March 14, 1988CITY OF CUPERTINO
CITY HALL 10300 TORRE AVENUE CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA 95014 (408) 252-4642
TO: ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE APPROVAL COMMITTEE
FROM: Sonia Binnendyk, ASAC COORDINATOR
Mark Caughey, ASAC COORDINATOR
Pam Eggen, STAFF ASSISTANT
DATE: March 8, 1988
SUBJECT: STAFF COMMENTS FOR THE REGULAR MEETING OF MARCH 14, 1988
The enclosed materials constitute a complete packet for Monday night's meeting. Please refer to
the attached community -wide location map for the geographic setting of each agenda item.
CONSENT CALENDAR
ITEM 1) APPLICATION ASAC 51,774.1 -- GOOD SAMARITAN CHURCH
Requesting approval of architecture for addition of a mechanical equipment roof
screen on an existing church building, located at the southeast corner of Linnet Ln.
and Homestead Road.
Tentative City Council Hearing Date: March 21, 1988
ENCLOSURES
1) Model Resolution
2) Exhibit A of ASAC 51,774.1
COMMENTS
1) Staff has no concerns; however, a condition requires a matching return on the
south end of the enclosure, not shown on the exhibits.
RECOMMENDATION
Approval of ASAC 51,774.1 according to the findings and conditions specified in the
enclosed Model Resolution.
INFORMAL REVIEW OF USE PERMITS
ITEM 2) APPLICATION 2-U-88 -- GOOD SAMARITAN CHURCH Requesting a Use
Permit to construct a 5,100 sq. ft. second story addition to an existing 15,800 sq. ft.
church located on the southeast corner of Linnet Lane and Homestead Road.
Tentative Planning Commission Hearing Date: April 11, 1988
ENCLOSURES
1) Exhibits A, and B of Application 2-U-88
COMMENTS
1) Applicants propose a second story classroom addition as shown on Exhibit B.
Colors and materials will match the existing structures.
--- - - - - ---
streetSCape ny InZroQUCing re51Q@fIlIdI-UUIIUIIIg-iurnis.-- --------- -- ---- -
2) Proposed residential architecture and materials similar to approved retirement
center. Comparative architecture for office building not available.
AGENDA SUMMARY & STAFF COMMENTS ASAC MEETING OF 03/14/88
PAGE 4
10 3) The sheet metal base should be finished with an alternative material.
4) The site address should be incorporated into the sign base.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of Application ASAC 51,770.1 per the attached model
resolution
ITEM 7) APPLICATION ASAC 51,771.1 -- CALIFORNIA STATE AUTOMOBILE
ASSOCIATION Requesting approval of a modification to an existing ground sign
located at an existing office center on the west side of So. Saratoga Sunnyvale Road
north of Prospect Road.
ENCLOSURES
1) Model Resolution
2) Exhibits F 1st Rev. and Info. of ASAC 51,771.1
COMMENTS
1) Current sign program includes the following elements:
A) Two office building ground signs measuring 50 square feet each.
B) One (CSAA) ground sign measuring approximately 10 square feet (see
Exhibit F-1 of Application ASAC 51,729.1).
• 2) Applicant's proposal to replace the current CSAA sign with an enlarged ground
sign measuring 6' x 6' was denied by ASAC on 01/25/88. During the appeal
stage, the applicant proposed the concept appearing on Exhibit F-1st Rev. The
revision adds a second panel to the existing CSAA sign without a background as
previously proposed.
3) Staff suggests that a solid background is more appropriate than the "unframed"
approach suggested. Unlike the prior submittal, the monument background
mass can be reduced by sloping the top of the sign at the same pitch as that of
the CSAA diamond.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the existing ground sign be modified to include the travel
agency panel, with the additional condition that a stucco monument frame be
included, sloped at the top at the same pitch as that of the CSAA diamond. Should
the ASAC wish to approve Exhibit F-1 st Rev. as submitted, all conditions after No. 9
should be deleted.
FORMAL REVIEW
ITEM 8) APPLICATION ASAC 51,773.1 MSI (Seven Springs) Requesting approval
of an Exception to Section 17.32.090 (A) of the Sign Code to permit an off site
subdivision sign in a residential zone. The proposed sign location is the northwest
corner of Stelling Road and Rainbow Drive.
10 Tentative City Council Hearing Date: March 21, 1988
AGENDA SUMMARY & STAFF COMMENTS ASAC MEETING OF 03/14/88
PAGE 5
ENCLOSURES
1) Model Resolution
2) Exhibits A and F of Application ASAC 51,773.1
3) Letter from Mr. Doherty dated February 22, 1988
4) Section 17.32.090 of Sign Ordinance
COMMENTS
1) Staff feels the requested exception is justified because the proposed sign
location is necessary to direct potential buyers along the most direct route to the
project site. In addition, both the affected streets are minor collector streets, not
local neighborhood streets.
