June 27, 1988• CITY OF CUPERTINO
CITY HALL 10300 TORRE AVENUE CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA 95014 (408) 252-4642
TO: ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE APPROVAL COMMITTEE
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF
PAM EGGAN, ASAC STAFF ASSISTANT
DATE: JUNE 22, 1988
SUBJECT: STAFF COMMENTS FOR THE REGULAR MEETING OF JUNE 27, 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.
INFORMAL REVIEW OF USE PERMIT APPLICATIONS:
ITEM 1) APPLICATION 16-U-88 -- STOWERS ASSOCIATES (EDWARD S. J.
ALI):
Requesting approval of a use permit to construct a 5500 square foot, one story
commercial building. Site located on the northwest corner of De Anza Boulevard and
McClellan Road.
ENCLOSURES:
1. Exhibits A, A-1, A-2, A-2, B, B-1, B-2, B-3, B-4 and C of Application 16-U-88
COMMENTS:
A. Public Works Department states that the southwest corner of the building
encroaches into the required traffic sight -distance area. Environmental Review
Committee requires that the building be modified. Trees should also be
evaluated to ensure visibility. Applicants should address issue at the meeting.
B. A color board will be available at the meeting. Staff will present additional
comments verbally.
ITEM 2) APPLICATION 17-U-88 -- RICHARD SCOTT.
Requesting approval of a Use Permit to construct a 2,600 sq. ft. office and warehouse
building devoted to the manufacture and display of cabinetry products, located on
the east side of Imperial Avenue, southerly of Stevens Creek Blvd.(Between Higdon
Pest Control and United Cable Headquarters).
ENCLOSURE:
1. Exhibits A,B, B-1, of Application 17-U-88
COMMENTS:
A. Staff has expressed concern previously about location of the parking lot adjacent
to the street, thus breaking the continuity of the streetscape established by the
buildings on either side.
B. Proposed architecture does not appear to capture the richness of detailing
implied in the Monta Vista Design Guidelines. No articulation of vertical planes, no
jetties or projections, and no fenestration detailing are indicated.
ASAC STAFF SUMMARY REPORT -- REGULAR MEETING OF JUNE 27, 1988
PAGE -2-
ITEM 3) APPLICATION 19-U-88 -- KINST & CO.
Requesting approval of a Use Permit to demolish an existing dwelling and replace
same with a four unit residential townhouse project located at the Northeast corner of
Lomita and Pasadena Avenues.
ENCLOSURE:
1. Exhibits A,B, B-1, C, Info 1 - 2. of Application 19-1-1-88
COMMENTS:
A. Committee should evaluate appropriateness of proposed below street grade
parking solution in relation to old Monta Vista setting.
B. No unit entry provided facing Lomita (Ex. B-1, So. Elevation)..; possible to realign
entry to unit 4 toward Lomita as a linkage to the secondary street frontage?
C. Roof material not specified; juxtaposition of textures with proposed shingle siding
unclear
D. Insufficient vertical relief provided on south elevation landscaping adjacent to
building Tree cover should be introduced within mounded area if possible
ITEM 4) APPLICATION 20-U-88 & 4-Z-88 -- CITY CENTER ASSOCIATES
(PROMETHEUS DEVELOPMENT CO.1:
Requesting approval of a 130 unit, three and four story residential complex located
on the east side of Torre Avenue, approximately 400 feet north of Rodriques
Avenue.
ENCLOSURES:
1. Exhibits A, A-1, A-2, B, B-1, and C of Application 20-U-88
COMMENTS:
A. The subject site is currently used for a surface parking lot. Approved conceptual
development plan designates site for open space. Applicant now propose a 130
unit residential project.
B. The following are topics for discussion and evaluation during the meeting:
1. Setback from property lines
2. Appearance of Torre Avenue elevation. Sufficiency of building movement
plane movement. Should additional breaks be incorporated into the
buildings.
3. Consider enlargement of main entryway to a visual break and strengthen
definition of entrance.
4. Appearance of the project at the pedestrian level. The first floor parking
garage is approximately 12 feet high at the northern end of the project.
