DRC Summary 020107
City of Cupertino
10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014 (408) 777-3308
To:
Mayor and City Council Members
Planning Commissioners
From:
Steve Piasecki, Director of Community Development
Date:
February 2, 2007
Subj:
REPORT OF DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE FINAL DECISIONS MADE February I, 2007.
Chapter 19.136 of the Cupertino Municipal code provides for
A eal of decisions made b the Desi Review Committee
1. Application
EXC-2006-13; Michael Inouye (Potsticker King), 19634 Stevens Creek Blvd
Description
Sign Exception for exposed neon on an illuminated sign at Marketplace Shopping Center
Action
The Design Review Co~ttee approved the application on a 2-0 vote. This is effective February I,
2007. The fourteen-calendar day appeal will expire on February 15, 2007.
Enclosures:
Design Review Committee Report of February I, 2007
Resolution No. 247
Approved Plan Set
2. Application
R-2006-49; Steve Benzing (Murray Residence), 10501 N Portal Ave
Description
Residential Design Review for a new 618 square foot second story addition and an exception for
front and rear setbacks
Action
The Design Review Committee approved the application on a 2-0 vote. This is effective February I,
2007. The fourteen-calendar day appeal will expire on February 15, 2007.
Enclosures:
Design Review Committee Report of February I, 2007
Resolution No. 248
Approved Plan Set
G:planning/Drq020107 summaryletter.doc
To:
From:
Subject:
Location:
Design Review Committee
AId Honda Snelling, Senior Planner
Application: EXC-2006-13
19634 Stevens Creek Boulevard
Date: February 1, 2007
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Sign exception for exposed neon on illuminated signs at the
Marketplace Shopping Center.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the DRC consider one of the following options for the
illuminated wall signs for Potsticker King Restaurant:
1. Approve EXC-2006-13 by allowing the exposed neon lighting in the sign with the
reduced lighting level.
2. Approve EXC-2006-13, based on the model resolution recommended by staff,
with the additional condition that the existing clear plastic face over each channel
letter be replaced with a semi-obscure face to reduce the amount of glare from
each channel letter sign.
BACKGROUND:
On December 7, 2006, the Design Review Committee (DRC) reviewed the proposal by
Potsticker King Restaurant for exposed neon lighting on its illuminated signs. Staff
recommended that the signage be modified by replacing the clear plastic face over the
channel letters with a sernl-obscure face to reduce the amount of glare from the signs.
The applicant recommended an alternative option of dimming the wattage on the neon
lighting to reduce glare from the signs.
The DRC recommended that the wattage of the neon lighting be temporarily dimmed
as proposed by the applicant until such time the DRC could review the dimmed
lighting and a subsequent DRC meeting could be held at which time a determination
could be made.
The applicant notified the City that the neon lighting was dimmed as proposed on
January 12, 2007. Staff subsequently notified DRC members that the lighting had been
reduced to allow the DRC time to review the new lighting level on the signs.
Staff has reviewed the reduced lighting on the neon signs and finds that the glare has
been reduced. The reduced lighting level on the signs now appear to be consistent with
the other illuminated signs within the shopping center.
1- /
December 7, 2006
EXC-2006-13
Page 2
DISCUSSION:
Staff recommends that the DRC make a determination whether to approve the exposed
neon lighting at the reduced lighting level, or approve per staff's recommendation to
include the semi-obscure facing.
Prepared by:
Approved by:
Aki Honda Snelling, Senior Planner
Ciddy Wordell, City Planner ~ lL.JndVl.~M --'
Enclosures:
IYlihl1tesbf December 7,2006
DRC staff report of December 7, 2006 w / attachments
Model Resolution
Plan Set
1-2
2 Design Review Committee
December 7, 2006
Architectural and Site approval for Building C and exterior modifications and an
outdoor seating area for Building B at Marketplace Shopping Center
Design Review Committee decision final unless appealed.
Requested postponement to December 21, 2006 meeting
MOTION:
SECOND:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
YOTE:
Commissioner Wong moved to continue application ASA-2006-14
Chairperson Giefer
None
None
2-0
Application:
Applicant:
Location:
EXC-2006-13
Michael Inouye (Potsticker King)
19634 Stevens Creek Blvd
2.
Sign Exception for exposed neon on an illuminated sign at Marketplace Shopping
Center
Design Review Committee decision final unless appealed
Staff member Honda explained that the Committee is hearing this application for exposed neon on an
existing, approved sign for Potsticker King. The neon was not mentioned in the original sign approval.
Once Staff became aware of the exposed neon in the sign, the applicant was asked to modify the sign. The
applicant has decided to file for an exception instead. Staff is recommending that the applicant find a way
to tone down the brightness of the sign. Commissioner Wong asked for clarification between the approval
for the neon sign at the Elephant Bar restaurant and this one. Staff explained that the approval process
was different when the Elephant Bar sign was approved on 2004. The sign program for the shopping
center was approved in April. Since then the sign ordinance has been changed pertaining to exposed neon
to allow the DRC to review and determine approvals for neon signs. The Property Manager for the
Marketplace Shopping Center stated that it is possible to install a dimmer switch which will reduce the
brightness of the sign. However, the reduced electricity to the sign may cause the neon to glow
inconsistently around the letters. This solution would be cheaper for them than placing some sort of
barrier over the exposed neon to obscure it. Commissioner Wong said he supports the idea of a dimmer as
opposed to having the applicant go to the expense of replacing the sign. Chairperson Giefer agreed that
trying the dimmer switch approach would be fine. She also made mention that this is the third retroactive
sign exception application to come from the shopping center and that the center needs to get their signs
approved ahead of time in the future. The discussion continued about the replacement of the palm trees.
It was agreed that the applicant would dim the neon lighting so that the committee members and the
public will have a chance to view the modification for a few weeks before the DRC makes a
determination. The application would be reheard at the December 21, 2006 meeting with a continuation to
the first meeting in January if the dimmer switch could not be installed right away.
MOTION:
SECOND:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
YOTE:
Commissioner Wong moved to continue application EXC-2006-l3 to the December 21,
2006 meeting
Chairperson Giefer
None
None
2-0
(-3
To:
From:
Subject:
Location:
Design Review Committee
Aki Honda Snelling, Senior Plaml.er
Application: EXC-2006-13
19634 Stevens Creek Boulevard
Date: December 7, 2006
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Sign exception for exposed neon on an illuminated sign at
the Marketplace Shopping Center.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of EXC-2006-13, based on the model resolution, with the
additional condition that the existing clear plastic face over each channel letter be
replaced with a semi-obscure face to reduce the amount of glare from each chaml.el .
letter sign.
BACKGROUND:
The applicant, Michael Inouye, on behalf of Potsticker King Restaurant, is requesting a
sign exception to retain the existing channel letter wall signs as they are currently
installed with a clear plastic face over visible yellow internal neon lighting.
The applicant received approval of the channel letter wall signs through a sign program
approved for the Marketplace shopping center by the Design Review Committee (DRC)
in April of 2006. However, the exposed neon lighting was not a part of the approval for
these signs. Staff became aware of the visibility of the neon lighting after the signs were
installed.
Since the updated Sign Ordinance took effect in early November, neon signs require
approval by the DRC. Therefore, this application is being forwarded to the DRC for
review. Previously, neon signs required approval by the Planning Commission.
DISCUSSION:
The channel letter wall signs (See Sign Plan) are located on the side (west) and rear
(south) elevations of Building A of the Marketplace shopping center that face into the
interior parking lot of the shopping center. There are no signs for Potsticker King on the
front elevation of the building facing Stevens Creek Boulevard. However, the sign on
the west side elevation is visible from Stevens Creek Boulevard.
The yellow neon lighting is internally located against a green background within each
channel letter of the signs. Therefore, the signs appear brighter than some of the other
signs on the building and within the shopping center.
The Marketplace shopping center has received approval of neon signs for two of its
tenants. Wahoo's Fish. Taco restaurant, which is located next to Potsticker 'King,
I/'t
December 7, 2006
EXC-2006-13
Page 2
received approval for neoi1.lighting on its signs in May of this year. However, the neon
lighting was approved only for accent . lighting of the fish logo on its cabinet signs.
Elephant Bar Restaurant also received approval for its neon signs in September of 2004.
Staff recommends that the brightness of the existing Potsticker King signs be softened to
provide some consistency with other signs on the building, which include internally
illuminated channel letter and cabinet signs, only one of which includes limited neon
lighting for accent purposes only. Therefore, staff recommends that the existing clear
plastic. face of the signs be replcJ::ed. with a semj-obscure face that would not limit the
visibility of the neon lighting, but soften the brightness of the existu1.g signs and achieve
the desired effect of the sign.
Prepared by:
Approved by:
Aki Honda Snelling, Senior Planner
Ciddy Wordell, City Plaru1.er ~ ~
Enclosures:
Model Resolution
Plan Set
, '-5
EXC-2006-13
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
MODEL RESOLUTION
OF THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
APPROVING ASIGNEXCEPTION TO ALLOW SEMI-EXPOSED NEON SIGNS
.... ... ..__.
ON TWO WALL SIGNS AT THE MARKETPLACE SHOPPING CENTER
(POTSTICKER KING)
SECTION I: PROTECT DESCRIPTION
Application No.:
Applicant:
Location:
EXC-2006-13
Michael Inouye
19634 Stevens Creek Boulevard
SECTION II: FINDINGS
WHEREAS, the Design Review Committee of the City of Cupertino received an application for
a Sign Exception, as described in this Re~olution; and
WHEREAS, the Design Review Committee finds the following with regards to this application:
1. That the literal enforcement of the provisions of this title will not result in restrictions
inconsistent with the spirit and intent of this title;
2. That the granting of the exception will not result in a condition which is materially
detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare; and .