2) The sign may not exceed a 10 ft. height.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of Application ASAC 51,773.1 per the attached model
resolution.
ITEM 9) APPLICATION ASAC 51,674.11 -- ALICE SEIGRIST Requesting approval
of modification to an existing ground sign to reduce overall display area. The sign is
located at a commercial center on the northwest corner of N. De Anza Boulevard and
Rodriguez Avenue.
ENCLOSURES
1) Model Resolution
• 2) Applicant's Letter of 02/22/88 with attachments
3) ASAC Resolution 1299
4) Applicant's letter of 08/04/87
5) Exhibits F-2 and F-3 of ASAC 51,674.11
COMMENTS
1) Condition 10 of Reso. 1299 requires sign face area reduction to 75 sq. ft. upon
the next change of tenant panel. Applicant's letter of August 4, 1987, submitted
in conjunction with Condition 10, requests phased compliance with sign area
reduction requirement.
2) Letter of February 22, 1988 proposes immediate reduction of face area to 98 sq.
ft.; however, they do not state specific circumstances under which further
reduction to 75 sq. ft. would occur.
3) Though phasing is not strictly in compliance with Resolution 1299, staff finds the
approach in the February 22 letter to be reasonable in relation to the applicant's
circumstances and the public interest. A proposed condition would establish the
next change of tenant panel as the threshold mechanism to achieve final 75 sq.
ft. area.
RECOMMENDATION
Approval of Application ASAC 51,774.11 according to the findings and conditions
specified in the Model Resolution.
ITEM 10) APPLICATION 2-EXC-88 -- ERIC SUNG Requesting approval of an Exception
• to Ordinance 1438/1-Irgency Ordinance to permit second story elements on two
parcels with various reductions in required setbacks, and floor area ratios in excess of
.20 above the first floor. The subject property is located on Stelling Road and
Rainbow Drive.
AGENDA SUMMARY & STAFF COMMENTS ASAC MEETING OF 03/14/88
PAGE 6
•
0
ENCLOSURES
1) Model Resolution
2) Urgency Ordinance No. 1438
3) Resolution No. 1358 (Minute Order)
4) Exhibits:
Corner Lot: B-3, B-4, Info 2, 3 & 4 of Appl. 2-EXC-88 (M-2)
Interior Lot: B, B-1, B-2, Info & Info 1 of Appl. 2-EXC-88 (M-1)
5) Letter from Mr. Sung dated February 19, 1988
COMMENTS
CORNER LOT
1) The applicant is requesting the following exceptions to the setback and FAR
requirements of the Urgency Ordinance:
Required Proposed
Side Combined total of 30 22 ft.ft. @ Second Floor
Rear 30 ft. @ Second Floor 29.5 ft.
FAR .20 Maximum @ Second Floor .20+ (estimated)
2) The unusual lot shape and considerable dedication constitute unusual
circumstances which impose a hardship on the applicant.
3) Although an exception appears justified, the degree of deviation requested from
the side setback requirements is excessive. The north elevation consists of a
solid vertical plane, inconsistent with the intent of the Ordinance to provide
vertical movement. This elevation will be highly visible from Rainbow Dr.
4) The proposed house is reasonably compatible with the neighborhood. It serves
as a transition from the larger westerly homes to the smaller homes across Stelling
Rd.
5) In summary, although the lot shape and dedication requirements justify an
exception, the proposed degree of deviation is excessive. Greater vertical
movement should be incorporated into the north elevation.
INTERIOR LOT
1) The applicant is requesting the following exceptions to the setback and FAR
requirements of the Urgency Ordinance:
Required Proposed
Side Combined total of 30 25 ft.ft. @ Second Floor
Rear 30 ft. @ Second Floor 21 ft.
FAR .20 Maximum @ Second .26 (estimate)
® 2) The proposed rear setback does not comply with the requirements of the R1
Ordinance prior to the Urgency Ordinance. The variance procedure, requiring
both Planning Commission and City Council review, is the proper procedure for
this setback deviation.
AGENDA SUMMARY & STAFF COMMENTS ASAC MEETING OF 03/14/88
PAGE 7
• 3) The subject lot is a standard shape and size. There do not appear to be any
circumstances imposing undue hardship or practical difficulties. In fact, the lot has
more flexibility than most similar lots because the front property line is in the
middle of the private road. Setbacks are measured from property lines, which are
generally at the edge of the public right of way.
