Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutASAC Minutes 05-06-1976CITY OF CUPERTINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino Telephone: 252-4505 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE APPROVAL COMMITTEE HELD ON MAY 6, 1976 IN THE LIBRARY CONFERENCE ROOM, CITY HALL, CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA SALUTE TO THE FLAG The meeting was opened at 7:07 p.m. by temporary Chairperson Sallan with the Salute to the Flag. ELECTION OF CHAIRMAN AND VICE-CHAIRMAN Since the Ordinance requires a full committee be present, the election of officers was postponed to the next meeting. ROLL CALL Members present: Blaine, Bond, Irvine, Chairperson Sallan Members absent: Claudy Staff present: Assistant Planner Steve Piasecki Senior Planning Technician Mark Caughey INFORMAL REVIEW OF THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT USE PERMIT APPLICATION: None UNFINISHED BUSINESS: None APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Minutes of the Regular Meeting of April 22, 1976 not available POSTPONEMENTS: Item 6 - Application HC -51,183.3 in compliance with request of applicant. HC -164 Page 1 WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: Letter from Administrative Assistant John Vaughn regarding cable television. HC -164 Page 2 Special Meeting MINUTES OF THE MAY 6, 1976 H -CONTROL MEETING ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: Assistant Planner Piasecki said Alice Siegrist had called requesting committee to consider color for building. It was agreed to discuss this at end of agenda. Stephen Sanborn had requested approval for modifica- tion of roof material. It was agreed to hear this at end of agenda or at special meeting. Due to number of applications, Assistant Planner Piasecki requested the committee to schedule an additional regular meeting to be held on Thursday, May 13, 1976 at 7:00 p.m. Chairperson Sallan announced no item would be initiated after 11:30 p.m. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. Application HC -51,299.3 - Cal Coast Sign Company (Stevens Creek Center) requesting approval of a sign program for an office complex located between Stevens Creek Boulevard and Alves Drive approximately 150 ft. west of Saich Way. Continued from H -Control meeting of April 22, 1976. Staff report: Assistant Planner Piasecki reminded the committee this application had been continued to give the applicant more time to present materials. encompassing a comprehensive program for the center, and to reconsider the V.I.P. Realty sign. The V.I.P. sign is basically the same as previously presented. The sign is 18" x 10' with dark brown letters on a white background to be mounted under the mansard at the edge of the roof. The sign program includes a ground sign 3' x 10' of dark brown redwood with 8" to 12" gold letters. Mr. Piasecki pointed out sign location. He indicated only one ground sign would be allowed for the site. Slides of the site and buildings were shown. Ms. Pamela Reeder, Stevens Creek Office Center, said she was the new manager. She said things are improving every day and the landscaping is being taken care of now. Member Blaine questioned if the applicant had reconsidered the V.I.P. sign and its location. MINUTES OF THE MAY 6, 1976 H -CONTROL MEETING HC -164 Page 3 Mr. W. F. Dean, representing V.I.P. Realtors, said they need identifica- tion. They felt the sign would fit with building and would provide them with the identification they need. When the Stevens Creek Office Center sign was located in the center aisle it would help them some. The owner of the building had approved their sign. He reminded the committee that V.I.P. is the prime tenant in the complex. He suggested putting one sign under the B-1 in the center of the building. Mr. Dean exhibited a sample chip of the off-white color being proposed. With reference to staff's suggestion that sign be located on the stucco portion of the building, the slides had indicated the olive tree would obscure it. Chairperson Sallan reiterated the committee's concerns as indicated at last meeting and asked that a new sign be designed and brought back, including renderings which would show exactly how the sign would look in relation to the building. Member Irvine used the diagram of sign location to indicate the concern that sign would break up the straight line running under the mansard roof. He pointed out the sign was the only illuminated sign in the Center and would represent a glaring deviation. Mr. Dean said he could not understand the objection to having the line broken up. He said they had tried to comply with all requirements. Member Blaine said her objection to proposal was placement of sign on roof line and the colors. Member Bond said he had a problem with the location also, but felt it would not be so drastic if the sign were centered on the building. The location of the proposed bank building and the possibility of the sign being hidden behind it were discussed. Member Irvine reiterated his concern for the