5. Impact of project upon adjoining residential units.
C. Colored drawings will be available at the meeting.
FORMAL REVIEW:
ITEM 5) APPLICATION ASAC 51,712.12 -- RICARDO FRATARCANGELI:
® Requesting approval of modifications to a previously approved plan for an addition to
a duplex located on the west side of Lockwood Drive, approximately 225 feet south
of Voss Avenue. 10417 Lockwood Drive.
ASAC STAFF SUMMARY REPORT -- REGULAR MEETING OF JUNE 27, 1988
PAGE -3-
ENCLOSURES:
1. Exhibit B of Application ASAC 51,712.12
2. Model Resolution
COMMENTS:
Applicant seeks to legalize a second floor window installed on the north side of a
duplex.
RECOMMENDATION:
A. ASAC should evaluate privacy impacts upon the adjoining residence. The
neighbor has been notified of this hearing. A model resolution has been
enclosed.
B. This application will be forward to City Council for final review.
ITEM 6) APPLICATION ASAC 51,775.1 -- M. R. BEDRI:
Requesting approval of a sign program for an existing commercial building located on
the southwest corner of Stevens Creek Blvd and Imperial Avenue in the Monta Vista
area. 21670 Stevens Creek Boulevard.
ENCLOSURE:
1. Model Resolution
2. Exhibits F-1 1 st Rev and Info. of ASAC 51,775.1
3. Page 23, Monta Vista Design Guidelines
COMMENTS:
A. Sign constraints imposed by Monta Vista Design Guidelines; Maximum proposed
face area (30 s.f.. is less than the 10% floor area limit under Guideline 11 W.
B. Above -canopy mounting technique is acceptable. Mounting approach will be
subject to structural review at building permit level.
C. Sign faces will be stained glass overlays with backlighting; effect is consistent with
historical scheme of Monta Vista. Intent of prohibiting plexiglass faces/internally--
lighted signs in Guidelines is to discourage typical contemporary "cabinet" sign
designs usually found in modern shopping centers.
RECOMMENDATION:
A. Approval of Application ASAC 51,77.5.1 according to the findings and conditions
contained in the Model Resolution.
B. ASAC decision final unless appealed.
ITEM 6) APPLICATION 9-EXC-88 -- HARLAN JACKSON Requesting approval of an
Exception to Ordinance 1438/Urgency Ordinance to permit second story elements
on an existing house with various reductions in required setbacks, and floor area
ratios in excess of .20 above the first floor. The subject property is located on
Cupertino Road east of Foothill Blvd.
ASAC Decision Final Unless Appealed
is
•
•
ASAC STAFF SUMMARY REPORT -- REGULAR MEETING OF JUNE 27, 1988
PAGE -4-
ENCLOSURES
1. Model Resolution (Distributed at meeting)
2. Resolution No. 1358 (Minute Order)
3. Exhibits:A ,B and Info of Appl. 9-EXC-88
4. Applicant's letter of justification and supporting correspondence
COMMENTS
1. The applicant is requesting the following Exceptions to the setback requirements
of the Urgency Ordinance:
Required
Side 10' min. each side;
Combined total 30'
Front first floor coverage not
to exceed 50% of area
between 20 and 30' line
Proposed
20` combined total
68% coverage
2nd floor setback = 30 ft. 23.7 ft. 2nd story
2. The proposed house addition will appear reasonably consistent with other
dwellings in its neighborhood context, according to the applicant's photostudy.
3. There are no unsual physical constraints of lot shape or topography; the applicant
cannot substantiate an issue of hardship in this case.
4. On June 20, 1988, the City Council passed First Reading of the proposed R-1
Ordinance; as these regulation appear certain for final adoption, staff has
compared the requested Exceptions with the proposed regulation in order to
judge the degree of deviation requested:
Proposed 68% front yard coverage -- 50% provision is eliminated in new
Ordinance in favor of an overall .45 FAR
Proposed 23.7' front 2nd floor setback -- New Ordinance would require 25 ft.