3. That the exception to be granted is one that will require the least modification of the
prescribed regulations and the minimum variance that will accomplish the purpose.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted
in this matter, the application no. EXC-2006-13, is hereby approved; and
That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this Resolution are
based and contained in the public hearing record concerning Application EXC-2006-13 as set
forth in the Minutes of the Design Review Conunittee Meeting of December 7, 2006, and are
incorporated by reference herein.
/-(p
Model Resolution
Page 2
EXC-2006-13
December 7, 2006
SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPT.
1. . APPROVED EXHIBITS
Approval is based on the plan set submitted by Allen Signs consisting of 1 page attached to
the staff report, except as may be amended by conditions in this resolution.
2. SIGN FACE
Each existing clear plastic sign face on the wall signs shall be replaced with a semi-obscure
face to soften the brightness of the visible neon lighting. Prior to installation, the semi-
obscure face material shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning and Building
Divisions. The semi-obscure face material shall be installed within 30 days of this approval.
3. NOTICE OF FEES, DEDICATIONS, RESERV A TIONS OR OTHER EXACTIONS
The Conditions of Project Approval set forth herein may include certain fees, dedication
requirements, reservation requirements, and other exactions. Pursuant to Government
Code Section 66020(d) (I), these Conditions constitute written notice of a statement of the
amount of such fees, and a description of the dedications, i'eservations, and other exactions.
You are hereby further notified that the 90-day approval period in which you may protest
these fees, dedications, reservations, and other exactions, pursuant to Government Code
Section 66020(a), has begun. If you fail to file a protest within this 90-day period complying
with all of the requirements of Section 66020, you will be legally barred from later
challenging such exactions.
P ASSEDAND ADOPTED this 7th day of December 2006, at a Regular Meeting of the Design
Review Committee of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by .the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
Ciddy Wordell
City Planner
Lisa Giefer, Chair
Design Review Committee
, -1
EXC-2006-13
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
MODEL RESOLUTION
OF THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
APPROVING A SIGN EXCEPTION TO ALLOW SEMI-EXPOSEpNEONSIGNS
ON TWO WALL SIGNS AT THE MARKETPLACE SHOPPING CENTER
(POTSTICKER KING)
SECTION I: PROTECT DESCRIPTION
Application No.:
Applicant:
Location:
EXC-2006-13
Michael Inouye
19634 Stevens Creek Boulevard
SECTION II: FINDINGS
WHEREAS, the Design Review Committee of ~e City of Cupertino received an application for
a Sign Exception, as described in this Resolution; and
WHEREAS, the Design Review Committee finds the following with regards to this application:
1. That the literal enforcement of the provisions of this title will not result in restrictions
inconsistent with the spirit and intent of this title;
2. That the granting of the exception will not result in a condition which is materially
detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare; and
3. That the exception to be granted is one that will require the least modification of the
prescribed regulations and the minimum variance that will accomplish the purpose.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted
in this matter, the application no. EXC-2006-13, is hereby approved; and
That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this Resolution are
based and contained in the public hearing record concerning Application EXC-2006-13 as set
forth in the Minutes of the Design Review Committee Meeting of February 1, 2007, and are
incorporated by reference herein. .
;-s
Model Resolution
Page 2
EXC-2006-13
December 7, 2006
SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPT.
1. APPROVED EXHIBITS
Approval is based on the plan set submitted by Allen Signs consisting of 1 page attached to
the staff report, except as may be amended by conditions in this resolution.
2. SIGN FACE
Each existing clear plastic sign face on the wall signs shall be replaced with a semi-obscure
face to soften the brightness of the visible neon lighting~ Prior to installation, the semi-
obscure face material shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning and Building
Divisions. The semi-obscure face material shall be installed within 30 days of this approval.
3. NOTICE OF FEES, DEDICA TIONS, RESERVATIONS OR OTHER EXACTIONS
The Conditions of Project Approval set forth herein may include certain fees, dedication
requirements, reservation requirements, and other exactions. Pursuant to Government
Code Section 66020(d) (1), these Conditions constitute written notice of a statement of the
amount of such fees, and a description of the dedications, reservations, and other exactions.
You are hereby further notified that the 90-day approval period in which you may protest
these fees, dedications, reservations, and other exactions, pursuant to Government Code
Section 66020(a), has begun. If you fail to file a protest within this 90-day period complying
with all of the requirements of Section 66020, you will be legally barred from later .
challenging such exactions.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 1st day of January 2007, at a Regular Meeting of the Design
Review Committee of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
Ciddy Wordell
City Planner
Cary Chien, Chair
Design Review Committee
I-Of
POTSTICKER KING BUILDING SIGN ELEVATION:
19634 STEVENS CREEK BLVD.
CITY OF CUPERTINO
PROPOSE TWO SIGNS @ soum & WEST ELEVATION I
1J':/1f\(r;p\(~\/~-r' -:;iji;:;(tf?/~'I-Cj" ';t&7'T'r~ t~
I'!~/( \J,',,~::: kj':,')_ _:c )~,,(;~: t~~(s.~!(~~jt" ,I_~:.I\ .~~~:' '~~;.
5" THICK INDIVIDUAL CHANNEL LETTERS, EXPOSE YELLOW I\jEOr~ FOR ILLUMINATION.
?:1I4" BRDN7F CmOR TRIMcCAF; INSIDE lETTER PAII\jTED DARK GREEN CmOR (DEA130 lUCKY CLOVER)
RETURN PAINTED KELLY MOORE 701-M STONE AGE COLOR
SCALE: 1/4"=1'-0"
DATE: JAN-10-2006
.
STEVENS CREEK BLVD.
.
'~'.~'-"";-. -..:, ~,Q:n~'!~II~rijl"l'lr ~1~1'.O;<: -llllill-I-11 j-:- o----!
- . / , ' :::: n I " = : .
: I = ~ =rr= - = '~ ~. 'l I I f - - :FE':::j''''' I
. I _ --L- -1~ - - . 1 ~ I
;.' ,,' "" -\. I l n. I ~ E --
I' .. ...'.- == :=1,--=' 3E ==. -. =1. '.: -;- ( I 1: ~ ~l- '- ,'~ )
(t-- ---0- -9- -0- --:-- \J I . II , ~ v ~,
,., J Ii _.
\':= =->-- =1= I. F =~ :::J[' = Jl , II V"'" = I
'. = -<;- I,- ~ ~ -- --v- ::j:= . I, I II~,// =
, ~' '::: =O=::::i= = -v-- ---v-- ~r-: t I:> == :
~=I'j-:- nll~~"711111 ;II~~ n II~ -' 'In ~ 1_ .. =. ,.!
~ .r ------------:~\ ::( '. , 'I .-
_ /;r,--.,.,,~~~/ ,,-', /, / ," //-- '. 'V'..':' ~I
I: - -:[~~-( ~ < II . /lilllllll 18
-. l'gl,,:1 ~<~ l' -----
o ...... I /"
't- I,:. : - : lZ' ;--~--.--.--. r N ~ '.:,--:
I. 1_-'--~I--r~ I I .>,
: bl_l_lllrJ~~--'~' ~I__n___~__ Ij~ r _ ___2_'YJf!/
11=
~ ~
11
POTSTICKER KING
19634 STEVENS CREEK BLVD.
CITY OF CUPERTINO
N
w-<rE
s
60'-0" STORE FRONTAGE
60'-0" STORE FRONTAGE
NEW SIGN LOCATION
NEW SIGN LOCATION
SOUTH ELEVATION
WEST ELEVATION
SIGN FACE FLUSH WITH
ROOF RAFTER
EXISTING 6"x 8"
ROOF WOOD OUTRIGGER
RECEIVED
D
_ C 2006
3/8"x3" THRU-BOLT & WASHERS
1.5"x1.5"xl/8" ANGLE IRON @ EVERY
48" ON CENTER, MIN. 2 PER SIGN
INSTALL METAL BIRD SPIKES @ TOP OF RACEWAYS ,BY:
TENANT SIGN CONTRACTOR(S) TO
CONNECT SIGN TO J-BOX POWER & CONTROLLER
PROVIDED BY LANDLORD. J-BOX LOCATED IN MANSARD ROOF ATTIC
--
1.5"x1.5"xl/8" ANGLE IRON
PAINT TO MATCH BUILDING BACKGROUND COLOR
AS SPECIFIED BY LANDLORD
NEON FOR INTERNAL ILLUMINATION
l/4"xl" BOLTS
DISCONNECT SWITCH
TRANSFORMER MUST BE IN RACEWAY OR
ACCESSffiLE LOCATION
24 GAGE GALV. STEEL SHEET
METAL RACEWAY PAINT TO MATCH BUILDING
BACKGROUND COLOR AS SPECIFIED BY LANDLORD
#lOx3/4" SHEET METAL SCREW
MIN. 3 PER LEITER
U.L. LISTED LABEL FOR
CHANNEL LEITER SIGN
#1 -- INSTALLATION DETAIL
All designs & art works belong to Allen Signs, l:1c. Any duplication is prohibited. COpy RIGHT 2006
All designs & art works belong to Allen Signs.
any duplication is prohibited. COPY RIGHT 2006
E-mail address:allensigns.@yahoo.com
Tel:408/280-6500 Fax:408/280-6700
1982 Stone Ave. SanJose, Ca. 95125 State Lic.# 834580
To:
From:
Subject:
Location:
Design Review Committee
Aki Honda Snelling, Senior Planner
Application: R-2006-49, RM-2006-33
10501 N. Portal Avenue
Date:February 1, 2007
PROTECT DESCRIPTION
Residential Design Review for a 618-square foot second story addition to an existing single- .
story residence with an exception for an approximately 19-foot front yard second story setback
and 20-foot rear yard second story setback.
. The applicant has removed the previously proposed second story side balcony on the south
elevation and, therefore, no longer requires the Minor Residential Permit.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee (DRC) approve R-2006-49 based on the
model resolution that incorporates the DRC's recommendation to inset the second story walls
two feet from the first floor walls and require obscured glazing on second story windows
along the rear (west) elevation.