breaking of the roof line. He was pleased there was a total program for the Center and he would like to see V.I.P. conform with that sign program. He answered Ms. Reeder 's suggestion to have V.I.P. use the dark background and center the sign on the building, that it would still break up the straight line Chairperson Sallan noted after further discussion that a solution had been reached. She noted the committee was not comfortable in the role of designing signs. Mr. Vern Pitroff, 845 Reed St., Santa Clara, said he could design the sign if he could find out what the committee wanted. Chairperson Sallan said she understood their need for identification but the problem was the placement of the sign. She pointed out three of the four committee members were concerned about the colors tying in with the rest of the Center. HC -16 4 Page 4 Public Hear- ing closed HC -51,299.3 approved w/ exception of V.I.P. sign. IMINUTES OF THE MAY 6, 1976 H -CONTROL MEETING IMr. Dean said he also did not know what the committee wanted. Ms. Reeder ascertained the ground sign would be considered separately from the V.I.P. sign. Chairperson Sallan indicated the ground and window signs were acceptable, with the exception of the V.I.P. sign. The committee members concurred with this. Mr. Dean said he thought the committee members were being unreasonable and arbitrary. Mr. Pitroff asked about putting the sign on the mansard under the B -l. He was asked to come back with a drawing of that proposal. Mr. Piasecki pointed out the continued portion of the application would be heard at the special meeting on May 13, 1976 so the delay would not be a lengthy one. He also advised the applicant of their right to ask for a decision with the option of appealing to the City Council. Mr. Dean opted for having a decision rendered. Mr. Piasecki said if they changed their mind and wanted to propose another sign, they should prepare the necessary exhibits and have them available for hearing. IThe Public Hearing was opened to comments from the audience. There were none. Member Irvine moved to close Public Hearing. Seconded by Member Bond. Motion carried, 4-0 Member Blaine moved approval of Application HC -51,299.3 sign program for ground sign and window signs with the exception of the V.I.P. Realty sign, with the standard H -Control conditions and that the ground sign shall not be in line of sight. Seconded by Member Irvine. AYES: Members Blaine, Bond, Irvine and Chairperson Sallan. NOES: None Motion carried, 4-0 Chairperson Sallan advised this would now be heard by the City Council jat their May 17, 1976 meeting. Mr. Dean clarified the reason they were going on to City Council was that he did not know what the committee wanted. MINUTES OF THE MAY 6, 1976 H -CONTROL MEETING 2. Application HC -51,088.121 - Diamond Signs, Inc. (Syntex Corpora- tion) requesting approval of a sign program including an exception to Section 6.04 of the Sign Ordinance to allow two ground signs on existing industrial lots with less than the required frontage. Said property is located in the West Valley Industrial Park on the east and west side of Bubb Road approximately 200 ft. southerly of Stevens Creek Boulevard. Continued from H -Control meeting of April 22, 1976. Staff report: Senior Technician Mark Caughey referred to staff report of April 15, advising the applicant had chosen to resubmit the same proposal. Slides were shown of the site and buildings to be identified. Chairperson Sallan asked why the applicant had chosen to resubmit rather than redesign in accordance with the committee's suggestions. Mr. Anthony Chan, 10040 Bubb Road, Cupertino said the driveway was very narrow with no room for a common sign. The slide showing the driveway area was reshown. Mr. Chan said this driveway was used by large delivery trucks and could not be obstructed by a sign. Mr. Caugheu sa�dit was the standard 38' driveway. He pointed out several locations where it would be possible to have a sign which would identify the two buildings. Mr. Chan pointed out the requested signs were quite small, especially in comparison with other signs on Bubb Road. He said their building is right at the curve. It was clarified that the signing being discussed was for buildings 1 and 3; building 2 sign was acceptable. Mr. Chan said they would like to have the two signs rather than one sign at the shared driveway. They would like to have one sign as soon as possible after the 76 station. Mr. Doug Kersey, Diamond Signs, said the existing wooden sign in front of building 3 is approximately 8'. He said the two small signs bein g requested were of less footage than the one sign. Mr. Caughey explained that neither lot has the required frontage for a ground sign. Mr. Ken Gunderson, 10040 Bubb Road, Cupertino, explained there are two lanes of traffic going around a curve. Since this is a very busy street, they need a sign that will catch the eye quickly. HC -164 Page 5 HC -51,088.12 Syntex Corporation HC -164 MINUTES OF THE MAY 6, 1976 H -CONTROL MEETING Page 6 Member Irvine