Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutASAC Minutes - 08-05-1976CITY OF CUPERTINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014 Telephone: 252-4505 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE APPROVAL COMMITTEE HELD ON AUGUST 3, 1976, IN THE CONFERENCE ROOM, ROOM 105, CUPERTINO CITY HALL, CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA SALUTE TO THE FLAG Acting Chairperson Blaine called the meeting to order at 7:07 PM with the Salute to the Flag. Chairperson Sallan arrived immediat ly thereafter. ROLL CALL Members present: Blaine, Bond, Claudy, Chairperson Sallan Members absent: Irvine Staff present: Senior Planning Technician Mark Caughey INFORMAL REVIEW OF PLANNED DEVELOPMENT USE PERMIT APPLICATION: Application 13-U-76: Sobrato-Berg Properties for a 53 -acre industrial/office park located on the east side of De Anza Blvd., between Freeway 280 and the easterly extension of Lazaneo Drive. The Senior Planning Technician reviewed the site plan on the bulletin board. Areas of concern are: The number of curb cuts. The location of the loading dock(s) - for impact on residences to the east. Building heights. Peripheral landscaping. The proposed 12 feet include the areal under the 2 foot overhang of the roof. The tank farm location and its need for ventilation. No compact car parking stalls indicated. Access to Mariani Avenue; school children will be walking here.: Impacts from noise of air conditioning units. HC -171 Page 1 HC -171 IMINUTES OF THE AUGUST 5, 1976, ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE APPROVAL COMMITTEE MTG,. Page 2 The staff suggests the grouping of the buildings on the left side of the site plan the same as those on the right side. Also, guidelines are needed from this Committee as to where the large transformers should be located. Member Blaine felt there should be a bike lane in addition to the pedestrian path. Chairman Sallan commented that the buffer proposed is marginal. The applicant, Mr. John Sobrato said this is very expensive land and they initially talked about a 5' buffered landscaping along the perimeter. In other developments they have had as little as 3' for this purpose. It is his contention that any kind of shrubs and/or trees that can go in a 15' width can also grow in a 12.5' area. In addition to the landscaping they will construct a concrete wall. Mr. Sobrato said they will have a study done on the air conditioning ecuipment, but he does not believe there will be noise impact on the residential nearby. The four buildings on the left side of the site plan have 2 acres of "park" in addition to the 20' of landscaping around the buildings. They have devoted 10,000 sq. ft. for the tank farm. Their consultants will study this. Member Claudy said it is easier to get in and out of angle parking and wondered if the applicant had studied this. Mr. Sobrato agreed it is more convenient that way; however, more parking spaces can be accommo- dated with 90° parking. Mr. Sobrato presented a rendering of the proposed office -type buildings, 29' tall, with fins projecting out every 30-40', for the front portion of the property. The warehouse building will be in the southwest corner and will be located some 180' from the residential. The Committee expressed concern about the proposed location of the loading docks. The would prefer to have the loading dock oriented toward the freeway. They cited the problems experienced at Vallco Park and McClellan Square Shopping Center. Mr. Sobrato said he willcheck to see if the tenant can get along with only one loading dock. He was asked to also consider an 8' rather than 6' block wall. The parking ratio is 4 cars per 1000' of building. Mr. Sobrato said the spec buildings on the right side of the site plan would have a meandering sidewalk/bike path along the property line which will tie in with that along De Anza Blvd. MINUTES OF AUGUST 5, 1976 ARCHITECTURAL & SITE APPROVAL COMMITTEE MTG Member Claudy would like to see a planned randomness for the trees in the parking lot. Member Bond would like to see the islands in the parking lot asymetrical. Mr. Sobrato said there will be 3300 cars here when the property is developed. They are negotiating with a restaurant (similar to the Velvet Turtle) to serve this area. They would like to have 3 curb cuts along De Anza Blvd. A bank would also like to go into this location. The consensus of the committee was that a minimum number of curb cuts be allowed as warranted by the Public Works Department in accordance with De Anza Boulevard general guidelines Member Blaine would not like to see the curb cuts close together. