Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutASAC Minutes - 05-04-1978CITY OF CUPERTINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10300 TORRE AVENUE, CUPERTIN0, CA 95014 Telephone: (408) 252-4505 ra REGULAR MEETING OF THE ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE APPROVAL COMMITTEE HELD ON MAY 4, 1978 IN THE CONFERENCE ROOM, ROOM 105, CITY HALL, CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA SALUTE TO THE FLAG The meeting was called to order at 7:10 by Chairman Bond with the Salute to the Flag. ROLL CALL Members Present: Ripplinger, Sallan, Irvine (until 7:43), Johnson, Chairman Bond Members Absent: None Staff Present: Kathryn McKenna, Planning Intern, Mark Caughey, Assistant Planner ELECTION OF OFFICERS 1978-79 TERM Member Sallan nominated. Elliott Bond for Chairman of the ASAC for the 1978-79 term. Member Ripplinger seconded the nomination. Member Sallan moved and Member Irvine seconded that nominations be closed. Motion carried, 4-0 Bond abstaining The vote was called for the nominee for Chairman. Carried, 4-0 Bond abstaining Member Sallan nominated Ted Ripplinger for Vice -Chairman of the ASAC for the 1978-79 term. Member Irvine seconded the nomination. Member Ripplinger nominated Member Irvine for Vice -Chairman of the ASAC fo the 1978-79 term. Member Irvine declined the nomination. Member Irvine moved and Member Sallan seconded that nominations be closed. Motion carried, 4-0 Ripplinger abstaining The vote was called for the nominee for Vice -Chairman. Carried, 4-0 Ripplinger abstaining HC -217 Page i HC -217 MINUTES OF THE MAY 4, 1978 ASAC MEETING Page 2 Chairman Bond commented that Member Ripplinger has served on other Commissions and is a valuable member of the ASAC. He noted that Member Sallan has been a member of the ASAC for several years and has served as its Chairperson at least twice, and Member Irvine's contribution to the Committee as a professional (architect) has been and will continue to be appreciated. He added that one thing he would like to accomplish as Chairman is to try to make small business or once -in -lifetime applicants comfortable and work with them. He commented that large developers are more familiar ;with the ASAC's function and know how to deal with the suggestions of ' the Committee more easily. He hopes to work harmoniously with the members of the Committee in this (and all) matters during the coming term. POSTPONEMENTS & COMMUNICATIONS 'Mr. Caughey noted that Application HC -51,454.1 (item 7 under Public Hearings) has been postponed. WRITTEN COiuivli.ATIUNS Mr. Caughey distributed a letter written by a citizen concerned about land use planning. Members will read the statement for comment at another meeting. NOTICE: Chairman Bond announced that no public hearing will be initiated after 11 p.m. If a hearing is in progress at that time, it will be continued until its conclusion or until midnight, whichever comes first. The Committee will adjourn by midnight. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Minutes of Regular Meetings of April 6 and April 20, 1978. Minutes of April 6, 1978 - The following corrections were noted: 1. Page 8, last paragraph: the word "stops" in the second to the last sentence should read "mowing strip". 2. Page 10, list of concerns under informal review 3-U-78: Item 1 should read, "Bomanite border should be continued on all 4 sides of the paved area." 3. Page 2, paragraph 3, first sentence: should read "...Mr. Cicero was to come back within two months after the new ordinance was to go into effect ...". Member Irvine moved and Member Sallan seconded that the Minutes of April 6, 1978 be approved as corrected. Motion carried, 3-0 Members Ripplinger & Johnson abstaining Member Sallan asked if Planning Commission Reports will contain a separate section with ASAC comments. Mr. Caughey replied in the affirmative. Page 3 Minutes of April 20, 1978 Member Ripplinger moved and Member Sallan seconded that the Minutes of April 20, 1978 be approved as submitted. f Motion carried, 3-O Members Irvine and Johnson abstaining II� PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued Applications (from ?.SAC meeting of April 20, 1978): 1. Application HC -51,402.11 - Orchard Valley Partnership (Terranomics Development Corporation) requesting modification to the approved sign program for a multi -tenant commercial center at the southeast quadrant of Stevens Creek Boulevard and Portal Avenue. Mr. Mel Peterson was present for this application. He noted that the Committee concerns from the last meeting were about a range of color choice vs. monochromatic color choice for the sign program, and also the request that a transom sign or hanging sign (or both) be allowed each tenant in addition to the fascia sign. The previously approved sign program allowed a color choice of either white or ivory. Regarding the additional signs, Mr. Peterson said that some tenants have a secondary message which would be facilitated if either a hanging or transom sign were allowed. All tenants will have the fascia sign. Member Irvine noted that he would rather see all tenants have either the hanging sign or the transom sign consistently. Mr. Peterson noted that there was some disagreement as to