4) In summary, the application is premature due to the necessity for a variance. In
addition, there is insufficient reason to justify the granting of an exception for the
side setbacks and FAR.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends DENIAL of the exceptions requested for both the corner and
interior lot of Application 2-EXC-88 per the attached model resolution. The
Committee's decision is final unless appealed within seven days to the City Council.
ITEM 11) APPLICATION 3-EXC-88 -- LUNG-SENG SHIH Requesting approval of an
Exception to Ordinance 1438/Urgency Ordinance to permit a second story element
with various reductions in required setbacks. The subject property is located on the
west side of Clarkston Avenue, north of Flintshire Street (11137 Clarkston Ave.)
ENCLOSURES
1) Model Resolution
2) Exhibits A, B, B-1, Info 1, and Info 2 of Application 3-EXC-88
3) Vicinity Map
4) Letter from Mr. Shwe dated February 19, 1988
• 5) See Item 10 enclosures for Urgency Ordinance and ASAC Minute Order
COMMENTS
1) The applicant is requesting the following exceptions to the setback requirements
of the Urgency Ordinance:
Required Proposed
Front 30 ft. @ Second Floor 20.44 ft.
Rear 30 ft. @ Second Floor 25 ft.
2) The subject lot is only 76 ft. deep, limiting the second floor to a 16 ft. depth if the
applicant were to comply with City requirements. This is an unreasonably narrow
depth for a second floor; and therefore, constitutes a hardship.
3) Although an exception appears justified, the degree of deviation requested is
neither the least necessary to accommodate a second floor, nor has the second
floor been designed to minimize perceived massing effects. The front elevation
particularly conflicts with the Ordinance's intended effect of minimizing mass by
creating vertical movement.
4) The proposed house is out of scale with the surrounding neighborhood;
however, a home considerably larger than those in the neighborhood could be
built even if the applicant complied with City requirements.
• 5) In summary, although the narrow lot depth justifies an exception, the proposed
degree of deviation is excessive. The perception of mass, particularly in the front,
should be minimized by creating greater movement along the vertical wall planes.
AGENDA SUMMARY & STAFF COMMENTS ASAC MEETING OF 03/14/88
PAGE 8
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends DENIAL of Application 3-EXC-88 per the attached model
resolution. The Committee's decision is final unless appealed within seven days to
the City Council.
ITEM 12) APPLICATION 4-EXC-88 -- BOB KIEL Requesting approval of an Exception to
Ordinance 1438/Urgency Ordinance to permit a second story element with various
reductions in required setbacks. The subject property is located on Manita Court
northerly of Rainbow Drive.
ENCLOSURES
1) Model Resolution
2) Exhibits A, B-1st Rev., B-1, B-2, B-3, B-4, B-5 1st Rev., Info. 1 and Info. 2 of
Application 4-EXC-88
3) Applicant's letter of justification
4) See Item 10 enclosures for Urgency Ordinance and ASAC Minute Order
COMMENTS
PARCEL A
1) The applicant is requesting the following exceptions to the setback requirements
of the Urgency Ordinance:
Required Proposed
FRONT 30 ft. setback to 2nd Story 21.5 ft. setback
SIDE Combined total of 30 ft. Combined total of 22 ft.
2) The proposed dwelling is an existing unit that will be relocated from the proposed
lot to the north. To comply with the required sideyard setback total would entail
substantial reconstruction of the move -on house, and would most likely result in
its demolition. The City's General Plan encourages public action to conserve
existing housing stock where possible.
3) Relief under the Exception procedure appears justified, given the narrow width of
the lot which is a fixed dimension within the proposed subdivision. The home is
matched in scale to those existing on Manita Court, and is appropriate to the
neighborhood setting.
4) The proposed sideyard exception is consistent with the intent of minimizing the
degree of exception requested, since the house dimensions are preexisting.
However, the proposed second story front yard can be increased to 24.5 ft. by
shifting the house 3' north. This adjustment will leave the rear second story
setback at 30 ft. as required by the Urgency Ordinance.
PARCEL B
1) The applicant is requesting the following exceptions to the setback requirements
of the Urgency Ordinance:
0
AGENDA SUMMARY & STAFF COMMENTS ASAC MEETING OF 03/14/88
PAGE 9
0 Required Proposed
REAR 30 ft. setback to 2nd Story 24 ft. setback
2) The unusual lot shape is dictated by the dedications necessary to complete the
compound corner of Manita Court. The narrow lot width is fixed by infill lot
conditions. These circumstances impose a hardship on the applicant not of his
own making.
