Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutASAC Minutes - 08-26-1976CITY OF CUPERTINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California Telephone: 252-4505 MINUTES OF THE ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE APPROVAL COMMITTEE HELD IN THE CONFERENCE ROOM, CITY HALL, CUPERTINO CALIFORNIA ON AUGUST 26, 1976. SALUTE TO THE FLAG At 7:30 p.m. Chairwoman Sallan opened the meeting with the Salute to the Flag. ROLL CALL Members present: Blaine, Bond, Claudy, Irvine, Chairwoman Sallan Members absent: None Staff present: Senior Planning Technician Mark Caughey PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. Application HC -51,391.1 - B.A.S. Homes, Inc. (MacKay & Somps) requesting approval of sound wall design and location for a single-family home tract located easterly and adjacent to North De Anza Boulevard approximately 625 ft. northerly of the intersection of Stevens Creek Boulevard and North DeAnza Boulevard. Continued from H -Control meeting of August 19, 19 76 . Staff report: Senior Planning Technician Caughey referred to exhibits of wall types, noting the committee is being asked to approve the location, materials and design concept for a sound wall. He noted the intent was to provide some visual interest to the wall until such time as the plantings matured. Staff member Caughey said the committee was asked to react to planting plan as exhibited,although it was not a formal part of the application, since this is the first implementation of De Anza Boulevard landscaping plan. Mr. Ed Wood, Landscape Architect, 3563 Ryder Street, Santa Clara, showed pictures and explained concept and materials being proposed for the wall. HC -173 Page 1 HC -51,391.1 B.A.S. Homes, Inc. HC- 173 Page 2 Public Hear- ing closed MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 26, 1976 ADJOURNED H -CONTROL MEETING Mr. Wood answered Member Blaine that the color was painted on and would probably not require repainting for ten years. He said he liked the light beige and had not brought any other color samples. A discussion was held on whether a light or dark fence would be more inobtrusive. Mr. Wood said he had not brought any slides of a "winged" wall as they preferred to keep the wall simple and focus on the landscaping. Mr. Steve Stern, B.A.S. representative, said with the "winged" walls they could mound behind the walk. The committee members indicated their concern about having the mounding against the wall. Mr. Wood answered Member Claudy that the dark columns would be used with the "winged" walls. It was ascertained there would be a 50 ft. setback. A discussion was held on the "winged" wall alternative. Mr. Wood said they had made a mock up and they felt the plant material should give the impression the wall was not there. The focus would be on the wall if the "winged" approach was used. Member Claudy said he liked the approach of the brown vertical columns and tree trunks, against the simple wall. The committee agreed the emphasis would be on the plantings rather than the wall. Relative to a cap in the wall, the committee members agreed if a cap was used it should be of a light color. A discussion was held on the variation of height in the wall. Mr. Wood said they would like a lee -way of 6". There would be a minimal difference of 6" in 90 ft. With a 50 ft. setback and the staggered trees, any such variation would not be noticed. Member Blaine said the variance should not be in the middle of somebody's backyard. Chairwoman Sallan indicated more investigation by the Public Works Depart- ment relative to the step-up and step-down of the wall would be helpful. The hearing was then opened to the public for comments. There were none. Member Bond moved to close Public Hearings, seconded by Member Claudy. Motion carried, 5-0 MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 26, 1976 ADJOURNED H -CONTROL MEETING Member Blaine moved for approval of Application HC -51,391.1 - B.A.S. Homes, Inc., with the standard H -Control conditions, if there are any applicable, and (1) That the wall shall be a 50 ft. setback. (2) That it is to be a 6 ft. wall. Variation of height at posts shall not be more than 6 inches and these variations shall occur only at lot lines and as few as possible. (3) The approval is based on Exhibit C-lst Revision Alternate 1. This does not constitute landscaping approval. It is strictly the wall design and location of the wall. Seconded by Member Bond. AYES: Blaine, Bond, Claudy, Irvine, Chairwoman Sallan NOES: None Motion carried, 5-O The applicant was advised this would be heard by the City Council at its September 7, 1976 meeting. 