whether the transom sign was a true sign, or part of the architecture. Members Ripplinger and Sallan said they would consider them signs. Member Sallan requested a copy of the present sign program for this development. Mr. Peterson showed samples of the color range he proposes for a new sign program in a lit display box. He stated he would like to be able to tell his tenants that they could use any one of this range of colors. He noted that the actual colors should look more like the unlit samples. Member Irvine noted that the developer's previous development got out of hand with colors of signs (too many varied colors), and that he is swayed by that. He noted that in this case there would be 3 or 4 colors instead of the variety that went up in the other center. Mr. Peterson asked for the drawings of the elevations which he presented at the last meeting. Mr. Caughey brought them to the hearing room. Members Ripplinger and Sallan said they would like ivory better than the range. Member Johnson noted that the colors presented are almost too bright, and he would lean toward ivory. Chairman Bond said the sign program would look better if all signs were a uniform color. HC -217 MINUTES OF THE MAY 4, 1978 ASAC MEETING Page 4 i Mr. Peterson commented that since only 3 members have seen the elevation :renderings, the other members cannot visualize how the colors will look. Member Sallan said she has no objection to seeing the renderings again, but .that an artist's rendering does not always show what the elevation will look like in real life. Member Irvine left at this point (7:43 p.m.). Member Johnson asked if 8 colors is normally considered a limited range. Chairman Bond noted that the Committee can limit the range as much as it wishes. Mr. Peterson offered to bring each sign in separately for approval. Member Ripplinger suggested this could be done on an informal basis. Member Sallan said she would definitely approve only- ivory. As much as the rendering is appreciated, she feels this shopping center has a chance to look classy with the ivory. The ivory will give the tenants the identity they need quite adequately. Ir. Peterson explained that in the previous center, a lot of heavy �--_-t_ is (national 1 chain stores) were involved. In the advertising tenants l.J \Lla l.lvtLay - �. a proposed center, most tenants don't have any pre -conditioning and will aot demand a heavy color approach. Member Sallan noted thatif this is the case, the tenants would be more willing to go with ivory. biscussion switched to the additional signing proposed. Member Ripplinger Mated he likes the board signs, but does not feel every tenant should 6e required to put one up. He said he feels the transom sign would mean double exposure on the same elevation,, since it faces in the direction of the fascia sign. He noted that the transom signs can be seen from the treet. He noted he would be willing to give the tenants a choice of either hanging (board) sign or a transom sign. mber Sallan felt the transom sign would mean double exposure. She felt the hanging signs would lend class to the center, but that if the Individual tenant did not wish to have one, he should be limited to the fascia sign only. Member Johnson asked what materials would be used on the transom. Mr. 'eterson said the hanging signs would be wood -carved and the transom 'signs would be wood -carved, stained glass, etc. These transom signs Would be architectural embellishments, and would not be obviously visible rom the front. Chairman Bond noted that in a similar shopping center, the signs on the fascia were too high for viewing up close, while the poor signs were back far enough as to not be viewed from farther back from 'ere the fascia signs were viewed. Mr. Peterson added that the letters on he fascia are only 15" high. airman Bond noted he did not see anything wrong with giving tenants an ption for either board or transom signs. Member Johnson said he also 'felt comfortable with giving tenants that option. tiv 1 / Page 5 Discussion turned to the proposed ground sign. Mr. Peterson said the lettex and logo will be black, with the words "Market Place" in orange with a black outline. The letters will be 9" high on this sign and the sign will be externally illuminated. Mr. Caughey suggested that approval be conditioned that the sign be no higher than 12' above sidewalk grade. Members of the Committee and Mr. Peterson agreed to this. In answer to a question by Member Johnson, Mr. Peterson said that the sign will be 4' above the moundin and 6' high. He does not know the exact height of the mounding, but thought it would be 2'-3' high. It was suggested that if the mounding height brough the overall height of the sign to over 12' above sidewalk grade, the bottom of the sign could be lowered to 3' above the mound. Chairman Bond opened the hearing to the public. Mr. Bill Tagg commented that in Vallco Village, there are small signs in the walkway because people often; do not see the fascia signs. He noted that all letters on signs are the same color, but that colors are allowed for their logos or insignias. In answer to a question by Member Ripplinger, Mr. Peterson said that the ground sign will be tongue and groove rather than