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Minutes of Regular Meeting of July 22, 1976. Page 2, paragraph just prior to POSTPONEMENTS: Add to the end of the sentence "suggesting a single reference at the end of the motion as a solution." Page 5, line 1: Add the word "sent" after "had been". Page 9, line 1: Change "red" to "reader". Page 11, paragraph 5: Add "to the south planter on Rodrigues" after "xylosma" on the first line. Page 12, middle of the page: Should read "Chairwoman Sallan said she . . . . .with the aesthetics and intensity of the signing approach." Page 15, paragraph 3, line 2: Add "or residents" after "business" Moved by Member Blaine, seconded by Member Bond to approve the Minutes of July 22, 1976, as corrected. Motion carried, 3-0-1 Member Claudy abstained POSTPONEMENTS: None. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: None. HC -171 Page 3 7/22/76 Minutes approved HC -171 I MINUTES OF AUGUST 5, 1976 ARCHITECTURAL & SITE APPROVAL COMMITTEE MEETING Page 4 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Mr. G. Wayne Eggleston, District Manager of University Property Management Company, 235 Montgomery Street, Suite #920, San Francisco, CA. 94104, presented the Committee with a set of colored pictures of the new shopping center at 10562-10620 South De Anza Blvd,, next door to Coco's Restaurant. The shopping center people are requesting an identification sign. They believe past decisions in regard to this site have created a hardship for this center. The sign will not be detrimental to the City, but in- stead, will be of help to the people in the community who are trying to locate the businesses within this center. He answered Chairperson Sallan that he has received copies of all minutes, etc., in regard to the signing decisions for this property. He answered Member Bond that the merchants are adamantly against this being called the "Coco Center". They are not interested in a reader board sign. The Senior Planning Technician answered Member Claudy that the frontage for this center is 365'; 35' short of qualifying for a shopping center sign. Member Blaine said she would not like to see anything higher than the Coco's sign. Mr. Eggleston said a directional sign has been installed here that is actually an obstruction. The staff was instructed to check on this. Mr. Eggleston said he was asking for a non -illuminated, low profile sign. Chairperson Sallan said that Coco's was well aware that center would be allowed one ground sign only. She suggested they put an address on the grassy knoll or incorporate the address into the Coco's sign. It was her opinion that there was more than adequate signing at this center. It was decided that the tenant identities would be.on the facade of each building. Member Bond said he agrees with the applicant that this shopping center is hard to see from the street. He said he was not on this Committee when this project was approved. He cautioned Mr. Eggleston that even if his request for variance were approved by this Committee, that it might still not be approved by the City Council. Chairperson Sallan advised the audience that there was a relatively long agenda and the Committee has determined that no new public hearing would be initiated after 11:30 PM. During the break the Committee would decide whether they would adhere to this policy and continue those items not covered by that time or whether they would continue to the end of the agenda. MINUTES OF AUGUST 5, 1976 ARCHITECTURAL & SITE APPROVAL COMMITTEE MTG PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Application HC -51,218.2 - Gene Pinkston (A & W) requesting approval of the modification of architecture for an existing restaurant located at the northwest corner of Stevens Creek Blvd. and Portal Avenue. Continued from H -Control meeting of July 22, 1976. The applicant, Mr. Gene Pinkston, 5458 McKee Road, San Jose, was present at this meeting. The Senior Planning Technician presented samples of the tile material and color the applicant wished to have on the roof of the A & W. The Committee took the sample outdoors to see the sample in the natural light. Chairperson Sallan said the original tile roof was very acceptab: and wished the applicant had not changed it. Member Blain asked the applicant to use flat rather than glossy paint on the tiles. She asked Mr. Pinkston to bring in a tile with several shades of brown painted on it, for comparison. She objected strenuously to the glossy paint but not necessarily to the color orange. Member Claudy said he did not object to richer earth tones. Mr. Pinkston stated that he was going on vacation and asked for a continuance until after August. A gentleman in the audience who said he was a neighbor to this A & W asked that the parking lot lights be shaded to avoid their shining onto his property. Moved by Member Claudy, seconded by Member Bond, to continue application