BACKGROUND
On October 5, 2006, the Design Review Committee reviewed this project and requested that
the applicant revise the plans to address issues raised by both the Committee and the adjacent
neighbors regarding privacy impacts, and the visual and massing impacts of the second story.
As a result, the Committee continued this item until such time the plans could be revised.
The applicant has submitted revised plans that incorporate most of the changes requested by
the DRC, and has also provided story poles and a story board notice on the property. Notices
were also sent to the adjacent neighbors notifying them of this DRC meeting.
DISCUSSION
The following is a table indicating the DRC's comments and the applicant's. responses per the
revised plans:
'K~~~~!""\,;':~1f\R~~j:~~;~q:m~nt~~::~Qmm~1)!i .~~"'<;""-..l~~~~:~11~~~.:'Q~~:~.
Maintain the proposed addition over the · Proposed addition over the garage IS
garage. Staff previously recommended maintained.
that the addition be placed over the
existing living portion to eliminate the
need for the setback exceptions. The DRC
agreed with the applicant to maintain the
addition over the garage, as the garage is
stepped down from the main living
portion, providing a lower second story
hei ht.
c2-(
February I, 2007
R-2006-49
Desi llReview COlll:rnittee Co:rnments",', ',' "'A
Inset the second story two feet from the
first floor wall to reduce massing
impacts of second story walls.
Enhance the east street side elevation
with architectural enhancements (e.g.
add roof eyebrow over the first floor)
Address privacy protection measures
Page 2 of 3
licant'sres' onses
. Revised plan has inset portions of the
front and rear second story walls 1 1/2
feet from the first floor walls.
. Applicant says that insetting walls any
further would compromise the size of
the addition by making the proposed
bedroom, office, bathroom and closet
smaller than desired b the a licant.
Revised elevations show the addition
of roof eyebrows along the front and
rear elevations to comply with the
DRC's recommendations.
Revised elevations show that the
balcony on the south elevation has
been removed and is now replaced
with a window. Therefore, there is no
longer a need for the Minor Residential
Permit.
. Property owner has obtained privacy
protection waivers. Adjacent neighbor
to the south has signed a waiver based
upon the revised plans showing
replacement of the second story
balcony with windows. Adjacent
neighbors to the west impacted by the
second story windows have signed
waivers based on the revised plans
subject to use of obscured glazing on
second story windows along the west
elevation.
Should the DRC approve R-2006-49, allowing the exceptions to the front and rear yard
setbacks, DRC will need to make the following findings:
1. That the literal enforcement of the provisions of this title will result In restrictions
inconsistent with the spirit and intent of this title.
2. That the approval of the exceptions will not result In a condition that IS materially
detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare.
3. That the exceptions to be granted are ones that will require the least modification of the
prescribed regulations and the minimum variance that will accomplish the purpose.
~-~
February I, 2007
R-2006-49
Page 3 of 3
4. The proposed exception will not result in significant visual impact as viewed from abutting
properties.
Attachments:
Minutes of October 5, 2006 DRC meeting
DRC staff report of October 5, 2006 w / attachments
Model Resolution
Plan Set
Prepared by:
Approved by:
Aki Honda, Senior Planner
Ciddy Wordell, City Planner ~~/-L-J(.-;~e:~___/
d. -3
Design Review Committee
October 5, 2006
Cupertino, CA 95014
(408) 777-3308
APPROVED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE DESIGN REVIEW
COMMITTEE HELD ON October 5, 2006
ROLL CALL
Corrunittee Members present:
Lisa Giefer, Chairperson
T::\(Th; ~::l::lr1::lt-i rrYrnm;~~;nnpr
~ -b~-- ....--------j -------~~------
Committee Members absent:
None
Staff present:
Colin Jung
Aki Honda
Staff absent:
None
APPROV AL OF MINUTES:
August 3,2006
Minutes of the August 3, 2006 Design Review Committee were approved by
Commissioner Saadati at the September 9, 2006 rneeting and by Commissioner Wong
via email.
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS:
None
POSTPONEMENTSjREMOV AL FROM CALENDAR:
None
ORAL COMMUNICATION:
None
CONSENT CALENDAR:
None
PUBLIC HEARING:
1.
Application:
Applicant:
Location:
R-2006-49, RM-2006-33
Steve Benzing (Murray residence)
22562 Alcalde Road
Residential Design Review for a new 676 square foot second story addition and an
exception for front and rear setbacks. Minor Residential Permit for a second story side
balcony on a new 676 square foot addition
Design Review Committee decision final unless appealed
02-4-
2 Design Review Committee
October 5, 2006
Staff member Honda explained that this application is not supported at staff level for approval
so it has been referred to this Committee for review and approval. The lot is very challenging
due to its length and narrowness. The applicant wants to place the addition over the garage.
This encroaches into the setback areas. Staff has recommended that the addition be placed over
the living area instead. The applicant's architect has stated this will compromise the first floor,
however, no plans have been reviewed with this design. Commissioner Saadati asked for
clarification of the setback measurements and commented on the lot difficulties. Chairperson
Giefer asked about any utility easements further reducing the setback area. The applicant talked
about the need for additional space. Their architect explained that due to the current layout of
the house, an addition over the main portion of the house would be a much more involved
_.~__...:J~1 'T'1-~ 1-~..~~ ~~ ~.f-"'~~0A TH~.f-1-. -1-1-.0 n-.",.."n-eo ,,';..-10 ......4= f-ha h......,,"o l......ura,. th<:>Tl f-ha rDct cn thD tnt::!l
~C.1~lUU.C:~. ~~LC:: .1.1VUCJC.La CJl.\...yt''-'-'-/ YV..Lt...A.L L.LL'- b......~\,A.b'- v..........._ '-'.... ....LL"- .l,L"-'_'-'_ ...~.... -... ~..................... -..- ....---,....- ....-..- ------
elevation of the addition on that side of the house would be lower than if placed above the
living area. He is willing to try to redesign the addition over the garage to change the aesthetics
and break up the mass of the exterior walls. Neighbors spoke about privacy concerns with the
second story windows and the visual impact of a second story. Commissioner Saadati agreed
with Staff that the applicant should bring back revised plans to address concerns about mass
reduction, setbacks, elevations and privacy issues. The revised plans should: reduce the second
story massing, second story should not line up with the fir,st floor exterior wall, where two story
walls are proposed, an "eyebrow" roofing should be added to breakup the massing between the
first and second floors, provide at least a two foot setback along the frontage and around the
home over the garage, dress up the front elevation, ok to provide the addition over the garage,
articulate. the first and second floor and add privacy protection plantings. Chairperson Giefer
concurred with Commissioner Saadati's comments.
MOTION:
SECOND:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
VOTE:
Commissioner Saadati moved to continue application R-2006-49 and RM-2006-33
Chairperson Giefer
None
None
2-0
2.
Application:
Applicant:
Location:
ASA-2006-20
Justin Mozart
10977-10985 and 22028-22036 Acacia Way
Architectural ands Site approval for a landscaping plan for an approved planned
residential development (Homestead and Maxine Ave)
Design Review Committee decision final unless appealed
Staff member Jung explained that this application is being heard to review the privacy
landscaping plans for the five . lots per the use permit. The lots need to conform to the R-1
ordinance privacy planting requirements, taking into consideration the existing oak trees. The
project has had some additional conditions of approval added requiring minimum planting
heights of 6' for shrubs and 8' for trees. A covenant is also added to protect the trees from
removal in the future to preserve privacy. Commissioner Saadati asked about the spacing of the
proposed plantings. Chairperson Giefer asked about what was planted under the oak trees. The
applicant confirmed which of the shrubs he would need to remove to preserve the health of the
existing oak trees. The applicant has also contacted the neighbors to show them what plantings
are proposed. Chairperson Giefer confirmed that these plantings are just for privacy screening
and not residential landscaping of the entire site. She asked the applicant to plant shrubs in the
space between the fence and retaining wall. A neighbor spoke about how nice working with
J-5
To:
From:
Subject:
Location:
Design Review Committee
Aki Honda, Senior Planner
Application: R-2006-49, RM-2006-33
10501 N. Portal Avenue
Date:October 5, 2006
PROTECT DESCRIPTION
Residential Design Review for a 676-square foot second story addition to an existing single-
story residence with an exception for an approximately 18-foot front yard second story setback
~....rl '/l1_.t:,...,....f- "'0,:>'" "T,:>...r1 carn......r1 C...n...."T co"''h~("''lc
__.. U.l.l\.A....L..V__.. ,L,V_\..tL.._~_"-lA..L ....r;\A..L......... v'-,,-::.'-'.L L""'-...u .....J~.J' .LJ__ ..."-(,--....~-'L... ..
Minor Residential Permit for a second story side balcony on a new 676 square foot second
story addition.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee (DRC) take one of the following options:
1. Recommend that the applicant re-design the second story addition to be constructed
over the existing residence, rather than over the garage, to prevent the need for an
exception for the front and rear yard setbacks. Staff also recommends that the second
story walls be articulated and inset from the first floor walls.
2. Deny R-2006-49 and RM-2006-33, based on the model resolutions.
BACKGROUND
The subject property is located at 10501 N. Portal Avenue on the west side of Portal Avenue,
north of Merritt Drive.
Aerial Photo
J -{p
October 5,2006
R-2006-49
Page 2 of 4
The site is a 10,462 square foot lot that has an irregular lot orientation uncharacteristic of the
neighborhood due to its wide frontage along N. Portal Avenue and narrow depth. As a result,
a Variance was approved for this property in 1962 to construct the existing residence with its
current setbacks, including the reduced front yard setback. The existing setbacks include a
minimum 16-foot front yard setback, 20-foot rear yard setback, 51-foot south side yard setback
and six-foot north side yard setback. The distance from the adjacent residences to the west is
approximately 55 feet. The distances from the adjacent residences to the north and south are
approximately 20 feet and 66 feet.