carved. Member Sallan moved and Member Ripplinger seconded that the public hearing be closed. Motion carried, 4-0 Member Ripplinger asked asked if there would be any control over the size and type of transom sign. Mr. Peterson replied that the definition of a transom limits the size of the sign. It could not be more than 6' wide for a double door or about 3' wide for a single door. The height would be determined by ceiling height. Letters would be 3" to 4" high at the most. Member Sallan asked if the approval could be moved in three parts because she would like to vote for 2 of the parts, but not the third. Mr. Peterson said he would rather get each item approved separately so that if he wished to appeal, it could be done more readily. Mr. Caughey said the Committee could approve the application as a whole package and the applicant could appeal a specific part of it. Member Irvine moved that Application HC -51,402.11 be recommended for approval Approval of subject to Standard ASAC conditions 1-8 and conditions 9-14 as follows: Application HC -51,402. 9. That the recommendation of approval is based upon Exhibits F-2 and F-3 11 and informational of this application except as may be amended by special conditions enumerated herein. 10. The tenant sign portion of Exhibit F-2 is approved, except that copy color shall be restricted to ivory only. 11. The proposed hanging signs shall not be less than 8' at their lowest point above any pedestrian passageway. Page 6 12. Final height of the proposdd freestanding sign (Exhibit F-3) shall not exceed twelve (12) feet above adjoining sidewalk grade. Final location of said sign shall be subject to approval of the Traffic Engineer. 13. The ASAC or its staff shall retain authority to review lighting intensity of any sign approved under this application, and to require correction of off -site intrusion impacts or excessive glare. 14. No more than 2 signs shall be allowed each minor tenant within the development; one hanging sign or one transom sign as shown in Exhibit F-2 may be permitted in addition to a fascia sign. The motion was seconded by Member Sallan. The Committee would like the staff to review the hanging or transom signs and bring any concerns back to the ASAC. Motion carried, 4-0 Ayes - Johnson Ripplinger Bond Sallan Mr. Peterson was informed that if he wishes to appeal one of the conditions, he must submit a written request to do so within 5 working days of this meeting. 2. Application HC -51,299.6 - Stevens Creek Office Center Associates requesting approval of exception to the approved sign program for an existing office center complex located on Stevens Creek Boulevard east of Saich Way. Mr. Noel Marquis of Amcoe Sign Company was present for this application. The Committee Members received the staff's report as to the number of tenants and offices occupied and the usefulness of the present sign program. Nearly every rentable office space is occupied (43 out of 44) and most conform to the present sign program. Ms. McKenna reported that one exception has its logo in the window (2' x 2') and one sign has a red & white logo attached to the window of the door. The other exception is that of V.I.P. Realty. Mr. Caughey added that the owner said he would probably not be renting to any more realtors because of a parking problem. The other tenants are those which do not demand a great deal of parking (e.g. an architect, engineer, credit bureau, etc.). Member Sallan noted that it is the use itself that demands an extraordinary sign approach. She indicated that if the exception is approved, some extraordinary findings should be stated. Chairman Bond commented that it may be difficult to determine how much visibility each tenant would need and that a criteria would have to be set. Member Ripplinger asked how the V.I.P. exception was justified. HC -217 Page 7 Chairman Bond said that he recollected the complex was having a problem getting tenants at that time. The new owner at the time felt he needed one big tenant and that tenant (V.I.P. Realty) would not come in without the sign. Member Ripplinger commented that once the Committee starts giving exceptions, it would have a harder time denying exceptions in the future. Mr. Caughey stated this is a question of two competitive business in the same area, and one business should not have a visual advantage over the other. The businesses are both about 350' from the street. Mr. Marquis feels that Cornish & Carey felt they should be allowed the sign exception because of that granted V.I.P. He asked what would be wrong with having all businesses in the center with this type of sign, if they serve the general public. Chairman Bond said that if findings were stated to substantiate the exception, the sign itself is acceptable. He asked for opinions from the other members. Mr. Caughey suggested findings as stated in the staff repor for the meeting of April 20, 1978. Members Sallan and Johnson stated they agreed with the sign design if findings were stated to substantiate this exception. Member Sallan noted that the sign would be**visible from the parking area rather than the street and asked if this business is more difficult to locate than the other businesses. The response was that it would