said the problem was getting them into the Syntex parking lot. Once there were in the parking lot, they could then easily find the right buildings from building identification. Chairperson Sallan said the issue was whether or not they would be granting an exception to the ordinance since even a single sign would require an exception. She asked why the colors were not changed in light of the concerns which had been expressed by this committee. Mr. Chan said the white, red and blue were the company colors. Member Blaine said her feeling was that there should be only one sign. She suggested putting the building numbers on the buildings . The colors were acceptable on the small signs. She said she was concerned about the other illegal signs on this street. Member Bond said he basically concurred with Member Blaine. After looking at this street, and its other signs, this sign would not be out of place. Member Irvine agreed he could find an exception for one sign rather than two. After getting into the parking lot, the visitor could find the proper building by the building numbers. The colors were acceptable to him. Mr. Chan said if buildings 1 and 3 were numbered, building 2 should be numbered also. He said he hoped the numbers on the buildings could be very clear so that people would not be going into the wrong build- ing. He referred to the busy traffic pattern of this street. Chairperson Sallan said she was prepared to grant an exception for a single sign for buildings 1 and 3. She was concerned about the colors. She felt they could use a dark color on the white background and it would be very visible and more in keeping with the tone of the industrial park. Mr. Kersey said from safety point of view, an eye level sign would be much more advisable in this situation rather than a sign on the building. He was concerned about where the common sign could be placed to be visible from both directions. Chairperson Sallan said as the designer, it would be up to him to answer this. Mr. Chan said each building has a different function which made it important to have each building clearly identified. Mr. Kersey asked how one large sign could be more preferable than two small signs. Member Blaine answered that neither lot qualified for a ground sign and that having two signs would add to a proliferation - lof signs in West Valley Industrial Park. MINUTES OF THE MAY 6, 1976 H -CONTROL MEETING Member Irvine reiterated they should concentrate on getting people into their parking lot and then into the proper building. Mr. Piasecki pointed out the ordinance requires the committee to make a finding that the exception is the one that will required the least modification of the prescribed regulation and the minimum variance that will accomplish the purpose of that exception. Chairperson Sallan opened the meeting to public comments. There were none. Member Bond moved to close Public Hearings, seconded by Member Blaine. Motion carried, 4-0 The applicant then asked for a decision rather than a continuation. Chairperson Sallan referred the committee members to Section 10.4e and clarified what the exception would cover. Mr. Piasecki clarified that sign for building 2 would not require an exception. Senior Technician Caughey said the existing ground sign and the building sign are not included in the sign program. Member Blaine moved approval of Application HC -51,088.121 for sign for building 2, with the standard H -Control conditions and that any signs now serving building will be removed. The sign will be removed in case current tenants should move. Seconded by Member Bond. AYES: Members Blaine, Bond, Irvine NOES: Chairperson Sallan Motion carried, 3-1 Member Blaire moved to deny Application HC -51,088.121 for exception for two ground signs because they do not meet the conditions as required under Section 10.4e - Sign Ordinance. Seconded by Member Irvi AYES: Members Blaine, Bond, Irvine, Chairperson Sallan NOES: None Motion carried, 4-0 HC -164 Page 7 Public Hear- ing closed HC -16.4 Page 8 Public Hearing reopened Public Hear- ing reclosed, Previous motion rescinded HC -51,088. 121 approved w/ conditions MINUTES OF THE MAY 6, 1976 H -CONTROL MEETING The applicant was notified this would go before the City Council at the May 17, 1976 meeting. Mr. Chan said they would not want the sign on building 2 if they could not have signs for buildings 1 and 3. The Public Hearing was reopened. Mr. Kersey asked if the staff could approve a single sign for buildings 1 and 3. The committee agreed with the exception of Chairperson Sallan who said her objection was to the colors. The size of the single sign was discussed. It was agreed the single sign could be somewhat larger since it would have to include directory symbols to the two buildings. The Public Hearing was then closed again. Member Blaine moved to rescind previous motion. Seconded by Member Irvine. Motion carried, 4-0 Member Blaine moved approval of Application HC -51,088.121 for exception to sign program for one sign for two buildings on Bubb