Loading...
April 22, 1970r 0 CITY OF CUPERTINO, State of California 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014 Phone: 252-4505 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE APPROVAL COMMITTEE HELD APRIL 22, 1970 IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF THE CITY HALL, CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA Vice Chairman Adams called the meeting to order at 8:07 P.M. and led the salute to the flag. Roll Call Committee Members present: Marquez, McLaren, Ryner, Vice Chairman Adams. Members absent: Chairman Small. Also present: Chief Building Inspector Benevic'h, City Clerk Ryder. Election of Chairman and Vice Chairman Member Marquez commented that there were members of this committee who had applied for consideration of appointment to the Planning Commission. It was his thinking that the election of committee officers should be deferred on the possibility that the committee might be constituted differently in the near future. It then was moved by Member Marquez, seconded by Member Ryner and passed unanimously to postpone the election of committee officers until after the Planning Commission members had been selected. Communications There were no written communications. There were no verbal communications, Minutes of April 8, 1970 ® It was moved by Member McLaren, seconded by Member Marquez and passed unanimously that the minutes of April 8, 1970 be approved as submitted. Applications A. Application 298-HC-70, Vallco Park, P. 0. Drawer V. Cupertino, the Phase II expansion of Mark Systems, Inc., located at the intersection of Homestead Road and Tantau Avenue. The application was presented by Mr. Joe Wucher. the property manager for Vallco Park. He stated that this was a continuation of an existing pro- ject for the Mark Systems and the proposed building would be of the same materials and colors as the existing one. He said if there were specific questions, the architect was present. The architect, Mr. Robert Bernstein, architect for Albert A. Hoover Associ- ates, responded to Member McLaren's inquiry that the proposed building would be 45,000 square feet compared to 50,000 square feet for the one in Phase I. He said the lower floor would be of off-white concrete with the HC-7 roll call election continued page 2 Appl. 298-HC-70 recommended for appro- val APPI. 455-HC-70 recommended for approval utes of H Control Committee April 22, 1970 Applications cont'd. - 298-HC-70 upper being predominately wood and glass. 'The upper floor would be set back half a module so as to provide balconies. The landscaping and light- ing would be the same as for Phase I. Mr. Benevich told Member Ryner that the location of the two future units would be behind that of the Phase II. Thelconcept for this was to have one large square, consisting of four smaller square buildings. Lighting would be from small plastic lights atop ten foot standards, the same as for Phase I. Member Marquez received assurances that the garbage and refuse area was within a covered space and would not create any problem. It was moved by Member Marquez, seconded by Member McLaren and passed unanimously that Application 298,-HC-70 Jeirecommended to the City Council for approval, subject to the 12 Standard Conditions, the Planning Commis- sion check list and the continuation of landscaping and lighting motif as originally approved. Chairman Adams advised the applicant thatthis application would be before the City Council at its meeting of May 4,!1970 at which time the appli- cant's presence was requested. B. Application 455-HC-70, Daniel Fitch, 15065 Stratford Drive, San Jose, requesting approval to construct a duplex on Lot 25, Greenwood Court. i' Mr. Charles Pickens, Eterna Builders, presented the application, saying it had been continued from the previous meeting so that more information could be given. He said that new plans had been submitted and he felt everything was in order according to the Committee's request. He advised Member McLaren that revised plans had been submitted to take care of the parking request, that additional space had been provided but he first had thought tandem parking was permitted. It was determined that landscaping plans had been submitted. Member Ryner was told that the subject property was bounded on either side by four-plexes but that due to the technical requirements for flood control it had been necessary to rezone this property to permit the construction of a duplex. The roof would be of heavy shakes. r It was moved by Member McLaren that Appiication 455--HC-70 be recommended for approval to the City Council, subject to the Planning Commission check list with the back -out space from the garage to be 29 feet. Also, subject to the 12 Standard Conditions and per the plans submitted for the building and landscaping. Member Marquez seconded the motion. Chief Building Inspector Benevich questioned of back -out space from the garage, advising quirement was being enforced for commecial i I i the condition for the 29 feet the Committee that this re - property only and not for Rl. HC=7 0 C:I A 0 0 Minutes of H Control Committee April 22, 1970 Applications cont'd, - 455-HC-70 After further discussion, Member McLaren amended her motion to strike that portion relating to the back -out space to which Member Marquez agreed with his second. The motion, as amended, was passed unanimously. Chairman Adams advised the applicant that this application would be before the City Council at its meeting of May 4, 1970 and requested his presence at that time. C. Application 462-HC-70, Ad -Art, 1607 Terminal Street, San Jose, requesting approval to erect a 1' 9" x 11' plastic illuminated sign. It being determined that the applicant was not present, Member Ryner moved, Member Marquez seconded and it was passed unanimously to con- tinue this application to the next meeting. Chairman Adams then stated that the agenda which had been mailed to the Committee had contained four items but the agenda that was before the meeting had but three. He inquired which agenda was official and also pointed out some confusion from the subject application being numbered differently on both agendas. The matter was clarified by Chief Building Inspector Benevich. Unfinished Business 1. In reply to her inquiry, Member McLaren was advised of the action taken by the City Council at its last meeting on the antique store on Stevens Creek Boulevard. Mr. Benevich had said the question of signs for this establishment would be before the Committee at its next meeting. 