TI-Le aDDlicarit is. reG:u.esti:iL~. ut)DrcTvTal- to cc.r..struct - tl:.e second stor~l adclitio!1. O'.Ter t11e existirle:
.J..J. .J. V.L.1. .,J '-'"
garage; however, due to the second story setback requirements, there will not be sufficient
space to construct the addition without approval of an exception from the front yard, rear yard
and surcharge setback requirements. Application 'of the required 25-foot front yard setback,
25-foot rear yard setback and additional 10-foot surcharge setback for the second story
addition will essentially make the addition unfeasible due to the narrow width that would
remain for the addition.
DISCUSSION
The existing residence is a single-story, 2,015 square foot residence with an attached 502 square
foot garage. The existing lot coverage is 28 % and the existing floor area ratio (FAR) is 24 %.
Photo of Residence
2006 8 g
With the proposed addition, the lot coverage will remain at 28%, but the FAR will be 30.5%
and the second floor to first floor ratio will be 26.8%, which conforms to the R-1 ordinance
requirements.
The proposed second story addition does not incorporate wall articulations from the first story
walls, other than the addition of gable roof elements on the rear (west) and east (facing N.
.)-1
October 5, 2006
R-2006-49
Page 3 of 4
Portal Avenue) elevations. The south elevation includes a balcony on the second floor with a
sliding glass door and has a 25-foot setback from the rear property line and .a 50-foot setback
from the south property line. No elevation is' provided for the north (side) elevation of the
building; however, the applicant indicates it will be identical to the shape' of the south
elevation with no wall openings or balcony. ,The addition is proposed to have a board and
batten siding and cedar shake roofing to match the existing residence.
Staff does not support the design of the project, including the balcony, or the setback exception
because the addition is not consistent with the surrounding neighborhood and does not
confax-Yr, ta the desi~ zuidelines fa! secan.dstO!'l. additiofl5, Without Wr.lll r.lrtlculations
. -, - \..J - LJ .'-' . J'--
between the first and second story walls, the massing impacts of the addition would be
emphasized due to the lengthy street frontage of the lot. Additionally, a substantial perimeter
of the second story has exposed walls over six feet in height, except for the gabled window
areas, which is not consistent with the second story wall height requirement of the R-l
ordinance.
As a result of these concerns, staff met with the applicant to suggest alternatives to the
proposed addition without having to apply for a setback exception. Staff suggested that the
applicant construct the addition over the existing living portion of the residence, which would
eliminate the need for a setback exception. The applicant states that staff's suggestion would
compromise the existing living space on the first floor due to the addition of a staircase needed
to access the addition. The applicant does not wish to remodel the interior of the existlll.g
living portion of the residence to accomplish staff's recommendation.
Staff believes that the proposed project does not meet the required following findings for an
exception:
1. That the literal enforcement of the provisions of this title, will result in restrictions
inconsistent with the spirit and intent of this title.
The applicant has not demonstrated that the setback requirements cannot be met if the
addition is constructed over the existing living portion of the residence; therefore, literal
enforcement of the regulations may apply to this project without resulting in restrictions to
the proposed project that are inconsistent with the intent of the zoning ordinance.
2. That the approval of the exceptions will not result in a condition that is materially
detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare.
Although the proposed addition will not result in a condition that is materially detrimental
to the public health, safety or welfare, it may set a precedent to allow exceptions without
exploring other means to achieve the addition in conformance with the zoning ordinance.
3. That the exceptions to be granted are ones that will require the least modification of the
prescribed regulations and the minimum variance that will accomplish the purpose.
The applicant has 110t demonstrated that the setbacks cannot be met if the addition is
constructed over the living portion of the residence as opposed to over the garage;
J-b
October 5, 2006
R-2006-49
Page 4 of 4
therefore, this finding cannot be made that the requested exception will require the least
modification of the regulations and minimum variance.
4. The proposed exception will not result in significant visual impact as viewed from
abutting properties.
The proposed addition requiring the setback exception will create a visual impact from
adjacent properties and massing impacts along the street frontage, given its lengthy
frontage along N. Portal Avenue and narrow width. Additionally, the second story walls
are not inset or articulated from the first story walls, making the project inconsistent with
the design guidelines for second story additions and second story setback requirements to
inset second storT-walls. Additionally; the.perirneter length of the addition alrnost enti.rely
has exposed wall heights greater than six feet, except for the addition of the gable features
that include the second story windows. The R-l requirements do not allow more than 50%
of the total perimeter length to have exposed second story wall heights greater than six
feet.
Attachments:
Model Resolution
Plan Set
Prepared by:
Approved by:
Aki Honda, Senior Planner
Ciddy Wordell, City Planner
cJ2fJ
\
. \ ... r \
\r---> . -0 f,..,- ,~, \IJ ·
;J-q
R- 2006-49
CITY OF CUPERTINO .
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
MODEL RESOLUTION
OF THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DENYING A 676-
SQUARE FOOT SECOND STORY ADDITION TO AN EXISTING SINGLE-STORY
RESIDENCE WITH AN EXCEPTION FOR REDUCED FRONT YARD AND REAR YARD
SECOND STORY SETBACKS .
SECTION I: PROTECT DESCRIPTION
Application No.:
Applicant:
Location:
R-2006-49
Steve Benzing
10501 N. Portal Avenue
SECTION II: FINDINGS
WHEREAS, the necessary public notices have been given in accordance with the Procedural
Ordinance of the City of Cupertino, and the Design Review Committee has held one or more.
public hearings on this matter; and
WHEREAS, the applicant has not met the burden of proof required to support said
application; and has not satisfied the following requirements:
1. That the literal enforcement of the provisions of this title will result in restrictions
inconsistent with the spirit and intent of this title.
2. That the approval of the exceptions will not result in a condition that is materially
detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare.
3. That the exceptions to be granted are ones that will require the least modification of the
prescribed regulations and the minimum variance that will accomplish the purpose.
4. The proposed exception will not result in significant visual impact as viewed from
abutting properties,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence
submitted in this matter, the design review application is hereby denied; and
That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this resolution
are based and contained in the public hearing record concerning Application R-2006-49 set
c2 -to
Model Resolution
Page 2
R-2006-49
October 5, 2006
forth in the Minutes of the Design Review Committee meeting of, October 5, 2006 are
incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 5th day of October 2006, at a Regular Meeting of the Design
Review Committee of the City of Cupertino, Stat~ of California, by the following roll call
vote:
}.~YES:
rnl\Al\AT~~T () l\TH'RC:::'
'-"......'.!.. .-..' . ,- ...'-."''"-'''... -_... - ----- -~ ~-: ,'.._..-,
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
APPROVED:
Ciddy Wordell
City 'Planner
Lisa Giefer, Chairperson
Design Review Committee
)-11
RM -2006-33
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
MODEL RESOLUTION
OF THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DENYING A
SECOND STORY SIDE BALCONY ON A NEW 676- SQUARE FOOT ADDITION TO AN
EXISTING SINGLE-STORY RESIDENCE
SECTION I: PROTECT DESCRIPTION.
Application No.:
Applicant:
Location:
RM-2006-33
Steve Benzing
10501 N. Portal Avenue
SECTION II: FINDINGS
WHEREAS, the necessary public notices have been given in accordance with the Procedural
Ordinance of the City of Cupertino, and the Design Review Committee has held one or more
public hearings on this matter; and
WHEREAS, the applicant has not met the burden of proof required to support said
application; and has not satisfied the following requirements:
1. That the project is consistent with the Cupertino General Plan, any applicable specific
plans, zoning ordinances and the purposes of this title;
2. That the granting of the permit will not result in a condition that is detrimental or
injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the
public health, safety or welfare;
3. That the proposed project is harmonious in scale and design with the general
neighborhood; and
4. That the adverse visual impact on adjoining properties have been reasonable mitigated.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence
submitted in this matter, the design review application is hereby denied; and
That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this resolution
are based and contained in the public hearing record concerning Application RM-2006-33 set
forth in the Minutes of the Design Review Committee meeting of, October 5, 2006 are
incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein.
cJ -/2
Model Resolution
Page 2
RM-2006-33
October 5, 2006
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 5th day of October 2006, at a Regular Meeting of the Design
Review Committee of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call
vote: '
AYES:
NOES:
.A.BST "AJN:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COJ\1JvlISSIOl\.TERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
APPROVED:
Ciddy Wordell
City Planner
Lisa Giefer, Chairperson
Design Review Committee
;)-(3
~
\
-
4:
~-
,...,.otCII(lTUlN.''I,,,,
"crT........ru&........._.C_
...1'_....._~
.-"
....,...-
1>...11I.......11117..."0'.'
.. ,....._.. .~t,..
C. ........-.0..111.,
D. .......'.. .'to"
..11I.......,.....,,,.,
.""...~".p1illTlCtO
1..",._18"-'-" ..,..,. ......._.-~
TCI'I"....."'""""'O"..,11.'.'..O.....~
_....l'UoTlO
/
\ J
\
\
H 00. 1 "SOM rt
,'....22.
- -
_..------=---
....'G-t<..I!T...,..'H....\'.l.L.
DeG-K
l:
1
~
I
~
:
~
:
-----------------
(I!)HOU~e
l
FIN FLR EL ...!I'-'"
/-
I
L HO"'~O"...""."O'
SITE PL.AN
e.C...LI! '". &'-0.
.......-
or&HI~el
M.... . """'1. 6COTT MUIl.,.,.....,.
10501 H. ,.QIIlT,l.L ,..,,1..
CUP'~TIHQ. c....
zOtuH6... ... I
uae... lIteetOeHTlAL
6tZI!CJPLOT" 10..62.'
MAX LOT c:.O\/ellt...6.. .. 1 as a'
..."IUt...... 61T' 6LOP'. .. 2'"
~..~
:r~
""p'",eVlOUe elT! ~V'e"'''''.1!
nu eTIIlUGTUJltee. - 25 I",.' -2.... 1 '"
,....TI08 . r&,..LK......,.~ .
