Loading...
DRC Packet 6-2-2016CITY OF CUPERTINO AGENDA Thursday, June 2, 2016 10300 Torre Avenue, City Hall Conference Room C DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE 5:00 PM PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1.Subject: Draft Minutes of the March 17, 2016 meeting Recommended Action: Approve or modify the Draft Minutes of March 17, 2016 Draft Minutes, March 17, 2016 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the members on any matter not on the agenda. Speakers are limited to three (3) minutes. In most cases, State law will prohibit the council from making any decisions with respect to a matter not listed on the agenda REPORTS/UPDATES PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS 2.Subject: Fence Exception to allow a six (6) foot fence in the required front setback area. Application No(s).: EXC-2016-02; Applicant(s): Mr. and Mrs. Ruiz; Location: 10240 Stern Avenue APN# 375-12-042 Recommended Action: Staff recommneds approval of the Fence Exception per the draft resolution Staff Report Draft Resolution Plan Set NEW BUSINESS OLD BUSINESS Page 1 CITY OF CUPERTINO June 2, 2016Design Review Committee AGENDA ADJOURNMENT In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), anyone who is planning to attend the next meeting who is visually or hearing impaired or has any disability that needs special assistance should call the City Clerk's Office at 408-777-3223, 48 hours in advance of the meeting to arrange for assistance. Upon request, in advance, by a person with a disability, meeting agendas and writings distributed for the meeting that are public records will be made available in the appropriate alternative format. Also upon request, in advance, an assistive listening device can be made available for use during the meeting. Members of the public are entitled to address the members concerning any item that is described in the notice or agenda for this meeting, before or during consideration of that item. If you wish to address the members on any other item not on the agenda, you may do so during the public comment portion of the meeting. Please limit your comments to three (3) minutes or less. Page 2 CITY OF CUPERTINO Design Review Committee March 17, 2016 Cupertino, CA 95014 (408) 777-3308 ACTION MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE HELD ON March 17, 2016 ROLL CALL Committee Members present: Margie Gong, Chairperson Geoff Paulsen, Commissioner Committee Members absent: none Staff present: Catarina Kidd Staff absent: none APPROVAL OF MINUTES: January 21, 2016 Minutes of the January 21, 2016 Design Review Committee meeting were approved as written ORAL COMMUNICATION: None POSTPONEMENTS/REMOVAL FROM CALENDAR: None WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: None CONSENT CALENDAR: None PUBLIC MEETING: 1.Application No.(s): EXC-2016-01 Applicant:Richard Hartman (Li residence) Location:21124 Greenleaf Dr R1 Exception to allow the conversion of one bay of an existing garage into a media room, and construct a 20'-8" by 10'-5" single-bay garage at the front of the house, resulting in an 11’ front yard setback where a 20’ setback is required. Design Review Committee decision final unless appealed. Staff Member Kidd explained that the application has been referred to the Design Review Committee because the application for the remodel includes an R1 Exception for a reduced front yard setback. Per the City’s Municipal Code, R1 exceptions are approved at the discretion of the Design Review 2 Design Review Committee March 17, 2016 Committee. The lot is a triangle-shaped non-conforming lot. It is smaller than the other lots in the area. The home was extensively remodeled in 2008 and allowed for a variance to establish the 11’ front yard setback. This new proposal will offer the property owner some additional living space within the home while still meeting the onsite parking requirement. The alternative is to apply for a second-story addition to the existing residence. Adding a second story would have far more impacts on the neighbors than the current proposal. The property owner did reach out to their neighbors and have support from them for the garage conversion. Staff supports the application and recommends approval per the draft resolution. Chair Gong asked for clarification of the neighbors noticed of the project. Staff member Kidd explained that the noticing requirements for this type of project are site signage and mailings to the adjacent neighbors at least 10 days prior to the hearing. Chair Gong asked about the project comments from Public Works in relation to traffic site line distance/visibility. Staff member Kidd provided the comments which stated that they did not feel that there was an issue with sight distance or visibility in that the house is not on a true corner. The applicant addressed the Committee. He stated that there is only one neighbor with a potential impact. They did meet with them and went over the project with them. From the neighbor’s yard, the garage is barely visible. The applicant said that they have