HomeMy WebLinkAboutDRC Summary 072104
City of Cupertino
10300 Tone Avenue, Cupertino, California 950140 (4008) 777-3308
To:
Mayor and City Council Members
Planning Commissioners
From:
Steve Piasecki, Director of Community Development
Date:
July 23, 2004
Subj:
REPORT OF DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE FINAL DECISIONS MADE
July 21, 2004.
Chapter 19.136 of the Cupertino Municipal code provides for
A eal of decisions made b the Desi Review Committee
1.
Application
DIR-2004-10; Rich Alfano, 22239 Hammond Way
Description
Referral of a Director's Minor Modification to construct a 336 square foot
office/ storage building in the rear yard and to exceed the maximum square
footage allowed on the lot by approximately 300 square feet.
Action
The Design Review Committee approved the application on a 2-0 vote. This is
effective July 21, 2004. The fourteen-calendar day appeal will expire on August
4,2004.
Enclosures:
Design Review Committee Report of June 21, 2004
Resolution No. 161
Plan Set
2.
Application
R-2004-15; Holly Hartman (Hadap residence), 10110 Lockwood Drive
Description
Residential Design Review for an exception for a second story addition to exceed
35% of the first story.
Action
The Design Review Committee approved the application on a 2-0 vote. This is
effective July 21, 2004. The fourteen-calendar day appeal will expire on August
4, 2004.
Enclosures:
Design Review Committee Report of June 21, 2004
Resolution No. 162
Plan Set
3.
Application
EXC-2004-09; Thirumalpathy Balakrishnan, 10080 Peninsula Avenue
Description
Fence Exception to construct a side yard fence on the property line instead of
setback five feet.
Action
The Design Review Committee approved the application on a 2-0 vote. This is
effective July 21, 2004. The fourteen-calendar day appeal will expire on August
4, 2004. .
Enclosures:
Design Review Committee Report of June 21, 2004
Resolution No. 163
Plan Set
4.
Application
EXC-20O4-12; Rhonda Marion (Cypress Hotel/Helios Restaurant), 10030 S. De
Anza Blvd.
Description
Sign Exception to allow three wall signs (one wall sign, two on awnings over
entries) and to exceed the allowed height of a wall sign.
Action
The Design Review Committee approved the application on a 2-0 vote. This is
effective July 21, 2004. The fourteen-calendar day appeal will expire on August
4, 2004.
Enclosures:
Design Review Committee Report of June 21, 2004
Resolution No. 164
Plan Set
G:planning/Drc/O72104 summaryletter.doc
To:
From:
Subject:
Location:
Design Review Committee
Ciddy Wordell, City Planner
Application: DIR-2004-10
22239 Hammond Way, Cupertino, CA
Date: July 21, 2004
PROJECT DESCRIPION
Director's referral of a minor modification to construct a 336 square foot office/ storage
building in the rear yard and to exceed the maximum square footage allowed on the lot by
approximately 300 square feet
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee approve the proposed office/storage
building.
BACKGROUND
This property is in the Oak Valley subdivision, which is a planned residential zoning district.
This application modifies the original architectural and site approval for the residence (13-
ASA-98 - Lot 6). The lot size is 27,641 square feet. The Floor Area Ratio for this property
allows a maximum of 5,051 square feet; the existing residence is 5,009 square feet, leaving a
balance of 42 square feet. The proposed building is 336 square feet; therefore the allowed
square footage is exceeded by 294 square feet.
DISCUSSION
The proposed office/ storage building is attached to a pool cabana. The pool cabana does not
count toward the allowed square footage because it is not substantially enclosed. As shown
in the overall site plan and photographs, the property is abutted by open space to the north.
The proposed building is 20 feet from the rear property line, 25 feet from the west property
line and 75 feet from the east property line. It is 11 feet in height.
Due to the lack of impacts on surrounding properties and the small amount of square footage
over the allowed floor area, staff recommends approval of the application. Staff does not
expect to recommend that future proposals in this area exceed the allowed floor area, unless
they are in similar, isolated locations.
Please note that a condition of approval identifies that the private open space area is
incorrectly shown on the applicant's site plan; this will be corrected in the approved site plan
that remains in the file.
Enclosures:
Model Resolution
Exhibit A - Letter from applicant
Exhibit B - Photographs of rear yard
Exhibit C - Overall site plan
Exibit D - Tract Map
Plan Set
g:planning/ pdreport/DlR-2004-10
I-I
DIR-2004-10
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
MODEL RESOLUTION
OF THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO APPROVING A
DIRECTOR'S REFERRAL OF A MINOR MODIFICATION TO CONSTRUCT A 336 SQUARE
FOOT OFFICE/STORAGE BUILDING IN THE REAR YARD AND TO EXCEED THE
MAXIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE ALLOWED ON THE LOT BY APPROXIMATELY 300
SQUARE FEET, LOCATED AT 10050 N. WOLFE ROAD.
SECTION I: PROTECT DESCRIPTION
Application No.:
Applicant:
Location:
DIR-2004-10
Rich Alfano
22239 Hammond Way
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. The proposal, at the proposed location, will not be detrimental or injurious to property
or improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public health,
safety, general welfare, or convenience;
2. The proposal is consistent with the purposes of this chapter, the General Plan, and
zoning ordinance; .
3. Abrupt changes in building scale is avoided and a gradual transition related to height
and bulk is achieved; and
4. Design harmony between new and existing buildings and structures is protected
through the use of consistent or compatible design and color schemes
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 subject to the
conditions which are enumerated in this Resolution beginning on page 2 thereof; 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 DIR-2004-10 set
forth in the Minutes of the Design Review Committee meeting of, July 21, 2004, and are
incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein.
I-~
Resolution No.
Page 2
DlR-2004-10
July 21, 2004
SECTION III. CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPT.
1.
APPROVED EXHIBITS
Approval is based on a plan set entitled: "Zingale Office, 22239 Hammond Way,
Cupertino CA, 95014" dated May 17, 2004, except as may be amended by conditions in
this resolution.
2.
PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
The Private Open Space area shall be shown correctly on the approved site plan.
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 21st day of July 2004, 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
Gilbert Wong, Chairperson
Design Review Committee
G:\ Planning \ ORC\ res \ DIR-2004-1O res.doc
ì -3
EXHIBIT A
To: Siddy Wordell
City of Cupertino
Building Permits
From: Ten Zingale
22239 Hammond Way
Cupertino, Ca 95014
650-938-3931
Per our phone conversation please find enclosed some pictures of our current pool
structure - when compared with the drawings you have from SEA Construction for the
proposed remodeled one, I think you will see that visually from the outside it is not very
different in appearance. Also fmd attached a picture of what the structure is looking at
&om every angle (north, south, east, west, etc.). As you can see we are surrounded by
public open space and The MaryKnoli Seminary park and cemetery. This structure is not
really visual to any of our neighbors in Oak Valley.
I am asking for an exception to the square footage rule that exist for this planned
community so I can remodel the current structure. This will in no way effect any of our
neighbors in any way.
Ironically the reason I am asking for this exception is so I can use this to space to store
fundraising paperwork and work. on the volunteer aspects that I do for both Montclaire
School, which is in the Cupertino Union School District, and for the Cupertino Education
Endowment Foundation. I hope that you will be able to help.
Thanking you in advance for any help you can give me on this matter.
Sincerely,
Ten Zingale
Please feel free to contact Rich at SEA Construction directly while [ am away (June 28 -
July 13th). We are both anxiously awaiting your decision.
1-4-
EXHIBIT B
£f/ff.£P'I r ¡¿o!.- y-rr<K--!-urL.
f/¿1f¿ ~tJ""'1/1-7¿' £./1 fl~ Sßfi- lo'1J¡-rJJ-r~-
f)/-.1UJfl1 &5 -Iv s.¿¿ h,.'L>J ¡¡ti/L.- G/~
¡~'>'A4Iy flJff- Vi / / b<- .
1-5
toú J-¡v;f- ¡elf Jí
-(p
t- {jo f...f r?' G 1r5'Í
~o ~/(r
íß!/_í/f- M~T
-1-
f,óDt--/n) JOJf'h-
~ Vbt--I-þ t/?,......TL
- t>
LOS
H I
ALTOS
INTERSTATE
2 8 0
EXHIBIT C
!L
J
0
i'l
if
".
"êYC1~T5,
'"eN"
, "em
CITY",
." 'A;C,W'
"
Brian Kangas Foulk
[og;n,." . $u""yo" . Plannees
'",,-
'-".~
~.
"
,~
--=""'-
11
jJ
~
//
NO"
OAK V ALLEY - 212 ACRES
CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA I C1-
FEBRUARY 1998 -
DEVELOPER & BUILDER: THE O'BRIEN GROUP;
(650) 377-0300 I
www.baynetcOmfobrien j
GRAPHIC SCALE
~- '
500 0 SOD 1000
N
'-
EXHIBIT D
~
UJ
UJ
:I:
II)
UJ
UJ
II)
..,
0
..;
./
~~
",
.~/
0"/
"'>~
c, ~o/
/
/
/
/
7
)(J,622 SQ. n
~
r-
~I
~I
~I
~
~I
~I
81'
. S.,';)2'.6"!-.'13.:...-
--
'...
...
.-:
"
...
6
27.6.' SQ. rT.
u.~
So1
=:i
N
I
z I
& I
~ .
..
1 I
'-I
I
LIMIT OF P."'.E.
R-24.50'
6-5'"59'1"
L-U51'
R-20.00'
"x~.,
~
~"
\-\0
DlR-2004-10
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
RESOLUTION NO, 161
OF THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO APPROVING A
DIRECTOR'S REFERRAL OF A MINOR MODIFICATION TO CONSTRUCT A 336 SQUARE
FOOT OFFICE/STORAGE BUILDING IN THE REAR YARD AND TO EXCEED THE
MAXIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE ALLOWED ON THE LOT BY APPROXIMATELY 300
SQUARE FEET, LOCATED AT 10050 N. WOLFE ROAD.