keep people from getting confused. The sign is not to benefit visibility from Stevens Creek Boulevard. Member Sallan asked how many more exceptions the ASAC might have to deal with in connection with this center. Mr. Caughey said he could not accurately predict this. Member Sallan noted that from the aerial photo, it looked like a possible 4 facing north and 3 facing south. Mr. Caughey said that this exception is being tied to the nature of the business'; V.I.P. would have an advantage over C&C if the exception was not granted. He noted that the V.Z.P. exception approval was not substantiated by findings and that this exception can do so to make the reasoning a little clearer. Since there were no comments from the audience, Member Ripplinger moved and Member Johnson seconded that the public hearing be closed. Motion carried, 3-0 Sallan abstaining Member Ripplinger moved that Application HC -51,299.6 be approved subject Approval of to the standard ASAC conditions 1-8, conditions 9-il, and findings as Application follows: HC -51,299.6 9. That the recommendation of approval is based upon Exhibit F and infor- mational of this application except as may be amended by special con- ditions contained herein. 10. The ASAC or its staff shall retain authority to review and require reasonable correction of intensity of the sign approved under this application following its installation. Page 8 ' 11. The proposed sign shall be used only by the Applicant whose business is identified as "Cornish and Carey" per Exhibit F; at such time as the subject business vacates the referenced address, the subject sign shall be removed. Approval of Application HC -51,299.6 is based on findings as follows: 1. That the proposed sign program exception is consistent with criteria specified in Section 11.02 of Ordinance 746, and with the intent of signing in the City of Cupertino as described in Section 1.03.2 of Ordinance 746. Subconclusions : a. The proposed sign will serve the public interest by reducing difficulties in locating the subject business from the Office Complex Parking Area. b. The proposed sign is the minimum variation necessary to accomplish the purpose of Criteria 1, 2, 4, 5 of Sign Ordinance, Section 1.03.2. c. The proposed sign will provide equitable treatment of similar business within the same geographic locations. Member Johnson seconded the motion. Motion carried, 3-0 Ayes - Ripplinger Johnson Bond Sallan abstaining The Committee recessed at 8:34 and reconvened at 8:47. 3. Application HC -51,333.12 - International Consolidated Contractors, Inc. (Jenn Chiu) requesting approval of site, architecture, landscaping, grading, lighting, and signing for a restaurant and adjacent commercial building located westerly of and adjacent to De Anza Boulevard north of Valley Green Drive. Mr. Dick Pacheco, 1960 The Alameda, San Jose, CA 94301, was present for th is application. It was noted that the applicant has made a number of changes, and that the Committee appreciates the effort put in to comply with Committee suggestions from the last meeting. Staff suggested the addition of a pedestrian walkway from the main parking lot to the eastern entrance of the restaurant. The applicant proposes a walkway adjacent to the southern elevation of the restaurant; however, staff suggests further walkway extension along east elevation to the main entrance. rage y Mr. Pacheco stated that Mr. Wei, the architect, does not wish to sacrifice landscaping to put in an elevated walkway. He feels the driveway is sufficient at 24 ft. wide to accommodate pedestrians. He feels the removal of some of the lanscaping would unbalance the look of the building. The only people using the front area would be those utilizing valet parking anyway. The building is 15' away from De Anza Boulevard and very well lit, so safety should not be a problem. Member Ripplinger asked how wide the sidewalk would have to be and noted that handicapped persons would have to come up onto the sidewalk at the south side and back into the driveway way when they reached the east side.; Mr. Pacheco replied that the sidewalk would probably be 4i to 5' wide. He added that cutting down on the driveway would lose the feeling of openness and that the difference of elevation of the entrance would detract from the building. Chariman Bond suggested that a sidewalk be added, but it need not be raised. It could be the same level as the driveway, but have different paving which would delineate it as a walkway. No landscaping would have to be removed. Mr. Pacheco and the Committee members agreed that this would be a good solution. Another staff concern was that of landscaping in the southwest corner of site. This is the area in which the trash enclosure will be located. Staff suggested the addition of tree and low -growing planting to extreme southwest end of the site. The applicant agreed that this would be done. Staff is to approve the variety and size of these plantings at the building permit level. The primary Committee concern is the south elevation of the commercial structure. The applicant has added decorative tile similar to that used on the restaurant facades, and wood posts at 10' centers. The staff suggested that the vertical wood trim be 