a new addition to their household and just need to have some more space. They intend to reclaim a bed room for the children and make the garage into the family room. The lot size does allow for a 3,000-square-foot home, but they only have a 2,000- square-foot home and are only asking for a minor remodel. Commissioner Paulsen said that he went by the project site and noticed that a neighbor would have a window that would now be partially blocked by the new garage. The applicant explained that the neighbor was fine with that because they didn’t have much of a view from the window anyway and the sun has always made that room very hot. Chair Gong confirmed that Staff had not received any comments from neighbors. MOTION: Commissioner Paulsen moved to approve EXC-2016-01 per the draft resolution APPROVE: Chair Gong ABSENT: none ABSTAIN: none VOTE: 2-0-0 OLD BUSINESS: None NEW BUSINESS: None Respectfully submitted: /s/Beth Ebben Beth Ebben Administrative Clerk DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE STAFF REPORT Agenda Item No. Agenda Date:June 2, 2016 SUBJECT: Fence Exception to allow a six-foot high fence in the front setback area where a three-foot high fence is permitted. Application No(s): EXC-2016-02 Applicant(s): Sabrina and Gino Ruiz; Location: 10240 Stern Avenue APN: 375-12-042 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee approve application EXC-2016-02 per the draft resolution (Attachment 1) PROJECT DATA: General Plan Designation:Residential: Low Density (1-5 units) Specific Plan/Special Area:n/a Zoning Designation:R1-5 Single Family Residential Lot size:6,240 sq.ft. Existing residence, gross area:2,065 sq. ft. (33.1% FAR) Proposed residence, gross area:2,662 sq.ft. (42.7% FAR)w/ reserve garage area Required property line setbacks:20’ front; 5’ interior setback, 12’ street side setback; 20’ rear Proposed property line setbacks: 20’ front; 5’ interior setback, 12’ street side setback; 10’-10” rear setback (existing non- conforming) Project Consistency with: General Plan:Yes Zoning:No, exception requested for a six-foot fence height in the front setback area Environmental Assessment:Categorically Exempt, CEQA Section 15303, Class 3 (New construction or conversion of small structures) COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING DIVISION CITY HALL 10300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255 (408) 777-3308 • FAX (408) 777-3333 EXC-2016-02 10240 Stern Avenue June 2, 2016 Page 2 BACKGROUND: The City issued a building permit for a single-family addition on April 8, 2015. In order for the Planning Division to approve the building permit, the Applicant was required to provide a conforming fence consistent with the City’s requirements. In this instance, the Applicant intended to provide a three-foot high fence along the property line; consistent with Cupertino Municipal Code (CMC) Chapter 19.48 Fences. Upon further consideration, the Applicant determined that a six-foot high fence was best suited for the fence area surrounding Arata Way and Loree Avenue. The location of a six-foot fence in the front yard area requires a Fence Exception. DISCUSSION: The orientation of the home places the functional rear yard of the home in what the City determines to be the front yard area. The City allows a three-foot high fence in this area, but a six-foot fence high fence is requested to provide better privacy. In order to provide adequate privacy, the fence will be set back five feet from the property line, and measure six feet in height. Because the property is functionally a key lot, there is a setback requirement from the street side property line of ten feet, and a twelve-foot side setback from the interior property line. The key lot is defined when a rear property line adjoins a side property line; however, in this instance, the key lot is used with the front property to ensure adequate views for the adjacent property owner driveway. Public Works staff reviewed the proposal, and do not have any issues with the location of the fence within the vision triangle. Public Works based this on the location of the limit line of the Arata Avenue stop sign which provides adequate view angles at the intersection. Stern Avenue Loree Avenue Arata Way EXC-2016-02 10240 Stern Avenue June 2, 2016 Page 3 Staff has made the following findings in support of the exception: 1. The literal enforcement of the provisions of this chapter will result in restriction inconsistent with the spirit and intent of this chapter. The proposed fence location has been designed to meet the intent of the chapter by providing a fence height that is allowed (six feet), and the location is least intrusive to the adjacent property owners. 2. The granting of the exception will not result in a condition which is materially detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare. The fence location will not be detrimental to public health, safety or welfare because the fence location is generally consistent with the City’s fence ordinance, and the fence will provide privacy for property owners. 