SECTION I: PROTECT DESCRIPTION
Application No.:
Applicant:
Location:
DIR-2004-10
Rich Alfano
22239 Hammond Way
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. The proposal, at the proposed location, will not be detrimental or injurious to property
or improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public health,
safety, general weIfare, or convenience;
2, The proposal is consistent with the purposes of this chapter, the General Plan, and
zoning ordinance;
3, Abrupt changes in building scale is avoided and a gradual transition related to height
and bulk is achieved; and
4. Design harmony between new and existing buildings and structures is protected
through the use of consistent or compatible design and color schemes
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 subject to the
conditions which are enumerated in this Resolution beginning on page 2 thereof; and
That the subconc1usions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this resolution
are based and contained in the public hearing record concerning Application DIR-2004-10 set
forth in the Minutes of the Design Review Committee meeting of, July 21, 2004, and are
incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein.
Resolution No. 161
Page 2
DIR-2004-10
July 21, 2004
SECTION 111. CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPT.
1.
APPROVED EXHIBITS
Approval is based on a plan set entitled: "Zingale Office, 22239 Hammond Way,
Cupertino CA, 95014" dated May 17, 2004, except as may be amended by conditions in
this resolution,
2.
PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
The Private Open Space area shall be shown correctly on the approved site plan.
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 21st day of July 2004, 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: Commissioner Chen and Chairperson Wong
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS: Commissioner Miller
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
Isl Ciddy Wordell
Ciddy Wordell,
City Planner
Isl GilbertWon~
Gilbert Wong, Chairperson
Design Review Committee
G: \ Planning \ ORC\ res \ DIR-2004-1O res. doc
GENERAL NOTES:
ALl. WORK""'L ""'FOR""" 11<' _""",,-"DARUS OF T1U0LL0WING ccm.
C""""""""",ool E""'"
"""",_"""""ooIE""
C"",""".d,,"~I~'ool"',,,"
~;",~"""'ooIE-
N,"oo. """" """ '000"".'
n<I1lNTENTION OF T",Sf _NTS is TO INCLI.ÐE ALL ""OR. 'QU"""NT, MATERIALS. "'VI" AND TRAHSPORWION
N'CESSARr 'O, A coMPlETE AND ","""LY F"""O""B AS l><>IeAlID ON TH' DRAWINGS OR ""SONABLY INFE""O
TH"'F"'"
THE C""""ITO' SHALL """"" ANY T'""","",Y """'" SHORING, GUTTINO OR OTH" "EANS NECESSA" to AVœO
E"'<SOY' ""'" ON n< ,""'NO ANOTO SUFfICŒ1ffi.Y HOlD STRUCTUIW. "'NENTS IN PiA" O""" CONSTRUCTION.
n<I1 C""""ITOR S>;ALl. """"" ALL NECESSAAY BLOOONG. ",CXINO. F""'ING, """',. OR OTH" "-"""" FOR ALl. ITEMS
",'UO... '"' """,
"" C,,",,",ITOR SHALL" 'ESroNS<U FOR ALl. an11NO ANO PATCH'" """"'" FOR PROÆR IN'''AliA,,," OF THE WO"'
ANO SHALl. ",OTECT, PATCH ANO "'IFOSH (TO MATCH ""STING) AREAS TO ""","œsTUR"O BY NEW CONSll<lIC11ÖN. THE
CONTRACTOR SHAI.' BE 'ES'ONSO" FOR ",P""'" OAMASED AREAS THAT OCCUO OIIONO CONSTRUCTION THAT IS WrTHlN
SCOPE OF wO"' OR OUTSI" SCOÆ OF WO"' IF CAUseO BY ~" OR SUB<:ONTRACTORS-
-
THE C""",,CTOR ,><ALL" "spo"",", TO VEO" FIELO CONOn1ONS. UN!S, l.EVtLS ANO OI",NSIONS ""'" "=EOING
WITH CONmUCTlON, THE A"'~"'CT SHAl.L BE NOmED OF ANY .SCRE"NCIES OR INCONSISTENCIES B"""N DRAWINGS
AND "'STING CQNOfI1ONS "Fo" ",OCEEOING WrTH THE WORK . QUESTION
l1IM"SlONS REf" TO ROOOH CON"m SURFACES. FACE OF STUDS, FACE OF CO.:Rm 01.00<, TOP OF SHEAmNO, TOR OF
Sl.ÁB O, CEN"""'" OF PARTITION UNLESS O""WlSE NO"'O. OAVIO OR THE CON11iACTOR SHALL NOT SCAl.E OI'AWINOS.
""""" OI",NSIONS SHAU.AiWAYS OOVE,",
'ALIGN" AS USED IN TH,se OOCUMENTS SHALl. MEAN TO ACCURAmy LOCA'" FINISH FA'" IN THE 5A1<E PUI".
H.UAROOIIS"ATERIA1.S,
IN 11;E 'VE"" THAT THE CONTRACTOR ENCOUNTERS ON THE ,m "ATtRIALS 'EASONABLY BEUEVEO TO BE ASBESTOS.
POt"HLO"""'O ""'NYL (PCB), LEAO PAINT OR ANY m" HAZA'OOU' MATER"'- WHK:H HAS NOT BEEN ","",REO
""""'SS. T" CONtRACTOR S><AU. "'EOIA my NanFT "" 0_'.
.IIJIIIIIJIJ!æ
MANUFACTU<E1<S "_lID ARE INTENOEO m INOI<A Tt QUAlm ST ANO,"O> SUBSTmlTIONS FROM IN.CA"" PR<1D1JCTS
5HA1.L" PCRMlTTEO IF """A"'" AS EQUAL BY THE ARCHmCT,
SYMBOLS LEGEND:
~r --~, ~ JUNCTION BOX IN CElUNG ~ OIIPl.EX FLOOR OUTI.ET
LfTfERS IN HORIZONTAL
NUMBE" IN VERTICAL -d * QUADRA>l.EX WAU. OUTlET
~-- VANm UGHT FIXTURE
'* """" WA1.L OUTlET
!:Jp PULl.CHAINLK;HTCOLING (2)
C MOUNTED
<V-- W,"""WTAGS rQ-A INCANDESCENTUGHTWALl 3
MOONTED f
ø OOOR TAGS
~ SCONCEUGHTWA1.L
(2) "'NOTES .".", MOUN"" f
§I@]EI CO 'LI.IORESCE"cK;HTCElL>IG SWITCH,SlNGl.EPOtE
"ECH"mc., PW"B.,
KEYNOTES MOUNTED
ffi DA ~5:..\'i~':E" UGIIT "'UNO 3D
CETNL"ARK f SW'TCH,3WAY~""ER
W -t) CAN UGIfT FIXTURE IN CElUNO
D
ELEVAT1ON MARK ~
~ >AN UGHT C""'" FOCIU" SWITCH, ONGl.E POtE ~"""
~SEC11ONMARX
~ FWORESCENT mlP wm .SU'-"TION
M @ S"OKE omCTOR - (N1WAiLS
œ NORTH ARROW kJ C CABl.E TV 0lffiEf = B",KWAl.I.S
= CONC1<£TE
LIVING ROOM '00" TAG kJT T"',"ONE 0lffiEf
(NorwORK) ......... ",YWOOI>
~'.'~ OA11J"POINTMARX (j) "'l.EPHONEOlffiEf EAR"'I SOIL
~ OR
c þ GROlINO FAULT """",em WOOO FRAIoRNG INTERRUPT1:0
WAU.OlffiEf "EMBER OR Bl.Ooo'"
FOR"O "'RUNIT c þ ~ WOOO FRAMING THROOOH
0lJI'W( WAU. 0UTl£T "EMBER
8 @WPWAmPROOfWAU.OUTl£T CSJ ""U,""OSTER
WAm"EAm @ 22D VOl. T WALL OUTUT C8J """Y"OSTER
220
DRAWING1NDEX:
"WECT OATA,
01""', TEAl ANOTONYZINGI\J..E
ADORESS, "'" HAMNONO WAY
CUPERllNO. CA
9501<
J:.<i---.;CEIVÉD
MAY 2 7 2004
AO TITLE SHEET, GEN. NOTES, T-Z411--'
AI SITE PlAN, DEMO PlAN, """OTR1CT,
FLOOR ÞLAN, & ElEVATIONS -
AZ "LoG stenoNS AND IJ£TA(LS OCCUPANCY, R3
TYPEOFCONSTRUCTIO" V,",
so STRUCTURAL NOTES
SI STRUCTURAL ÞlANS & DETA1LS
SCOPE OF WORK;
NEW OFF« ANO smRAG< EXPANSIONS TO
(E) POOL CABANA
ABBREVIATIONS:
_.
<W.
~.
'""
'"
"'"
~
=:."""
AAOm"'-""
~""'"
-
,com.;
,""
",.
-
""-
".
~
"'"
~
_~n
"""'"
~-
~~
>~
"""
i'i
~~'
..
:~
"'~
~æ
""""'"
:~
='"
"""'"""""""
;::rw ROO<
"""
."'.",,'"
;~:::=
"""rol
FI'OO~""""'"
"""""'"
""","",~w",œ,
,-
F"""
Fro
~
..
......
::¡
:",..,
"
~
,m
-
~::¡¡;:~
'"""'w~'"."'
_ow'"'
~~
"""""
:,~
.......
~"""""
~
~A1.
_.
_.
'"
~
'"
~
"""
....
~
:'h
"'W
~1N~cr
00"""'"
D.C
D'."
~-.o,
"""""""""""'0
".0
~
~""
,.,,~~~'"
"-"",,",,",,n
~"""'"
w
"'.
w.
'.D
~,.;:
~
!;.
".0
~"'"
OW"
""'-"
== ~...,
u.o
~,
""""""'"
~
""""".,"""',,'"
W"".