20' on center instead of 10', that windows be eliminated, and that wood trim on the doors match that depicted for the north elevation. Committee members agreed that the vertical posts should only be at 20' centers instead of 10'. Regarding the elimination of windows, Mr. Pacheco said the applicant did not want windows in the first place, but added them because the elevation was too blank. Since the tile plant-ons have now been added, the windows should not be necessary. Ms. McKenna stated that staff would also be in favor of taking out the doors. Member Ripplinger asked how trash would be taken out if doors were removed. Mr. Pacheco noted that doors were not originally included in the plan either and that trash could easily be taken out the front since the stores are only 40' deep and the type of tenants anticipated would not generate much trash anyway. Member Sallan suggested that if the back doors were removed, the applicant could put more landscaping in the back. She asked what the doors will look like, since they may be worth keeping.' HC -217 Page 10 MINUTES OF THE MAY 4, 1978 ASAC MEETING Approval of Application :iC-51, 333.121 Chairman Bond commented that not all tenants would have to have doors. Mr. Pacheco said that the applicant would either put in doors for all tenants or no doors at all. He asked that he be given the option to eliminate doors if there is no fire safety requirement for them. Member Sallan agreed that the elevation would look better without the doors or windows, but only if the landscaping was much heavier. Member Johnson agreed that he would have to see heavy landscaping if doors were eliminated. Mr. Pacheco said he would also like to eliminate the sidewalk along this elevation if there are no service doors. Member Sallan noted that more landscaping could be added in that case. Member Ripplinger stated he is still not happy with the long expanse on the south elevation. Chairman Bond noted that with the addition of the tiles, and heavy landscaping, the view from Valley Green Drive would be mostly landscaping and the roof. The south wall' itself would tend to fade from view. Additional lighting in the parking lot was the next topic of discussion. Mr. Pacheco said the applicant will definitely install adequate lghting for its patrons. Chairman Bond suggested that the adequacy of lighting be left to staff approval. - Landscaping on the south elevation was discussed next. Member Sallan asked how high from the ground the plant -on tiles would be. Mr. Pacheco replied they would be 7' off the ground. The landscaping planned for that area would be 6' high, so very little of the wall would be seen. Chairman Bond suggested that the lanscaping in this elevation be brought back informally to the ASAC. The Committee would like to see heavy landscaping with a variation of heights. Mr. Pacheco said the plantings would be mixed, not all in a row as depicted. Mr. Caughey said the ASAC and staff would lean more toward clusters in an informal manner rather than rows of plants. Member Sallan noted that with the 5' extra gained from elimination of the sidewalk, the applicant would be able to work with depth and texture. Chairman Bond asked that the applicant bring the landscaping for this elevation back for informal review, including the southwest corner as discussed previously. Since there were no comments from the audience, Member Sallan moved and Member Ripplinger seconded that the public hearing be closed. Motion carried, 4-0 Member Sallan moved that Application HC -51,333.12 be approved subject to the standard ASAC conditions 1-8 and conditions 9-17 as follows: 9. That the recommendation of approval is based upon Exhibits A, 1st Rev, B, B-1 1st Rev., B-2, E, and E-1 of this application except as may be amended by special conditions contained herein. z a6= ii 10. The site plan shall be revised at building permit level to incor- porate a pedestrian walkway adjacent to east elevation of restaurant, said approach to be subject to staff approval. 11. The applicant shall supply a detailed drawing of the surface treatmen of the pedestrian walkway located between the commercial and restaurant structures at the building permit level. 13. The landscaping portion of the site plan is approved with the exception of the south perimeter of the site, including the southwest corner. The applicant shall prepare a landscaping plan in place of sidewalk adjacent to south elevation of the commercial structure, said plan to meet with staff approval. South elevation landscape plan shall be submitted to the Committee for informal review prior to issuance of building permit. 14. On -center spacing of vertical wood trim on south elevation of commercial structure shall be 20 ft. 15. The windows and doors on the south elevation of the commercial structure shall be eliminated unless required by the fire marshal. In the event that they are required, the staff shall bring this elevation back to the ASAC for informal review. 16. Grading and drainage plans for the site shall be prepared to the satisfaction of Director of Public Works, prior to release of development permits. 