HC -51,218.2 to the first meeting in September. Motion carried, 4-0 2. Application HC -51,342.3 - Winchell's Donut House requesting exception to the following section of the City Sign OrdinancE Section 6.042 to allow more than one ground sign on a single lot; Section 6.044 to allow a ground sign to project over a portion of the public right—of—way; Section 7.021(a) to alloF a sign area in excess of three per cent of the gross floor area of a commercial structure. Said business is located on the southwest corner of the intersection of Stevens Creek 3lti and East Estates Drive within the Brentwood Market Shopping Center. Continued from H -Control meeting of July 22, 1976. HC -171 Page 5 HC -51,218.2 cont'd to Sept. -171 MINUTES OF AUGUST 5, 1976 ARCHITECTURAL & SITE APPROVAL COMMITTEE MEETING ge 6 1Mr. Clint C. Mullen, 30150 Ahern Street, Union City, was present to represent the applicant. The Senior Planning Technician referred to details in the staff report. There was a discussion of the definition of the term "structural change". The Senior Planning Technician stated that maintenance of a sign is allowed as long as it does not make it more valuable; e.g., the applicant could build a new sign exactly like the old one. Mr. Mullen said they feel they did not structurally change the sign, with the exception of the sign face. He felt they were conforming to the codes as they exist. The lettering style and placement and color have been changed. It was the City Attorney's opinion that the existing ground sign has undergone a change of copy and represents an economic reinvestment in this structure on the part of the owners. Mr. Mullen stated they are in the process of going through their chain of donut shops and upgrading them. When this sign was damaged, they felt they would be doing like justice when they replaced the damaged sign. He said they are willing to work with this Committee in resolving this matter. Mr. Mullen said that at the present time, they have two signs on the premises. They would like to go with a 30' sign on the north and east walls and an illuminated sign or lettering with light shining down on the lettering. They would be willing to eliminate their sign on the reader board. Chairperson Sallan told the applicant that he would be in conformance with the new Sign Ordinance if he went to the fascia signs. In light of the City Attorney's comments, Member Bond said he would have to vote disapproval of this application. He would look forward to re —application of some sign that conforms to the Sign Ordinance. The Senior Planning Technician pointed out the details of the signing program for this shopping center, one of which requires a white back- ground. Chairperson Sallan said the Committee is very much interested in the new concept introduced by the applicant at this meeting. They would like to see the pole sign eliminated. They are comfortable with two wall signs and removal of the pole sign and conformance with the signing program for that shopping center or a minimal deviation from it. Since there were no further comments from the audience it was moved by Member Claudy, seconded by Member Bond to close the Public Hearing. Motion carried, 4-0 Z-51,342.3 Moved by Member Bond, seconded by Member Blaine to continue HC -51,342.3 ontinued to to August 19, 1976. /19 Motion carried, 4-0 MINUTES OF AUGUST 5, 1976 ARCHITECTURAL & SIGE APPROVAL COMMITTEE; HC -171 MTG j Page 7 3. Application HC -51,322.2 - William Herman requesting approval of site modification for a recreation building in a cluster development located adjacent to and easterly of Stevens Canyo Road, approximately 200 feet southerly of Riverside Drive. Continued from meeting of July 22, 1976. The applicant, Mr. William Herman, 1085 Stevens Canyon Road, was present at this meeting. Chairperson Sallan complimented the staff on the excellent staff report on this matter. She announced that the City Council is presently discussing an historical preservation ordinance, althou no determination has been made as yet. The Senior Planning Technician pointed our the modification to th next to the last sentence on page 7 of the report. Colored slide of the site and of the tack house were displayed. The staff was asking the Committee and the public to review the new proposal as well as the tack house and then continue this application unti a determination is made by the City Council as to its historical value . Mr. Herman referred to his original statements in regard to this tack house. He would like to retain it as long as he can reason- ably meet the requirements of the Building Department. He ex- plained that when the shell is jacked up and a completely new foundation is put in and a new roof is put on it, it will cost 1.5 times as much as