W"
w""""
w'n'~n'
BY:
LOTSIZE. 27,6415.F.
"".:=-.=*-,.,. .,.... - """"'--"~"'."-.'
"'1S11NG STIlUCTU"S.
,,)HOUSE. ',IB",.
,,) GARAGE. '" I'
(E) POOl. CABANA "5 .F.
(""'O) POOl. STORAGE '5, .F:
",OPOSEO AOOmoN>
STORAGE/OFF«
TOTALCOV'GA""-
"'OF.
I
"~l
'¡¿:
(£) LOT COVERAG'-
(N) LOT to_G!.
Case Manager
MANDATORYMEASU
","", MF-IR
""~"oo, o~'",~",I_""",oo""OO"-,"""",,".,N""~."".,
DESeRW"ON
O"<ONER I ENFORCEMENT
","""",,,",.-...,.
x
. """ ~'-""'q'-".
"""' '-""'-.---""""'"
:~i~~~~~~~;~:;;~;~~;-=:~I ii
""",-".
"'---~~"-
".,-"
, "-"----"~~~~'-~""-'-~'"
x
""",'----""'--"""'"
""" ".",."'-~-""--_..,"'-,_..~...
A-
I ~~
".., '-"_.""'--",",'-,,"'--""-~
, ~..,--.""'~--'
.,..-..-..",..-
"N"'N"'."_'~~-~
"'".,---"'
,.._---,.,.. "..,.. ""..
~;::~,::"~':"^:'::':~:::'::::,::=:::::'::::'::~:._"-
,,-, "-.."",,.~,,'~-".'__"M~""'O>"^"^
"',,"'~,
,",."'~~"""'-",.'~,"-
""".0'_"""
, :~".::::::::-.:;:"::,;.:.~;:';.:;-:;:,::"-'--""""'"
""'~"",",_.,-.--'--",._...,~,,"-~.,
NA
""",.","",~--""'"",,
"-"",.,",,,..-.,..,.-..-..,....
"sc~rnON
""ONER I EN",.CEMENT
..."é_",-,".,W'.'.-';~"'~."~""-~"."'.'-".';'" !
.""..,_.."..
I ':;;Z';-~.=~;..'7..4_.~'__-'-~---
":':,:7,::;,:-_..._--_...,... ' ~A
:.,~:.~::::::::::.:::::....._-- I
::,:-,:;=::::'::~::::;::'=::-::~-:'::'-=:_" ,,~.
x
",,~,~..-
:~~~~~~~~~I ~:
CERTIFICA IT OF COMPLIANCE, RESIDENTIAL "-' .0)
Z-"""""~ ~I"'" _OS114/Ò
~'~~2."" ~.M"'D<I D ...tI~
""'~'tt.. t..IND'EL<...
~þ """IF
'-~'-~~"~""~""-'
><E~SIONS
NO I OAT< l"scoll'11ON
CF-IR
~~:':c~.~N~~~" ^,-~......L^
:;:~~'""!-"'i.~,::", --",-
1-""""-' -'"."""'" -""'~~>^.~'
_00"_- =-N_".."..,...",,_.-
Ë~:E¡;~' ~~_.._-,..,,-~--'
""'ANTB..R"R -..... ,,",'"-, , ,.," ~"'"~~..."""'-"'-"
8m '<Ne ",.,it"", '"on mON
""0>_"'-"..10'
'~"-,CA_3
Td",1-"74M
"""""74M
"""""'3320
::-I'::"I~..'" "-""" ,..". """"
,,~ -;::;:: '::-:-".: ';~: "..' ".'ow'
w., 0
W,"
.....""""'u.-
,-'":"'..::::;;::;"..,
~
,-".. ,._",.. '"~'" u~,,~
I=':' .:C "¡,? ~'"'" "'" ,;.-~,,~;::'"
,-
,-,
~
~,
-
-
",
", ,
<:!
UJ~~
~~Q)
0«
::¡:u
UJ ~ "
~J:~
ZQ)t;:
ÑMUJ
~§S
NU
~
:£
<CV)
II ::d
~¡::
~~
oðoð
zV)
OZ
¡:::3
<Ca..
Q
Z
::>
0
u..
DA"', S"'/O4
SCA1.E, AS SHOWN
DRAWNBY, ".W.H.
CHECKEO BY, "AL
JOB""",",
~
,," """,-,",",.,~,,-;.",,~.w~,~..,,...,..",,-,~.~
,:;; ~=~~
!::'.:,E::, "~~ :=~ ,~~ ~~' =-=:
~
SEAL,"O"CTI>,.'nV,'~AI_."..M_..~,
~~
~~
c ~.~..",.._-,
"...._,~-~,"u-..._-~_..,
::~:.::::;:=;:::'::':;"7':::~:~:;:"'~.-
:::~~":.::~~::::::::;::;;:;:::":;:::;;,:::..,~,
"J, ~'-"""-"'~""'-~""""-"'"~"'._'""'"'~'-'-)
¡¡
,~5
.'10
WATERHEATINGSV'TEMS
'-' ~,-,
w.,....,. D'M."~ N_~ ,::;':. ,;,:;:., = ,-,' ,:."
"" ,- ",,- ._" .", m._, ,._", "".
~~==--
¡î~:::; =~ ~ ::;.:i':!;;;'E= :..~:"=..':;:.:~ ':'.:::;::= :-:.:-"
"'"" ""TIO"'" " ".._" ,-, ",_ç."',TXV.""""_,~....
_.'(-;""""'-~'_m.m.fu<",_,"",-',""."'.ò.'OOI""",,"'M...,)
'._'."'_.~'~-".._"'~'~'~"""'
COM"'AN"'STmMENT
TI""""""."mol_"",......"",r_.d~"~_""ill","","_.-."".
TI".".,.."",",r"C,II"m.ç"".""""_."""...;~~;,,,,~..,,~,....,,",",
,.. Th",","~",...."..."..""";o.,,,;ò_"'p-....'."" _..,..,,=-
",-""".""",;-"""",""",","oo"~'-"',,",",,,"_,~_,r....,",
""""~""""S~.'F_""",,~". Th,""--=p"'ò.-.-"'"
""...""..~TXV.","~".~I""""~"'""."'""';""""'.,,.,,~_ooœ"<RS
"";.....~-",,,"._~~,,-,-,-, .~_.".OO,..~
",...~-,,~",.,
:::- ~~~C ::~- £;~~
'žfLI\ '1<-UljL -- n-~
",-'.'ì~~
¿j¡";:~~~"f;;~: ------
,-, =, "",,
'"""-"""
~
~
1:,-
qS
~c:
~:i
m
r
m
~
Õ
z
w
~::E
, m
"C/)
,,-I
.m
r
m
~
-I
Õ
Z
N
q~
~s:
~O
'r
::¡
Õ
Z
"tJ
ç
Z
LJ
~~~~~
~â~~~
~È;P
~
:j
~
r
í
~
~ j ~C~
, ~ ~..¡ ~;;
:1/ ; '1\ '. ~ ~ ~
:.~/!~ ¡:'~ I~H
- : I I~ I: "i ~,'. 50 LJ~
i ~ Ii I
~ t' i' ::0
i ~ ~ ,j "tJ
- - '1 - -~ ~~ir' --..--,.- --.,.""./ ~
t' 1\ ij
; i!~
, I \ II '\
I I \ I \
¿ . :11 g~~~
\ -~'I:----4:1 ~.~i~
--T-~_I n~~
\ \ \ Iii;
~~i ~ !>~a 8~§~
~~o ~ ~~~ h ~
~~~ ~ ~~~ ~o 0
~a~ a ~i~
~ a!'~
~ ~I.~
~~
;¡~
aê
n
a~g~
~~~F
~õi~
~ ~
Ii ~
E
;~
i~
aè
~.
.~
i
I
i
.
.~
~
ß
i
~
)
Ii
~
~ . 7."
-,/,-_u- ----~ ...........>.......
</ ..1. ._<~:::---
'--, -"<~f:~-1' 'ì
<IT "~, : . :
I"~ /'~ :.-L!
--'- Ii ¡
'- "" g
-, "
-, ", -!.: """--+
' "'- '-" - -- -.:.; :: ìí
--=~ ~ ß: 'V1ï),þ
'-- "" ~ : ¡:\\ ~ õ
'--<""" ~ : : ~ ~ ~
'-- "'" ~ 1 ¡ ;:..¡ a
-, , I':X
~ --'- -", ) ¡ ì ('I> ......
-'I"""" ,// /) ~ ~ ~t.
'- './ ,'". (7)
", ,/ . <:.
-'- /.
-,./
\
I
g
~
i
"C/)
:::¡
em
""
ç
Z
@~~
----...-., "'-~,
f
~
ãI
~
I
~
;i
8
~U
o~"
ßI:\ß
~H
-¡..i
,
~a
n
¡
I
I
~
~
¡;
~
~
~
a
~
~
1
~'
,~
1â
~
I
¡
\ \ '
\ \ \
¡j~~ . §
ui ~ §
¡;¡~. . ~
ê~~
.~
2
~
~ ~
U
f ~~õ' '~f' ~I'.'
" h~ f~ ~"
[ ." ,.
- .~~ ~J i>¡
~ i1~ß h š.'"
K ~~ ~
SITE PlAN, DEMOLITION PlAN,
FLOOR PLAN, AND ELEVATIONS
ZINGALE OFFICE
22239 HAMMOND WAY
CUPERTINO, CA 95014
~
~
To:
From:
Subject:
Location:
Design Review Committee
Gary Chao, Assistant Planner
Application: R-2004-15
10110 Lockwood Drive
Date:July 21, 2004
Project Description: Residential design review for an exception to allow a second story
addition to exceed 35% of the first story.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee take the following action:
1. Approve R-2004-15 subject to the model resolution.
BACKGROUND
The project is located on an 11,056 square foot site that allows for a 4,975 square foot house.