2. Application HC -51,264.2 - USA Petroleum Corporation request- ing approval of signing for the remodeling of an existing service station located at the southeast corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and Blaney Avenue. Continued from H -Control meeting of August 19, 1976. Mr. Robert Malouf, USA Petroleum Corporation, Box 1839, Santa Monica, said he had not had time to take pictures so had brought a logo which he displayed. This showed the colors of the signs, as well as the light bar insert. Chairwoman Sallan ascertained Mr. Malouf had received a copy of the proposed new sign ordinance. In answer to Member Bond, Mr. Malouf said they were allowed a much larger sign on the wall and in the ground sign. They were just spac- ing out their alloted area allowance. He said they did not anticipate any changes which would make conformance to the new sign ordinance mandatory. Chairwoman Sallan stressed conditions under which his sign program would have to become donforming. She then determined he wanted to proposetheapplication without any modifications. HC -173 Page 3 HC -51,391.1 approved w/ conditions HC -51,264.2 USA Petroleum Corporation HC -173 Page 4 Public Hear- ings closed HC -51,264.2 approved MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 26, 1976 ADJOURNED H -CONTROL MEETING Chairwoman Sallan said she still felt the colors were excessively bright, and that they should be of a more subdued tone. Mr. Malouf said these were their trade -mark colors. He said a lighter or more subdued color would transmit more light. Chairwoman Sallan clarified it was not the night "glare" she was objecting to, but the daytime "strength" of the colors. Member Bond said he was satisfied with the colors as proposed. Member Claudy agreed. Member Blaine said since it was the trade -mark colors and the colors were used throughout the station, she could accept it even though the colors are bright. Member Irvine said he was not very sensitive to color, but he respected the Chairwoman's concern and because of this, he would have difficulty in saying he favored the colors proposed. Chairwoman Sallan pressed her concern further. Member Irvine pointed out there would be basically 17-1/2 sq. ft. of red on the sign. Chairwoman Sallan noted she would vote against this signing because of the intensity of the colors, not because she did not appreciate the up -grading of this site. Member Irvine said he did not have any trouble with the number of signs. Member Blaine said under existing ordinance they did not have much choice although she would prefer less signs. Member Claudy said he would prefer fewer signs but he would vote for this because the signs are not intrusive. Member Bond and Chairwoman Sallan agreed. Member Claudy felt the motion should indicate the applicant had been made aware of the provisions of the draft sign ordinance. The hearing was then opened for public comments. There were none. Member Irvine moved to close Public Hearings, seconded by Member Bond. Motion carried, 5-0 Member Bond moved for approval of Application HC -51,264.2, with standard H -Control conditions. This application is being approved based on the existing ordinance and the applicant has been informed that at some future time that under the new sign ordinance he would have to bring his sign program into conformance. Seconded by Member Claudy. AYES: Members Blaine, Bond, Claudy NOES: Member Irvine and Chairwoman Sallan. Motion carried, 3-2 MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 26, 1976 ADJOURNED H -CONTROL MEETING The applicant was informed his application would now be heard by the City Council on September 7, 1976. 3. Application HC -51,002.11 - Stephen Sanborn requesting approval of modification of architecture for a four unit apartment complex under construction on Alpine Drive. Continued from H -Control meeting of August 19, 1976. Chairwoman Sallan reviewed what had occurred at the last meeting. Items to be resolved were covering of smoke stacks, extension of 6 ft. deck to corner of Unit 1, the window and _deck area which:faced the Kane and Weimer properties and the screening along the north side of the property. Mr. Stephen W. Sanborn, 23048 Granger Avenue, Los Altos, said they are covering the smoke stacks and the decks had been completed. He pointed out the surface area of door glass was less than the window would have