the cost of an entirely new building. Everything above the first floor must be removed because it does not conform with the Building Code. Member Blaine wondered why these requirements are being made of Mr. Herman in light of the new State Law that allows relaxation of some of the restrictions to buildings of historical signifi- cance. Mr. Herman said his understanding of that law is that there shall be no exceptions in the case where a building is bein. used by the public. This building is sitting where his plans cal for a recreation building. Member Blaine would like to know from the Building Department what exceptions, if any, would be allowable. Further, she would like to know from the staff what portions of this building have historical significance. Mr. Herman said it will cost $34.20/sq. ft. to restore this old building, or $30.000/sq. ft. to construct a new one. He offered to give the old building to the City and will also help to move it. This structure is on private property and nobody will be abl to go up and look at it unless they are guests of the homeowners. Of all the people who have purchased units and those on the wait- ing list to purchase, not one is interested in preserving this structure. -171 MINUTES OF AUGUST 5, 1976 ARCHITECTURAL & SITE APPROVAL COMMITTEE MTG. Lge 8 Mr. Roy Roberts, 22364 Riverside Drive, asked if there is a written report from the City Engineer regarding the Code requirements. He was told there will be one. Mr. Thomas Twerdahl, Architect, 22354 Riverside Drive, said he lives where he can see this building. It was great when there were horses around there. It makes no sense to keep it now. It is 'way out of scale for this area. He would like to see the City move it to the McClellan Ranch Park. Mrs. Norma Bradlyn, 22344 Riverside Drive, asked how much homework was done by Mr. Herman prior to making the comment that he would be willing to keep the tack house. She is very much in favor of retaining it. She thinks everything should be left as is until there is an additional staff report. She said this tack house has been included in the County's booklet regarding historical structures in Santa Clara County. Mr. Roberts said he is very much in favor of retaining this tack house. No structure could be built that would come up to this structure. It fits into the character of this area. Cupertino's history is centered in this area. There has been some discussion about what has to be done to maintain this building. He would like to hear the City Engineer's opinion before a decision is made. He would like to see. Mr. Herman submit a proposal that leaves the building as close as possible to its original state. Mr. Twerdahl suggested research be done as to whether or not the kids from the correctional facility could work on it, as they have done on the McClellan Ranch Park. It could be moved to the Park and used as it was originally. Member Blaine pointed out that the City has determined there would be no horses at the Park. Member Claudy questioned whether the homeowners should have to pay for this. Mr. Roberts felt it was already factored in. Mr. Herman said he had $120,000 in the budget for this facility. Mr. Steven Sanborn, a builder in the area, said this would run closer to $100 per square foot. If the public can't get in to see this building there is no point in saving it. If the public wants it, then he felt they should pay for it. Mr. Sam Bradlyn, 22344 Riverside Drive, said he is against this entire project. He had no idea there were any reservations as to retention of the tack house. He felt every effort should be made to keep it. Mr. Twerdahl suggested this structure would be great for vehicle storage at McClellan Ranch Park. It is a great building, but not in its present location. MINUTES OF AUGUST 5, 1976 ARCHITECTURAL & SITE APPROVAL COMMITTEE HC -171 MTG Page 9 Mrs. Bradlyn asked if there was enough space at the Park for this structure. The Parks and Recreation Commission should be con- sulted. She would like Mr. Herman to find out how much it would cost to move it. Mrs. Glory Bratton, 10965 Miramonte Road, Monta Vista, asked if it has been decided this building has historical significance. What criteria do we have to apply? Is one criteria that it would have to be accessible to the public? Perhaps before future purchases are made for developments it should be established whether there is historical significance to be maintained. She said one reason Mr. Herman's original proposal was acceptable was because of his interest in this structure. Since there were no further comments from the audience, it was moved by Member Bond,. seconded by Member Claudy to close the public hearing. Motion carried, 4-0 Member Blaine believes this structure has historical