The proposed new house is approximately 3,791 square feet (34% F.AR) and is within the
allowable building day light plane. Normally, a two story house under 35% F.AR is not
reviewed by DRc. However the exception request for a larger second floor requires the
approval by DRc. The project has been reviewed and approved by the City's Architectural
Consultant.
DISCUSSION
The project conforms to all of the prescriptive regulations in Section 19.28,060 in terms of size,
setbacks, height and second story articulations with the following exceptions:
35% Second Floor to First Floor Ratio:
According to Section 18.28.060(B3) of the Zoning Ordinance, the floor area of a second story
must not exceed 35% of the existing or proposed first story or six hundred square feet,
whichever is greater. The proposed second floor area will be approximately 38% (1,009 S.F.)
of the ground floor area. The intent of this rule is to control the apparent mass of the proposed
second floor and provide articulation from the ground floor. The existing house already has a
second floor. The mass and bulk of the second floor will not be significantly increased by the
proposed addition. In fact, the new second floor addition improves the design and
articulation of the existing house, In addition, the proposed house fits in well with the existing
homes of the neighborhood in term of style and architecture.
Staff supports the exception to allow the proposed second floor to exceed 35% of the ground
floor given its exceptional design and that the apparent mass and bulk concerns relative to the
neighboring houses are addressed. Staff believes the proposed second story addition is
acceptable, and the exceptions can meet the following findings:
,J-I
July 21, 2004
R-20O4-15
Page2of3
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 purpose of the zoning ordinance section 19.28.060 (B3) & (E5a) is to ensure that the second
story will not be overly massive and that its apparent mass will not impact the neighborhood.
In staff s opinion, the proposed project is consistent with the intent of the ordinance and will
not impact the neighborhood since it improves the design and articulation of the existing two-
story house.
2. That the approval of the exceptions will not resuIt in a condition that is materially
detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare.
The proposed project is an allowed use and is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood
in terms of setbacks, height, mass, style, and design.
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 project property allows for a 4,975 square foot homes, The applicant chooses not to
maximize the allowable F.A.R and requests a slightly larger second floor instead. The
proposed second floor meets all of the articulation and setback rules and its design is
consistent with the intent of the ordinance. The exception of a 38% second floor to first floor
ratio requires the least modifications to the prescribed regulations in order to accomplish the
expansion.
4. The proposed exception will not result in a hazardous condition for pedestrian and
vehicular traffic. .
The proposed project is away from any public streets and will not affect 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 16.28.010.
The project is consistent with the General Plan and zoning in that it is a single-family use, In
addition, the proposed project is within the allowable square footage and meets the intent of
the prescribed by the Zoning Ordinance.
Street Side Yard
The required street side yard along Stevens Creek Blvd. for this project is 12 feet measured
from the property line. The proposed plans indicate an 11-foot street side yard setback. The
applicant is aware of this error and consents to increasing it to 12 feet. A revised site plan shall
be submitted to the Planning Department for review and approval prior to issuance of
building permits.
2
d-~
July 21, 2004
R-20O4-15
Page30f3
Privacv
The applicant is required to plant privacy protection trees along the rear (east) property line
and the right side (south) property line. All of the privacy protection trees will be recorded as
a covenant on the property and the final landscaping plan must be reviewed and approved by
the Planning Department prior to issuance of building permits. Since a detailed privacy-
planting plan has not been submitted, the applicant will be required to submit a planting plan
to the Planning Department for review and approval prior to issuance of any building permits.
Prepared by:
Approved by:
Gary Chao, Assistant Planner
Ciddy Wordell, City Planner (:~f' ¿i¡
Attachments:
1. Model Resolution
2. Plan Set
G:\P1aIming\DRC\staff rep\R-2004-15 SRdoc
'--.. --:J
""I - .:::>
R-2004-15
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
RESOLUTION NO.
OF THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO APPROVING
A EXCEPTION FOR A SECOND STORY ADDITION TO EXCEED 35% OF THE FIRST
FLOOR.
SECTION II: PROTECT DESCRIPTION
Application No.: R-2004-15
Applicant/Owner: Holly Hartman/Hadnap
Location: 10110 Lockwood Drive
SECTION II: FINDINGS
WHEREAS, the Design Review Committee of the City of Cupertino received an
application for a R1 Exception, as described in this Resolution; and
WHEREAS, the Design Review Committee finds that the changes are beneficial and
compatible with the surrounding area and the following exception findings can be met;
1. That the literal enforcement of the provisions of this title will result in restrictions
inconsistent with the spirit and intent of this title in that the proposed project is
consistent with the intent of the ordinance and will not impact the neighborhood
since it improves the design and articulation of the currently two-story house.
2. That the granting of the exception will not result in a condition which is
materially detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare in that the
proposed project is an allowed use and is compatible with the surrounding
neighborhoods in terms of setbacks, height, mass, style, and design.
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 in that the project property allows a 4,975 square foot homes. The
applicant chooses not to maximize the allowable F.A.R and requests a slightly
larger second floor instead. The proposed second floor meets all of the
articulation and setback rules and its design is consistent with the intent of the
ordinance. The exception of a 38% second floor to first floor ratio requires the
least modifications to the prescribed regulations in order to accomplish the
expansion.
,~-+
Resolution No,
Page 2
R-2004-15
July 21, 2004
================================================================
4, The proposed exception will not result in significant visual impact as viewed
from abutting properties in that the proposed house design is compatible with
the surrounding houses and the second floor does not appear overly massive and
out of scale addressing the intent of the ordinance.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence
submitted in this matter, the application no, R-2004-15, 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-2004-15 as set forth in the Minutes of the Design Review Committee Meeting of July
21, 2004, and are incorporated by reference herein.
SECTION III: CONDITIONS
DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
ADMINISTERED
BY
THE
COMMUNITY
1. APPROVED EXHIBITS
Approval is based on a plan set entitled: "Addition and remodel for Vasudeo &
Vaishali Hadap, 10110 Lockwood Drive, Cupertino, Ca." consisting of five sheets
labeled: A1 - A5, and dated 6/16/04, except as may be amended by conditions
contained in this resolution,
2. PRIVACY PROTECTION PLANTING
The applicant shall submit a final privacy protection plan indicating the planting of
City approved trees to screen all new second story windows in accordance with the
City's R1 Ordinance unless if a waiver is obtained from the affected property
owners. The final privacy protection plan shall be submitted for review and
approval prior to issuance of the final occupancy.
3. PRIVACY PROTECTION COVENANT
The property owner shall record a covenant on this property to inform future
property owners of the privacy protection measures and tree protection
requirements, The precise language will be subject to approval of Planning staff,
Proof of recordation must be submitted to the Community Development
Department prior to final occupancy of the residence.
,;;( - ~
Resolution No.
Page 3
R-2004-15
July 21, 2004
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
4. SITE PLAN
A final detailed site plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department for review
and approval indicating accurate building setback lines (ground floor & second
floor) prior to issuance of the building permits. In addition, the street side yard
setback along Stevens Creek Blvd. shall be increased to 12 feet (measured from the
property line).
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 21st day of July 2004, 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
Gilbert Wong, Chairperson
Design Review Committee
G:\ Planning \ ORCI res \ R-2004-15 res.doc
;;{ - V:J
R-2004-15
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
RESOLUTION NO. 162
OF THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO APPROVING
A EXCEPTION FOR A SECOND STORY ADDITION TO EXCEED 35% OF THE FIRST
FLOOR.
SECTION II: PROTECT DESCRIPTION
Application No,: R-2004-15
Applicant/Owner: Holly Hartman/Hadap
Location: 10110 Lockwood Drive
SECTION 11: FINDINGS
WHEREAS, the Design Review Committee of the City of Cupertino received an
application for a R1 Exception, as described in this Resolution; and
WHEREAS, the Design Review Committee finds that the changes are beneficial and
compatible with the surrounding area and the following exception findings can be met;
1. That the literal enforcement of the provisions of this title will result in restrictions
inconsistent with the spirit and intent of this title in that the proposed project is
consistent with the intent of the ordinance and will not impact the neighborhood
since it improves the design and articulation of the currently two-story house,
2, That the granting of the exception will not result in a condition which is
materially detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare in that the
proposed project is an allowed use and is compatible with the surrounding
neighborhoods in terms of setbacks, height, mass, style, and design.
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 in that the project property allows a 4,975 square foot homes. The
applicant chooses not to maximize the allowable F.A.R and requests a slightly
larger second floor instead. The proposed second floor meets all of the
articulation and setback rules and its design is consistent with the intent of the
ordinance. The exception of a 38% second floor to first floor ratio requires the
least modifications to the prescribed regulations in order to accomplish the
expansion.
Resolution No, 162
Page 2
R-2004-15
July 21, 2004
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
4. The proposed exception will not result in significant visual impact as viewed
from abutting properties in that the proposed house design is compatible with
the surrounding houses and the second floor does not appear overly massive and
out of scale addressing the intent of the ordinance.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence
submitted in this matter, the application no, R-20O4-15, 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-2004-15 as set forth in the Minutes of the Design Review Committee Meeting of July
21, 2004, and are incorporated by reference herein.
SECTION III: CONDITIONS
DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
ADMINISTERED
BY
THE
COMMUNITY
1. APPROVED EXHIBITS
Approval is based on a plan set entitled: "Addition and remodel for Vasudeo &
Vaishali Hadap, 10110 Lockwood Drive, Cupertino, Ca." consisting of five sheets
labeled: A1 - A5, and dated 6/16/04, except as may be amended by conditions
contained in this resolution.
2. PRIVACY PROTECTION PLANTING
The applicant shall submit a final privacy protection plan indicating the planting of
City approved trees to screen all new second story windows in accordance with the
City's R1 Ordinance unless if a waiver is obtained from the affected property
owners. The final privacy protection plan shall be submitted for review and
approval prior to issuance of the final occupancy.