been. He had been prepared to put up screen but Monterrey Pines had been suggested. He said Mrs. Kane was allergic to the Eucalyptus trees originally proposed. He said Mrs. Weimer would not talk to him. Chairwoman Sallan used diagram provided by staff to clarify current status of this application. Mr. Sanborn answered Member Blaine that the Monterey Pine was being proposed for screening. Member Claudy pointed out that at the last meeting the screening being talked about was frosted glass with a green house effect inside the building. The hearing was then opened to public comment. Chairwoman Sallan explained intent was to work with what was existing and try to solve the problem by dialogue and compromise. Mr. Tom Di Franco, 10427 Vista Knolls Boulevard, Cupertino, said he felt the neighbors had been comfortable with what had been approved. All these changes are pushing away from the goals originally set. He felt each change enhanced intrusion problems. With regard to the structure on Unit 4, unless the view of that rail was above eye level he was against it totally. Mr. Sanborn explained he felt this was so far from the property line that it would not be an intrusion. HC 173 Page 5 HC -51,002.11 Stephen Sanborn Mr. Di Franco pointed out the ownership might change and the landscapin allowed to deteriorate. HC -173 MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 26, 1976 ADJOURNED H -CONTROL MEETING Page 6 Slides taken from the Sanborn building were shown. Mr. Sanborn said the deck was in and that when the landscaping was in there would not be any privacy intrusion. Mr. Di Franco said he did not have that much confidence in landscaping since it could die, noting he had lost several plants to oak root fungus. Member Claudy said he had gone to site and these are solid walls on the balcony. Anyone sitting in the living room could not see over the rail- ing. Mr. Di Franco said covering the stacks and the deck on Unit 1 were acceptable to him. Mrs. Weimer, 10447 Vista Knolls Boulevard, Cupertino, said she would not compromise. She was allergic to having someone look into her window. Her realtor had said he could not sell the house because of the Sanborn building. The balcony on Unit 4 had to come down. Mr. Richard Kane, 10437 Vista Knoll Boulevard, Cupertino, said he hoped something could be resolved. He noted the primary problem which was the deck on Unit 4 overlooked mostly his property. If the catwalk remained, there would have to be some screening on it. He said the Monterey Pines would screen, but this would take several years. A type of trellis screening might be adequate. It was learned that none of the bathroom windows were of opaque glass. Mr. Sanborn described the door being proposed. He said a wooden screen could be put upon the railing. Member Blaine pointed out that Monterey Pines are not resistant to oak root fungus. Chairwoman Sallan noted this would validate concern that landscaping would not be the way to go in solving the problem in this situation. Chairwoman Sallan said the choices were to remove the catwalk, modify it so there is no visual intrusion and this would have to be verified to by the residents or they could go back to what was originally approved, which was no balcony and window configuration as shown. A discussion was held on whether opaque glass could be required in the bathrooms. Member Blaine said she liked the idea of the catwalk but it would have to have some type of screening, such as angled slats. MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 26, 1976 ADJOURNED H -CONTROL MEETING Member Irvine said he had less objection to balcony as to bedroom windows. The balcony is not used that much. When it is 90 feet from the property line, he did not think it was that much of a problem. Member Bond agreed, noting however that it was good to have the input of the residents. Member Claudy agreed with Member Irvine. He had been on the balcony. It was built without permission, therefore he would go along with the idea of a vertical louvre screen. Chairwoman Sallan said she did not think the residents should have to suffer from the application. The first step would the slat type of approach. Mrs. Weimer and Mr. Kane should be able to stand on the balcony and not find any visual intrusion of their property. If it could not be screened satisfactorily, then the catwalk would have to come down. Member Blaine moved to close Public Hearings, seconded by Member Claudy. Motion carried, 5-0 Staff member Caughey advised there