Desk ItemsOFFICE OF COM[M[UNITY DEVELOPMENT ^
CITY HALL
10300 TORRE AVENUE e CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255
gia i , (408) 777-3308 ® FAX (408) 777-3333 e planning@cupertino.org
CUPERTINO
�at� November; 2�9� 20E17
Subject: Deport of the Community Development Director
Item's of Interest:
Plate xx r'� g� Co ; ;m=isslori meetul�g m�nutes
Our minutes transcriber for the past 24 years has informed us that she will not be able to
continue preparing ,summary minutes for Planning Commission meetings due to insurance
requirements in her contract.. The City Clerk's office has researched transcription services and
has informed us that as most cities have web streaming and video archives of their meetings,
there are very few. "firms that do this sort of work. New contracted services` would cost
approximately $60 to $90 per hour of transcription. Typically, each hour of meeting time takes
three hours of transcription time. Additionally, the City Attorney's office has expressed concern
on creation of a "second record" by someone who is not a licensed court reporter. If detailed
minutes are required for specific meetings for legal purposes, a court reporter could be hired to
prepare them. As is typical for Council, other Commissions and Committees, action minutes
will be prepared; to record decisions and recommendations for the Planning Commission.
Beth Ebben
From. Beth Ebben
Sent: Ty;�
h rsd�FaDece;m�ber3�28,�20r �7 4 58�PM
To: Alan Takahashi (ATakahashi@cupertino.org); David Fung (DFung@cupertino.org); Don
Sun ; Geoffrey Paulsen (GPaulsen@cupertino.org); Jerry Liu (JLiu@cupertino.org)
Cc: Benjamin Fu; Aarti Shrivastava
Subject: election of Chair and Vice Chair, Committee appointments
Hello Everyone!
I. hope that you are all having a great holiday season! As we wind down the year, I wanted to remind you of a few
upcoming chores....
Usually the first meeting in February is when we have the election for the new Chair and Vice Chair and regular
Committee appointments. We have no vacant seats coming up until 2019, so I look forward to another year working
with all of you :o). I also give you a'calendar of meeting dates at this time so that you can plan your vacations or we can
see what meetings should be moved or cancelled to accommodate Federal holidays or special events.
The Planning Commissioner's Academy in 2018willbe held from April 4=6 in Monterey. I don't see that registration has
opened yet, but please let me know if you want to attend and I will get on it once we get back from break.
Beth Ebben
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Dear Planning Commission,
B. C. <brenc@wowway.com>
Monday, January 22, 2018 9:33 PM
Joseph Chou
skadari@gmail.com; jronne@yahoo.com; City of Cupertino Planning Dept.;
Jayargee@comcast.net; sasha@WilsonHaven.com
Re: Comments to Appeal of a Two Story Permit, R-2017-27, RM2017-28 (18850 Barnhart
Avenue)'
This is from James Hylen and Benren Cheng, the owners of 18833 Pendergast Ave, Cupertino. We have received the following email
from Joseph Chou, appealing the permit for a 2nd story balcony, and want to reiterate that we agree with the sentiments he expresses
objecting to the 2nd story balcony overlooking his and our properties.
Sincerely,,
James Hylen & Benren Cheng
From: "Joseph Chou" <joseph.chou@aol.com>
To: skadari@grnail.com, jronne@yahoo.com, planning@cupertino.org, brenc@wowway.com,
Jayargee@comcast.net, sasha@VilsonHaven.corn
Saint: Sunday, January 21, 2018 10:54:53 PIVI
Subeoto Comments to ,appeal of a Two Story Permit, R=2017-27, RM2017-28 (18850 Barnhart
Avenue)
have been living in the Rancho Riconada neighborhood since 2009. 1 have gone to quite a few open houses in the
neighborhood and have been surprised with how much neighbors' properties can be seen from the second story
balcony. To me, this is an intrusion of privacy and I am strongly against my backyard neighbor's proposed rear and side
facing balcony.
The owner of 18850 Barnhart proposed to add two feet tall lattice to the existing fence, but the current backyard fence is
already at the maximum allowed seven feet height. The owner also proposed to grow Boston Ivy, but when I first move
into my house, we had ivy on the two sides of the fence; the rats loved to hide in the leafy area. The vines were thick and
heavy; they actually pulled the fence down. The neighbors finally got together, hired gardeners to cut down the ivy and
had the new fence installed. I am strongly against ivy as i do not want to see rats running around and the fence destroyed
again.