3. PRIVACY PROTECTION COVENANT
The property owner shall record a covenant on this property to inform future
property owners of the privacy protection measures and tree protection
requirements. The precise language will be subject to approval of Planning staff.
Proof of recordation must be submitted to the Community Development
Department prior to final occupancy of the residence.
Resolution No, 162
Page 3
R-2004-15
July 21, 2004
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
4. SITE PLAN
A final detailed site plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department for review
and approval indicating accurate building setback lines (ground floor & second
floor) prior to issuance of the building permits. In addition, the street side yard
setback along Stevens Creek Blvd. shall be increased to 12 feet (measured from the
property line).
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 21st day of July 2004, 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: Commissioner Chen and Chairperson Wong
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS: Commissioner Miller
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
/s/ Ciddy Wordell
Ciddy Wordell
City Planner
/s/ Gilbert Wong
Gilbert Wong, Chairperson
Design Review Committee
G:\Planning\ORC\ res \ R-2004-15 res.doc
-~._~
.¥Tv
NYWJ.1!YH -,. C11IYJ<)!H
\
c)
i
II I
" I
Ii
~ i:j
, .:< I
.;
H
I_"
.~î '\\
" ,
. '\ .
1
I
~
0
¡£ ~
...... =
.". '"
ii:
c :z
~ ~
~
"""""1IsorNVS,""",^V""""""",,'V",,,,'
.:)NJ 'IDlJU.:)ffi.IIO1IV
:)::iI.L:!IWOH
1
~H~¡;I~
" .. - '" '"
IL
<
:E
ç
Z
Ü
s;:
l'
~ .. ",'" ~
~n.g.
i.
.
"
Ô
~ a
, D 0
" 7 =-
~ ;¡
; ~ H ~\ ~
~ ~ n ~
qqø ~
~ æ ~
~ ~ ~
i
;¡
7-
-C^,"õ!
?I()gS VJ 'ONt.œLMD"3o\DI( aocv.IXJO1 OII()
dVavH IlVH5IVA '51 03an5VA
f ""
1 i~
~! ~.~.
. :,J
J , i:!~
i J ~'t .: l~
~~\:. "~;i
-, $ - ~.
, ) ,. .
~~:;I'J;"'¡;¿'
~~ r^ ~ ~;:..
, . ~ ~ t
f- '
I II
I.
I:
,,'
~. <
~~ ¡..;
~~ ë§
~~ ~
~ ~ h -
~ ~ ~I II)
~ ø ~~
d @~
~ 9 ~~
~
~
~
I
""",,;,-----
"""""?d,,.
--..\33<1-::> s.1i'3A3.L'7
~n ¡( .... i
1~ ~ .,;:-
¡ j j d
"
,
"
i
~
-:l
d
D
p
~
~
~
z
:s
IL
~
¡j)
I
'VTV
Nvw.L>MI "V <I1IVHO"
""'VO"BSOrNV'""""^VVOO,,,,,,",dV-<""
~
Q
==
..-
-,-,=...'
z
0
~
it
-I
UJ
I-
IS)
~
z
0
~
it
-I
UJ
::r:
li2
0
z
z
0
¡::
~
UJ
-I
UJ
1i5
<
UJ
c--_.J
I
I
"
:1
I'
:1
"
:1
"
:~
"
:1
I,
:1
I,
:1
"
I
I
I
-----1
I
I
I
z
0
¡::
~
UJ
-I
UJ
¡!:
::)
0
IS)
WJIõ6 VJ 'OHu:nIro '3MIa CIOCI'IttXJ1 OUOI
dYQVH I1YH9IY^ 'P 03an9Y^
:¡¡o,¡ 13(J()I'I3¡ ONY HOWOOV
! '" ~
_S :¡;~
! ~~
i~ !
. s-+
~ !
¡¡¡~ ~
~=-!
0
w~
~~
"'~
I '
: :1
: :11
: :1
I :
L_____-:
,
I :
1
-1,;-+
'i~
I ~
I .
I ~
lob
I
I
~ ~
I I
I
1
1
1
I
I
1
~ ~ :
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1 :
, 1
I :
, I
I :
, I
J :
I , I
:1 I :
IL , I
:1 I :
" , I
:1 I :
I , I
I I
I______---------------------_J
I
I
n ~ ~ .... i
~ ~ .( .
; H d ~
z
:s
~
a¿
0
0
-I
u..
1i5
a¿
¡¡:
~
Z
¡::
\!)
~
z
:s
IL
8
-I
u..
Q
Z
8
UJ
IS)
~
z
~
~
-(r;-? nnm'~ _I t. j¡: i i~:;:-~¡;~,JnnmJ
f---Y ~ :1 ~ I ,// rn/-'-n
,i! ~~~~~,~~~~~~~ nn_n-i~~iJ i:: ~~~ y/ O.,u, J//
~ j"I\' " ~~/ ~-: / ,
,,': '::", :' ~h~ ' /,
, . I / ¡--¡I ~ /, r.
" . v I---J: ~ /..~, ~I
I: _:: i /'~-~ o!___n_n<U i
'I,! ¡! '- ~ ,- ~ k P ¡¡ .:7 .> ,~ :'
:: t I i 1'-...)110 ?,~ ,m-i L~';,n- :
" ~i ,,~i ~~~ :. ::: ~i-r'~i. ',lIoi
:,.,!,:' " Ii t ,Ii i' ':nrJl¡-L¡;!~'.. [~' ,."--c",,,'~ ~
, : "" ,~ ii'iì: : Ii : oM
:' ': L""""" 3:' :
, -I' 1 I ~ ' , , , , i! , : i~: I~ '
:i:! ,I ' " , , , 9~ , : 'I 9 x, , ..
: ,/_n:: '~-r-': ~~:'
, I: Ai" '!'it --, :::
Ii:! ~ ¡ ~L/ - . r------------------------------'-------------------- ~¡-- a~2- ~_-=~_~L_'~~_~. I i ~: 4
I'---i-cki~-_u----,---"" ' , i'. /
, . ~!..:::.=.:::"'::=-=- /;/','
1<--::""""" ' i // , " /
. ----------'------------------ /;;/ ~ ",,- ~/
----"':: tT",----¡ ,/' I ~ mm__- /Î //:;
/ ------~-'" / :'
~ ' ¡ ~ 1J1~ -V ':
, _Ln -/ ~ ii'i~ " --~-~~ ;:
I / I ~ ~~ I ':
~, / """"" ~, ::
'\ I '-~h-I -IL~j m_um_mmm,:,:',!
" -------------~1--}
l.
n---~--=-7-7 uu-
.-00 I I.
I!
~U ~
4m ~
,- ----------- c~
,
" ~ ~ //
", //
" /
" 1 i"'~
, ~'~
, ~
" ,
I ~
" (/ I
<--
,t ,~~,-- ~/ '
r, :; '1:: : / :
U' " ," ' 1
n__nh n"',~n_u_-:~n,-:: / Ii I~ I:
, ':' ': ,-1~---e- x--- ,
"",:":'/~'~~ ,
5~ ":":/Ô' þ ,
. i"~ ,'" "//'" ""'0
'------e-~'----¿--;</ :,-, if / I " ,
~ '9~ / :', ~'/" , T---- 71
. :i / "¡----'!- _c]"
// '$~" ,: ~ ~~ : k' :: ¡-:;-.f-J /
s;~n_--_--.__'_nhn- '- -,<- , 'i:: ~ , ¡¡¡~" ,/ I /
IV X-, ~;;~ "'IÎTi5~ì: /¡ : /
1 / " ,. ,,¡¡ ,-t-t-t-- ~ ,.... ' ~
/'¡' - / -i--'-- ,¡""",,:' !/¡¡¡ì:
/~ 00 :à" ,() ~ ~ 1n:,,~f
i¡;" i¡;i. 'i'" , ¡t ,--I
e:¡~ I-- ~:¡~ e¡;~ ' ~¡ ,n' ",
~ þ Q (0'~ ~:¡~ 1'--: '
^, ,,' b.. "I~, "
~
_m_=
.""""-.""NVS"",,,,^V-.oo"""""V-<>K'
~
I
'VTV
NVl'<L1!VH .V <nIVIDI1I
.3NJ 'ffiIflLJ3.I.lli311Y
:):Il.:lWOH
.0-"
""~
".a
.-a
s.,
~.
..
t
~
4-Z
.>-a
....
..."
.....
; II I filii II
II I I nq,Hnl¡ 1'1
i id~id!dnlnlllddl ¡
;:;:g~dQ'ì!.Q' \ \T-Q-B..~-;;-:.£%@ ~~:X
.<»
~
,
,
,
,
" ---------,
...a
...0
I--
i " , , -~
" " ,t¡~
-1--1--J.J. ~-1-~¡¡~-
r ï r
. I I
I I
, r
I '
I '
I '
I I
I I
I '
I ,
L_~-ì
I I
I I
I I I
I I
I' I
I I I
I' I
I I I
I' r
:: I
lJ.~
il
I
'<>0
""
,,~ti~
1\ ~ ~:'"
~
~
-
-
- IAJ
---
z
:s
IL
I.Il
8
....I
u..
I-
Z
UJ
::¡;
UJ
If)
<
I!I
~~
~£
~
~ ~
1\
'Q..........í - -- - :
, ,
r
~
I.-
f"i",-
, ", I , I , I , , I
"""'" "
---(
,
I
I
I
I
,
I
,
I
~
~
.....
~
;
~
"'- ---------- ,
4-0
.
"""
- YJ 'ONWl3¥O '3AI) (] (]()()foI)t)O1 0lIO\
dVOVH I1VH9IYA ~ 030n9YA
::JI(), l3OOrmi aNY NOlIJ(](]V t"""-'
~ ,i§ ~ i
~ ~ljF; t! I~
r ~1Jt} I~
r ~,
>.: Þ-f\
~~
i J
~ p ~ t') î
. ~ 8 ,.