were no graphic exhibits on what was being proposed and he felt City Council would prefer to have some. Mr. Sanborn explained since the Monterey Pines had been suggested rather than a wood structure, he had not brought in any plans. A discussion was raised on the possibility that the residents would not verify adequacy of screening once it was built. In answer to Chairwoman Sallan, Mrs. Weimer said she would refuse to go onto Mr. Sanborn's property to see if the screening would work and would take other measures. Member Blaine felt that although citizen input was necessary, it was the responsibility of this committee to determine whether or not the screening was satisfactory. It was decided that the committee members would make an on -site inspection. How this would relate to Brown Act was discussed. Member Irvine suggested continuing this until the next meeting, meeting at the site and then returning to regular meeting to make their decision. Member Blaine moved to continue Application HC -51,002.11 to 7:00 p.m. on Wednesday, September 8, 1976 at 10384 Alpine Drive, Cupertino. Seconded by Member Bond. Motion carried, 5-0 HC -173 Page 7 Public Hear- ings closed HC -61,002 .11 continued to 9/8/76 HC -173 Page 8 HC -51,380:1 E. C. Lacey Public Hea ing closed HC -51,380.1 approved w/ conditions MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 26, 1976 ADJOURNED H -CONTROL MEETING At 9:45 a recess was taken with the meeting reconvening at 10:05 p.m. Mr. Sanborn (Application HC -51,002.11) asked to be heard again at end of the agenda. The committee agreed to do this. 4. Application HC -51,380.1 - E. C. Lacey requesting approval of modification of architecture for a commercial building located at the northwest corner of Scofield Drive and South De Anza Boulevard. Continued from H -Control meeting of August 19, 1976. The staff displayed a colored rendering of the building as it had been approved previously by this committee. The rendering showed the build- ing with shake roofing material. Staff explained that the applicants now wished to change the roof material to an interlocking cement tile, and displayed a sample of the new material. Staff indicated that the applicants also wished to eliminate the raised planter boxes at the south and east elevations of the building and instead to extend glazing to the finished floor level of the building. Mr. Herbert Cuevas, 480 N. 1st Street, San Jose, who is architect for the project, explained the proposal in more detail. Chairwoman Sallan was answered that the change in roof material was first brought about for fire safety reasons, but was now sought for its aesthetic value. Member Irvine explained the "fire flow" determination process as established by the Fire Marshall's office. The elimination of the planter box was next discussed. Member Blaine indicated concern that the additional glass area to be substituted in place of the planter would permit more signage in the windows. The applicant explained that the planter box removal was necessary from a marketing standpoint. There is a significant grade difference between De Anza Boulevard and the proposed finished floor elevation of the building. In answer to Member Blaine, staff member Caughey stated that the approved landscaping material in the planter box was to be rosemary. Member Blaine noted that if the rosemary were planted where the planter boxes would have been, they would be obscured from view of the street behind taller growing shrubs. After discussion of the point, it was agreed that this problem could be solved by reversing the positions of the rosemary and raphiolepsis as shown on Exhibit C. Chairwoman Sallan asked for comments from the audience. There were none. It was moved and seconded to close the Public Hearings. Motion carried, 5-0 Member Claudy moved, Member Bond seconded, to recommend approval of Application HC -51,380.1, subject to standard ASAC conditions and the following special conditions: (1) That approval of architectural modifications for the roof, the east and south elevations is according to Exhibit B -2nd Rev. (2) That the positions of the rosemary and raphiolepsis plantings as shown on Exhibit C of this application will be reversed. Motion carried, 5-0 Referred to City Council meeting of September 8, 1976 MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 26, 1976 ADJOURNED H -CONTROL MEETING 5. Application HC -51,397.1 - United Auto Parts (Rich Jones & Chuck Perez) requesting approval of site, architecture and landscaping