In this day and age, the city should have the attitude of "when in doubt, disclose". Most of the residents who reside close
to the two-story house with the balcony do not know how clearly people can see other properties from the balcony. When
the Planning Department sends out two-story house application notices to the adjacent neighbors, there should be a
disclosure that the balcony can see into people's properties. I am aware of the privacy issue because what I have had
seen from second story balconies and l have been working in'the construction field for more than ten years.
I have yet to see privacy trees completely, block the second story, o
would also like to add, trees could be trimmed down; once they arE
we havemany sun -loving plants adjacent to the fence. If 18850 B,,
be affected and may not grow well or even die from the lack of sun
the trees would not protect my privacy from people standing on the
designing,a house, there is a required Title 24 Calculation forthe h
or calculation of the loss of sunlight/natural lightfromthe trees that
appears the city wants us to change the lifestyle that we have enjo
second story house's balcony.
cupants' balcony view into neighbors' properties.
trimmed, it takes time to grow. In my family garden,
rnhart neighbor plants privacy trees, my plants would
ght. The trees may affect my plants, but the height of
balcony, looking down my yard and my house. In
►use. However, I do not see the city requires a study
No affect neighbors' gardens and houses. It
ed for many years in order to accommodate a new
Beth Ebben
From:
Aaron Lee <aaronleecy@gmail.com>
Seng:
Monday, January 22, 2018 10:23 PM
To:
City of Cupertino Planning Dept.
Cc:
Joseph Chou; Susanna Leung Leung
Subject:
Re: Comments to Appeal of a Two Story Permit, R-2017-27, RM2017-28 (18850 Barnhart
Avenue)
We agreed with Joseph and shared the same concern.
Aaron Lee & Susanna Leung
18840 Pendergast Ave, Cupertino.
On Jan 22, 2018, at 6:35, PM, Joseph Chou <joseph.choukaot.com> wrote:
Aaron, if you agree with my comments, please reply to:
planningncupertinoorg
Identify your name and your home address in your reply to show that you are part of the concerned
group.
Thank you.
Joseph
-----Original Message -----
From: Joseph Chou <ioseph.chouCa_aoI.com>
To: skadari <skadariP_gmail.com>; jronne <ironneCa)yahoo.com>; planning <planningacupertino.org>;
brenc <brenc wowway.com>; Jayargee <Jayagee" .comcast.net>; sasha <sashaCa%WilsonHaven. com>
Sent: Sun, Jan 21, 2018 8:54 pm
Subject: Comments to Appeal of a Two Story Permit, R-2017-27, RM2017-28 (18850. Barnhart Avenue)
I have been living in the Rancho Riconada neighborhood since 2009. 1 have gone to quite a few open
houses in the neighborhood and have been surprised with how much neighbors' properties can be seen
from the second story balcony. To me, this is an intrusion of privacy and I am strongly against my
backyard neighbor's proposed rear and side facing balcony.
The owner of 18850 Barnhart proposed to add two feet tall lattice to the existing fence, but the current
backyard fence is already at the maximum allowed seven.feet height. The owner also proposed to grow
Boston Ivy, but when I first move into my house, we had ivy 'on'the two sides of the fence; the rats loved
to hide in the leafy area. The vines were thick and heavy; they actually pulled the fence down. The
neighbors finally got together, hired gardeners to cut down the ivy and had the new fence installed. I am
strongly against ivy as I do not want to see rats running around and the fence destroyed again.
In this day and age, the city should have the attitude of "When'in doubt, disclose". Most of the residents
who reside close to the two-story house with the balcony 'do -not know how clearly people can see other
properties from the balcony. When the Planning Department sends out two-story house application
notices to the adjacent neighbors, there should be a disclosure that the balcony can see into people's
properties. I am aware of the privacy issue because what I have had seen from second story balconies
and I have been working in the construction field for more than ten years.
1
Beth Ebben
From:
jeff ronne <jronne@yahoo.com>
Sent:
Monday, January 22, 2018 10:48 PM
To:
City of Cupertino Planning Dept.
Cc:
Joseph Chou; skadari@gmail.com; Jayargee@comcast.net; brenc@wowway.com
Subject:
Re: Comments to Appeal of a Two Story Permit, R-2017-27, RM2017-28 (18850 Barnhart
Avenue)
Cupertino ,Planning Commission,
In addition, to agreeing with the following comments from Joseph Chou I would like to enumerate the
following 2 points.
The rear setbacks for single family two story housing structures should be increased as the
rear wall of this proposed structure is simply too close to the back property line. For privacy
concerns housing structures should be biased towards the front side of the property lot. This is
especially true for two story structures. We built our 5 bedroom, 3 both 2750 sq ft two story
house in 1,997 at 18851 Pendergast Ave having a 33 foot setback from the rear property
line. This increases our privacy along with our neighbor's privacy. Smaller rear setbacks for
single story houses would be permitted as square footage is important and the privacy impact
concerns are not as great for single story structures given the surrounding 6 foot fences.