significance. The entire area does. She does not agree with the feeling that since it is on private property that it should be removed or demolished, or that it is of less historical significance just because the public does not have access to it. She believes it does not have to be owned nor maintained by the City. Of the 15 listings in the Cupertino Sphere of Influence in the County's booklet, only 5 are left. All across this Country, structures with historical significance are being retained, both publicly and privately. Member Claudy agreed this is happening, usually b.ec.ause the owner chooses to do so. He suggested that modifying building to retain it in place would destroy historical value. Member Bond said the structure would not lose its historical significance if moved to another location, but he is not sure the City has the funds to do this. Chairperson Sallan agreed the tack house has historical signifi- cance. How it is handled is the dilema. Perhaps it should be a co -effort between the developer and the City. It is worth saving: in its purest form. Mr. Herman has said there is some problem with the time frame. iC-171 'age 10 iC-51,322.2 :ontinued MINUTES OF AUGUST 5, 1976 ARCHITECTURAL & SITE APPROVAL COMMITTEE MT G. MINUTE ORDER: Made by Member Claudy to direct the staff to prepare a report including these findings: l• ASAC determined this is an historical structure worthy of saving. 2. With the option that the structure should remain as close as possible to its original condition. 3. Whether it is possible to maintain this structure and retain its historical significance on this site or on another site. The Committee said this will go to the City Council on August 16th. The Committee feels it is worth while for the Chief Building Inspector to be at this meeting. Moved by Member Blaine, seconded by Member Claudy to continue this application. Motion carried, 4-0 4. Application HC -51,027.121 - Civic Center Professional Group (Torre Professional Center) requesting exception to Section 6.041 of the Sign Ordinance to permit installation of a ground sign on a lot with less than required linear frontage on a public right-of-way and a sign plan for a professional office center located on the west side of Torre Avenue approximately 420 feet north of the intersection of Torre Avenue and Pacifica Avenue. Mr. Keith Belcher, representing Environs, Mountain View, was at the meeting to represent the applicant. The Senior Planning Technician called attention to the staff`s concerns as reflected in the July 29, 1976, staff report. Mr. Belcher said the exception request is based on the fact that this property has two separate lots. Member Claudy said he would be inclined to go along with this request since the two properties function as one. Member Blain said "extraordinary circumstances" condition applies here. Mr. Belcher said all signs in this complex are 2' x 9". The identifi- cation of this entire center is minimal. Member Claudy suggested that perhaps the problem here is the 5 different street addresses in this center. In addition to complying with Section 10.4(a), Member Blaine said it also fits (b) because it would result in unnecessary hardship to the public as well as to the doctors. This proposal would require the least amount of modification. MINUTES OF AUGUST 5, 1976 ARCHITECTURAL & SITE APPROVAL COMMITTEEHC-171 MTG , Page 11 The aesthetics were discussed next. These colors proposed go bac: to those in the directory. The staff was asked to closely check the plans. It was felt the directory should be -oriented to drivers of cars rather than to pedestrian traffic. The Committee wanted the applicant to know they expected no furth sign requests for this complex. Moved by Member Blaine, seconded by Member Bond to close the public hearing. Motion carried, 4-0 Moved by Member Blaine, seconded by Member Bond to approve appli-' HC -51,027.121 cation HC -51,027.121 granting exception to the Sign Ordinance approved permitting installation of a ground sign with the standard H -Control conditions; and that the colors on the ground sign shall match the colors on the buildings, subject to staff approva . This will be the sign program for the Torre Professional Center and shall apply to any additional suites added in the future. The hanging signs shall be a minimum of 7' above the sidewalk for E, F, G and H on the plans submitted. The Committee finds this meets the criteria of Section 10.2 B, C, D and E of the Sign Ordinance. AYES: Members Blaine, Bond, Claudy, Chairperson Sallan NOES: None Motion carried, 4-0 5. Application HC -015.181 - Bill Moore and Associates (Wherehous Records) requesting exception of the Sign Ordinance to allow a total sign area in excess of that permitted by ordinance. Said property