Road. The exception is granted because this is one that will require least modification and minimum variance. Said sign will be of the same design as the sign approved for building 2 across the street and will be subject to staff approval. Sign should be approximately 66" wide x 18" high. The other lettering on building 1 may remain as part of the sign program. Any other existing signs shall be removed. Also standard H -Control conditions. Signs will be removed in case of tenant change. Seconded by Member Bond. AYES: Members Blaine, Bond, Irvine NOES: Chairperson Sallan Motion carried, 3-1 Chairperson Sallan notified the applicant his request had been approved and staff would approve proposal for single sign. This would now be heard by the City Council at its May 17, 1976 meeting. At 8:55 p.m. a recess was called with the meeting reconvening at 9:03 p.m. MINUTES OF THE MAY 6, 1976 H -CONTROL MEETING 3. Application HC -51,075.421 - Ehrlich, Heft and Rominger (Hewlett-Packard) requesting approval of site, architecture, landscaping and grading for an employees recreation area located at the southeast quadrant of Homestead Road and Wolfe Road between Wolfe Road and Tantau Avenue. Continued from H -Control meeting of April 22, 1976. Assistant Planner Piasecki said the request would cover a slight modification of master conceptual plan which would add more landscaping. He referred to proposed guard house for exterior entrance to the complex. Slides were shown of the site. Senior Planning Technician Caughey said there was some concern over the asphalt concrete path, suggesting there might be a material that would blend better into the natural surroundings. He also questioned the material used for paving in front of barn and asked for clarification of this material. Mr. Lawrence Moon, 18 Hillview Avenue, said the asphalt walkway was needed for services into the barn area. The hard surface in front of the barnwas salt seeded concrete to simulate earth tone of the surrounding area. It was noted the committee members were happy to see an old building being used instead of demolished. With regard to change of master plan, Mr. Skip Law, Hewlett-Packard, said they were not asking for revision to master plan except to move some of the green area, which will increase the green area. The change was a result of location of recreation area on site. Mr. Moon compared the original proposal with what was being proposed now. Mr. Piasecki answered Chairperson Sallan that staff had looked at the change briefly. He said since it was on a conceptual plan, it would not be creating a problem. Chairperson Sallan noted a creative landscaping approach could screen parking along Pruneridge Avenue. Mr. Moon said they had already started the planting. The guard house was discussed. Mr. Moon referred to bombing of Palo Alto plant. He located its position on site as being approximately 60' off the street. HC -164 Page 9 HC -51,075 .42 Hewlett- Packard HC -164 Page 10 Public Hear- ing closed HC -51,075.42: approved MINUTES OF THE MAY 6, 1976 H -CONTROL MEETING The hearing was opened for public comments. There were none. Member Irvine moved to close Public Hearings, seconded by Member Bond. Motion carried, 4-0 Chairperson Sallan stressed the location of guard house should be as located in this presentation. Member Irvine moved to approve Application HC -51,075.421, with the standard H -Control conditions and site modifications as exhibited here tonight. Staff to work with applicant and approve guard house. Seconded by Member Bond. AYES: Members Blaine, Bond, Irvine, Chairperson Sallan NOES: None Motion carried, 4-0 Applicant was notified this would be heard by City Council on May 17, 1976. 4. Application HC -51,382.1 - I. K. Ishimatsu requesting approval of site, architecture, landscaping, grading and lighting for a 16 -unit cluster development located on the west side of Finch Avenue approximately 360 ft. southerly of the inter- section of Sorenson Avenue and Finch Avenue. Continued from H -Control meeting of April 22, 1976. Staff report: Assistant Planner Piasecki referred to exhibited site plans and Planned Development site plan. Also exhibited elevations. He said staff was asking that application be conditioned for protection of trees both during and after construction with barriers around the drip line of trees. Mr. Piasecki since the office building was being eliminated, the fence line should be clarified. The emergency access area was described. Slides were shown of the site and surrounding area. Mr. Roger Griffen of Dick Finnegan, Inc., explained office building removal. This will enable them to save an additional tree on the site. Only four trees will be removed from the site. Site: It was determined the 20' radius as proposed for emergency vehicles would be adequate. Mr. Griffen said they are trying to gain access in and out of church property for emergency vehicles. MINUTES OF THE MAY 6, 1976 H -CONTROL MEETING Architecture: No comments. Landscaping: Mr. Griffen said they were planning to use