Applicant could comply with this requirement with minimal revision of the main
floor plan
Sideyard setback total of 30' -- New sideyard setback surcharge rule would
require applicant to add 15 ft. of total setback to the front or side yard(s), with at
least 5 ft. added to the side setback. Assuming that the front setback for the
addition would not be less than 25 feet, the entire 15 surcharge would have to be
added to the west sideyard setback, which would result in a 25' sideyard, rather
than 14 feet as proposed. The applicant would be at an advantage to add only
ten feet to the west side yard for a total of 24 and thus comply with the Interim
Ordinance.
While the applicant's point that the distance to the westerly neighboring house is
great enough to preclude privacy impacts is well taken, An Exception would
appear to be incosistent with the intent of the Interim Ordinance which is
concerned with control of building mass, not privacy impacts.
ASAC STAFF SUMMARY REPORT -- REGULAR MEETING OF JUNE 27, 1988
PAGE -5-
IS
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends denial of Application 9-EXC-88 in accordance with the findings in
the Model Resolution ASAC's decision is final unless appealed to the City Council
within seven days of the June 27th meeting.
ITEM 8) APPLICATION 10-EXC-88 -- TERRY BROWN CONSTRUCTION;
Requesting approval of an exception to Urgency Ordinance 1438 for a single-family
home located on the south side of Rainbow Drive, approximately 125 feet west of
Upland Way. 21520 Rainbow Drive.
1. Exhibit A of Application 10-EXC-88
2. Applicant's letter dated June 7, 1988
3. ASAC Resolution No. 1358 (Minute Order)
COMMENTS:
A. Tentative Map conditions designate the west property line as the front and also
require a 20 foot setback from the north property line adjoining Rainbow Drive.
Urgency Ordinance allows 50% coverage of the usable area between the 20 and
30 foot front setback lines. Applicant proposes 90% coverage. The zoning limits
the house to one story.
B. ASAC Resolution No. 1358 provides criteria for granting an exception. Staff
believes that the Urgency Ordinance front setback creates an unreasonable
burden on the property owner given the house orientation, large required side
setback, and the single -story limitation. The structure complies with the basic R-1
Ordinance standards.
A. Staff recommends approval of Application 10-EXC-88 per the findings and
conditions contained within the enclosed model resolution.
B. The decision of ASAC is final unless appealed.
ITEM 9) APPLICATION ASAC 51.778.1 -- DE ANZA PROPERTIES (CAL -
NEON):
Requesting approval of a new ground sign for a previously approved retail/office
center located on the north side of Stevens Creek Boulevard, approximately 500 feet
east of De Anza Boulevard. 20343 to 20401 Stevens Creek Boulevard.
ENCLOSURES:
Exhibit F 1 st Revision of Application ASAC 51,778.1
COMMENTS:
A. Application was continued from meeting of April 25, 1988. At that time, applicant
proposed a ground sign for Apple Computer. ASAC rejected the submittal and
directed the applicant to develop a comprehensive ground sign for the site.
B. Applicant now proposes an 8 to 9 foot high, 56 square foot ground sign (see
is Exhibit F-1st Rev.).
1. Sign area is consistent with Sign Ordinance standards.
ASAC STAFF SUMMARY REPORT -- REGULAR MEETING OF JUNE 27, 1988
PAGE -6-
2. Tenant panels will utilize an opaque ivory background; copy color is at the
property owner's discretion. The existing sign program includes a list of
approved copy colors. Staff suggests that approved colors be consistent
between wall and ground signs.
RECOMMENDATION:
A. ASAC should evaluate ground sign colors as discussed above. Size and general
appearance of sign is acceptable to staff. A model approval resolution is
enclosed.
B. The decision of ASAC is final unless appealed.
ITEM 10) APPLICATION ASAC 51,792.1 -- ORTHOPEDIC & SPORTS PHYSICAL
THERAPY (AMCOE SIGN CO.):
Requesting approval of a second ground sign for an existing building located on the
south side of Valley Green Drive, approximately 200 feet west of Bandley Drive.