DfllVell'lAY .. '666... ".~ ...
L...ttPec......e .......... - 62""' - 60,,"
TOTAL ... 'O"IID - 100..
61%10.- 6TfWCTUlltl&
1!)Q6TIH. fl,1!6/t'IHGe
IXI.TIN. ....tv..e
,....opoeep APt'
6IlCOH.,....."APP
TOT....L LlVltt" ""lite""
T"T....~ ..u"......e"
:2015.,
!50:2 .1
616 al. 21.6'" OF e)(16-r6 1.t...L1f.
:26..1.1
51 qe.f.. 50.5'5 ,....JIit
StOV&lO !'Ol1Z,">:l, Anhltod 6122t:lOO6 'I.::25....M .Il.....'
steve eenzing
Architect
C-'1~&!I
1 240& frederl"kaburg
aaretoga c:.ellFornla
let .040& 661 6..10
f.K 406 66' 6015 1
.mel Semardloc;omc;eat..net.
~.""oUlPua.Of'PIl"'~.
......-------...
--.--.......--,-..
..--...............-,-...........-
-~_....-..~_...._-...,....
.-..-........-...........
.--.....--..-.........
-...................-...--..
..........-_._....-..~_...
.--..--""".
RECEIVED
AllG 2 9 2006
BY:
I'
t
.,~
..
(
~
~ITI!PL.,a...
...c:ld/,a.lt to realden"e
. 1 O!lO' H. portel...ve.
Cupertino, c'"
fori
Mr. I Mra. e.""tt Murrey
1 0150' H. portal ...vo.
G-upertlno, C...
dat.e: 6/ 1 6/06
a"elo, NOTeD
drewn by, ~MI!l
Job no. "" 1 2
6heet A 1 0' 15 &ht.e
~ '" . ,
C ::> Ii hr.J
'N .D
c~ ~~ ,,- .1 iijH!
(U\l ~ " -" , ! I r . 'i
..0
IO(U ..~ .." : fllli'l
.,,=
.. " rr . I q. .
(U~ UI .\:" .." ~ I ill',fj
>..1: ll\ " .... , t 'I I"
m '" .... ii' i! ~!
(U\l;!: 1).3 ,,"
~1...- .. " ~~ i ! hilt\t
\0.( ~ '" Ii _x
- .. . .. ~ u U
-----------------1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
J
I
:
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
r------.j
J
~-----~-----------------
I
I
I
J
I
I
,
I
I
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
,
D
______J
i --6-;--i
1 i~: :
s l!~ I
3
!:
i:
"
:if--W1" ~
:!I s: j
~ I
I n I
::::
Ii
()
()
...J
IL
D
z
()
\l
IIJ
.n
D
III
.n
()
Il
()
Ii
Il
..
Z
<
.J
..
It
I)
\)
.J
..
~
" <
" -
ii~
." '-
-= ~ <<(
~ :i O.
... _ 0
~().!:
~ ~ t;
~-!t
< . \l
'"
" .
'- "
'- >
::> <
~:!
o 6 -<
.llL\l
f~~
l:o't
.::~~i
.2f-u
J
..
.c
.. "
~ n ~ '0
.. .. II
I-
"- \) 1: .. C1
.. Z dl <:l
50 -(
.D g
;;
~ Ii 3 .D "
II ~ .2, "
..
~
"
"
..
o
o
~
~
Ii
()
()
...J
IL
I-
III
Ii
u::
\!l
z
~
.n
x:
IIJ
d-IS
.......-..........
, ,
/",'/"'"
,
.....,,~:
"Ul''''~'''''''''
~TOIol.loTc:.tI__~
r.:'.::~:~r'
I
I
I ~l.. II'..'
I /Toi'1ll'1'l....
I
_ L.OT""'" ....."T
"
_'l.....,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.~~
tn ......0-
---.llU j....,....,.-
~TCI......TC"O._,...
[LJ]
STREET E1..EVATION
-----------....--
REAR (I"lEeT) E1..EV A TlON
~
,
-
~
SloVCI BefI[lf'lg, I..rchltcd e/2212006 1J.;2!f AM .Itee
steve 6enzing
Arc.hitec.t
C-l"T'I85
1240!l freder'Gk.burg
Soar.toga c.alifornla
t.el 40e &6' 6-' 10
'8M 040e a., 6051
em.. eens...ch.comc..t.nete
~""'P"'.Of"P",,"""""'e
......--------...
..-.-....-......--.-..
..-..................~..,_._I...-
ft.,..._........._.___.........
-...--........................
.....-......--..----
""'....,....-.....-..............
---..--....-...--
_..__..~-
~><TeFt'O'" ELEVATIONS
Add/ Alt to r.old.nG.
. 10110 1 N. ~ortal Av..
Cupertino. CA
for:
Hr. . Hr.. SGott Hurray
10110 1 H. portal Av,.
Cupertino. CA
dete: 6/16/06
&oc.ale: NOTeD
drllwn by: SMS
Job no. 06 1 :2
sheet A 6 of s e-htr.
R-2006-49
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
MODEL RESOLUTION
OF THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO APPROVING A
618- SQUARE FOOT SECOND STORY ADDITION TO AN EXISTING SINGLE-STORY
RESIDENCE WITH AN EXCEPTION FOR REDUCED FRONT YARD AND REAR YARD
c"Crr'\1\ Tll C'T'r'\DV C"C'T'U ^ rvc
J L'- '--' ~ "LJ J.L '--'.L '\..L J.LI.L 1J.L1. '--.L '-J
SECTION I: PROTECT DESCRIPTION
Application No.:
Applicant:
Location:
R-2006-49
Steve Benzing
10501 N. Portal Avenue
SECTION II: FINDINGS
WHEREAS, the necessary public notices have been given in accordance with the Procedural
Ordinance of the City of Cupertino, and the Design Review Committee has held one or more
public hearings on this matter; and
WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application;
and has satisfied the following requirements:
1. That the literal enforcement of the provisions of this title will result in restrictions
inconsistent with the spirit and intent of this title.
2. That the approval of the exceptions will not result in a condition that is materially
detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare.
3. That the exceptions to be granted are ones that will require the least modification of the
prescribed regulations and the minimum variance that will accomplish the purpose.
4. The proposed exception will not result in significant visual impact as viewed from
abutting properties,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence
submitted in this matter, the design review application is hereby denied; and
That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this resolution
are based and contained in the public hearing record concerning Application R-2006-49 set
J-( 7
Model Resolution
Page 2
R-2006-49
February 1, 2007
forth in the Minutes of the Design Review Committee meeting of February 1, 2007 are
incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein.
SECTION III. CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPT.
1. APPROVED PROTECT
This approval is based on a plan set prepared by Steve Benzing, Architect, for a second
~trw" .::\r1rlitirm .::\t 10.1:)01 1\.1 Port~l AVPn11P for Mr. I?r Mrs Srott Mllrr~v. datf'd Odohf'r 20.
--~-J ------------ --- --- -- - -- - ------ --- ------ --- ----- .-' --.----.' -- - -'-' -------------J ,- - -- -- -- - .- - -,
2006, consisting of three sheets, except as may be amended by conditions in this
resolution.
2. CONSULTATION WITH OTHER DEPARTMENTS
The applicant is responsible to consult with other departments and/ or agencies with
regard to the proposed project for additional conditions and requirements. Any
misrepresentation of any submitted data may invalidate an approv~l by the Design
Review Committee.
3. SECOND STORY WINDOWS
The applicant shall provide obscure glazing on all second story windows on the rear -
(west) elevation of the addition to mitigate privacy impacts onto the adjacent neighbors to
the west. The type of obscure glazing shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of
Community Development prior to issuance of building permits.
4. SECOND STORY SETBACKS
The applicant shall revise the plans to provide a minimum two-foot second story setback
from the first floor walls along the front and rear elevations. The plans shall be reviewed
and approved by the Director of Community Development prior to issuance of building
permits.
5. NOTICE OF FEES, DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS OR OTHER EXACTIONS
The Conditions of P~oject Approval set forth herein may include certain fees, dedication
requirements, reservation requirements, and other exactions. Pursuant to Government
Code Section 66020( d) (1), these Conditions constitute written notice of a statement of the
amount of such fees, and a description of the dedications, reservations, and other
exactions. You are hereby further notified that the 90-day approval period in which you
may protest these fees, dedications, reservations, and other exactions, pursuant to
Government Code Section 66020(a), has begun. If you fail to file a protest within this 90-
day period complying with all of the requirements of Section 66020, you will be legally
barred from later challenging such exactions.
)-110
Model Resolution
Page 3
R-2006-49
February 1, 2007
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 1st day of February 2007, at a Regular Meeting of the Design
Review Conunittee of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call
vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
APPROVED:
Ciddy Wordell
City Planner
Cary Chien, Chairperson
Design Review Conunittee
)/fq
,.
20'-0 x 2....6 . 5()C"
8
_l>"'-"-_
'06 aP- 4Cr.TAII'6J-.1S.r
...,.,..............~.....CI!IL
146T "'" &'4(l1t._
""'''''''
""""'T!5T.
Tro<;l!
e
'"
"""""'-~
_T~
~ 2.'-6)( 20'-6 . '~.z'"
IL 12'-. J( :aCt-6 .. a,.,
~ 2~-6x U'-o.6.1"
o. .'-0)( 26'-0 .., so.,
I!.. 2S'-6" ."-6.605"
TOT~ ~B'"''
~~.............
,Qa-,-..cceTARfr). 61611''' a.... ..ot-EXla~
TOTH..BOT'H~...'S."'-ao ...~&...OCIIIItAIUA.
.....TlO
2ndFue.e~+..'-~" _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ I
I I
At>t>mON ON 2nd ~ I I
cs.ARAc5e ON 1 5t "L.~ (!!)HOUS!! I 1
I I
--- / FIN "L.~ I!L. +19'-"1" I I
I I
-- --
~iIlR ~~" I I --~ ' I I
-- --- -- - I
I
....... I
.................J I
........ I
I I ........ I
- I .., ................