chains around the trees rather than a wood barrier. Member Blaine noted that if something was arranged with the church, the landscaping plan would have to be modified. Mr. Griffen said the eucalyptus trees could be spread to give adequate space. The vehicles could drive over the ground cover. The fencing would have to be modified. Mr. Griffen said Mr. Ishimatsu was talking with the church personnel now regarding this. Chairperson Sallan said she was concerned about Finch Avenue site. In response to her question, Mr. Griffen said the plants were not intended to obscure the fence. Grading: Satisfactory. Lighting: Mr. Griffen said they were planning to have building lights serve as their lighting plan for the project. It was suggested two more globes be added. Chairperson Sallan suggested this should go to staff when the locations were settled upon. Public Hearing was opened to comments from the audience. There were none. Member Bond moved to close Public Hearings, seconded by Member Blaine Motion carried, 4-0 Member Blaine moved for approval of Application HC -51,382.1, with standard H -Control conditions and additional conditions: (1) Protection of trees during construction which will include barriers around drip line of trees. (2) Staff approval for lighting. (3) Modifications that need to be made in turn arounds and emergen ingress -egress would be approved by staff and Fire District. (4) Office building to be removed per suggestion by applicant. (5) Residence on property will be painted to he compatible with other buildings. Seconded by Member Bond. AYES: Members Blaine, Bond, Irvine, Chairperson Sallan NOES: None Motion carried, 4-0 HC -164 Page 11 ?ublic Hear- Lng closed HC -Si, 382.1 approved w/ conditions HC -164 Page 12 HC -51,383.1 Good Samari tan United Methodist Church MINUTES OF THE MAY 6, 1976 H -CONTROL MEETING Chairperson Sallan announced this application would be heard by the City Council at its May 17, 1976 meeting. 5. Application HC -51,383.1 - The Good Samaritan United Methodist Church requesting approval of site, architecture, landscaping, grading, lighting and signing for a three phase expansion of the church facility located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Homestead Road and Linnet Way, Continued from the H -Control meeting of April 22, 1976. Staff report: Senior Planning Technician MarkCaughey advised the committee members that Resolution 1503 covered this application, copies of which were distributed. Condition 19 ensured that all major trees be installed in this initial phase. Slides were shown of the site. Mr. Warren Gilbert, 168 Jackson Street, San Jose, clarified that trees will be planted around parking lot and the parking lot restriped. The landscaping will be as exhibited on this application. There will be some changes when the later construction is done. Site: No questions. Architecture: Chairperson Sallan ascertained the garden wall will be 8'. Chairperson Sallan said the spire seemed very tall. Mr. Gilbert said it was 80' including the 34' building. He said if the spire was in proportion to the building it is not an obtrusive type height and does not have an adverse impact. Chairperson Sallan disagreed. Member Irvine said it was making a statement that this is a church and he felt it was a legitimate statement. Mr. Gilbert answered Member Blaine that this was a thin slender spire, not a 7 -story building so height should not be considered in that context. Member Irvine noted there are trees in the area that are quite tall. Chairperson Sallan said she felt it could be designed with something other than a spire. Mr. Gilbert said he had designed over 50 churches and he felt this was the best expression for this congregation in this locality. It was ascertained the Bethel Lutheran Church spire (seen in previous slides) was 85' and was much wider than the one being proposed. The color of Bethel spire was gray in tone as contrasted with dark brown of this proposal. MINUTES OF THE MAY 6, 1976 H -CONTROL MEETING Member Bond said he felt the spire would blend in nicely with the trees in the area and he had no objection to it. Member Irvine said he thought the building was hard to depict on a flat elevation. To shorten the spire would throw it out of scale. Member Blaine said after seeing the other spire, this one did not disturb her. She liked the building. Landscaping. Member Bond said he would urge tham to put something under the ground cover to deter weeds coming through it, since most maintenance of churches is done by volunteers. The applicant agreed this was a good point. Chairperson Sallan asked to have the 8' wall dealt with carefully so it would be well landscaped. She pointed out anything on the street side of the wall should be of 5 -gallon size. Grading: Satisfactory. Lighting: Mr. Gilbert referred to type of fixture being proposed and located them on site plan. The concern was expressed over spill -over onto Linnet Way. This would entail one light at the curb which was shown at 17' high. After discussion it