for a remodeling of an existing commercial building located on the north side of Stevens Creek Boulevard between Vista Drive and De Anza Boulevard. Continued from H -Control meeting of August 19, 1976. Staff member Caughey briefly reviewed location and background of application. Referring to site plan, he pointed out 25 ft. landscaped setback along Stevens Creek Boulevard and pedestrian walkway between front of store and Stevens Creek Boulevard. Slides were shown of the site and modifications described. Mr. Sid Nash, 1567 Kooser Road, San Jose, said the Traffic Engineer had recommended the proposed perpendicular stalls. He also has suggested the three parking stalls located in front of the store be shifted eastward and aligned with the proposed stalls to be placed along the east wall of the store. Mr. Nash answered Chairwoman Sallan that they had more than the required number of stalls. She suggested eliminating the three front stalls and increasing the landscaped area. Mr. Nash said that they really needed this number of stalls even though it was more than required. He answered Chairwoman Sallan they could compromise by moving the stalls in by several feet. Mr. Rich Jones, 16200 Greenwood Lane, Monte Sereno, stressed they would like to keep the three stall spaces. With regard to staff's suggestion on backing distance behind stalls, Mr. Nash said they would prefer to keep the 32 ft. Member Irvine agreed the aisle space would make it much easier for vehicles coming in here, especially for campers and trucks. After discussion the committee members agreed that in light of the perpendicular parking the 32 ft. space was preferable. Member Blaine felt having xsylosma continued all the way down east planter strip would help provide the effect of a wider strip. A discussion was held on the moving of the three parking stalls. It was the consensus of the committee that they should be moved easterly by approximately 10 ft. Mr. Nash described the landscaping intent and located the areas of the planting. He said they had not planned to add mounding because of drainage structure. HC -173 Page 9 51, 397.1 ted Auto is HC -173 Page 10 Public Hear- ings closed HC -51,397.i approved w/ conditions MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 26, 1976 ADJOURNED H -CONTROL MEETING Chairwoman Sallan said the landscaping plan was unclear and should be more specific. She suggested continuing the landscaping portion of the applica- tion. It was questioned whether English ivy would grow under the redwood tree. Member Blaine suggested using tan bark or gravel. The hearing was then opened for public comments. There were none. Member Bond moved to close Public Hearings, seconded by Member Claudy. Motion carried, 5-0 Member Blaine moved to approve Application HC -51,397.1 with standard H -Control conditions and (1) The three parking sites on the east side of front walkway be set further east by approximately 10 ft. subject to staff approval. (2) That planter areas will be landscaped and construction of the wall will be as proposed of Sierra precast concrete sections. The applicant to submit exhibits of the wall -'subject to the staff approval. (4) That the sign changes shall be as proposed. (5) The landscaping portion of the application shall be continued to September 8, 1976 meeting. (6) The building shall be painted as shown on the exhibit. Colors to be Barcelona brown and toffee beige. The wall shall be painted to match the existing wall. Seconded by Member Claudy. It was suggested that bike racks be included. It was agreed to discuss this as part of the landscaping at next meeting. AYES: Blaine, Bond, Claudy, Irvine and Chairwoman Sallan NOES: None Motion carried, 5-0 The applicant was advised this would now be heard by the City Council at their September 7, 1976 meeting. MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 26, 1976 ADJOURNED H -CONTROL MEETING 6. Application HC -51,075.47 - Vallco Park, Ltd. requesting approval of site, landscaping and grading for a parking lot addition to the financial center located at the north- east corner of Wolfe Road and Stevens Creek Boulevard, Continued from H -Control meeting of August 19, 1976. Staff report: Using site plan, Staff member Caughey described the proposal. He referred to Traffic Engineer's modification as shown on Exhibit A. Mr. Bill Tagg, 619 Torrington Drive, Sunnyvale, displayed a layout which he said he had made according to City standards. He had added 6 inches to the parking stalls and removed several