........
....... I
........
........
I I .........J
--
I
I
(
\
\
~-
t
<<
r
1
...
z
:l
-1
n
'(
fi
~
'f.
<<
~
II:
POOL
15:2'-
t
r
I
I
I
I
I
I
L _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -(- - 31(Y_
L N.O~~O.~~O~
SITE
PLAN
AI"N _ eCA1..E 1.. &'-C,.
OI"CNEft6:
MR. . M~e. ec.OTT MUftltA'I"
1 050 1 N. POftT AL. AVE.
CUPI!~T1NO. CA
ZONIN& - lit 1
use - ~E$IOENTIAL.
5I%EOFL.OT. 10...626f
MAX L.OT COVEAA&E - ... 1 &19 !If
A'IE!ItA&B SITE $L.OPE . 2 %
IMPIIU!'II0ue SITE CO'IEAA&I!
(a) 5TRUCTUIIU!& - 251"1 sf -2.... 1 "
P"ATIO& . ~L.I<~'I"5.
Dlltl'll!~'I"
L.AND~PE AftEA
TOTAL.
. 1665 - 15." 'J&
- 62"'"1 - 60 %
. 10...19&- 100 "
51%! 01" &TRUCTUftE5
EXI5T1N& RIl!$lP!!NCI!
EXI5T1N6 &AItA&!!
"~I"OseD ADD
SECOND l"L.1It ADD
TOTAL. UVIN& AftEA
TOTAL. I"L.~ A~EA
- 20156f
502 sf
6 1 & sf. 2....6 "OF eXleT'Go 1 at; !"Lilt
2655 sf
19 1 55 sf . SO 'J& FAit.
~~~
~r~
()
't-
tlI
'f
~
..
N 00"1 ~'eo.1( 154.22'
,J
S~IC.K ~eT AINI
& JI'(AI.I.
C.ONC..
l'ec.K
..
..
~
:1
z
II~
....
t.!
...
q
III
CJl
'I~
....
II -
L
I
-......
F'OFi:.; AL. AVE.
J
~ e.ru:1ncI. An::h~
IOI2O~ 1.24 t"M "-vHd flocr plan.dlolg
steve Benzing
Architect
C,-1-rQ&5
1 2""015 frederick.sburg
saratoga Galifornia
tel ...0& &6'1 6.. 10
fax ...0& &6"1 6051
emall sen%ar~ho~t;.net;
_.._ueeQlF'l>~
AI........~...~ thIrcof~..
............-~....iIIIIl1.............1ta
~ "I'heIrcUIJc-..fonlf""'respec;t.f6tH&
~jlc:t -"" _.JOlC't t.c be -.dI_.~ot:hIlI' pruJ-t.
~Ion_~lonto_tofftd:lll~
..~ra.or'OJt'othrpor'pO'SClilft~GIUl
tta,"",jl&4.""Et.obc~_~a
der~oI.bNell!len:lMll~~.co--.'"
Ulf91tM (W'otIW~.....
~IT!! PLAN
Add/ Alt to re6iden~
. '050 1 N. Portal Ave.
cupertino. C,A
for:
Mr. .. Mrs. Scott Murray
, 050 1 N. Portal Ave.
Cupertino. C,A
date:
scale:
drawn by:
job no.
6/1 6/06
NoTE!:'
5MB
0612
sheet A 1 of S Sht5
Co
M.S...TtI ~~
-~------------------------------------------------------------------------------,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
I
,
T
, r---r-'
I , ,
L______________________________________~ I
I
I
I
,
L_________________________________~
~
THIa_ m
eLO"......f;r ______ _ ~
--------
THlll_
S...... rI-u'
-------------
0l"I'IG.e
~
~
~
~~~~~----------~
I
i
I
M. B!PJIlOOM
,.-..0_ ''''-0
----,
=:-C-l
,
,
rD,j-l I
I l"!,IoUQl( ,
C'.1.05aT
I ""-h"___ ~
QP'eN TO
SI!l..""
~
:.;
L&d
V
, ".....l{,.
""'-Ill{,.
PROPoeeo Sec.ONO FLOOR
SrrG..... 1/.... t'l.C:r'
(!J .....MIl. '!'ROaM
_T_
....-
-....
IQTGHEN
D1~
(I!) ....~
S,lt.Jt~I!&...l'-a.
I I I
II'
LJ.
fIN ~ IS... .'-r
eXISTIN6 FIRST FL.OOR
~
....-
-
D
11
NOOIC.
swv. ~ ~~t
i
IOI2D/XJ06 1.24 ptM ~,'- plcln.dMg
steve eenzin9
ArGhiteGt
C-1 "fq6$
1 2405 frederic.k6burg
6aratoga c.a1ifornia
tel "1-0& &6., 6"110
fa" "1-0& &61 6051
email B8n%ar~~_t.nel;
Q__UHOF_
""~~...~---~..
.......... _~",,""NIIIIlI"
'""*"'" -n.,..w..__...............tollM
~.JIIId"'- Nt "'........._...OItIcrpnt,IGL
~or~lOlICCtoH\dlll~
1'"~_..twft;rOUw"fI'FI"'M..,~dlcHl~
~~~.~ww~~.~~
dcrogAbtof1f~""e~~~.~....
~QI'"otfcr'I'C1olR'VMI"IgtU..
FL.OOflt pL.ANe
Add/ Alt to resldenc.e
. 1 050 1 N. Portal Ave.
cupertino. CA
for:
Mr. . Mr&. 5c.ott Murray.
1 090 1 N. Portal Ave.
Cupertino. C.A
date:
&G.ale:
drawn by:
job no.
6/16/06
NOTED
eMS
0612
sheet A:2 of s sht&
0IITlJ1eaf'
__TIN&~
"" l-Ol' 1ICHINI>-.a:;T
--
~~'-'Y'
-~
I'IIlCl<:lr<I
I~I~T.
.,
ir
~-f'IN
u
~.TIl<$"-AT_
rn
TITT
.,.,...,. --
STREET E1.EV ATION
a.6'-(7
D'''''urr:"~ \
l
"'",,,,.,..........,..............
,. ,
"."" ........... IiWILPINcS etNI!L.~
", "" '...... 0I.I1'UNI!
/".~ ......"
",.,,' .................. ~"'It.SHNiZ
" ~.MATGH.......... ItO~TOMATC+4l!X1eT1N5
".",-"'" IDO!oTlNlSo.............
,,'" 12
",...,/'
~ "
",,~~ .......,
", ~ "
~~----~ 1 ",
I ~ ''-,
I Ie "
I e1.. "'-6" g. ' '-
I ~GI! ! "
l/ ~ .1......
..........................
"'-6-""'''''''BT''N - -----....,
Nel6+lSaRS I
1!X15TlN6 s.....AAGeDOOPt
~:~
i'i'MOi'_1GK ReT"1N1lt6 """"'-J.
=tt - - - - - - -JH-I- ~!'l.~--.,;
~ 6''~51.1105.1'-Il'
6ARA6E END ELEVATION
...:......1 lJ'4a.. ,'..v
eer>A" __
"Oaf' TO_Tc:.t<__
~
c
l>_...~
JlllJJI
[L]]
111~nnn
iI
1
..
I ,ot!'l.lt~~____________
KAU! 11'4...'....0'"
~
e1. (1-(7
kr.-rm..evATIC>tl
-
c;__
ROaf'TQ_T(;If_~
fJ11Jm
- I I II ~I I I I a
.1
::I U ir
i
1 II IT
~n:.~
I-------------+--.j-----------~~~
REAR n~EST) ELEVATION
SWi. BenzIng. ~_
~.TIN&._AT_
(0/2C:>>I:2006 1.24 P'M ~ floor plCl'l.dlolg
steve Benzing
ArGhiteG t
C-1"TCfee
1 :2409 frederi,-k,5burg
5arat.oga ,-allfornia
tel 40& &6' 6..10
fax 40& &6' 6051
ernail Benur~~t.net
~oIdlI)U5eOF'_
M........~_... .....,............
..-......~.................
P"'PII"tI. 'fhq..to_.....o-.,..~tolHil
~jn:tnd_lDtto......._..CltMrprojKt.
~..or,.trb/t.lotIto-..t~~
~~or'_O'1he'"~h~d.looIulth
U.PrOJ-c:t..Nrttobcco..CNI.II_~ln
~ofeteYll""~~.~"""
c.oprIfICor~rcMr'Vcd~
I!XTE~IOR EI.EVATIONS
Add/ Alt t.o re5lden~e
. 1 oeo 1 N. Portal Ave.
Cupel"t.ino. CA
for:
Mr. . Mr5. a'-Ott Murray
1 oeo 1 N. portal Ave.
Cupertino. CA
date:
&'-8le:
drawn by:
Job no.
6/16/06
NOTEt'
SMa
061:2
sheet A S of, shts
EXC-2006-13
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
RESOLUTION NO. 247
OF THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
APPROVING A SIGN EXCEPTION TO ALLOW EXPOSED NEON SIGNS
ON TWO WALL SIGNS AT THE MARKETPLACE SHOPPING CENTER
(POTSTICKER KING)
SECTION I: PROTECT DESCRIPTION
Application No.:
Applicant:
Location:
EXC-2006-13
Michael Inouye
19634 Stevens Creek Boulevard
SECTION II: FINDINGS
WHEREAS, the Design Review Committee of the City of Cupertino received an
application f9r a Sign Exception, as described in this Resolution; and
WHEREAS, the Design Review Committee finds the following with regards to this
application:
1. That the literal enforcement of the provisions of this title will not result in
restrictions inconsistent with the spirit and intent of this title;
2. That the granting of the exception will not result in a condition which is
materially detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare; and
3. That the exception to be granted is one that will require the least modification of
the prescribed regulations and the minimum variance that will accomplish the
purpose.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence
submitted in this matter, the application no. EXC-2006-13, is hereby approved; and
That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this
Resolution are based and contained in the public hearing record concerning Application
EXC-2006-13 as set forth in the Minutes of the Design Review Committee Meeting of
February 1, 2007 are incorporated by reference herein.