was decided a solution should be worked out with staff and approved by staff. Signing: Mr. Gilbert said there were two building identifications of metal letters on the wall. The letters would be 12" high maximum and would be permanently installed. Chairperson noted there should be a discussion some time about quasi - public uses and signs. The hearing was opened for public comments. There were none. Member Blaine moved to close Public Hearings, seconded by Member Bond. Motion carried, 4-0 Member Irvine moved to approve HC -51,383.1 with the standard H -Control conditions and the following additional conditions: (1) That all plants facing street be of 5 -gallon minimum size. (2) That the lighting plan and fixture be changed and approved by staff. HC -164 Page 13 Public Hear- ing closed Seconded by Member Blaine. HC -164 Page 14 HC -51,383.1 approved w/ conditions HC -51,183.3 Stephen Coulthard postponed MINUTES OF THE MAY 6, 1976 H -CONTROL MEETING AYES: Members Blaine, Bond, Irvine NOES: Chairperson Sallan Motion carried, 3-1 The applicant was notified this would now be heard by City Council at its May 17, 1976 meeting. 6. Application HC -51,183.3 - Stephen Coulthard Postponed per applicant's request HC -51,015.18 7. Application HC -51,015.18 - Bill Moore & Associates (Wherehouse continued to Records) 5/13/76 Continued to May 13, 1976 meeting HC -51,126.8 8. Application HC -51,126.8 - Mario Meola requesting approval of Mario Meola modification of site for a five -unit apartment complex located on the south side of Oasis Court approximately 125 ft. from the intersection of Alpine Drive. Staff report: Assistant Planner Piasecki reviewed application, noting a requirement of an offsite turn -around easement. This was proposed strictly as a functional consideration and not as a safety precaution for public service delivery. He explained how the situation had developed whereby the applicant could not obtain the necessary space. The Traffic Engineer feels the site will function without the easement. Slides of the site were shown. Mr. Fred Caploe, 660 W. Dana Street, Mountain View, explained the applicant's position. This solution would be most equitable and the three parties involved could then get back to their normal living. Member Blaine ascertained there was parking on Oasis Court. Mr. Caploe answered Chairperson Sallan that without this solution it could be a very bad situation. He answered her that if it went to court, it would be a close question as each side had its points. The Public Hearing was opened for comments. There were none. Mr. Keith Bautista, Design & Engineering System, 303 Bradford Street, Redwood City, explained mechanics of maneuvers without the easement. MINUTES OF THE MAY 6, 1976 H -CONTROL MEETING Member Irvine suggested another possible alternative. Member Bond moved to close Public Hearings, seconded by Member Irvine. Motion carried, 4-0 Member Bond moved to approve Application HC -51,126.8 as written. Seconded by Member Blaine. Motion carried, 4-0 Chairperson Sallan advised the applicant this would be heard by the City Council at its May 17, 1976 meeting. 9. Application HC -51,384.1 - Moyer & Associates requesting approval of site, architecture, landscaping and lighting for modification of an existing service station site to an office center located at the southwest corner of Stelling Road and McClellan Road. Staff report: Packets on the application were distributed. Assistant Planner Piasecki said staff felt this was an excellent solution to existing situation. After discussion, it was decided to hear applica- tion although the committee members did not like to do so without having time to study presentation. Slides were shown of the site. Mr. Piasecki said one call had been gotten expressing concern over having an office complex on this site. The trash enclosure will remain but the light fixtures would come down. Landscaping on the perimeters would remain the same. Mr. Walt S. Hoefler, 12306 Kosich Court, Saratoga, said the trash enclosure could be screened. The diesel fuel pump would be retained for emergency power during a brown -out. A generator will be near the power pole but will not be installed at this time. It was noted this would raise visual problems that would have to be considered. Mr. Piasecki suggested a way it could be moved back. With the under- standing there would be one less parking space, staff could approve the installation at the appropriate time. HC -164 Page 15 Public Hear- ing closed HC -51,126.8 approved HC -51, 384.1 Moyer & Associates Mr. Hoefler said the Loomis courier service would be making one or two stops a day. HC -164 Page 16 Public Hear- ing closed MINUTES OF THE MAY 6, 1976 H -CONTROL MEETING The applicant was advised to develop their sign in accord with the building design. They would have enough frontage for one ground sign on McClellan Road. The applicant was told it could be caticorner if it was out of the 40' triangle. Mr. Hoefler advised the committee members they had talked to the neighbors. Member