is located within the Cupertino Crossroads Shopping Center complex located on the southwest corner of Stevens Creek Blvd. and De Anza Blvd. The applicant, Mr. Bill Moore, of El Cerrito was present to discuss his proposal with the Committee. The Senior Planning Technician offered to answer any questions. He referred to the July 28, 1976, staff report. C-171 age 12 IC -51,015.181 ipproved MINUTES OF AUGUST 5, 1976 ARCHITECTURAL & SITE APPROVAL COMMITTEE MTG. Chairperson Sallan said she brought up at the Mayor's luncheon on this date the need for criteria in making determinations on sign graphic types of applications. The Committee reviewed again the proposal for a graphics -type sign. Mr. Moore said an early decision was very important because what happens to the outside of the building will determine what happens to the inside. Right now, the building is gutted. Chairperson Sallan believes it needs to be determined how much of the graphics are actually sign and how much are not. Guidelines are needed. Members Bond and Claudy liked the graphics approach. Member Bond said he had spoken with Member Irvine about this over the weekend and he, too, liked the graphics approach. Aside from personal opinions, Member Blaine contended that the whole thing is a sign. Since there were no comments from the audience, it was moved by Member Blaine, seconded by Member Bond to close the public hearing. Motion carried, 4-0 Moved by Member Blaine,seconded by Member Bond to recommend approval of application HC -51,015.181 for granting sign ordinance exception based upon items B, C, D and E of Section 10.2 of the Sign Ordinance, with the standard H -Control conditions. AYES: Members Blaine, Bond, Claudy, Chairperson Sallan NOES: None Motion carried, 4-0 At this point, since it was well past 11:30 PM, Chairperson Sallan announced (after conferring with the other Committee Members) that the balance of the Public Hearings would be heard at the next regular meeting. 6. Application HC -51,002.11 - Stephen Sanborn requesting approval of the modification of architecture for a four -unit apartment complex under construction on Alpine Drive. CONTINUED TO THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING. MINUTES OF AUGUST 5, 1976 ARCHITECTURAL & SITE APPROVAL COMMITTEE IHC-171 M,TG Page 13 UNFINISHED BUSINESS Chairperson Sallan reported on the contents of the Mayor's meetin . 1. Variance setback for MAYBO was approved. 2. San Carlos Homes proposal was denied. General Plan called for 43 homes. There is the need for more open space and pro- tection of privacy. 3. Closure of Scenic Blvd. The City Council closed it with the option of reopening it if Stevens Creek Blvd. is widened. 4. Gemco service station. The City Manager was interested in the future of their ground sign. It was Chairperson Sallan's understanding that they were going to remove it. 5. A fire service study is going on. They are considering breaking it up into service areas. 6. The Council voted to remove Memorial Park barn. 7. The July 4th photographs will be available to those persons wishing to purchase them. 8. The Water Commission discussed how to conserve water. 9. The Library Commission announced the dedication of the new community room will be 1 - 3 PM on September 19th. 10. Public Safety. Smoke detectors will not be required for R1, R1C. 11. The public hearing before the City Council on the Sign Ordi— nance will be August 24th. Graphics should be discussed. 12. City Manager and City Council felt tours were a good idea. They requested reports be made to the rest of the committee by those people who go on tours. 13. Privacy intrusion was discussed. It was decided the individua zones would handle this. 14. Planning Commissioner Cooper is resigning and a plaque is being prepared for her. 15. Lighting of Memorial Park tennis courts is going in. 16. Inter -Commission notes could be incorporated into the minutes. 17. Police service. The City has a 40 -hour and a 60 -hour unit. The 60 -hour unit is being changed to afternoon and evening service. -171 ,Qe 14 MINUTES OF AUGUST 5, 1976 ARCHITECTURAL & SITE APPROVAL COMMITTEE MTG. Chairperson Sallan requested the other Committee Members let her know what they would like her to convey to the Council at the next meeting. Member Bond would like the Council to know the Mayor went around and spoke to everybody at the recent Vallco open house. He said it was an exceptionally good party. Member Blaine would like the Historical Ordinance enacted as soon as possible. An opinion by the City Attorney was requested in regard to the Drexel Furniture Store's sign. NEW BUSINESS: None. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 12:12 AM. ATTEST: Is! Wm. E. Ryder City Clerk AR APPROVED: Is/ C. Nancy Sallan Chairwoman