Loading...
PC 05-11-77 CITY OF CUPERTINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, CA 95014 Telephone: 252-4505 PC-254 Page 1 MlL'ruTES OF THE REGULAR ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSIO HELD ON MAY 11, 1977 IN THE COUNCIL CHAM.BER, CITY HALL CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA SALUTE TO THE FLAG Chairman Koenitzer called the meeting to order at 7:35 PM with the Salute to the Flag. " ROLL CALL Comm. present: Adams, Blaine, Gatto, Markkula (7 :40 PM), Chairman Koenitzer Comm. absent: None Staff present: Assistant Planning Director Cowan Assistant Planner Piasecki Deputy Assistant City Attorney Foster PUBLIC HEARINGS 11. Application 2-V-77 of VICTOR C. STEVENS: VARIANCE request from Section 9.4 of Ordinance 780 to allow reduction of required rear yard setback for a two-story building from 25 feet to 20 feet. Said property is located adjacent to and northerly of Baxley Court approximately 290 feet westerly of the intersection of Baxley Court and Linda Vista Drive. First Hearing. The Assistant Planner described the proposal, as detailed in the May 6, 1977 staff report. He noted that the lot width setback line on these lots in this cul-de-sac is 45 to 50 feet rather than the normal 70 feet, for which a previous variance was obtained. This ±s a rather minor variance request in that the proposed 2-story structure would protrude into the setback in certain portions. A drawing was displayed on the screen showing the configuration of the lot and the proposed home footprint on it. Mr. Victor C. Stevens, 3623 Cody Court, Santa Clara, stated that this is a narrow lot by City standards. You have to go back 48 fe t before you reach the 60 foot width required for the building setback. His basic point was that he has a narrow, deep, pie- shaped lot. If his lot were only 100 feet instead of 126 feet deep he could build this without a variance. PC-254 Page 2 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ADJOURNED PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, 5/11/77 The Deputy Assistant City Attorn~y answered Comm. Gatto that if this application is approv~d by th~ Planning Commission the eKhibit showing the specific variance area can be attached to the Resolution to the City Council. Mr. Joseph Evelich, 10862 Linda Vista Driv~, Cup~rtino, said he owns the house on th~ adjac~nt lot, and he has only a 5 foot side yard setback on that side. He fe~ls this proposal will put the houses too clos~ togeth~r. H~ f~els the g~ntleman is trying to put too large a house on this prop~rty. He wonder~d if there would also be a balcony on the s~cond story of it. Mr. Stevens answered Mr. Evelich that he, was considering a balcony but if that means not getting the variance he would be willing to del~te it. Mr. Barry Scott, 7507 Moltzen Drive, San Jose, said he owns th~ lot along-sid~ that of Mr. Stev~ns. H~ just got his building permit. He believes the variance should be granted. He beli~Mes it is an unfair penalty becaus~ this is not a rectangular lot. Becaus~ of the shape of his lot, he would prefer his n~ighbor's landscaped front yard be next to his house rather than his neighbor"s house. Mr. St~vens answered Comm. Adams that he has b~en studying house plans for ov~r two years to try to come up with one that is right for this lot. Moved by Comm. Blain~, seconded by Comm. Markkula to clos~ the public hearing. Motion carried, 5~O Comm. Gatto said the variance r~quest is relatively minor, but when you look at th~ building envelope it app~ars th~r~ must be anoth~r house plan that would fit on it. H~ believes that with minor changes to these plans it will fit within the building envelop~ without n~~d for a varianc~. 2-V-77 denied Comm. Blaine comm~nted that one reason for the setback for two-story homes is th~ privacy intrusion of adjacent lots. Chairman Koenitzer obtained from the staff reconfirmation of a 25' from setback. Moved by Comm. Gatto, s~conded by Comm. Markkula to deny application 2-V-77 . AYES: NOES: Comm. Adams, Blain~, Gatto, Markkula, Chairman Koenitzer Non~ Motion carri~d, 5-0 MINUTES OF 'tHE REGU'LAlt ADJOtmNED PLANNING COMMISSION MEE'!ING 5/11/ 7 PC-254 Page 3 Findings: The Planning Commission finds that the applicant has failed to demonstrate the presence of exceptional and extra- ordinary circumstances compelling variations from setback standard contained in Ordinance 780. Further, the earlier granting of a variance to allow closer proxiĊ“ity to the front property line allows ample room for construction of a residence on this lot. Mr. Stevens was told this would go to the City Council on May 18, 1977. 12. Application 3-V-77 of DONALD P. VAN BUREN AND qµENIE L. " VAN BUREN: VARIANCE request from Section 16.28.040 of the Municipal Code to allow applicant to place a 6 foot fence on the side lot line in lieu of a required 12 foot setback line. Said property is located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Janice Avenue and Cass Place. First Hearing. The Assistant Planning Director stated the Municipal Code indicate deviation from the Fence Ordinance requires an exception rather than a variance. !he applicant agreed to proceed with. this public hearing rather than start over again with an application for an exception. The Assistant Planning Director stated the staff has reviewed the proposal and does not believe there is a basis for approval of it. Mr. Don Van Buren, 10208 Cass Place, Cupertino, said he is asking for privacy for two bedroom and a bathroom windows fronting on this wall and also to obtain better usage of his property. With a monolithiC: sidewalk, there is more area for landscaping the front. He would like to see a 12 foot strip added, but would be willing to compromise for something less. All the neighbors he has spoken with about this agreed it was a good plan. He said his neighbor to the rear has a driveway running along the rear property line. He said he has had one ¡o.ndow screen removed from one of the bedroom windows. Mrs. Greenie Van Buren, 10208 Cass Place, Cupertino, said she felt someone stole the screen off that window and it gave her a "spooky' feeling. She feels that they will be less vulnerable with a fence up. Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Adams to close the public hearing. Motion carried, 5-0 PC-254 Page 4 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ADJOURNED PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 5/11/77 Chairman Koenitzer said this may not be the best home design, but it is not unique. Others in the City with the same problem have screened the windows very sucessfully with plants. Comm. Blaine said that because of the location of this house on this lot, she feels some sort of fence would help protect the safety and welfare of these people. She would be willing to consider other alternatives, however. Moved by Comm. Gatto, seconded by Comm. Markkula to deny 3-V-77. AYES: NOES: Comm. Adams, Gatto, Markkula, Chairman Koenitzer Comm. Blaine Motion carried, 4-Í Findings: Location on the street side of a corner lot does not confer exceptional nor extraordinary circumstances to the property involved, nor is the granting of the exception necessary to preserve the sub- stantial property rights of the petitioner. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: None. NEW BUSINESS: Comm. Markkula suggested the staff research the possibility of including provision for TV reception in the Planned Development Ordinance. REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION; None. REPORT OF PLANNING DIRECTOR: None. ADJOURNMENT Chairman Koenitzer adjourned this meeting at 8:35 PM. APPROVED: TTEST: , City Clerk