Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
101-staff report.pdf
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY HALL 1010300TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255 TELEPHONE: (408)777-3308www.cupertino.org CITYCOUNCILSTAFFREPORT Meeting:January 4, 2011 Subject Appeal ofaDirector'sApprovaltoallowa pavedparking stallinthefrontyard ofanexisting duplex. RecommendedAction Upholdappeal(SeeAttachmentA.PlanningCommissionResolutionNo. 6619) Description Application:DIR-2010-30Appeal Applicant:LindaShen-Jung(GLSAA,LLC) Appellant: ErwinWolf Location: 965-967 MillerAvenue,APN 369-19-052 ApplicationSummary:Appeal ofaDirector's Minor Modificationtoallow pavinginthefront yard ofanexisting duplexforthe purpose ofaparking space. Discussion Background OnSeptember 23, 2010,theDirectorofCommunityDevelopmentapprovedaDirector’s Minor Modificationtoallowthereplacement ofan 11footby 17 footturfareawith pervious stone paversinthefront setbackfor parking purposesforanexisting duplex(AttachmentB). The approvalwasappealedonOctober 5, 2010 by Mr. ErwinWolfwho ownstheadjacent duplexto the north(957-959 MillerAvenue – seeAttachmentC).His duplex sharesacommon driveway withtheapplicant’s duplex. Accordingtotheapplicant,the pavedareawill not only provideadditionalparkingonthe property, butwillimprovemaneuverabilityforresidents of both duplexes,allowing vehiclesto enterandexitatthe sametime,andallow vehiclestoturnaroundand headintotraffic. PlanningCommission OnDecember 14, 2010, thePlanningCommission heardtheappealandrecommendedthatthe Council upholdtheappeal(i.e., denytheDirector’sApproval) ona 3-2 vote(Vice-ChairLee& Kaneda voting no – seeAttachmentD). The draftCommissionmeetingminuteswill be availableattheCouncilhearing. ThePlanningCommission discussedthefollowingissuesatthe hearing: ·The safety(to pedestriansand bicyclists) of havingavehicleparkedinthefront setback nexttoa driveway ·Potentiallymodifyingthe sizeandthe orientation ofthe pavedarearelativetoits functionsasa parking stallandasa vehicleturnoutandturnaround ·The necessity ofhavinga vehicleturnaround since onealreadyexistsatthegarages ·The necessity ofhavinganadditional parking stall sincethereisavailable street parking ·The precedentand desirability ofallowingparking/pavinginthelandscapedfront setback ofthis duplex The dissentingCommissionerswho did not supporttheappealfeltthat parkinginthefront setback did not posea significant safetyrisk because: ·Therewere numerous other duplexes on Millerwithfront setback parking. ·Therewere numerousexamples offront setbacklandscapingthat obstructsmotorist’s views ofthe sidewalk. ·Thereare noreportedaccidents ofmotorists backinginto pedestrians or bicyclists. ·Anyremainingriskcould beavoidedbyredesigningandreorientingthepavedarea. AppellantConcerns Theconcernsandcommentsexpressedbytheappellantare summarized below (Responses are providedinitalics): ·Safety –Itis difficulttoexit drivewayinto busyMillerAvenue,especiallyforelderly tenants.Withthe proposedchangeandacarparkedinthe space,itisimpossibleto seethe sidewalkfootand bicycletraffic.Accidentswill happen. Response:There are numerous duplexes onMiller Avenuewith parkinginthefront setback area.There havebeenno reports ofvehicular/pedestrian/bicyclist accidentsinthis area because ofvehicle parkinginthefront setback.Having a car parked atthe proposed areais no differentfromthecars parked on the numerous drivewaysinfront of otherexisting duplexesintheimmediate neighborhood. ·Proposed parking doesnot belongin setbackareawithout directaccessandit degradesthe appearance ofthe properties. Response:The duplex design has a largerthan normallandscapedfront setback.The parking stalltakes up 22% ofthelandscapedfront and has direct accesstothe driveway. Parkingis not prohibitedinthefront setback area and the paved areawillimprovethe maneuverability ofvehicles on thelot. Perviouspaverswill retain onsite stormwater runoff. _____________________________________ Preparedby:ColinJung,AICP,SeniorPlanner Reviewedby:GaryChao,CityPlanner;AartiShrivastava,CommunityDevelopmentDirector ApprovedforSubmissionby:DavidW.Knapp,CityManager Attachments: A.PlanningCommissionResolutionNo. 6619 B.Director’s Minor ModificationApproval,DIR-2010-30 C.AppealPetitionfrom ErwinWolfforDIR-2010-30 D.PlanningCommissionStaffReportdatedNovember 14, 2010