3. The exception to be granted is one that will require the least modification of the prescribed regulation and the minimum variance that will accomplish the purpose. The fence height and material is consistent with the ordinance. Placement of the fence location is consistent with that of a key lot, and the placement of the fence would be consistent with the requirements of street side fence location. 4. The proposed exception will not result in a hazardous condition for pedestrian and vehicular traffic. The proposed fence is five (5) feet from the property line which provides adequate pedestrian accessibility. Additionally, Public Works has reviewed the site plan, and has determined that the proposed fence location will not be detrimental to vehicular traffic. 5. The proposed development is otherwise consistent with the City’s General Plan and with the purpose of this chapter as described in Section 19.48.010 The proposed fence is otherwise consistent with the City’s General Plan since fences are permitted throughout the single-family home area. 6. The proposed development meets the requirements of the Santa Clara Fire Department and Sheriff’s Department, and if security gates are proposed, that attempts are made to standardize access. There are no issues with the fence. Santa Clara Fire Department and the Sheriff’s Department are normally concerned when security gates are proposed. The projects proposes no security gates. EXC-2016-02 10240 Stern Avenue June 2, 2016 Page 4 7. The fence height for the proposed residential fence is needed to ensure adequate screening and/or privacy. The six-foot fence height is consistent with the allowable fence height which is to aid in providing privacy. These findings are incorporated into the draft resolution in Attachment 1. OTHER DEPARTMENT/AGENCY REVIEW The City’s Public Works Department reviewed the project. No additional conditions of approval have been imposed. OUTREACH/NOTICING The following table is a brief summary of the noticing conducted for this project: Notice of Public Hearing Notices &Site Notice Agenda Site Signage (10 days prior to the hearing) Notices mailed to property owners adjacent to the project site (10 days prior to the hearing) Posted on the City's official notice bulletin board (one week prior to the hearing) Posted on the City of Cupertino’s Web site (one week prior to the hearing) No comments were received from any member of the public at the time of staff report production. PERMIT STREAMLINING ACT This project is subject to the Permit Streamlining Act (Government Code Section 65920 – 65964). The City has complied with the deadlines found in the Permit Streamlining Act. Project Received: April 12, 2016 Project Deemed Incomplete: May 2, 2016 Project Resubmitted: May 4, 2016 Deemed Complete:May 5, 2016 Applicant Revised Submittal: May 17, 2016 Revised Submittal Deemed Complete: May 18, 2016 The City has 60 days until August 1, 2016 to make a decision on the project since this project is Categorically Exempt from CEQA. The Design Review Committee’s decision on this project is final unless appealed to the City Council within 14 calendar days of the decision. EXC-2016-02 10240 Stern Avenue June 2, 2016 Page 5 CONCLUSION Staff recommends approval of the project since the conditions of approval address all concerns related to the proposed project and all of the findings for approval of the proposed project are consistent with Chapter 19.48: Fences of the Cupertino Municipal Code. Prepared by:Erick Serrano, Associate Planner Approved by:Benjamin Fu, Assistant Director of Community Development Attachments 1. Draft Resolution 2. Plan Set EXC-2016-02 CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 DRAFT RESOLUTION OF THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO APPROVING A FENCE EXCPETION TO CONSTRUCT A FENCE IN THE FRONT SETBACK AREA OF A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE SECTION I: PROJECT DESCRIPTION Application No.:EXC-2016-02 Applicant:Sabrina and Gino Ruiz Location:10240 Stern Avenue, APN: 375-12-042 SECTION II: FINDINGS WHEREAS, the Design Review Committee of the City of Cupertino received an application for an Exception from the Residential Single Family Zoning regulations as described in Section I. of this Resolution; and WHEREAS, the Project is Categorically Exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 15303, Class 3 (New construction or conversion of small structures); and WHEREAS, the necessary notices have been given in accordance with the Procedural Ordinance of the City of Cupertino, and the Design Review Committee has held at least one Public Meeting on this matter; and WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application; and WHEREAS, the Design Review Committee finds the following with regard to the exception for this application: 1. The literal enforcement of the provisions of this chapter will result in restriction inconsistent with the spirit and intent of this chapter. Draft Resolution EXC-2016-02 June 2, 2016 Page - 2 - The proposed fence location has been designed to meet the intent of the chapter by providing a fence height that is allowed (six feet), and the location is least intrusive to the adjacent property owners. 