17. The final configuration of parking lot lighting shall be subject to staff approval on the building permit level. The motion was seconded by Member Johnson. Mr. Pacheco objected to having the landscaping approval tied to issuance of the building permit. He asked that it be changed to read occupancy permit, since he must get an occupancy permit before the business can open. Staff replied that administration of the application is facilitated if all required conditions are tied to issuance of the building permit. If it were tied to the occupancy permit, someone would have to keep track of the file and progress made on the development, and this would leave room for neglect of this condition. If the condition is tied to building permit, the application is much cleaner and easier for the City to administer. Mr. Pacheco said he does not agree with staff's reasons. Chairman Bond said that the Committee supports the staff's position in this matter. Member Sallan complimented the applicant on working with the ASAC and incorporating their suggestions. Chairman Bond agreed. Motion carried, 3-1 Ripplinger against. HC -217 Page 12 Approval o Applicatio HC -51,075. 443 MINUTES OF THE MAY 4, 1978 ASAC MEETING New Applications: 4. Application HC -51,075.443 - Vallco Park Ltd. requesting approval of modification of architecture to extend the height of the existing barrier of the west side of the tennis center in Vallco Village Center, adjacent to Linnet Way. Mr. Bill Tagg, 619 Torrington Dr., Sunnyvale, California, was present for this application. Mr. Caughey explained that the tennis center is concerned about fly -over of tennis balls into the residential area across Linnet Way. A 4' chain link section will be added to the top of the barrier. The approved landscaping plan, which called for coniferous trees to be installed between the face of the concrete barrier and the curb on Linnet Way, has been changed to shallow -root evergreen alternative which will adequately obscure the proposed fence addition and not invade the Sanitary District's underground easement in the area. The fence will be coated with black vinyl. Mr. Tagg reported that this is an advantage because it does not reflect the sun's rays; therefore, it would tend to drop out visually and also not confuse tennis players with a reflection. Chairman Bond opened the public hearing to the audience. Member Ripplinger asked if the neighbors on Linnet Way had been contacted. Mr. Caughey reported he had hand -carried notification of the hearing to all homes in the area which would be affected. Mr. Tagg noted he has not heard from any of the neighbors since the tennis facility opened. He added that the tennis pros at the facility had requested the fence extension. Member Ripplinger asked how close the fence would be to the homes. Mr. Caughey replied that it would be about 100' from residences and that about 20 residences could be affected. Since there was no comment from the audience, Member Ripplinger moved and Member Johnson seconded that the public hearing be closed. Motion carried, 4-0 Member Ripplinger moved that Application HC -51,075.443 be approved subject to the standard ASAC conditions 1-8 and conditions 9 and 10 as follows: 9. That the recommendation of approval is based upon Exhibit B-4 and staff informational of this application except as may be amended by special conditions contained herein. 10. The proposed chain -link fence addition shall extend only along the west boundary of the tennis facility, and shall utilize a black, vinyl -clad fabric. The motion was seconded by Member Johnson. Motion carried, 4-0 MINUTES OF THE MAY 4, 1978 ASAC MEETING HC -217 Page 13 5. Application HC -51,333.13 - Sobrato-Berg Properties requesting approval of site, architecture, landscaping, grading, for a multi -story industrial structure at the southeast quadrant of Valley Green Drive and Bandley Avenue. Mr. Bob Granhum. 20700 Valley Green Drive, Cupertino, California, was preset for this application. Mr. Caughey distributed a revision to the landscaping plan for this application. He noted that the applicant responded to every concern that staff had regarding landscaping. He added that the staff had been concer about the east elevation where the tank farm and roll -up door to the bull are located. The applicant has tried to heavy -up the landscaping along this elevation and ha -s deleted one parking space for a planter strip. Member Ripplinger commented that when the "footprint" of the building is viewed, it seems to take up 40%-50% of the site. Mr. Granhum said that it actually covers about 30% of the site. Member Sallan commented that there does not seem to be a lot of landscaping she explained that she was talking about the width of the landscaped strip. Mr. Caughey noted the strip is 6' wide with a 1 1/2 ft. overhang on each side for cars. This leaves about 3' for trees and shrubs. Chairman Bond noted that the number of plants on the strip seems to be dense. Mr. Caughey said that the plan is the best one for landscaping and parking configuration Chairman Bond asked that the matter of location of required bicycle racks be left to staff's discretion. ASAC members agreed with this. The staff report suggested the elimination of three compact parking stalls adjacent to the tank farm in order to increase landscape screening of the east