Since housing in Cupertino is increasingly expensive it is important to get the front and rear
setbacks optimized to address privacy concerns properly as more and more two story
structures will increasingly be built in this and other Cupertino neighborhoods. This has impact
to everyone's property values including those who undertake the new construction. I have
been a neighborhood resident since 1987 and have witnessed the ongoing housing
transformation which will only continue to gain speed with the new Apple Campus opening up.
Jeff Donne
1.8851 Pendergast Ave, Cupertino, CA
On Sunday, January 21, 2018, 8:54:55 PM PST, Joseph Chou <joseph.chou@aol.com> wrote:
I have been living in the Rancho Riconada neighborhood since 2009. 1 have gone to quite a few open houses in the
neighborhood and have been surprised with how much neighbors' properties can be seen from the second story
balcony. To me, this is an intrusion of privacy and I am strongly against my backyard neighbor's proposed rear and side
facing balcony.
The owner of 18850 Barnhart proposed to add two feet tall lattice to the existing fence, but the current backyard fence is
already at the maximum allowed seven feet height. The owner also proposed to grow Boston Ivy, but when I first move
into my house, we had ivy on the two sides of the fence; the rats loved to hide in the leafy area. The vines were thick and
heavy; they actually pulled the fence down. The neighbors finally got together, hired gardeners to cut down the ivy and
had the new fence installed. I am strongly against ivy as l do not want to see rats running around and the fencedestroyed
again.
In this day and age, the city should have the attitude of "when in doubt; disclose Most of the residents who reside close
to the two-story house with the balcony do not know how clearly people can see other properties from the balcony. When
Beth Ebben
From: Jayargee@comcast.net
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2018 10:34 AM
To: Joseph Chou; sasha@Wi[son Haven.com; jronne@yahoo.com; City of Cupertino Planning
Dept.; brenc@wowway.com; skadari@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Comments to Appeal of a Two Story Permit, R-2017-27, RM2017-28 (18850 Barnhart
Avenue)
I've lived here since 1958; born here, two stories where forbidden let lone balconies. If I had it my way
there would be neither. The view of the foothills is gone. I don't need people looking in my yard let alone
my windows. I enjoy gardening and sunlight. Please revoke the request for the balcony.
Jeff R Gregg
18840 Barnhart ay.
cupertino calif. 95014
born and raised in Rancho Riconoda
On January 21, 2018 at 8:54 PM Joseph Chou <joseph.chou@aol.com> wrote:
I have been living in the Rancho Riconada neighborhood since 2009. 1 have gone to quite a few open
houses in the neighborhood and have been surprised with how much neighbors' properties can be seen
from the second story balcony. To me, this is an intrusion of privacy and I am strongly against my
backyard neighbor's proposed rear and side facing balcony.
The owner of 18850 Barnhart proposed to add two feet tall lattice to the existing fence, but the current
backyard fence is already at the maximum allowed seven feet height. The owner also proposed to grow
Boston Ivy, but when I first move into my house, we had ivy on the two sides of the fence; the rats loved
to hide in the leafy area. The vines were thick and heavy; they actually pulled the fence down. The
neighbors finally.got together, hired gardeners to cut down the ivy and had the new fence installed. I am
strongly against ivy as I do not want to see rats running around and the fence destroyed again.
In this day and age, the city should have the attitude of "when in doubt, disclose". Most of the residents.
who reside close to the two-story house with the balcony do not know how clearly people can see other
properties from the balcony. When the Planning Department sends out two-story house application
notices to the adjacent neighbors, there should be a disclosure that the balcony can see into people's
properties. I am aware of the privacy issue because what I have had seen from second story balconies'
and. I have been working in the construction field for more than ten years.
have yettosee privacy trees completely block the second story occupants' balcony view into neighbors'
properties. I would also like to add, trees could be trimmed down; once they are trimmed, it takes time to
grow. in, my family garden, we have many sun -loving plants adjacent to the fence. If 18850 Barnhart
neighbor plants privacy trees, my plants would be affected and may not grow well or even die from the
lack of sunlight. The trees may affect my plants, but the height of the trees would not protect my privacy
from people standing on the balcony looking down my yard and my house. In designing a house, there is
a required Title 24 Calculation for the house. However, I do not see the city requires a study or
calculation of the loss of sunlight/natural light from the trees that would affect neighbors' gardens and
houses. It appears the city wants us to change the lifestyle that we have enjoyed for many years in order
to accommodate a new second story house's balcony.