¡~. .++ ~~
~ H d ..
"',
I
I
,
t-
"
!
I
,
"
~
~
------- --..="'
~
z
:s
IL
c¿
C
C
....I
u..
I-
g¿
¡¡:
~
h
~I
~
~
,"'~,~
i ~ In:
e,IJ1~----~~ II
~ ~~ ~I r r
,I I
~ /'"
~ I~
__n ' I
-::~~r':í~-= J
~
~
~
~
~
.<>ø.
.<>..
.."
""0
~
.
1
~ ~
z
:s
IL
I.Il
~. 8
~§ ïè
~ Q
Z
8
UJ
If)
r
I
I:
I
I
I: "
I
I
I:
I
I
I
r- --- -------- ~
r /~
/(
'------- ~
....
...0
"'Z
,<>"
""..
""'VO'""" "'" ",""",^VHOO>'OO<VdV-<>K'
YTV
NVI'li1lVH V O1IVIDrn
.JNJ 'ffiuillíl.I.IlD1!V
33J.:rn10H
.- - «-J
'1
~
¡
I
,
F
~~- J \ \
~~; ~ \
~~~ '"
hi 1/ à
¡¡~~~ ~ \\
~~nl \
hHIJ\ . ~\
i
;
,
¡
I
~ ~.~
If 0 ~ I
~ g¡ ~ ~
I .
~ ',~_._.. __....--M =-..>'
~
....J
c w
'd l-
F IS)
~ w ~
:. '"
..,J -~
. ~ 1 ~
~~ 1
1"
~~
,~
1~
.~
. ~nä
n~~
þ ~o- ~~~~
I~~ ~~~ ~~~~
i~~~-- -~U-- Uh
~d ~¡¡~
d~- ~h
~~J ~3i
m33
tIO!i8 '0 'ONWE&tJ '31.1) (] OOCWIJlJOl 01lOI
c:lVQVH 11YHSIY^ '¡I 03am",^
!¡ 3 ~ .
T:-- ( .,.!
t~ ..;:
! j I d
Wd l3(J()Ya¡ aNY NOUJaaV
/
f/.?
f
í
~
/
I
z
0
~
W
....I
W
~
<
w
~_.
~
i~
~~
~~
U~
¡¡~.
hI
z
0
~
it
....I
W
~
0
Z
~
g
¡¡
5
.;)NJ'
'V<I1IVHJrd
.,,'1,,""""
, """""'~
1
t'
,)
r
ì
!
í
z
0
¡::
~
1lJ
-I
W
ç;:
;::)
0
I.f)
...
~ ~
~ 0 .a ~
; Πo:g !1
~ g¡ U; ;1
... "
';"....... .,""...~,~,~ , -,-. ,j
~
~
CJ
"""'" v:J 'ONWG./ro """'" (]()Q'ott)()1 01lOI
.. ~ ~ § ." I
,,~ IJ "
:; > <
~ j j d
c:lVaVH I1YH91VA '11 03an9YA
'¡ Q 13QOI'G aNY NOIJJ(](JV
z
0
G
w
I.f)
@)
z
0
G
1lJ
I.f)
(3
To:
From:
Subject:
Location:
Design Review Committee
Colin Jung, Senior Planner
Application: EXC-2004-09
10080 Peninsula Avenue, APN 326-25-023
Date: July, 21, 2004
Project Description: Fence Exception to allow a street-side yard fence to be
constructed on the property line instead of set back five feet as required by the
fence ordinance, CMC section 16.28, at 10080 Peninsula Avenue, APN 326-25-023.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of EXC-2004-09 as modified, per the model
resolution.
BACKGROUND:
The property is located at the southeast corner of Peninsula A venue and Grand
A venue. It is an irregularly shaped lot that is approximately 40 feet wide and
100 feet long, A detached garage is located at toward the rear of the property
with access to Grand Avenue. The side property line is located at the inside
edge of the sidewalk (Exhibit A). The property is surrounded by other single-
family residences.
The property is part of an early Monta Vista neighborhood, subdivided and built
in the early part of the 1900's under County jurisdiction, As much of the single
family and duplex residences did not meet City zoning standards in terms of
setbacks, parking, lot coverage, lot size, the City pre-zoned the area "planned
development" in 1979 when it annexed the neighborhood, The planned
development zoning provides that residences proposed for redevelopment
should strive for the R1 or R2 development standards, but there would be a
certain amount of flexibility given the unique circumstances of the area.
DISCUSSION:
The existing house has a legal, non-conforming street-side setback of 8 feet where
12 feet is required, If the fence were setback 5 feet from the property line, a legal,
but narrow, fenced sideyard of 3 feet in width would be created. The applicants,
Thirumalpathy and Sangeeta Balakrishnan, has requested a fence exception to
erect a fence on the street-side property line, next to the sidewalk (See Exhibits B
&C).
Street-side property line fences are prohibited in the fence ordinance because
they created an unattractive, walled-off tunnel effect along the streetscape. In
3-)
this particular case, a property line fence also creates a visual obstruction with
the applicant's driveway,
Because of the unique circumstances of the property: a small, narrow lot and the
narrow, but legal, non-conforming side setbacks, staff is recommending a
modified fence exception, where the fence is set back 3 feet from the street-side
property line, instead of the normally required 5-foot setback. This solution
would allow the property owner to have a much more passable 5-foot wide
fenced sideyard from the front to the back of the property. Staff is also
recommending that the strip between the sidewalk and proposed fence be
landscaped with shrubs.
Staff believes the necessary fence exception findings can be made as follows with
staff comments in italics:
1. The literal enforcement of the provisions of this chapter will result in
restrictions inconsistent with the spirit and intent of this chapter.
The granting of a modified fence exception will allow the applicants to have an
adequately sized fenced sideyard for privacy, while maintaining sufficient separation
between the fence and public sidewalk for aesthetic reasons and the preservation of
property values.
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 does not obstruct the corner sight triangle,
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 exception as modified will accomplish the goal of providing a reasonable
sized fenced sideyard, while requiring the least variance from the prescribed
regulations.
4. The proposed exception will not result in a hazardous condition for
pedestrian and vehicular traffic.
The fence exception as modified will maintain sight lines for pedestrians and 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 16.28.010.
:!:>-~
2
ThE fence exception as modified recognizes thE unique development patterns of thE
Monta Vista neighborhood and provides flexibility where needed.
Prepared by:
Approved by:
Colin Jung, Senior Planner
Ciddy Wordell, City Planner
/
,~
~/
Enclosures:
Model Resolution
Exhibit A: Parcel Map
Exhibit B: Letter of Applicant
Exhibit C: Site Plan
G:\Planning\DRC\staff rep\EXC-20O4-09.doc
'?") - Z
'-.- __1
3
EXC-2004-09
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
RESOLUTION NO.
OF THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO APPROVING A
FENCE EXCEPTION TO LOCATE A FENCE 3 FEET FROM THE STREET- SIDE PROPERTY
LINE INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED 5 FEET, IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 16.28 OF
THE CUPERTINO MUNICIPAL CODE AT 10080 PENINSULA AVENUE
SECTION I: FINDINGS
WHEREAS, the Design Review Committee of the City of Cupertino has received an
application for a fence exception, as described in Section II. of this Resolution; and
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 the application, and
has satisfied the following requirements:
1, The literal enforcement of the provisions of this chapter will result in restrictions
inconsistent with the spirit and intent of this chapter, in that the applicants would have
a marginal fenced sideyard for privacy,
2. The granting of the exception will not result in a condition which is materially
detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, in that the fence location does not
obstruct the corner sight triangle.
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 exception as modified will accomplish the goal of providing a reasonable
sized fenced sideyard, while requiring the least variance from the prescribed
regulations,
4. The proposed exception will not result in a hazardous condition for pedestrian and
vehicular traffic. The fence exception as modified will maintain sight lines for
pedestrians and 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 16.28.010. The fence exception
as modified recognizes the unique development patterns of the Monta Vista
neighborhood and provides flexibility where needed.
'7 ..4-
~').- I
Resolution No.
Page -2-
EXC-2004-09
July 2.1, 2.0040
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED:
That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits and other evidence submitted in this
matter, the application for exception as modified is hereby approved; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED:
That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this resolution
are based and contained in the public record concerning Application No.EXC-2004-09, as set
forth in the minutes of the Design Review Committee meeting of July 21, 2004, and are
incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein,
SECTION II: PROTECT DESCRIPTION
Application No(s): EXC-2004-09
Applicant: Thirumalpathy and Sangeeta Balakrishnan
Property Owner: Thirumalpathy and Sangeeta Balakrishnan
Project Location: 10080 Peninsula Avenue
SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPT.
1. APPROVED EXHIBITS
The recommendation of approval is based on Exhibit C, titled: U Fence Exception Request
for 10080 Peninsula Avenue and dated 6/24/04, except as may be amended by conditions
contained herein.
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.
3, GRAND AVENUE FENCE SETBACK FROM PROPERTY LINE
A three (3) foot setback of the fence from the street-side (Grand Avenue) property line is
hereby granted.
4, LANDSCAPING
The applicant shall landscape the strip of land between the sidewalk and fence on the
Grand Avenue side of the property with shrubs.
~~.~
Resolution No.
Page -3-
EXC-2004-09
July 21, 2004
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 21st day of July, 2004, at a Regular Meeting of the Design
Review Committee of the City of Cupertino by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
ATTEST:
APPROVED
Ciddy Wordell
City Planner
Gilbert Wong, Chair
Design Review Committee
g: / planning/ pdreport/ res / resEXC-2004-09
~'
-- -(.0
~
ô
~co
oN
ml')
z
'"
a
~
~
u
~
~
z
~
a
u
~ @
'"
~
~
~
z
~
'"
'"
a
'"
'"
~
'"
'"
~
~
~
z
~
a
u
~
a
~
u
~
~
a
",-
I
I!'q-:~' g
----==2: "'----=-=
'.,J/ "
1 :...