building elevation. The applicant has dropped one parking stall, as noted above. Staff would like to see the other 2 dropped also. Mr. Granhui said that the visual point from Valley Green Drive would cut off any view of that corner of the building with landscaping as presently proposed. Member Sallan asked if these parking stalls were necessary to meet the parking requirement, and ascertained that they are not strictly necessary. She stated that the landscaping seems sparse in the area of the tank farm. Member Ripplinger stated he does not agree that the applicant has effective y screened the area by replacing only one stall with landscaping. Mr. Granhum asked if the parking stalls are eliminated, could the bicycle racks be located in that area. Mr. Caughey replied in the negative, beca bicycle racks must be in an area that can be under surveillance. Architecture Staff is particularly concerned about the building appearance on the east, but feels the heavy landscaping in the area will screen this elevation. Member Sallan noted this elevation has high visibility. Mr. Granhum noted that the height of the tank farm has been lowered from 20' to 14' and will have a redwood header and chain link with redwood slats. The nature of the material is irrelevant because of the screen of landscaping. HC -127 Page 14 Approval of Application HC -51,333.1 MINUTES OF THE MAY 4, 1978 ASAC MEETING Since there were no comments from the audience, Member Sallan moved and Member Johnson seconded that the public hearing be closed. Motion carried, 4-0 Regarding elimination of the three parking stalls near the tank farm and replacing them with landscaping, Member Sallan stated that unless the parking is absolutely critical, she would rather have landscaping. Chairman Bond ascertained that the parking requirement is 103 and that the applicant is over the requirement. Member Johnson stated he would rather see landscaping in this area also. Member Sallan moved that Application HC -51,333.13 be approved subject to the standard ASAC conditions 1-8 and conditions 9-11 as follows: 9. The recommendation of approval is based on Exhibits, A, B, C 1st Revision and D of this application expcept as may be amended by special conditions contained herein. 10. Exhibits A and C 1st Revision shall be modified at the building permit level as follows: a. Eliminate 3 compact parking stalls adjacent to the tank farm area and replace them with landscaping. Landscaping choice subject to staff approval. b. Provide 5 locking bicycle facilities in a location to be subject to staff approval. 11. Final pad height and on -site drainage details shall be subject to the approval of the City Engineer. The motion was seconded by Member Johnson. Motion carried, 4-0 This application will go before the City Council on May 15, 1978. 6. Application HC -51,216.7 - Amcoe Sign Company requesting approval of a sign program for a multi -tenant commercial building at the southeast quadrant of Homestead and Stelling Roads. Mr. Steve Coulthard, 330 Town & Country Villiage, #6, Palo Alto, California, was present for this application. Mr. Coulthard said he would like a uniform sign program for the shopping center, so that tenants coming in would know what would be allowed. All signs would have an ivory background and the cabinets will be wood grain. He presented copy color samples, which were earth tones (brown, green, rust). Signs will be internally illuminated. Staff was concerned about the rust color, but since the center is back 250' from the street, a little color wouldn't hurt. Members asked to see the colors with light behind them, and a demonstrator was used for this purpose. MINUTES OF THE MAY 4, 1978 ASAC MEETING j HC -217 Page 15 Mr. Coulthard noted the signs will be 2' high and the letters a maximum of 16" high. Member Sallan asked the number of tenants and Mr. Coulthard replied there would be 8. Member Sallan asked if there were any problems as to national companies wanting to have their own colors for signs. Mr. Coulthard replied that the center will have consistent sign color, and that most national companies would rather keep their letter style. Mr. Coulthard added that in another shopping center in which these colors was used, there was no problem with sign color for any of the companies. He does not anti- cipate a problem here either. After viewing the color samples with the light behind them, the Committee members agreed that the colors are acceptable. Mr. Coulthard commented that if anyone wanted to have a different color, they would have to come in to the ASAC for an exception. Chairman Bond said that in regard to that, the Committee feels that the colors will definitely be limited to these three. Member Sallan added that no excep should be allowed, but tenants can exercise their right to come in for an exception. The rest of the members agreed. The hearing was opened to the public. Mr. Ron Smithson, one of the owners of the development, said that he had no objections to the colors, which will probably be more than adequate; however, he feels the ASAC should be open minded about any possible exceptions. Chairman Bond replied that if the City takes a firm stand, people will comply with the program, as has happened