Beth Ebben
From: Jayargee@comcast.net
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2018 10:27 AM
To: Joseph Chou; City of Cupertino Planning Dept.; brenc@wowway.com
Ciro sasha@WilsonHaven.com; jronne@yahoo.com; skadari@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Proposed second story balcony for 18850 Barnhart Avenue
I agree fully
jeff r gregg
18840 barnhart ave
cupertino calif 95014
On January 21, 2018 at 8:50 PM Joseph Chou <joseph.chou@aol.com> wrote:
-----Original Message -----
From: B. C. <brenc@wowway.com>
To: Joseph Chou <joseph.chou@aol.com>
Cc: skadari <skadari@gmail.corn>; Jayargee <J ayargee@co m cast. net>; sasha
<sasha@WilsonHaven.com>.; jronne <jronne@yahoo.00m>
Sent: Sun, Jan 21, 2018 4:42 pm
Subject: Re: Proposed second story balcony for 18850 Barnhart Avenue
This is James Hylen & Benren Cheng, the owners of 18833 Pendergast Ave, Cupertino CA. The proposed 2nd story
balcony significantly reduces the privacy at our house. We agree with Joseph Chou's-objection to this, and support
the appeal. Unfortunately, we are not able to attend the appeal hearing.
Sincerely,
James Hylen & Benren Cheng
T6tal Control Parcel Lo in
To: ,planning@coertino.org Message Score: 1 High (60): Pass
From: jayargee@comcast.net My Spam Blocking Level: High Medium (75): i'ass
Low (90)`. Pass
Block this sender
Block comcast.net
This message was delivered because the content falter score did not exceed your filter level.
1
Beth Ebben
From: Joseph Chou <joseph.chou@aol.com>
Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2018 8:50 PM
To: brenc@wowway.com; City of Cupertino Planning Dept.
Cc: skadari@gmail.com; Jayargee@comcast.net; sasha@WilsonHaven.com;
jronne@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Proposed second story balcony for 18850 Barnhart Avenue
-----Original Message -----
From: B. C. <brenc@wowway.com>
To: Joseph Chou <joseph.chou@aol.com>
Cc: skadari <skadari@gmail.com>; Jayargee <Jayargee@comcast.net>; sasha <sasha@Wilson Haven.com>; jronne
<jronne@yahoo.com>
Sent: Sun, Jan 21, 2018 4:42 pm
Subject: Re: Proposed second story balcony for 18850 Barnhart Avenue
This is James Hylen & Benren Cheng, the owners of :18833 Pendergast Ave, Cupertino CA. The proposed 2nd story balcony
significantly reduces the privacy at our house. We agree with Joseph Chou's objection to this, and support the appeal. Unfortunately,
we are not able to attend the appeal hearing.
Sincerely,
James Hylen & Benren Cheng
Total Control Panel Lo in
To:_planning_a,cupertino.ora Message Score: 15 High (60): llas
From: joseph.chou@aol.com My Spam Blocking Level: High Medium (75): Pass
Low (90):.Ilass
Block this sender
Block aol.com
This message was delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level.
1 _ I
Beth;,Ebben
From: Joseph Chou <joseph.chou@aol.com>
Semite Sunday, January 21, 2018 8:55 PM
To: skadari@gmail.com; jronne@yahoo.com; City of Cupertino Planning Dept.;
brenc@wowway.com;`Jayargee@comcast.net; sasha@WilsonHaven.com
Subject: Comments to Appeal of a Two Story Permit, R-2017-27, RM2017-28 (18850 Barnhart
Avenue)
I have been living in the Rancho Riconada neighborhood since 2009.! 1 have gone to quite a few open houses in the
neighborhood and have been surprised with how much neighbors' properties can be seen from the second"story
balcony. To me, this is an intrusion of privacy and I am strongly against my backyard neighbor's proposed rear and side
facing balcony.
The owner of 18850 Barnhart proposed to add two feet tall lattice to the existing fence, but the current backyard fence is
already at;the maximum allowed seven feet height. The owner also proposed to grow Boston lvy; but when 1 first move
into>my house, we had ivy on the two sides of the fence; the rats loved to hide in the leafy area. The vines were thick and
heavy; they actually pulled the fence down. The neighbors finally got together, hired gardeners to cut down the ivy and
had the n°ew'fence installed. I am strongly against ivy as I do not want to see rats running around and the fence destroyed
again:
In this day and age, the city should have the attitude of "when in doubt, disclose". Most of the residents who reside close
to the two-storyhouse with the balcony do not know how clearly people can see other properties from the balcony. When
the Planning Department sends out two-story house application notices to the adjacent neighbors, there should be a
disclosure that the balcony,can see into people's properties. I am aware of the privacy issue because what l have had
seen from second story balconies and I have been working in the construction field for more than ten years.