Resolution No. 247
Page 2
EXC-2006-13
February I, 2007
SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
1. APPROVED EXHIBITS
Approval is based on the plan set submitted by Allen Signs consisting of 1 page
attached to the staff report, except as may be amended by conditions in this
resolution.
2. EXPOSED NEON LIGHTING
The applicant is granted approval of exposed neon lighting on the two wall signs
for Potsticker King Restaurant that is dimmed to a lighting level which does not
exceed 75 % of the full lighting capacity of the neon signs.
3. NOTICE OF FEES, DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS OR OTHER EXACTIONS
The Conditions of Project Approval set forth herein may include certain fees,
dedication requirements, reservation requirements, and other exactions. Pursuant
to Government Code Section 66020( d) (1), these Conditions constitute written
notice of a statement of the amount of such fees, and a description of the
dedications, reservations, and other exactions. You are hereby further notified that
the 90-day approval period in which you may protest these fees, dedications,
reservations, and other exactions, pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(a),
has begun. If you fail to file a protest within this 90-day period complying with all
of the requirements of Section 66020, you will be legally barred from later
challenging such exactions.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 1st day of February 2007, at a Regular Meeting of the
Design Review Committee of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following
roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS: Chairperson Chien, Wong
COMMISSIONERS: none
COMMISSIONERS: none
COMMISSIONERS: none
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
/s/Ciddy Wordell
Ciddy Wordell
City Planner
/ s / Cary Chien
Cary Chien, Chair
Design Review Committee
POTSTICKER KING BUILDING SIGN ELEVATION:
SIGN FACE FLUSH WITH
ROOF RAFTER
RECEIVED
OCT 1 S 2006
19634 STEVENS CREEK BLVD.
CITY OF CUPERTINO
I PROPOSE TWO SIGNS @ SOUTII & WEST ELEVATION I .
.. 26'-0" . ~
..lJXD1J.', ~'DO'~';'~I' 'TI' '~I':'C' =', D~=ll~.II'O' 1D~'1T. 'N,:ci
~~J'...1 lE ~ ..' . I ..' ,: :' .' -',' e..' " .' ' I..' " ".
ml-~-. . ~_. ."'~. ~~'. . .'~. " .
EXISTING 6"x 8"
ROOF WOOD OUTRIGGER
INSTALL METAL BIRD SPIKES @ TOP OF RACEWAYS IBY:
TENANT SIGN CONTRACTOR(S) TO
CONNECT SIGN TO J-BOX POWER & CONTROLLER
PROVIDED BY LANDLORD. J-BOX LOCATED IN MANSARD ROOF ATTIC
--
5" THICK INDIVIDUAL CHANNEL LETTERS, EXPOSE YELLOW NEON FOR ILLUMINATION,
3/4" BRONZE COLOR TRIM-CAp, INSIDE LETTER PAINTED DARK GREEN COLOR (DEA130 LUCKY CLOVER)
RETURN PAINTED KELLY MOORE 701-M STONE AGE COLOR
SCALE: 1/4"=1'-0"
DATE: JAN-10-2006
3/8"x3" THRU-BOLT & WASHERS
.
STEVENS CREEK BLVD.
1.5"x1.5"xl/8" ANGLE IRON @ EVERY
48" ON CENTER, MIN. 2 PER SIGN
.
~ -:=~:/~\~~-~;'~I';~?S.'!~Ct._.. f' \" ~I~~I~I-, - I
II I~.,J ~~ 'I~ .~ .:; i:t:irl,' /1. if:: I~!, ~__.- ~~. -~ _ '~OLJ ~I
I 1- -)- --t- I -0- _K':-, I! I I I" I
.- _ -+- _,_:=L . I .~-;"' I
'- - -+- - - ,,,y{,-
'- ---<>-- -0- ~ -.- ---<>-- - _ - I II -llltl';? .~~ =
I _ . -= -<>- -----L t- =.;=:::;:: - ' . 1'1' ..>Y." . ~~ = ==,
'.=.lTT] J:C:. ~ =1= _ . ~~, = l. 2"" y,'J i \,., ',/'/ ..'::::-
f' ~i'( -~- n 1.1 ~ . II! 11111111 '_~I.I .' ~:j3lJl.ILil _I.s. IL.~:;) , . ,
- /-'" ~'~o...~'y,; , ' . . . . ~', ;:7--'./'" .'1 ,/ </'.' II d'
: ___ c.[\--' c:'j'. ~,i~,r.( ,,'
- -: I,~LI . "'.}'<J"~" /).)" " ~~~~__II
I " ~ I /\. ~ < <..' I. II L .' I " .~../Z" ,'" r
' I , ' I' , IJ L~' C ,'" " ,
......... ' 0 . ....- \ -~
t I ' '-------- '" c/,,' -~
, :.~-- - \ .:.....i--r..:i. I ~"", ,<.' 2:
I 1- I ".-(\ " ~-':.:
, [, "'~~:": '.~n~n~n ~~ r ...:.....n2.1.'iJ w ~ E
19634 STE~~~~~i::: B~~g ~ S
CITY OF CUPERTINO
TT
:E ~
~ -0(
11
TRANSFORMER MUST BE IN RACEWAY OR
ACCESSIBLE LOCATION
1.5"x1.5"xl/8" ANGLE IRON
PAINT TO MATCH BUILDING BACKGROUND COLOR
AS SPECIFIED BY LANDLORD
NEON FOR INTERNAL ILLUMINATION
l/4"xl" BOLTS
DISCONNECT SWITCH
24 GAGE GALV. STEEL SHEET
METAL RACEWAY PAINT TO MATCH BUILDING
BACKGROUND COLOR AS SPECIFIED BY LANDLORD
#lOx3/4" SHEET METAL SCREW
MIN. 3 PER LETTER
U.L. LISTED LABEL FOR
CHANNEL LETTER SIGN
#1 -- INSTALLATION DETAIL
60'-0" STORE FRONTAGE
60'-0" STORE FRONTAGE
r~~~q;."w......... ~- .u..~,"'"",;_~~~~,,,~:~
~ C" -- '1
f APPROVAL G Y-t - t)oolo -I ~ 1
c Application Number I
lORe ;t-I- ';;007 i
t: Signature a,,,~~~
~m."""",-"","",<,:-_,.e ".., ~ ", < ~.,_ UV'~ "'~c,,"',.-'-=~
NEW SIGN LOCATION
NEW SIGN LOCATION
'-'-t- - --.
". .... \. ,.~.r"'~:"N".'~. :'''-'.~I~.... ,-~.. ~.'.---'-liI"
'" . aL.:f'I.> , ~JAi"'< '. tJ"''':1lIlliR.. I'
-: ..,'.,.. ., ~ ~ "1-
~:II!M:'II: '~..-"Jtiifl~'.~v~'l'~ ~~~
f~_~. . ...._. ~~l ~ ~A C' ....-~..
~, .'.:-::: -~ -- ......... ~..rr..,- - -- .\"ov';c; ~ ........... _~- _
~ - ,.- ----- -- --
SOUTH ELEVATION
WEST ELEVATION
All designs & art works belong to Allen Signs,
any duplication is prohibited. COPY RIGHT 2006
E-mail address:allensigns..@yahoo.com
Tel:408/280-6500 Fax:408/280-6700
1982 StOlle Ave. Sail Jose. Ca. 95125 State Lie. # 834580
All designs & art works belong to Allen Signs, h.c. Any duplication is prohibited. COpy RIGHT 2006
~.~. - '.\I(~'. . .~ .>.~ ~
R-2006-49
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
RESOLUTION NO. 248
OF THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO APPROVING A 618-
SQUARE FOOT SECOND STORY ADDITION TO AN EXISTING SINGLE-STORY RESIDENCE
WITH AN EXCEPTION FOR REDUCED FRONT YARD AND REAR YARD SECOND STORY
SETBACKS
SECTION I: PROTECT DESCRIPTION
Application No.:
Applicant:
Location:
R-2006-49
Steve Benzing
10501 N. Portal Avenue
SECTION II: FINDINGS
WHEREAS, the necessary public notices have been given in accordance with the Procedural
Ordinance of the City of Cupertino, and.the Design Review Committee has held one or more public
hearings on this matter; and
WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application; and has
satisfied the following requirements:
1. That the literal enforcement of the provisions of this title will result in restrictions inconsistent
with the spirit and intent of this title.
2. That the approval of the exceptions will not result in a condition that is materially detrimental to
the public health, safety, or welfare.
3. That the exceptions to be granted are ones that will require the least modification of the prescribed
regulations and the minimum variance that will accomplish the purpose.
4. The proposed exception will not result in significant visual impact as viewed from abutting
properties,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this
matter, the design review application is hereby approved; and
That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this resolution are based
and contained in the public hearing record concerning Application R-2006-49 set forth in the Minutes
of the Design R@view Committee meeting of February 1, 2007 are incorporated by reference as though
fully set forth herein.
Resolution No. 248
Page 2
R-2006-49
February 1/ 2007
SECTION III. CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
1. APPROVED PROTECT
This approval is based on a plan set prepared by Steve Benzing, Architect, for a second story
addition at 10501 N. Portal Avenue for Mr. & Mrs. Scott Murray, dated October 20, 2006,
consisting of three sheets, except as may be amended by conditions in this resolution.
2. CONSULTATION WITH OTHER DEPARTMENTS
The applicant is responsible to consult with other departments and/ or agencies with regard to the
proposed project for additional conditions and requirements. Any misrepresentation of any
submitted data may invalidate an approval by the Design Review Committee.
