 8:40 p.m. with the meeting reconvening at 8:50 p.m. 3. Application HC -51,380.1 - Herbert Cuevas requesting approval of site, architecture, landscaping, grading, lighting and signing for a commercial building located at the northwest corner of Scofield Drive and South De Anza Boulevard. Staff report: Assistant Planner Piasecki said the staff felt it was an attractive building and would be an asset to the City. There would be several modifications suggested as noted in the staff report. Mr. Piasecki distributed aerial photos, noting they would cover two applications being considered tonight. Slides were shown and the site described. Mr. Piasecki went over the conditions as suggested by staff and briefly described them. It was pointed out that sign approval would become the approval of sign program for center. Mr. Herbert Cuevas, 480 N. 1st Street, San Jose, said they would agree with all but three of the conditions suggested by staff. MINUTES OF THE APRIL 8, 1976 H -CONTROL MEETING Staff was suggesting the pedestrian area located adjacent to the truck loading dock be decreased in length by approximately 5 ft. and modified to permit vehicles using the truck loading area to drive over. Mr. Cuevas said space is limited and they need the turn around space in front of the dock. Mr. Cuevas described lighting being proposed and displayed a brochure of the fixture. He said they are 30 ft. standards. Since they are hiding the cars a good level of light has to be maintained for safety reasons. With regard to continuing roof line around the building, this is not required aesthetically or functionally. Mr. Cuevas said they would like to stay with their original design. Member Irvine said he was in agreement that trucks would require the proposed docking space. He also felt the on -site walkway was unnecessary. Mr. Gene Lacey, 20556 Scofield Drive, Cupertino, answered Chairman Koenitzer that the truck traffic must not be impeded so there would have to be a curbing. Mr. Lacey answered Assistant Planner Piasecki that truck deliveries would be made between,9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Member Blaine questioned the utility poles. Mr. Piasecki said these should be underground. Mr. Lacey said there are no poles on their property but they would be happy to participate in any improvement program. Mr. Lacey said the chain link fence looked terrible and he would prefer to remove it. He pointed out there is a curb along that property line. Member Irvine ascertained there would be some grading down but there would still be a definite grade change. The slide showing the curb and fence were shown again. Member Blaine said if the fence were removed shrubs or something should be placed in its stead. Mr. Lacey said if they were required to leave the fence up at least they would take the barbed wire off the top. It was noted there was not enough room to be landscaping there. There would be a curb placed along property line. HC -162 Page 7 Site HC -162 Page 8 Architecture Landscaping Lighting Signing MINUTES OF THE APRIL 8, 1976 H -CONTROL MEETING Member Blaine ascertained the applicant would be willing to plant along the curb if permission could be gotten from the owners. Chairman Koenitzer pointed out a problem would be the maintenance of the plants. Mr. Lacey said a warning sign at strategic points would be more effective. It was agreed the fence would be removed. Mr. Cuevas said there would be a difficulty in carrying the overhang around the building because of height of dock. Member Irvine said he thought it was a very handsome building and felt the clear areas were very pleasing. Member Irvine said he did not think the little sidewalk in front was necessary since it was so close to existing sidewalk. Deleting it would give more landscaping. He did not object to it but felt it was unnecessary. Member Blaine thought it was an interesting area. She ascertained the street trees would not be disturbed. Assistant Planner Piasecki advised all existing trees should be included on their detailed landscaping plans. Chairman Koenitzer suggested a taller variety of raphiolepis be used. He also suggested more trees be used along property line next to residence. Applicant was agreeable to these suggestions. Mr. Lacey pointed out these plants would be against wall and would not be seen from the residential side. Mr. Cuevas said if they were to cover the wall they would use a plain wall rather than the slumpstone being proposed. Chairman Koenitzer felt 25 ft. poles would serve as well as the 30 ft. Member Irvine ascertained there would not be a transformer at this time. He advised if there were one that it not be placed in front. A chip of the blue being proposed was displayed. All signs would have blue letters with brown edging. Mr. Lacey answered Chairman Koenitzer they would have to have the sign in the middle rather than over the doors because of architect- ural design of building. Mr. Lacey said he might not have a sign. If he did it would conform with what was being approved. MINUTES OF THE APRIL 8, 1976 H -CONTROL MEETING Chairman Koenitzer opened the hearing to the public for their comments. There were none. Member Irvine moved to close the Public Hearing, seconded by Member Blaine. Motion carried, 3-0 Mr. Piasecki said the staff would find out trucking hours and include as condition. Member Blaine moved to recommend approval of Application HC -51,380.1, with the standard H -Control conditions and the following special