20700 Valley Green Drive.
ENCLOSURES:
1. Exhibit F of Application ASAC 51,792.1
2. Model Resolution
COMMENTS:
A. The subject building contains two tenants -- the applicant and Apple Computer.
The site contains an Apple ground sign. Applicant proposes a second tenant
ground sign (see Exhibit F). The Sign Ordinance guidelines limit office sites to
one ground sign; the Planned Development zoning allows flexibility in applying
the ordinance standards.
B. Sign size and shape will match the Apple Computers sign located to the west.
Proposed sign colors are white copy with dark bronze background. Color board
will be available at the meeting.
C. A wall sign has been installed on the east side of the building without a sign
permit. A condition of the model resolution requires its removal.
RECOMMENDATION:
A. ASAC should determine if unusual circumstances exist which warrant a waiver
from ordinance standards. Staff feels the applicant's sign is tastefully designed
and unobtrusive. A model resolution has been enclosed.
B. Decision of ASAC is final unless appealed.
INFORMAL REVIEW:
ITEM 11) APPLICATION 49-U-87 -- AUDREY TSANG (KIRK MAHNCKE)
Requesting approval of a landscape plan for a office/retail building located on the
south side of Stevens Creek Boulevard, approximately 500 feet west of Blaney
Avenue. 20100 Stevens Creek Boulevard.
ENCLOSURES:
1. Exhibit L of Application 49-U-87
ASAC STAFF SUMMARY REPORT -- REGULAR MEETING OF JUNE 27, 1988
PAGE -7-
COMMENTS:
A. Some modifications to the landscape plan are necessary for consistency with the
Stevens Creek Boulevard Landscaping Plan. Applicant proposes ivy and shrubs
adjacent to the sidewalk at the northwest corner of the site. Landscaping Plan
requires a continuous lawn treatment.
B. Additional tree should be incorporated into the parkway strip. Two Pistacia
chinensis should be moved closer to the southerly side of the sidewalk to form
interlocking tree canopies.
C. General Plan requires minimum of five gallon shrubs.
ITEM 12) APPLICATION ASAC 51,789.1 -- CHESTER AND CYNTHIA GABRIEL
(PARAGON DESIGN GROUP, INC.):
Requesting approval of a materials and color palette for a new single-family home
within a Planned Development zone. Site located on the east side of Scenic
Boulevard, approximately 450 feet north of Palm Avenue.
1. Exhibits A, B, B-1 and Info of Application ASAC 51,789.1
COMMENTS:
Condition of the use permit requires ASAC approval of materials and color of each
house in the project. Staff will present the color board at the meeting.
40 ITEM 13) APPLICATION 33-U-87 -- BETHEL LUTHERAN CHURCH:
Requesting approval of site, architecture and landscaping for a storage building in
accordance with Conditions of the approved Use Permit.The church is located on the
southwest corner of Finch and Sorensen Avenues. 10181 Finch Avenue
ENCLOSURE:
1. City Clerk's Letter of Sept. 30, 1987
2. Exhibits ASAC "A" and "Ex. Info." of 33-U-87
COMMENTS:
Requirements pertaining to storage shed specified in Condition 20 of enclosed Use
Permit letter; perimeter landscaping plant selection should be identified per
Condition 20 (2).
ITEM 14) APPLICATION 5-U-88 -- CAL WORTHINGTON (ARCHITECTURAL
DESIGN GROUP):
Requesting approval of a final lighting and landscaping plans for a automobile
dealership located on the north side of Stevens Creek Boulevard, approximately 200
feet east of Stelling Road. 20955 Stevens Creek Boulevard.
ENCLOSURES:
1. Exhibits E, L, L-1, L-2, and L-3 of Application 5-U-88
2. . Enviro Light II Product Data Sheet
3. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4049
ASAC STAFF SUMMARY REPORT -- REGULAR MEETING OF JUNE 27, 1988
PAGE -8-
COMMENTS:
ASAC review of lighting and landscaping plans is required by Conditions 16 and 25 of
Planning Commission Resolution No. 4049 (enclosed). Staff will make a verbal
presentation on Monday night.
SUM06-2788(RD4)
•
0