3. SECOND STORY WINDOWS
The applicant shall provide obscure glazing on all second story windows on the rear (west)
elevation of the addition to mitigate privacy impacts onto the adjacent neighbors to the west. The
type of obscure glazing shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community
Development prior to issuance of building permits.
4. SECOND STORY SETBACKS
The applicant is granted approval of an exception to the front yard and rear yard second story
setbacks in accordance with the approved plan set dated October 20, 2006.
5. NOTICE OF FEES, DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS OR OTHER EXACTIONS
The Conditions of Project Approval set forth herein may include certain fees, dedication '
requirements, reservation requirements, and other exactions. Pursuant to Government Code
Section 66020(d) (1), these Conditions constitute written notice of a statement of the amount of
such fees, and a description of the dedications, reservations, and other exactions. You are hereby
further notified that the 90-day approval period in which you may protest these fees, dedications,
reservations, and other exactions, pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(a), has begun. If
you fail to file a protest within this 90-day period complying with all of the requirements of
Section 66020, you will be legally barred from later challenging such exactions.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 1st day of February 2007, at a Regular Meeting of the Design Review
Committee of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS: Chairperson Chien, Wong
COMMISSIONERS: none
COMMISSIONERS: none
COMMISSIONERS: none
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
/s/Ciddy Wordell
Ciddy Wordell
City Planner
/s/Cary Chien
Cary Chien, Chairperson
Design Review Committee
APPROVAL
t
f
i
ORe
Signature
i'
ti
\. ~"...~ :;~~~".:'~' ~:r.';':",,~.:,'~.;~-:'::""5:-~~::;"'''':
;V.;' ,.,....'':'.'''''.
I<
AO'.o K ........ ..10011
.
---
'06.,.40r.T_..'."
1OOr1oLl.____
...-r0lt'.'-r__
R. ., rJnrI/J - L/-LJ
Application Number
d- - /- ~(X) 7
~
It
---
-"--
/It. ..............Natl
.. ,....".... .H'"
0. .4''''''''-0''''''
o. ..-0......0 .180"
.. .....".,....-.,
TDT... _n"
---
'.....-40lltT_. .,... -..... ..0It'_~
T""...__-.,....-.. ..__
....110
.
I
I
\
~
..
\
~
J
...
!
~
Q
~
Pi
,
~
It
~
It
!
r
I
I
I
I
I
I
L _ _ _ - - - - -l- - -!'!!7_
L H.~~~~O~
'-
\ IlL 0'4
51TI! PLAN
Al"'N _ ec;.A1.I! 1.. tl-O.
~
~. MM. ec;()TT ~'I"
1 0.(>1 No P'ORTAL A'/8.
~"TINO. c::.A
%ON.... - "1
U8I! - IIUI6lC'I!NTIAL
6IZIl OfIl.OT . 10...2.,
MAXl.OT~ - ..1.8.'
A""~ erre e&.DI"I! . 21&
~erre~
(e) eTlltUc::.TUttBe - 2.1'., -2". 1 1&
P'ATJOe. ~"f6.
~y
~,.. AfIU!A
TOTAL
. 16.8- 1.... 1&
- 62'" - 60 1&
. 1eu.. - 10Q 1&
.118 OfIeTlltUc::.TUttB.
IXle~ q"'Nc::.1
1Xle,..... ....~
~OMPADD
6Ic::.ONI:' P'L." ADD
TOTAL ~ A"iA
TOTAL I"LA A"iA
- 201..,
802 at'
.16 at' . 2".6 1& Oft IX...,.. 1 H l"'LJlI.
2... at'
S 1.. at'. so 1&!lAIl
~~..
:r.
x
.~
.
1-
.
i
.
H 0C1' 1 ,,,0- '" 1.4.22'
I"4AU.
GoOHC..
~ON ON 2nd JIII.Jt'
~
6AAA6I! ON 1at.-ur.
.. .........1:::1:... _ _
-
151lL1C.K IUT Ai
J:)1!eK
i
....-..
caJHoueI!
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
I
I
I
1
I
I
1
............ .J
---
.-IN l"'LJlI.l&. .S'-,"
/
I
1
1
,
I
1
. I
I
-'-----
---
--
fDOflii:.T AI.. AVI!.
......
..............J
-
......
-
......
......
......
......
...........
~
IOI:IO~ ,.:14 PM ~......
-q
I :
-I
"I c.
-~
II
L
I
J
6teve Benzing
Ar(:,hite(:, t
e;.-1"1C1!&.
1 ~....o" "'ederlc::.kebLl"(I
....toge ~lfOl"TlI.
tel ..06 ..., ...10
'/8)( ..06 6.' ~1
....11 eenzar~
----.,..Q/f'~
............................. ...............
........................,....
........... ....................,..,.....
.....................................
....................................
............................-......
-~,..-.._~-~.
.........,.......... .......--
uprIfIl_.....~.......
6ITe ~H
Add/ AIt. to rnldenc::.e
. 1 oeo 1 H. Port. Ave.
c:.upertlno, e;.A
for:
Mr. . Mr.. ec::.ot.t MIrl"8Y
1 0.0 1 H. Port. Ave.
eupet"tlno. GoA
date:
6C4l1e:
c:lr'ewn by:
Job no.
6/16/06
HOTel::'
6MB
0612
.heet A 1 of. eht.
..,---
-r..._
__w-v
~
--------------~
~~~~---------~
I
I
I
M.~
,......,,....
----,
==-Vl
I
I
I
~
1......1L.
--....
--------------~------------------------------------------------------------------------------~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
I
I
+
-r..._
__W-V
---------------
0l"f'lC:e
,:It.... ,,,...
..-
J
r---------------
1.,._
-
~
~
_TO
--
-
IF
~
-
l
.....x..
I
I
I
I
I
~
I r---r-'
L______________________________________J I :
I
I
I
,
~---------------------------------~
PROP06eO&e~NOPLOOR
00 ...-.....
__...1.....
'-r.-""'J:~~,'. ,.,.,~......--...,"::":'.:'~"';~'\ ':~~~('\",:..;""f,,~1'tt. +;,~':.~':~j ~-"'l..~_.'l,.:-.."H.:~<;A~I~.j'\l;" :'.:
. _, 'ry~'.~,~
'~1
~~i
I!XI6TI~6 prIR&T prLOOR
l
\
,
i
or
APPROVAL
ORe
Signature
...... '/4-.''\4''
c.J"AML~
D
--
....-
--
~
11
I I I
: : I
L~
1'IN""...w....
lCITeteI
N(;JOK
ec.....- 11'...... ,.-4'
ee.w
~
~ I.:u..... .....,.........
eteve een:zing
ArGhiteGt
G-1"Ycte.
1 2<405 fraderlc.kebl.l"g
....atoga e.allfernla
UI ..c& 6.., ...10
fax ..c6 66., 6051
email e.nz.r~
~__DIf'~
....................... ..........-...
.....-., ......................-..
......... ..............................
~.........._.......-.................
.........."................. ......,.........
..........",...............~
.......... ................. ..........
........_..............#IINIaINI,..-..
.....",--~.......
"LOOfIt ~M6
Add/ AIt to r..ldenu
. 1 0.0 1 N. fl'ortal litva.
eupertlno. GIit
'er:
Mr. . Mr.. ~t.......-.y .
10.01 N. fl'ortal Ave.
eupertlno. GA
date:
&e.ale:
drawn by:
Job no.
6/16/06
NOTI!O
6MB
0612
.heet A ~ of e .tit.
If.''' "~;~:"":M~'__~' ""'.nl!l':i"'...."'.,.."'...,...~N.W...W~'_. "c, ....."...... ~,"." ~., .... "\.
1 \ /-,
1 APPROVAL R -,;}oN;;~;j-q j /~/ """ ==.......
~ "
I Appl' tio N mber ,",
\ 1C8 n u ...~' " c;IIPAl&
, tr) ./) ... ' -
! ORe ex-I - C7(oo1: ,......~ =:_Tc:H ", _TO_Tc:H_
, ~. /
! J Oat ~ ; .........~
",1 Signature Il/u #- ~, / ~,.1",::::1 """
DUT\.lIeClP' j4 Case Manager I ",
-- ~ I" "
QMloc:oT_-.&T : I 111... I".." "
- ~..... - --- ;v"""'""'" ,
r-.-__
-
1m4~,\
---
"
_.'_AII
tit - - - - - - -1-1-1- ~~-
~MUGK MT........1'lAU.
&AfltA&1! I!ND eLJ!VATION
'\.......... ..... ."-&"
...... 11...'......
--
_TO_Tc:H_
~ I
HIt
~
T
!
l
-...
-
I I._.!"'~----------
~
IIIII
__AT_
---
6TfIll!eT eLJ!V ATION
,.-G
~
1II..t:l4
~A~
--
NA6.8 1/.-. 1'4"
--
_TC'_Tc:H_
I IJIIJII
~
.
:
lU U U U U U ~ U
i------------+---I------------~~~
lIleAfIl ("1!6T) I!L.I!V ATION
aGAI.8 ,/...,.....
.....,. ..... ,.".....
___AT_
~ Io:u..... ~,....,.......
steve Benzing
Arc:,hitec:, t
C-1-rct&5
1 2....08 "'ederi~eburg
.".Og8 ~e1i'orni8
tel -40. ..~ ...10
'ee -40. 66'1 60. 1
.mall ~~
~_....t:If'~
,.........................,... -..-.........
........... - #INMIIII................
......... ............................-
.........................-...............
......................................
..................,.".....-
_~...~~...-nw_.....
..........,........----.--
c......-.......----.......
I!~~ I!LI!VATION6
Add/ AIt to ,...ic:leMe
. 1 050 1 H. P'or-teI Ave.
CUpertino. CA
'or:
M,.. . Mr.. kott Murr8y
1050 1 N. P'ortel Ave.
CUper-tino. CA
date:
~Ie:
dr8Wn by:
Job no.
6/16/06
Hc::>TI!J:)
6MB
0612
that AS of. .tit.