2. Member McLaren then inquired of the possibilities existing for following through on Committee recommendations and those conditions impose( by the City Council. She gave specific referral to Don's Pastrami at the corner of Portal Avenue and Stevens Creek Boulevard. Mr. Benevich said that the owner had been notified many times and advised that this body had requested compliance with the conditions. The owner had said that land scaping was not now possible in that the spraying for weeds had made the ground sterile for two years. Member McLaren had said this in itself was not an answer, that the other store had a nice appearance through the use of gravel, tanbark, etc. Member Marquez raised the question of what recourse was available to the members of this committee. It was his suggestion that the Committee let the Council know of their concern on this matter and wondered if a separate communication should be addressed to them, asking for some strength or backup for committee action. HC-7 page 3 motion amended Appl. 455-HC-70 Application 462-HCc70 continued antique store Don's Pastrami Chairman Adams felt that if the minutes adequately described the Committee's position, that these should satisfy this request. page 4 request for im- mediate action on Texaco stations Appl. 462-HC-70 returned to agenda recommended for appro- val discussion on clean- ing up Shell station site Minutes of H Control Committee April 22, 1970 Unfinished Business cont'd. HC-7 Member Ryner moved, Member McLaren seconded and it was passed unanimously to recommend to the City Council that immediate action be taken for im- plementation on the recommendations and specifications that the Archi- tectural and Site Approval Committee had made on the Texaco stations at Highway 9 and Homestead Road and at Highway 9 and Stevens Creek Boulevard, the Burger Chef on Saich Way and Stevens Creek Boulevard, and Don's Pastrami on Portal Avenue and Stevens Creek Boulevard. Member Ryner then commented that there had: been continual reminders to these establishments by the Chief Building Inspector and the matters had been brought up before this body many times. He felt it imperative if this body was to be an effective one to receive more support or more power from the City Council. At this point in the meeting, the applicant for Application 462-HC-70 arrived and on motion of Member Marquez, seconded by Member McLaren, the matter was returned to the agenda by unanimous vote. I I The applicant, Mr. Vernon Burgess, 1079 Almarita Drive, Campbell, apolo- gized for his tardiness and presented the application. Mr. Benevich said that the sign area was within the requirements of the ordinance and that no problems were involved. i I It was moved by Member McLaren, secondeC by Member Marquez and passed unani- mously that Application 462-HC-70 be recommended to the City Council for approval per the plans as submitted. Chairman Adams advised the applicant that this matter would be before the City Council at its meeting of May 4, 1970, at which time his presence was requested. New Business 1. Member McLaren commented on previous efforts of'cleaning up the Shell station site and abutting property, at the corner of Blaney Avenue and Stevens Creek Boulevard. She told of her efforts of having property owners jointly clean up the lots. She also inquired what the City's posi- tion in regard to the chuck holes on this property is as these chuck holes were being used as a traffic exit. Shelthought these holes constitute a hazard. i I Mr. Benevich advised the Committee thatIthis was private property and the City was without authority to require any corrective action to be done. He said that the most the City could dojwould be to notify the owner of a potential hazard but that any action taken due to an accident would be a civil action. Member McLaren suggested that a recommendation be made to the City Council to have a letter sent to the property owner, advising him of this danger. Chairman Adams suggested that the matter be left in the jurisdiction of Mr_ Benevich to allow him to approach the owner on a friendly basis. If further action was necessary in two orithree weeks, then it could be processed at that time. I • 0 i s 0 E 0 Minutes of H Control Committee April 22, 1970 New Business cont'd. 2. Member Ryner inquired as to the conditions imposed for the development of Mervyn's Department Store. Mr. Benevich referred him to Application 437-HC-69 which was before the Architectural and Site Approval Committee on September 24, 1969. 'iember Ryner then quoted from the minutes which stated that landscaping and lighting for this development would be submitted to the Committee at a later._ time. A motion was passed for these plans to be reviewed after having been submitted. Member Ryner commented that light standards for this develop- ment have been installed without review or approval by this body. It was moved by Member Ryner, seconded by Member Marquez and passed unanimously to recommend to the City Council and the Chief Building Inspector that immediate action be taken to bring the landscaping and lighting plans for this development before the Architectural and Site Approval Committee. 3. Member Marquez opened the discussion as to the best formal approach to get before the City Council the dilemna now facing this body. The Architectural and Site Approval Committee holds extensive hearings, reviews applications and makes recommendations for conditions of approval Often times these are ignored by the contractor or developer and when approached for compliance, the request is rebutted with the contention that there is no basis for enforcing the conditions imposed. He said it was his feeling that it was imperative to get some guidance from the Council as to what was expected of this Committee. The ensuing discussions on this question encompassed such points as back- up being provided on paper but not in the field where the violations occur, that the Committee was not requesting enforcement authority or more power but some means of having the City follow through on the conditions im- posed, that the effectiveness of this Committee was directly related to the availability of manpower for enforcement, that it was not the intention or purpose of this Committee to create problems or cause harm to any owner or developer but only to see that compliance was had with previously agreed conditions. Several courses of action then were suggested but it was then the consensus of the Committee that Chairman Adams' suggestion prevail. It was his position that the minutes of this meeting adequately contain the feelings of this Committee in the motions passed under old business, as well as the new business portions of the agenda. He said that the City Council as it -7 ge 5 Application 437-HC-69 questioned discussion concerning back-up on conditions imposed now stands was newly constituted. He felt the only proper course was to see what its position would be on these matters and that any effort on the part of this Committee for more forceful action be deferred to a later date. He also suggested the possibility of a future joint meeting with the Mayor and the City Manager to determine the proper course of action before bring- ing this before the City Council as a whole. 4. When requested, Chief Building Inspector Benevich reported that signs he had confiscated twenty-five posted signs in the last three days and that confiscated page 6 Minutes of H Control Committee April 22, 1970 i New Business cont'd. he was going out on another tour for the same purpose the following day. The posted signs confiscated were those placed in violation of the sign ordinance. Adjournment It was moved by Member Marquez, seconded by Member McLaren, that the adjourn- meeting be adjourned and Chairman Adams so!adjourned it at 9:14 P.M. ment Submitted for approval{ i pr City1Clerk I f i HC--7 J • 9 CJ