conditions: (1) That prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall sign a statement acceptable to the City Attorney agreeing to participate in reciprocal driveway and ingress/ egress easements, with the adjoining property owner to the north at such time as the same can be required of said property owner. By this statement the applicant shall agree to modify the parking layout and add landscaping as necessary to conform with a future cooperative circulation plan, particularly along the northern boundary. The applicant shall further agree by this statement to participate in at least half of the cost of improving a mutual driveway system along the northern border. (2) The westerly curb cut location on Scofield Drive shall be modified as necessary to incorporate the existing 11 -inch sycamore street tree within the landscape area subject to staff approval. Similarly, the existing 12 -inch pepper and 12 -inch pine located in the southwestern portion of the property shall be incorporated into the landscaping pl (3) The planter strip located along the western boundary and located adjacent to the building on the westerly side shall be enlarged by 111 ft. to provide for automobile overhang. (4) The lighting shall be subject to review by the City after installation to ensure little or no light intrudes into the adjacent residential property to the west. The light standards will be reduced to 25 ft. in height. HC -162 Page 9 Public Hearing closed (5) All individual tree wells shall be equipped with sprinkler bubblers . HC -162 Page 10 HC -51,.380.1 approved w/ conditions HC -51,027. 4 Northern California S avin gs and Loan MINUTES OF THE APRIL 8, 1976 H -CONTROL MEETING (6) Three trees shall be added in the excess parking space of the diagonal parking area of a type and variety approved by the City staff. The applicant may utilize a metal grate structure to enlarge the root area and provide for pedestrian passage, should this be deemed necessary. Two shrubs reaching height of 5 ft. or 6 ft. shall be added to north side of property, choice subject to staff approval. (7) The on -site walkway located parallel to the public sidewalk on De Anza Blvd. shall be decreased in size and shifted westerly. Paving treatment shall be utilized between said walkway and the northerly property line across the one-way drive to clearly delineate this area as a pedestrian crossing. (8) The one-way drive shall be appropriately marked to ensure that automobiles do not enter from the major parking area in an attempt to exit onto the Crossroads Shopping Center parking lot or the opposite way on the one-way drive. Existing cyclone fence is to be removed. A curb is to be added along northerly property line with warning signs added at end of each aisle. (9) Other tenant signs on the building shall not exceed an area equal to 18" x 12 ft., and shall be internally - illuminated, individually -mounted letters similar to the lettering type proposed on Exhibit F. This is the sign program for building. Letters to be same blue. Seconded by Member Irvine. AYES: Members Blaine, Irvine, Chairman Koenitzer NOES: None Motion carried, 3-0 Chairman Koenitzer advised the applicant this would be heard by the City Council at its April 19, 1976 meeting. 4. Application HC -51,027.4 - Northern California Savings and Loan requesting approval of a modification of site and architecture for an existing bank facility located at the northeast corner of De Anza Boulevard and Rodrigues Avenue. Staff report: Assistant Planner Piasecki referred to aerial photo. The applicant is proposing to add a vault area on the south side of the building, remove existing archways on east and west sides and add a wood screen to accentuate the western main entrance. MINUTES OF THE APRIL 8, 1976 H -CONTROL MEETING Mr. Piasecki also pointed out a proposed 26 ft. wide driveway and a plan to redo the parking lot area to provide widened parking stalls overhanging a 9 ft. planter area. Mr. Piasecki summarized staff recommendations: that the driveways to De Anza Boulevard be eliminated, the vault addition be scaled down in size, moved or eliminated and the parking lot configuration be redrawn providing for only two aisles serving the four rows of automobiles with an increased landscape area as shown on the staff prepared Exhibit A-1. Slides were shown of site and building. Mr. William Patrick, 831 Midglen Way, Woodside, said his client was interesting in up -dating the building. It was necessary for their business. He pointed out they are not in violation of any requirements. Since the City has not adopted the Town Center Plan they would like to use their property in this manner. When development does take place they will conform. He said the City Traffic Engineer did not object to their proposal. He explained how they would be assisting public safety and convenience by having the driveway. Mr. Patrick said there was one old Palm tree which would have to be removed. The other trees would be maintained with the exception perhaps of one pepper tree. Mr. Patrick said they also feel they should be allowed the wait- ing line as they are proposing. The landscaping total will be the same. If the driveway should be denied, then the staff's scheme would be the best. Mr. Patrick explained the reason for the architectural modifica- tion and placement of the vault. Member Irvine ascertained the applicant would sign agreement that they would remove driveway when the area was developed. Mr. Dan Bias, 139 