Blaine suggested having the bicycle lane come onto the property in some way. She explained how dangerous the situation was becoming at this intersection. This was discussed. Member Irvine suggested a concrete extruding curb in lieu of painted stripe to keep cars out of the bicycle lane. The applicant said if it -was not much more costly than that, they would prefer paying for that thantohave the bicycle lane on the property. Architecture: Satisfactory Landscaping: It was noted the "D" shrubs should be 5 -gallon size instead of 1 -gallon as shown on plan. The applicant was advised that all plants on street frontage should be 5 -gallon. Mounding with undulation at corner was suggested. Lighting: It was noted there would be four light stdnards. The light at the corner should have a short cut off so it would not intrude into the residences. Staff would approve lighting and review it after installa- tion. The hearing was opened to public comments. There were none. Member Bond moved to close Public Hearings, seconded by Member Irvine. Motion carried, 4-0 The committee asked to have information relating to bicycle lane referred back to them. Mr. Piasecki wanted to know if this was to be a requirement. Mr. Hoefler said again they would be willing to put an extruded bumper in if the cost was feasible. He explained how deeding property to City would create problems for their financing. Staff was to check back with the committee at the next meeting with more information. Kember Blaine moved for approval of HC -51,384.1, with standard H -Control conditions, and (1) That all designated "D" plants around the perimeter will be 5 -gallon size. (2) Existing trash enclosure will be screened and painted to be compatible with the wall. MINUTES OF THE MAY 6, 1976 H -CONTROL MEETING (3) The light standards and light intensity will be subject to staff approval and review after installation. (4) Applicant will work with the staff to determine the possibilit of developing a bicycle path. (5) That the landscaping along the perimeter of the driveways will be mounded subject to staff approval. (6) In the event of a need for a generator in the future, it will be subject to staff approval. Seconded by Member Bond. AYES: Members Blaine, Bond, Irvine, Chairperson Sallan NOES: None Motion carried, 4-0 The applicant was advised this would be heard by the City Council at its May 17, 1976 meeting. NEW BUSINESS: The committee requested staff to have Alice Siegrist bring in a sample of material to be used. 10. Review of proposed Tree Ordinance Member Blaine said she was against this as she felt if she wanted to re -landscape her yard she should have the ability to do so. She felt it infringed on her property rights. Member Bond thought it was fundamentally unconstitutional and he was also opposed to it. Mr. Piasecki noted these were comments on private property. It was decided to show clearly that it would not infringe on private owners. Private property owners should be exempted. Chairperson Sallan pointed out several "sexist terms" to be corrected. The ordinance was gone through briefly with several changes suggested. It was determined that to obtain approval for removing a tree, either (a) or (b) would have to be proven. It was also noted that the City would have to identify culturally or historically important trees. HC -164 Page 17 HC -51,384.1 approved w/ conditions aC-164 Page 18 .DJOURNMENT MINUTES OF THE MAY 6, 1976 H -CONTROL MEETING 11. Review of proposed Historic Preservation Ordinance was postponed to the next meeting. Sign Ordinance would be discussed at next meeting. The distributed copy of N. De Anza Boulevard Conceptual Plan was referred to briefly. Mr. Piasecki reported on Bicentennial Redwood Grove to be placed on south side of library. This will be reviewed by the ASAC at the May 13, 1976 meeting. With reference to letter concerning the cable TV, the committee members were asked to have input for next meeting. Mr. Piasecki reported A&W would be coming in about the orange roof and the artificial turf. He noted there is an $8,000.00 bond on this property. Mr. Piasecki reported Cicero's had been formally cited. Mr. Piasecki said Winchell's Donuts had changed copy without approval. A letter was being sent to them regarding this tomorrow. Chairperson Sallan reported on the Mayor's Meeting. She reviewed items on the agenda. If any ASAC member had something they wished to have included, it should be presented prior to the next meeting. The possibility of having concerns listed as part of the agenda and having them stay on the agenda until they are resolved was discussed. Priorities of staff and committee were discussed briefly. An informal meeting of staff and ASAC members was considered. ADJOURNMENT at 1:00 a.m. the meeting was adjourned to the additional regular meeting of May 13, 1976 at 7:00 p.m. as discussed at the beginning of this meeting. Moved by Member Bond, seconded by Member Blaine. Motion carried, 4-0 ATTEST: Is/ Wm. E. Ryder City Clerk APPROVED: Is/ C. Nancy Sallan Chairwoman