@
A)¡f M 3 3 !:L-:J
lS3M ~ gg 'AMH
A311V^
~
~
"
>:
0;
<:i
0:
0:
....
--
~
«
~
>
«
....
~
"
'"
'"
'"
'"
d
z
....
~
¡!:
co.
1£ I z ¡ S3H~NI
I, II, 11,111'/11,1,1,111,1,1'/11,111,111'/11,111,1
.,;C>.
, 8"'~
- BJ,~
"[C>'"
L~~
'lb-
. i >~
j. !~
!~ ~~
J: ~§
"
i ~~
a~
;;
c:i
~
<D
'"
W
W
II:
U
Q
~
EAi I.,;t-: Ft
~ - -:J..
-' I
E~\hì6¡-r-: B
~
From,
Thirumalpathy Balakrishnan
Sangeeta Balakrishnan
10080 Peninsula Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
May 18,2004
To,
The Design Review Committee
Community Development Department
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
Re: Pennission to construct the backyard fence at the junction ofthe property and the
sidewalk
Dear Sir/ Madam,
We recently purchased the property at 10080 Peninsula Avenue in Cupertino, This
property is located at the comer of Peninsula Avenue and Grand Avenue. The total size
of the lot is 4600sqft. The living space is 890sqft and the detached garage occupies
another 400sqft at the rear of the property. The distance from the house to the edge of the
sidewalk on Grand Avenue is approximately 8ft. The distance between the garage/
driveway and the house is 15sqft at the closest spot and approximately 20sqft at the
distant spot. The distance between the neighboring property line and our house is 3ft.
This leaves us with a very narrow gap to go from the backyard to the front yard, If we
construct a fence 5ft away from the edge of the sidewalk, according to the city ordinance,
it leaves us with very little room to have a safe backyard and a safe passage at the side of
the house for our two year old daughter.
We would like to request a fence exception and would like pennission to construct the
backyard fence at the junction of the property and the sidewalk. Please refer the attached
diagram for the proposed new 6 feet fence.
We hope that you will consider our request.
Thanking you in anticipation,
Sincerely,
13 - --TLI- C{/2 3fz'y'
Thirumalpathy Balakrishnan
~kA,,~ D G'j;29») '04-
Sangeeta Balakrishnan
3-ú
E"k \r,; \.. í h c-
85
.
:
:
i
'i
j
i
¡
!
i
:
:
i
j
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
3'
'-m~
PENINSULA AVE
side walk 4,5'
FRONT YARD
890 Sq feet built in area
I
~
/.........+,.
:
J .
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
40':
:
I
!
1
8'
'-u-------J
011'
side
walk
¡.f,~:~'~
. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --~
38'
-
BACKYARD
15'
20'
GARAGE
DRIVE WAY
2'
t
- new 6 feet fence
~
tf!---
rJ
----
G ~
R ~
A ç
N ~.J
D J:
A ~
V '>
V)
E $.
ç
~
0
~
c
<£
~
<;:
IV
W-
3J1
EXC-20O4-09
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
RESOLUTION NO. 163
OF THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO APPROVING A
FENCE EXCEPTION TO LOCATE A FENCE 3 FEET FROM THE STREET- SIDE PROPERTY
LINE INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED 5 FEET, IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 16.28 OF
THE CUPERTINO MUNICIPAL CODE AT 10080 PENINSULA AVENUE
SECTION I: FINDINGS
WHEREAS, the Design Review Committee of the City of Cupertino has received an
application for a fence exception, as described in Section II, of this Resolution; and
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 the application, and
has satisfied the following requirements:
1, The literal enforcement of the provisions of this chapter will result in restrictions
inconsistent with the spirit and intent of this chapter, in that the applicants would have
a marginal fenced sideyard for privacy.
2. The granting of the exception will not result in a condition which is materially
detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, in that the fence location does not
obstruct the corner sight triangle.
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 exception as modified will accomplish the goal of providing a reasonable
sized fenced sideyard, while requiring the least variance from the prescribed
regulations.
4, The proposed exception will not result in a hazardous condition for pedestrian and
vehicular traffic. The fence exception as modified will maintain sight lines for
pedestrians and 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 16,28,010, The fence exception
as modified recognizes the unique development patterns of the Monta Vista
neighborhood and provides flexibility where needed.
Resolution No, 163
Page -2-
EXC-2004-09
July 21, 2004
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED:
That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits and other evidence submitted in this
matter, the application for exception as modified is hereby approved; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED:
That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this resolution
are based and contained in the public record concerning Application No.EXC-2004-09, as set
forth in the minutes of the Design Review Committee meeting of July 21, 2004, and are
incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein.
SECTION II: PROTECT DESCRIPTION
Application No(s): EXC-2004-09
Applicant: Thirumalpathy and Sangeeta Balakrishnan
Property Owner: Thirumalpathy and Sangeeta Balakrishnan
Project Location: 10080 Peninsula Avenue
SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPT.
1. APPROVED EXHIBITS
The recommendation of approval is based on Exhibit C, titled: " Fence Exception Request
for 10080 Peninsula Avenue and dated 6/24/04, except as may be amended by conditions
contained herein.
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.
3, GRAND AVENUE FENCE SETBACK FROM PROPERTY LINE
A three (3) foot setback of the fence from the street-side (Grand Avenue) property line is
hereby granted,
4. LANDSCAPING
The applicant shall landscape the strip of land between the sidewalk and fence on the
Grand A venue side of the property with shrubs.
Resolution No,163
Page -?-
EXC-2004-09
July 21, 2004
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 21st day of July, 2004, at a Regular Meeting of the Design
Review Committee of the City of Cupertino by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS: Commissioner Chen and Chairperson Wong
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS: Commissioner Miller
ATTEST:
APPROVED
Isl CiddyWordell
Ciddy Wordell
City Planner
Isl Gilbert Wong
Gilbert Wong, Chairperson
Design Review Committee
G:\PlanningIDRClresIEXC-2004-09 res.DOC
PENINSULA AVE
side walk 4.5'
FRONT YARD
85'
t' Z:---""""'-""..",=.~~,-,,~-~, ^#"'" ,
:¡
APPROVAL
DRC
EJe- v'DC)~-{.Y:Î
Appl~tion Number
=7 I /04
I . I
A"7 ~ Dale
~~
Case Manager
Signature
E)\.'v--ìbt-. C.
,
,
,
,
,
, .'
T'
!
:
40¡
:
,
,
,
G
R
A
N
D
side
walk
A
V
E
4.5'
890 Sq feet built in area
3'
i
15' i
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
20' i
GARAGE
2'
8'
BACKYARD
DRNEWAY
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
~I':
. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --~
38'
-
= new 6 feet fence
-::r-
~
~
----
~
c,)
'J
ç
0)
l
~
^>
$?
'ç
£
0
~
l
<+-
-1;;
<:)
')
~
.11
t
~i
<V'
L\-:
To:
From:
Subject:
Location:
Design Review Committee
Ciddy Wordell, City Planner
Application: EXC-2004-12
10030 S. De Anza Boulevard
Date: July 21, 2004
Project Description: Sign exception to allow three wall signs (one wall sign, two on
awnings over entries) and to exceed the allowed height of a wall sign.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of EXC-2004-12, based on the model resolution.
BACKGROUND:
Helios Restaurant at the Cypress Hotel is changing its name to Park Place, and the
applicant proposes to replace all of its existing restaurant signs, Currently there is a
wall sign and a monument sign facing De Anza Boulevard. The proposal is to remove
the wall sign and replace it with two awning signs, The monument sign will be refaced
with the new name and logo. An additional sign is proposed over a door facing Cali
Mill Plaza.
The Sign ordinance permits one wall sign, so an exception is needed to allow three
walls signs. The ordinance allows the wall sign height to be a maximum of 18 inches.
The proposed wall signs on the front awnings are 2' 5" high (height includes the logo)
and the wall sign facing the plaza is 4' 9" high. The length of a wall sign is limited to
70% of the frontage. The restaurant frontage is approximately 100 feet, resulting in an
allowed length of 70 feet. The length of all three wall signs is approximately 17 feet.
DISCUSSION:
Staff recommends approval of the sign exception because of the ability to make the
exception findings,
Findings for Exception
Per Section 17.44.040 of the Municipal Code, the Design Review Committee may grant
an exception based upon the following findings:
A. Literal Enforcement of the Sign Regulations will result in restrictions inconsistent with the
spirit and intent of this title.
The intent of the Sign Ordinance is to "provide architectural and aesthetic harmony of
signs as they relate to building design" and to "provide [sign regulations] that will
allow for good visibility for the public and the needs of the business...." The signs
relate well to the building design; the two awning signs in front are balanced. The sign
over the door is a logical location.
4- J
2
B. ThE granting of thE exception will not result in a condition which is materially detrimental to
the public health, safety, or welfare.
The signs do not create any health or safety problems.
C. Least modification of the prescribed regulations and the minimum variance that will
accomplish the purpose,
Three signs plus a monument sign is a large number of signs for a restaurant.
However, the total proposed wall signage length and area are less than the allowed
signage length and area. With the two front signs being awning signs, it is reasonable
to have a sign on each awning. The sign facing the plaza is reasonable to add since the
plaza is recently open and identification from this direction is needed.
Staff therefore recommends approval of the sign program per the model resolution.