Montclair Drive, Santa Clara, said because of the community room, the additional parking was necessary. He said their business is being overshadowed by the new financial buildings. HC -162 Page 11 Site Mr. Piasecki answered Member Blaine there was no "normal" set- back requirement with regard to the vault placement. HC -162 Page 12 Architecture Public Hear- ing closed MINUTES OF THE APRIL 8, 1976 H -CONTROL MEETING Chairman Koenitzer said he was not sure they should allow any more curb cuts. Mr. Robert L. Rochett, 1335 Greenwood Avenue, Palo Alto, explained how the present situation causes traffic congestion. Giving them another ingress/egress would relieve this. Member Irvine said it was a corner lot, there was a traffic problem and they had to function. If they would sign an agreement, he would be willing to go along with this. Member Blaine said she liked the building as it was very much. It provides a different type of architecture but blends in very well. She was concerned about closeness of vault to the sidewalk. Mr. Patrick assured her that architecturally this was the best solution. He said they feel this is a better building and would serve the community better. Member Irvine said he liked the building and the vault was better as it was being proposed. It was a very effective design. He felt it created excitement to the property. Chairman Koenitzer did not feel the vault would be attractive. He thought the slope roof would be better. Member Irvine said the 10 ft. was too narrow for a sloped roof. Mr. Patrick answered Chairman Koenitzer that logistically there was no place else to put the vault. Chairman Koenitzer opened the meeting to the public for their comments. There were none. Member Blaine moved to close Public Hearings. Seconded by Member Irvine. Motion carried, 3-0 Member Irvine moved to recommend approval of Application HC -51,027.4 to the City Council with standard H -Control conditions and the following special conditions: (1) All attempts be made to save pepper tree; final configuration to be approved by staff. Seconded by Member Blame. MINUTES OF THE APRIL 8, 1976 H -CONTROL MEETING Member Irvine moved to amend motion that an agreement be drawn up between the City and the applicant as to the removal of the driveway when the remaining property along De Anza Boulevard develops. Seconded by Member Blaine: VOTE ON AMENDMENT: AYES: Members Blaine, Irvine and Chairman Koenitzer NOES: None Motion carried, 3-0 VOTE ON MOTION: AYES: Members Blaine and Irvine NOES: Chairman Koenitzer Motion carried, 2-1 Chairman Koenitzer announced the application had been approved and would be heard by the City Council at their April 19, 1976 meeting. 5. Application HC -51,075.40 - Vallco Fashion Park requesting exception to the Sign Ordinance to allow the erection of more than the permitted number of shopping center identifi- cation signs located easterly and westerly of Wolfe Road between Route 280 and Stevens Creek Boulevard. Staff report: Assistant Planner Piasecki referred to staff report listing number and types of signs being requested. He referred to applicant's exhibit showing illustrations and locations of the proposed signs. He pointed out all signs with the exception of D-13 and D 1/2 were obstructing view, located within the 40 ft. site triangle or located in the public right of way. Mr. Piasecki referred particularly to sign located next to the residences. HC -162 Page 13 HC -51,027.4 approved w/ conditions HC -51,075.40 Vallco Fashion Park Slides were shown of the site. HC -162 { MINUTES OF THE APRIL 8, 1976 H -CONTROL MEETING Page 14 Mr. Bill Tagg, representing Vallco, said there were three basic types of signs. He described how each type of sign was used to locate a certain area. He referred to sample of sign colors and layout. Mr. Sheldon E. Gordon, 118 Malibu Colony Road, Malibu, said the orchard design on the sign would be their standard logo. Member Blaine said it would not be wise to have any sign sticking above a fence near the homes. She was assured the sign would be below the fence. Mr. Walter Ward, General Manager of Vallco, said the fence would be raised by 2-1/2 ft. This had been submitted to the Planning Department. Mr. Gordon said the whole concept of the signing was not to advertise the stores but a means of directing traffic. These signs will do that more effectively. Mr. Ward said at Vallco Village some of the signs are in the right of way. He pointed out they have dedicated to ten lanes on Wolfe Road. For signs to be effective they have to be seen. They will be moved to the rear when the road is widened. Mr. Ward said the 40 ft. triangle should not be a problem. They would work with the Engineering Department to make sure there is no safety hazard. Member Blaine pointed out there is foot and bicycle traffic to be considered. Mr. Ward agreed. Mr. Piasecki said there was a problem with public liability in having the signs in the public right of way. Member Irvine said it would be well to have the Engineering Department work with the applicant on the placement of each sign. Chairman Koenitzer read excerpts from Minutes of April 24, 1975. He said this brought up the question of exterior signs for shops other than the major stores. Mr. Ward explained they meant they would have low entrance signs rather than huge pole signs. They need identification for main entrances. MINUTES OF THE APRIL 8, 1976 H -CONTROL MEETING Mr. Gordon said Magnin's would have entrance on exterior. He explained