in other cities. He added that he does not think exceptions will be a problem since the color choices are varied, but that the City should stand firm on this program. Member Ripplinger noted that if this developer wishes to come in with exceptions later, he would limit the colors to ivory and brown now and have the tenants come in with exceptions later. Mr. Smithson said that he does not think the colors would be a problem. Chairman Bond suggested that if colors need to be changed at some time in the future, the whole sign progra would have to be changed and everyone would have to change their signs. Mr. Smithson said he did not think he would do this. Member Ripplinger said that if the ASAC allows 4 colors now, they should not come back with a 5th and a 6th because a rainbow of colors is not desireable. Mr. Caughey asked what the -Committee's findings are that make this applicat different from the Orchard Valley Partnership application, in which the Committee earlier denied a range of colors for signing. Member Ripplinger noted that the ASAC did not limit the transom signs to any particular color. Member Sallan noted that what looks good is a subject ve decision. If four people can agree on what looks good, that is a good indic - tion that it will. This application represents a direction in signing that is better in taste and in its subdued approach. The colors chosen in this application are in conformance with the center and its surroundings. HC -217 MINUTES OF THE MAY 4, 1978 ASAC MEETING Page 16 +, Member Johnson agreed with Member Sallan, adding that the ASAC makes subjective judgements based on aesthetics. Member Ripplinger said he is not sure these colors will fit in with the rest of the signs in the area. Ms. McKenna commented that the colors for the entire center are blue and white. Member Sallan noted that it boils down to what the signs look like to the eye. Mr. Caughey pointed out that the ASAC had turned down the concept of a range of colors before, but is approving a range of colors on this application. Member Sallan said that the choice of colors is what is different in this case. Member Ripplinger moved and Member Johnson seconded that the public ,_ iacaring_e l losed. Motion carried, 4-0 Lpproval of Member Sallan moved that Application HC -51,216.7 be approved subject to Lpplication the standard ASAC conditions 1-8 and conditions 9 and 10 as follows: [C-51,216.7 9. That the recommendation of approval is based upon Exhibit B of this application except as may be amended by special conditions contained herein. 10. The Architectural and Site Approval Committee or its staff shall retain authority to review on -site lighting intensity for exterior lighting fixtures approved under this application and to require correction of off -site lighting intrusion problems. The motion was seconded by Member Ripplinger. Motion carried, 4-0 Chairman Bond requested staff to invite Walter Ward to come in for an informal discussion for options and programming of the sign at Vallco Village (the readerboard sign on Wolfe Road). Chairman Bond reported that he will attend a sign conference in southern California as chairman of the committee. Mr. Caughey presented a landscaping plan for some land acquired from PG&E at Blaney and I-280. The plan includes 46 sequoias. Committee Members expressed satisfaction with the plan. er Sallan left at 10:58 p.m. INFORMAL REVIEW OF PLANNED DEVELOPMENT USE PERMIT APPLICATIONS: 6-U-78 B.A.S.. Homes, Inc: to construct 31 single-family homes and conceptual approval for future location of religious facilities on the easterly portion of the site containing approximately 6.4 acres. Said property is located on the westerly side of Foothill Boulevard approximately 150 ft. southerly of Poppy Drive immediately opposite the intersection of Salem Drive. MINUTES OF THE MAY 4, 1978 ASAC MELTING HC -217 Page 17 Mr. Caughey reported that B.A.S. Homes proposes conventional detached, single-family homes. He noted that the slope is 22%, which is pretty steep Member Ripplinger asked what the density is, commenting that it looks pretty dense. Mr. Caughey said that it is actually below allowable density He asked if the Committee had any feelings about conventional architecture in this fairly unique area. Member Ripplinger asked about the rear yard setback of the liomes. Mr. Caul that the City requirement is 20', He would like to bring the architecture •to the ASAC at a future date. Chairman Bond noted that there is too little information presented at this time to comment on. Members Johnson and Ripplinger agreed. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None NEW BUSINESS None INTER COMMISSION NOTES Member Ripplinger reported on the mayor's luncheon, which he had attended. tu/iu. ig things discussed at the luncheon were.a new way for appointing ncz• commissioners, the role of the City in housing and subsidizing same, and a Japanese sister city. He noted that Mariani Avenue residents are becoming concerned about traffice on their street during peak hours. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 11:09 until the next regular meeting of May 18, 1978 at 7:00 p.m. APPROVED: /s/ H. Elliott Bond Chairman ATTEST: /s/ Wm. E. Ryder City Clerk