2. The granting of the exception will not result in a condition which is materially detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare. The fence location will not be detrimental to public health, safety or welfare because the fence location is generally consistent with the City’s fence ordinance, and the fence will provide privacy for property owners. 3. The exception to be granted is one that will require the least modification of the prescribed regulation and the minimum variance that will accomplish the purpose. The fence height and material is consistent with the ordinance. Placement of the fence location is consistent with that of a key lot, and the placement of the fence would be consistent with the requirements of street side fence location. 4. The proposed exception will not result in a hazardous condition for pedestrian and vehicular traffic. The proposed fence is five (5) feet from the property line which provides adequate pedestrian accessibility. Additionally, Public Works has reviewed the site plan, and has determined that the proposed fence location will not be detrimental to vehicular traffic. 5. The proposed development is otherwise consistent with the City’s General Plan and with the purpose of this chapter as described in Section 19.48.010 The proposed fence is otherwise consistent with the City’s General Plan since fences are permitted throughout the single-family home area. 6. The proposed development meets the requirements of the Santa Clara Fire Department and Sheriff’s Department, and if security gates are proposed, that attempts are made to standardize access. There are no issues with the fence. Santa Clara Fire Department and the Sheriff’s Department are normally concerned when security gates are proposed. The projects proposes no security gates. Draft Resolution EXC-2016-02 June 2, 2016 Page - 3 - 7. The fence height for the proposed residential fence is needed to ensure adequate screening and/or privacy. The six-foot fence height is consistent with the allowable fence height which is to aid in providing privacy. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of the maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, subject to the conditions which are enumerated in this Resolution beginning on PAGE 3 thereof: 1. The application for an Exception to the Residential Single Family zoning regulations, Application no. EXC-2016-02 is hereby APPROVED, and That the sub-conclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this Resolution are based and contained in the Public Meeting record concerning Application no.(s) EXC-2016-02 as set forth in the Minutes of Design Review Committee Meeting of June 2, 2016 and are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 1. APPROVED EXHIBITS The approval is based on the plan set titled “Proposed Neighboring Fence Adjustment” consisting of one sheet received by the City on May 17, 2016, except as may be amended by the Conditions contained in this Resolution. 2. 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. Draft Resolution EXC-2016-02 June 2, 2016 Page - 4 - 3. INDEMNIFICATION Except as otherwise prohibited by law, the applicant shall indemnify and hold harmless the City, its City Council, and its officers, employees and agents (collectively, the “indemnified parties”) from and against any claim, action, or proceeding brought by a third party against one or more of the indemnified parties or one or more of the indemnified parties and the applicant to attack, set aside, or void this Resolution or any permit or approval authorized hereby for the project, including (without limitation) reimbursing the City its actual attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in defense of the litigation. The applicant shall pay such attorneys’ fees and costs within 30 days following receipt of invoices from City. Such attorneys’ fees and costs shall include amounts paid to counsel not otherwise employed as City staff and shall include City Attorney time and overhead costs and other City staff overhead costs and any costs directly related to the litigation reasonably incurred by City. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 2nd day of June 2016, at a regular meeting of the Design Review Committee of the City of Cupertino by the following roll call vote: AYES:MEMBERS: NOES:MEMBERS: ABSTAIN:MEMBERS: ABSENT:MEMBERS: ATTEST:APPROVED: Erick Serrano Margaret Gong, Chair Associate Planner Design Review Committee PROPOSED NEIGHBORING FENCE ADJUSTMENT 10240 STERN AVE. CUPERTINO, CA 95014 ST E R N A V E N1 1 1 2 2 1 SWALE SET BACK FROM TOP OF ROPERTY LINE 5’-0” 12’-0” 5’-0” 5’-0” 18’-0” 5’-0” 10’-0” HOUSE GARAGE DRIVEWAY STOPARATA WAY33’-8”34.04’22.45’34.04’34’-1” 5% (N) 6’ HIGH FENCEWOOD TYPE: REDWOOD (N) 6’ HIGH FENCE WRAPS AROUND TO SIDE OF HOUSE WOOD TYPE: REDWOOD (E) 24”0 CEDARTREE TO REMAIN (E) 12”0 CEDARTREE TO REMAIN SCALE = 3/16” = 1’-0” 0 2 4 6