Enclosures:
Model Resolution
Plan Set
Site Plan (includes locations of previously approved signs)
Prepared by: Ciddy Wordell, City Planner
G: p lannmgl D RC / EX C- 2004-12
2
4-,~
EXC-2004-12
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
MODEL RESOLUTION
OF THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
FOR A SIGN EXCEPTION TO ALLOW THREE WALL SIGNS (ONE
WALL SIGN, TWO ON AWNINGS OVER ENTRIES) AND TO EXCEED
THE ALLOWED HEIGHT OF A WALL SIGN LOCATED AT 10030 S. DE
ANZA BOULEVARD (HELlOS RESTAURANT)
SECTION I: PROTECT DESCRIPTION
Application No,:
Applicant:
Location:
EXC-2004-12
Rhonda Marion (Cypress Hotel/Helios Restaurant)
10030 S. De Anza Boulevard
SECTION II: FINDINGS
WHEREAS, the Design R~view Committee of the City of Cupertino received an
application for a Sign Exception, as described in this Resolution; and
WHEREAS, the Design Review Committee finds that the changes are beneficial and
compatible with the surrounding area;
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 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-2004-12, is here by 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
4-3>
EXC-2004-12
July 21, 2004
Resolution No.
Page 2
EXC-2004-12 as set forth in the Minutes of the Design Review Committee Meeting of
July 21, 2004, and are incorporated by reference herein.
SECTION Ill: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
1.
APPROVED EXHIBITS
Approval is based on a plan set entitled: "Presentation for: Park Place, Cypress
Hotel, Drawing number 1096-C-02-LS, last modified 6/25/04" consisting of 2
pages, except as may be amended by conditions in this resolution,
2.
NOTICE OF FEES, DEDlCA TIONS, RESERVATIONS OR OTHER EXACTIONS
The Conditions of Project Approval set forth herein may include certain fees,
dedication requirements, resèrvation 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 90cday period complying with all
of the requirements of Section 66020, you will be legally barred from later
challenging such exactions.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 21st day of July 2004, 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
Gilbert Wong, Chairperson
Design Review Committee
G:\Planning\DRC\res\EXC-2004-12 res.doc
4-1-
t ~, "" 1i!J t.. ~
HH ~,' ~¡;!~ H ~, ;I ~ ,"
'*'~ ;¡ "i~'" -.. 1= !¡¡
!jij I ~n n fõa I ~
rp ~ - 111 'ì
0 Q :¡
U 3~~';-
- c ~r "j u,
. '",'~E,j" "',,¡ ~ ,,~
. " 1'¡ ...- '.
:_-",,"""" """",.I:,!ìl E-,~¡,;iU
- p i îH~i ;: ~ ~~ I.!
- II I! ~ i' ~ ~ ~ j
, 0 .,
¡§
Vi
~
,,2
~'"
U
¡:s1i'
~~~
e:;~
~:<~
;!U
:a~
O~~
§;~
~i'"
~ 9
iÆ: 8
"Ills;
i ~ì'!
to ,"~
" .~
Jj i~
; .
5'
.9-,1: l
F--
., ~
~j
~,
II
Ñ
'"
I ..,
I
I
8
1I~'1¡
!ì'!
I
~
"
I
%
~I
,,6-,'
I
W~
U~
«~
....I~
c..~
I-
~~
~g
~~
,,0-,[ k,()
II
...
..,
5'
,
~ ~
hH
. >. Œ
m~
Jæ Ii
.ìi ~",ð
8;!'fg
S ~~~
j ~h
I~i~i.
Ii !~ :1
- ~ i
~ g
¡;j ~
": 9
OJ ~
¡ s
" "
¡,¡ ~
D.'.. 1
. ~ !
dill
~p
hili
l¡! ti.
t;W
!n
~:I~ ~~ ~
. H!i fii
- ,," Jo,
rT1 ::; ~ ilJj 50!
~;:;5
~
z
~
I
'i!i
e;<
~!>
~~
¡;;
~
!
~
'i!~:
;~ --,
~:>
~8
~:;:
¡;;
~
00
L.i..I
U
<!
~~
a:::
~
I
I
~
¡oj
'"
~
or
~
'it
~
~
'"
z
~
~
~
~
'"
8
~
0
is
1E
"
"""
gg
Sj8
~i5
0%
'" n
h:;;~
~~~~
~~f5g¡
w';!!~~
¡!:<3z~
~U",
~<:;¡'!~
<c:Sã~
6~S~~
:s:süJß~
S~J~~Œ
g~¡¡::=:i~
m<cg¡i"~
~85 ~
"""i'" ~
1
,II
~
UJ
-'
"'"
u
en
~
;;
I
~
!
n
~
¡o .w
~~
Œ~
J
%
;=
~
z
~
~
z
;=
i!ì
0
~
¡oj
i
!Z
~
5
~
~
~~
~~
~~
"'~
~~
~ffi
Ii
~~
~~
~
In
+
APARTMENTS
SEE PLANNING PACKAGE-
BY OTHERS
0
~
SEE.IAHOSCAPE PLM-
.LOliflt~
--------
BUILDING FACE AT
PROPERTYUNE
BUILDING FACE A
PROPERTY UNE
~
u
9
OJ
~
~ Signature
I
"
1L-":"? >--f.U I2..R ~'I--
r-to Nt4I-tL Nì-
I
I ~
~~I íÌ
I 'f
I "
H o,¡-s, L.
2 STORIES
~
~
---------
-- .,,-, _".n
Ute
~
4 STC
l--__--
EXC-2004-12
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
RESOLUTION NO. 164
OF THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
FOR A SIGN EXCEPTION TO ALLOW THREE WALL SIGNS (ONE
WALL SIGN, TWO ON AWNINGS OVER ENTRIES) AND TO EXCEED
THE ALLOWED HEIGHT OF A WALL SIGN LOCATED AT 10030 S. DE
ANZA BOULEVARD (HELlOS RESTAURANT)
SECTION I: PROTECT DESCRIPTION
Application No,:
Applicant:
Location:
EXC-2004-12
Rhonda Marion (Cypress Hotel/Helios Restaurant)
10030 S. De Anza 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 Resolution; and
WHEREAS, the Design Review Committee finds that the changes are beneficial and
compatible with the surrounding area;
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 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-2004-12, is here by 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
Resolution No. 164
Page 2
EXC-2004-12
July 21, 2004
EXC-2004-12 as set forth in the Minutes of the Design Review Committee Meeting of
July 21, 2004, and are incorporated by reference herein.
SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
1.
APPROVED EXHIBITS
Approval is based on a plan set entitled: "Presentation for: Park Place, Cypress
Hotel, Drawing number 1096-C-02-LS, last modified 6/25/04" consisting of 2
pages, except as may be amended by conditions 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 cOl;.stitute 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 2151 day of July 2004, 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: Commissioner Chen and Chairperson Wong
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS: Commissioner Miller
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
Isl CiddyWordell
Ciddy Wordell
City Planner
Isl Gilbert Wong
Gilbert Wong, Chairperson
Design Review Committee
G:\Planning\DRC\res\EXC-2004-12 res.doc
hh Ji w~ð ! ¡w i i..
¡¡oj i ~~~ d.~
~~H 1 ~~â f !!: = ~
~H 0 ~.
~ , ~ j
-'--".\
,
:I
(.v
i
¡
¡
~ !
I: ,
,.
!~
.
~,., .....,.,.. -.----...-.-
!!!
::s
1ií
~ ët
~
..9-,~l
~
II
~
D 3 ~ ~~.
- lfti u"
- 'hI- ~"., ~ .
: - P i .. .tihl H n Iii
- II J f~~H rn ~ ~ ...;1 -!
H !f"f ,....~.1
¡§
'"
~
~~
o='
g:ð
-~"
~~~
ä5~t3
i;'j~"j
~~~
0"'>'
I. ~~~
~n
:5::j;;j
"'~;:
~i::I~
~ffi@
~>'-'
II"~
H
"lib
~ ~::¡
I
10. f~
,jj ~~
;>'
I
W~
" ~ ~ ~
~j~~
~,~~
~g
~~
'¡¡-,l .,-~
"6-,,
s
'8
I
%
'>
I
'"
~I
~
II
~
è'>
".0'
RE""VETHE
--I"
RECOVER AWNING
RE""VET",
$'OE OOMEAWN~G
RE¡:OVERAWNING
'1
~
".6' ------.j
PHOTO INLAY CONCEPT Of AWNING RECOVER WITH GRAPHICS.
SCALE '12"= l'
:::::I'" NEW"""",..".
RECOVER TWO EXISTING AWNING fRAMES AND REMOVE TWO DOME AWNINGS
fABRIC ..
VALANCE
...SUNBRELLA BLACK.
...ADD A NEW fLOPPY VALANCE TO THE TWO AWNINGS.
COLOR: SUNBRELLA BLACK WITH CAMEL BINDING.
lOrE: MAY NEED WEIGHTS SEWN IN BOTTOM Of VALANCE fOR STABILITY.
...ON Of THE fACE Of AWNINGS. WHITE, BROWN; ANOl!ORGUN[)'(tOtOOS:'-<-_.'~-"-,,, ,>
PAINT GRAPHICS...
ßII fJ; 'AS BUilT' AWNING DIMENSIONS, R~ SPACING, FEASABlllTY
OF PAlt-ITlNG lOGO OI'Ul CENTER FRAME RIB.
APPROVAL efC - ~~C)(¥1- /~
~ NurOOer
t: "?¡ a~
/)~
Case Manager
DRC
Signature
.1
(.
~_._..,.:--,~...æ-=~,-' .n..---
0"""",."",,",00'
PO.. - yw
"e'."~"""""""'"
~d.."."'mp'"
",,_öonfoc
p""PlACE
CYPRESSHOIEl
ClJ'ER""',CA
"'- Numbec
1OH-C.o2-LS
""'~"""".....;"':
.".,.
SoJ",..
De.... LS
R""""'.
6fl5~'RE\1SED.SEEG,
6125JIJ4 ADoroCOlDR OPTIDN
~"'.::.'"
-_.
-.....
""""'_.
¡¡;o--
",,-....-'"
",,""""""""""-'"
"-..-.-,
""""..",..~.,-""""
""'~",m""",.
ESSð
SIGN' ,W 0'",,--,-".
c""""""""""""""
ph. 541-485--
"'541-485-5813
,,=~
'- -- ,n"