spaces. This was discussed. The hearing was then opened for comments from the public. There were none. Member Bond moved to close Public Hearings, seconded by Member Blaine. Motion carried, 5-0 Member Bond moved to approve Application HC -51,075.47 with standard H -Control conditions, and Exhibits A 1st Revision and C. Seconded by Member Irvine. AYES: Blaine, Bond, Claudy, Irvine, Chairwoman Sallan NOES: None Motion carried, 5-0 The applicant was advised this would be before the City Council on September 7, 1976. (3) Application HC -51,002.11 - Stephen Sanborn Mr. Sanborn said he was hoping to finalize building on September 17 and if his application was continued it would not be before the City Council before the end of September. Another problem was that the far corner of the screen would be in to the area of a 15 ft. wire easement. In light of these considerations, he asked the committee to reopen hearings. He was proposing to go back to the original window on Unit 4 which had been approved and asked the committee to make a decision now on this proposal. HC -173 Page 11 HC -51,075.47 Vallco Park, Ltd. Public Hear- ings closed HC -51,075.47 approved HC -173 Page 12 HC -51,002 .11 Stephen Sanborn Hearing Reopened HC -51,002.11 approved w/ conditions MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 26, 1976 ADJOURNED H -CONTROL MEETING The plans were restudied and he described what he was proposing and how it would alleviate intrusion problem. Mr. Sanborn said the catwalk would be removed. The committee advised Mr. Sanborn to keeping his landscaping proposal as originally approved. Member Blaine noted each of the residents who had been present tonight should be notified of action being taken at this time. Staff was to contact each of them by phone tomorrow. A discussion was held on legality of reopening hearing and changing decision without presence of residents. It was decided to take action based on the approval of City Attorney. Member Claudy moved to reopen hearing on Application HC -51,002.11. Seconded by Member Bond. Motion carried, 4-1 No: Blaine Member Claudy moved to approve Application HC -51,0O2.11, subject to standard H -Control conditions and subject to the condition that such action be deemed legal by the City Attorney and concurred with by the residents in attendance, and following conditions: (1) Deck on Unit 1 be 6 ft. deep and be extended to the end of the southwest corner of the building. (2) That the catwalk structure on northeast corner of Unit 4 be removed to a distance of 2 ft. west from the northeast corner such that the deck is only on front of the building and comes to within 2 ft. of the wall. (3) Smoke stacks on Units 2 and 3 be covered in a siding material similar to the rest of the building. (4) A drawing be submitted prior to City Council meeting. (5) That a standard window as per original plan be installed in the existing door opening onto the former catwalk of Unit 4. Seconded by Member Bond. A discussion was held on whether or not the bathroom window had to be of opaque glass. Mr. Sanborn agreed to put in a stained glass window, as per the original plan. AYES: Bond, Claudy, Irvine, Chairwoman Sallan NOES: Blaine Motion carried, 4-1 Member Blaine clarified her no vote was because she felt the hearing was setting a poor precedent -which could be abused in the future. MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 26, 1976 ADJOURNED H -CONTROL MEETING Chairwoman Sallan announced this would make earlier motion for a continuance null and void. Mr. Sanborn would be notified tomorrow as to reaction of the residents. With reference to a summary of City Council discussion of sign program ordinance, Chairwoman Sallan suggested a special study session be held with the City Attorney to help develop criteria for developing sign program, amending sign program, etc. It was decided a time for this special meeting would be set at a later date. Chairwoman Sallan asked for further comments that the committee members wished forwarded to the Mayor's meeting. Member Bond reported on Mr. Mulkern's comment that he was in total accord that any change of copy should make a sign subject to being brought into conformance. It was noted that the Winchell Donut sign in McClellan Square shopping center was a white background with brown letters. ADJOURNMENT At 12:35 a.m. the meeting was adjourned to Wednesday, September 8, 1976 at 7:00 p.m. APPROVED: Is/ C. Nancy Sallan Chairwoman ATTEST: Is/ Wm. E. Ryder City Clerk HC- 173 Page 13