3) Although an exception appears justified, the degree of deviation exceeds that
allowed for an exception. Under the existing R1 Ordinance, a minimum 25 ft. rear
setback is required for second stories. A Variance would be required to fall below
that dimension.
4) The proposed house is reasonable compatible with structures on Manita Court
and the nearby Sevens Springs development. It transitions appropriately to the
older homes in the project vicinity, given the degree of articulation in the roofline
and wall planes.
5) In summary, justification for an exception has been demonstrated. However, the
house plan should be modified to delete 1 foot of width from the upper floor
envelope to attain the least degree of deviation from the Urgency Ordinance and
the conventional R1 rear setback depth (i.e. 25').
RECOMMENDATION
. Approval of exceptions for both parcels as requested under Application 4-EXC-88, in
accordance with the findings and conditions specified in the model resolution. The
Committee's decision is final unless appealed within seven days to the City Council.
OLD BUSINESS
ITEM 13) DISCUSSION OF HEIGHT LIMITS SPECIFIED FOR FREESTANDING
SIGNS IN TITLE 18 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE
ENCLOSURES
None
COMMENTS
1) The Committee directed staff at the February 22, 1988 meeting to prepare a
Minute Order outlining the Committee's policy on sign heights. This Minute
Order will be available at the March 28, 1988 meeting.
RECOMMENDATION
None. Informational Item.
ITEM 14) DISCUSSION OF ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE APPROVAL
COMMITTEE MINUTE ORDER REGARDING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS
0 ENCLOSURES
1) Resolution No. 1356 (Minute Order)
2) ASAC Minutes dated February 22, 1988
AGENDA SUMMARY & STAFF COMMENTS ASAC MEETING OF 03/14/88
PAGE 10
0 COMMENTS
1) The Committee adopted Resolution No. 1356 on February 22, 1988, but
directed staff to defer forwarding the subject Minute Order to the City Council.
RECOMMENDATION
None. ASAC Discretion.
ITEM 15) FOLLOWUP DISCUSSION OF MERCURY NEWS UNSIGHTLY
BUILDINGS ARTICLE
ENCLOSURES
None
COMMENTS
1) This item was placed on the agenda at the request of Member Mann.
RECOMMENDATION
None. Discussion purposes only.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
• ITEM 16) MINUTES OF ASAC MEETING OF FEBRUARY 22, 1988
0
ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE APPROVAL COMMITTEE - March 14, 1988
1. 51,774.1-Good Samaritan
Church
2. 2-U-88-Good Samaritan i
Church
WY
3. 1-U-88 - Richard Sutherl df� , JAI
r Il ,� r` qj.'�� '�� `�L►a��u���,��r1
4. 36-U-86 (Amended)
DeAnza PropertieE j)
5. 3-U-88 - Ken Kay Assoc.
6. 51.770.1 - Beacon Gasoline (1
Morteza Abdolla!fr�
)
7. 51.771.1 - Calif. State `0i
Auto. Assoc. �1�1
> f'?i��� = GWIII�I�� fin"
8. 51.773.1 - MSI (7-S rin ) ; J j iti�I
9. 51 .674.11 - Alice Siegri t
��� 'r�l '"
10. 2-EXC-88 -Eric Sung �� ������,�, ,� �;� ftlfElf€itYAfFl
11. 3-EXC-88 - Lun SShi - =d '�l�F� a
gen g �f`= go, E14�
12. 4-EXC-88 Bob Kiel
r 0
13. Discussion of Height
Limits
-
14. Discussion of ASAC Minute
Order re: Public Improme is
15. Followup discussion of
Mercury News article
16. Approval of ASAC Minutes
of Feb. 22, 1988
", , -
r
Row
Iz -
-
,
- `�_. - I•
L .
f
lit7-1
I
(17r
rw�j
jl_ c_: I1C������-1' LL...::C[•���41� 1��_n l /r� `I.. � \`.-rc
L 1
JO
lil
D �r /Ifjl�1 ill �I�I{
Ulm
-- 055i- Y�°1 - Oslo
i" , �'r IIIILInIIIImlal7lFlf-T-l�{91 -7UL
f��1�.61
ANN
�� � �®0® flj�I �
.— B� ® '® �♦x+e�1�iIImL'.r.�i� r.n. ....- ni.lul �I .0 r. .J��r �l
Jr. K
r F �� '� r f I►�1�]( s NIP OF
f�l 11� uls��►LII� { ;3 THE
1 _) �]� I,tT
o F CUP
liilrl�rm�-'F'��5ly�I�fl
DEPARTMENT OF—
PUREI[ WORKS
SHEET