I have yet to see privacy trees completely block the second story occupants' balcony view into neighbors' properties. I
would also like to add, trees could be trimmed down; once they are trimmed, it takes time to grog. In my family garden,
we have many sun -loving plants adjacent to the fence. If 18850 Barnhart neighbor plants privacy trees, my plants would
be affected and may not grow well or even die from the lack of sunlight. The trees may affect my plants, but the height of
the trees would not protect my privacy from people standing on the balcony looking down my yard and my house. In
designing a house, there. is a required Title 24 Calculation for the house. However, I do notsee"the city requires a study
or calculation of the loss of sunlight/natural light from the trees that would affect neighbors'.gardens and houses. It
appears the city wants us to change the lifestyle that we have enjoyed for many years in order to accommodate a new
second story house's balcony.
My family also enjoys having natural light coming into our house. We often roll them up the window blinds. The second
story balcony would greatly affect the lifestyle that we have enjoyed. There is always the possibility that people would
stand on the balcony looking into our yard and windows. The worry of invading of our privacy would cause a change in
our lifestyle and why are we the one to make the change in order to accommodate a new house's balcony?
My,family enjoys spending time in our backyard with,our friends. We host many backyard gatherings with friends. We do
not want to have people from the second story balcony looking directly into our yard when we have our gatherings. This
is an intrusion of privacy. Building fences higher than the two-story balcony would ensure people not able to look`into
other properties. However, City of Cupertino only allows seven feet tall fence, including lattice. Seven feet tall fence
would not guarantee our privacy.
Incidentally, prior to filing the protest, I went to a newly completed and moved -in two-story house on Pendergast
Avenue. I asked the homeowner to allow me to go to his second story backyard balcony to take a look and take a few
pictures. He closed the door on me quickly and told me that he could see his neighbor's properties clearly. 1 later went to
Barnhart Avenue, one street behind this house. From the street, I saw this balcony clearly. This told me from the
balcony, the homeowner could see into quite a few properties and also one street over. Imagine if he or his family
members use the binocular?
I went to another two-story house on Barnhart Avenue that was completed and moved -in s for about a year. I made the
same request and again, the owner turned me down. He also stated that he could see neighbors' properties. His next-
door neighbor, a single story house, allowed me to go into the backyard. From the backyard, I had an unobstructed view
of the two-story balcony. I then went to Tilson Avenue, one street behind this two-story house. Again, from the street, I
saw the balcony clearly. This told me from the balcony, the homeowner could see into quite a few properties and also
one street out. Imagine if he or his family members use the binocular?
In this day and age, we have to be protective of ourselves. We have gun control laws that the purchasers have to go
through the background check before being allowed to purchase the guns. However, we still see "normal people" commit
gun violence in the news. If I leave a brand new, expensive laptop computer, in plain sight inside my car, this gives
people the temptation to steal it and it is highly likely to happen; if I report the loss of computer to the police, the police
would tell me do not give people the temptation by placing the computer in a visible spot unattended. If a convenience
storekeeper leaves the door open after store closing, the fact of an open door and no one is inside the store would tempt
people to commit the act of stealing and there is a very high likelihood this would happen. When there is a second story
balcony, there is the temptation for the occupants to stand on the balcony to look into neighbor's properties; there is no
guarantee that the occupants would not use binoculars that could get even closer views of other people's yards and
houses. Allowing a second story balcony is giving the occupants the temptation to intrude into people's privacy. The best
way to prevent any intrusion of the privacy is not allowing the second story balcony to be built.
I want to put on the record that if the hearing panel wants to allow the building of the two-story rear and side facing
balcony, before putting the decision in writing, invite our adjacent neighbors to view five recently complete two-story
houses with rear and side facing balconies. The city government should make the formal request for the viewing as I had
been turned down and these occupants knew they could see into other people's properties. The city government should
have the record of these newly constructed houses. Let us all look with our own eyes, determine whether adjacent
neighbors' privacy is indeed protected. Let us use our own eyes to look into the reality and make the true judgment.
Joseph Chou
18841 Pendergast Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
Total Control Panel
To: plannin a,cupertino.org
From: joseph.chou@aol.com
Message Score: 1
My Spam Blocking Level: High
Block this sender
Block aol.com
This message was delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level.
High (60): Pass
Medium (75): Pass
Low (90): Fess
Login