reciprocal easement agreement they use. Only tenants with exterior entrance can have exterior sign. They will be applying for signage on a very controlled basis, possibly 4 or 5 signs and one over mall in Phase II. Member Blaine ascertained size of sign is subject to their control. Mr. Gordon said they hadn't gotten sign proposal from I. Magnin's] yet. He pointed out that out of 120 tenants there would only be about 6 or 7 signs. Chairman Koenitzer said there should have been an overall sign plan. Mr. Gordon said it was difficult to have a sign program when the tenants are so nebulous. Mr. Ward pointed out only one store will have impact on anyone but the shopping center. Member Blaine expressed her concern about signs in line of sight. Mr. Tagg answered her the paint was the same used by the highway department. Member Irvine said if it was conditioned that staff would work individually on each sign, he felt it would be a very successful sign program. Chairman Koenitzer felt names of stores could be eliminated. Also D-2 should be moved back. Mr. Gordon agreed it was not necessary to have names on the signs. Chairman Koenitzer suggested the panel could read, "All Stores Turn Here". Mr. Gordon said this could be the solution they had been looking for. Mr. Tagg said the signs were 7 ft. so they could be read over the cars. He answered Chairman Koenitzer that one group of signs was not as close as it appeared on the display. Mr. Ward said they had taken boards of the size and held them up. Member Blaine said the signs should be far enough back from intersection that it could be read and a decision reached in time to safely make the turn. Mr. Ward advised they are working on bus line terminal so there could be more directional signs needed. HC -162 Page 15 HC -162 Page 16 Public Hearing closed HC -51,075.40 approved w/ conditions MINUTES OF THE APRIL 8, 1976 H -CONTROL MEETING Chairman Koenitzer did not feel the Bollard signs needed to be 8 ft. since they are pedestrian oriented. He suggested having them about 6 ft. Mr. Gordon said they would be out of scale with the building then. Member Blaine ascertained parking below in back of Bullock's would be restriped after the construction was finished. The hearing was then opened to public comment. There were none. Member Irvine moved, seconded by Member Blaine, to close Public Hearing. Motion carried, 3-0 Member Blaine moved to recommend approval of Application HC -51,075.40, subject to standard H -Control conditions, and the following conditions: (1) That the signs which would have been placed in public right of way or line of sight triangle will be adjusted per discussion with the City traffic engineers. Also any other sign that might create a safety hazard will be reviewed. (2) That signs D-1/1 and D-1/2 will read "Vallco Fashion Park',' then "All Stores" with arrow. (3) Sign D-16 will not extend above wall. (4) This will be only for Phase I. Phase II signs will come in for hearing at another time. Seconded by Member Irvine. AYES: Members Blaine, Irvine, Chairman Koenitzer NOES: None Motion carried, 3-0 The applicant was informed this would be heard by the City Council at their April 19, 1976 meeting. Assistant Planner Piasecki asked for guidance regarding exterior signs. Mr. Gordon answered there would be the toy store sign, McDonalds, two restaurant signs and the I. Magnin sign. He was hopeful all these signs would come in within the next several weeks. Chairman Koenitzer noted there were exterior entrances that had not been approved. It was ascertained they did not expect to put in any more exterior entrances. MINUTES OF THE APRIL 8, 1976 H -CONTROL MEETING Mr. Gordon offered to give drawings of signs soon. Member Blaine felt this would be helpful. It was clarified this would be a fairly detailed approach on Phase I and a general approach to Phase II. NEW BUSINESS: Chairman Koenitzer announced he would not be present at the April 22, 1976 meeting. It was agreed to ask Member Sallan to chair the meeting. Mr. Piasecki informed the committee members that staff had been working on tree ordinance. It is in draft form and would be scheduled for City Council perusal on April 26, 1976. It would be presented to this committee at their next meeting. Chairman Koenitzer noted Cupertino Liquors had not painted the building. Chairman Koenitzer referred to color of Pic -A -Dilly sign and was surprised that other signs in the complex were approved before that sign was corrected. Mr. Piasecki said the Pic -A - Dilly sign had been approved by staff. Mr. Piasecki advised Cicero's Pizza had been notified by Code Enforcement Officer of non-conformance and was now being approached by the City Attorney; however, Cicero's were still not willing to respond. Chairman Koenitzer noted "Open" sign at Suburban House was still in operation. It was reported there are now tables and chairs being used at the Kentucky Fried Chicken establishment. Staff to check. It was noted there would be a Sign Ordinance meeting on April 26, 1976. The Planning Commission proposals were discussed. Chairman Koenitzer remembered they had not included reason for allowing sign exception on Vallco application HC -51,075.40. The main reason was the size and complexity of the center. ADJOURNMENT At 12:43 a.m. Member Blaine moved to adjourn to the next meeting on April 22, 1976 at 7:00 p.m. Seconded by Member Irvine. APPROVED: Is/ C. Nancy Sallan Chairwoman Motion carried, 3-0 ATTEST: Is/ Wm. E. Ryder City Clerk HC -162 Page 17