DRC Packet 08-03-2017CITY OF CUPERTINO
AGENDA
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
5:00 PM
10300 Torre Avenue, City Hall Conference Room C
Thursday, August 3, 2017
ROLL CALL
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Subject: Draft Minutes of June 2, 2016
Recommended Action: approve or modify the Draft Minutes of June 2, 2016
Draft Minutes June 2, 2016
POSTPONEMENTS
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 members from making any decisions with respect to a matter
not listed on the agenda
PUBLIC MEETING
Subject: Fence Exception to allow a six foot wall within the required street side
setback and a wall over three feet in height within the front yard setback of a
single family residence. Application No (s).: EXC-2017-01; Applicant(s): Santha
Chittajallu; Location: 20982 Alves Drive APN# 326-31-004
Recommended Action: Find that the project is exempt from CEQA and deny the
application per the Draft Resolution
Design Review Committee decision final unless appealed
Staff Report
1 - Draft Resolution
2 - Landscape Plan (Sheet L1.0)
3 - Revised Site Plan (Sheet A1)
4 - Grading and Drainage Plan (Sheet C2)
OLD BUSINESS
Page 1 CITY OF CUPERTINO
August 3, 2017Design Review Committee AGENDA
NEW BUSINESS
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.
Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the members after publication of
the agenda will be made available for public inspection. Please contact the City Clerk’s
Office in City Hall located at 10300 Torre Avenue during normal business hours.
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.
Page 2 CITY OF CUPERTINO
Design Review Committee
June 2, 2016
Cupertino, CA 95014
(408) 777-3308
ACTION MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF
THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE HELD ON June 2, 2016
ROLL CALL
Committee Members present: Margie Gong, Chairperson
Geoff Paulsen, Commissioner
Committee Members absent: none
Staff present: Erick Serrano, Associate Planner
Benjamin Fu, Assistant Director of Community Development
Staff absent: none
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
March 17, 2016
Minutes of the March 17, 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-2016-02
Applicant:Mr. & Mrs. Ruiz residence
Location:10240 Stern Ave APN # 375-12-042
Fence Exception to allow a (six) 6 foot fence in the required front setback area
Design Review Committee decision final unless appealed.
Staff Member Serrano explained that the applicant submitted a plan last year to the Planning
Department for a proposed addition. That project required a conformance setback which, per the Fence
Ordinance, required a three foot front yard fence. After construction on the addition was finished, the
applicant felt that the fence did not provide adequate privacy screening. The way the lot is oriented
posed a challenge for installing a six foot fence in that the functional rear yard is by the City’s definition
the front yard. The proposed design meets as much of the Fence Ordinance requirements as possible,
and allows for a six foot fence while preserving as much of the rear yard space as possible. The fence
2 Design Review Committee
June 2, 2016
curves around Arata Way, a five foot setback is proposed to allow for pedestrian travel. Further down
Arata, the fence adjacent to the neighbor will have a twelve foot by ten foot ‘clear’ area so that the
neighbor can back out of the driveway without visual obstruction. The Public Works Department
reviewed the plan and determined that a six foot fence where Arata meets Stern, would not pose a line-
of-site safety issue at that corner. Staff supports the Fence Exception application and requests approval
per the draft resolution.
Commissioner Paulsen suggested that trees be planted along Arata Way to reduce the visual impact of a
six foot fence to pedestrians walking along there.
Chair Gong commented that there is an existing fence there and was confused about the replacement
plan. Staff member Serrano explained that the existing fence in a non-conforming fence. The application
will push the fence back and bring it into compliance. The discussion continued regarding the
orientation of the house on the lot. The home has a Stern Avenue address, but the homeowner enters the
home from Arata Way. Due to this orientation, the front yard will have a six foot fence.
The applicants mentioned that once they move the fence, there will be bushes between the fence and the
sidewalk addressing Commissioner Paulsen concern about plantings to soften the look of the fence.
Chair Gong and Commissioner Paulsen agreed that the application was well thought out and was a
good solution for the challenges of the space.
MOTION: Commissioner Paulsen moved to approve EXC-2016-02 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 Assistant
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE STAFF REPORT
Meeting: August 3, 2017
Subject
Fence Exception to consider allowing a six-foot tall wall within the required street side
setback and columns in a front yard fence to exceed the maximum permitted height (by
up to six inches) within the required front yard setback. (Application No.(s): EXC-2017-
01; Applicant(s): Santha Chittajallu; Location: 20984 Alves Drive; APN(s): 326-31-023)
Recommended Action
That the Design Review Committee deny the Fence Exception (EXC-2017-01) in
accordance with the draft resolution (Attachment 1).
Discussion
Application Summary:
Fence Exception to allow a newly-constructed six-foot tall wall to encroach into the
required street side setback, and a newly-constructed wall with columns exceeding the
maximum permitted height within the required front yard setback.
Project Data:
General Plan Designation:Residential Low Density (1-5 DU/ac)
Special Area/Neighborhood:Garden Gate
Zoning Designation:R1-10 Single Family Residential
Lot Size: 11,046 sq. ft.
Floor Area Ratio:4,970.2 sq. ft. (44.9%)
Front Street Side Interior Side Rear
Required fence setbacks for
6 foot tall fence
20 feet 5 feet None None
Project Consistency with
General Plan:Yes
Zoning:No, fence exception requested as described below
Environmental Assessment:Categorically Exempt
OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
CITY HALL
10300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255
(408) 777-3308 • FAX (408) 777-3333
EXC-2017-01 20984 Alves Drive August 3, 2017
Background:
A Two-Story Permit (R-2014-14) and associated Minor Residential Permit (RM-2014-19)
was approved in August 2014 to allow a new two-story single-family home at 20984
Alves Avenue. In addition, a Director’s Minor Modification (DIR-2015-01)was approved
to allow design modifications to the second story massing and window placement.
Subsequently, a building permit for this work was issued in March 2015. The approved
building permit plan set indicates,on a red-lined landscape plan,that the applicant
intended to construct a six-foot tall masonry wall,that complied with the City’s Fence
Ordinance -five feet from the street side property line (along North Stelling Avenue),
avoiding the corner triangle and that lowered to three feet in height when located within
the 20 foot front setback area (Attachment 2). However, during an onsite inspection, it
was discovered that the six-foot wall along North Stelling Avenue is located within the
required five-foot street side setback. It was also discovered that a section of the wall
within the required front yard setback has approximately six columns that exceed the
allowed height limit.
While the City does not require that fences be constructed between properties or between
the right-of-way and a property, the City regulates the location and height of fences, if
one is constructed. Chapter 19.12, Administration, of the Cupertino Municipal Code
requires that the Design Review Committee review and approve requests for exceptions
to the development standards adopted in Chapter 19.48, Fences.
Applicant Request:
The applicant, Santha Chittajallu, is requesting a Fence Exception to allow the newly
constructed six-foot tall wall to encroach into the required street side setback and the
three-foot tall wall with columns exceeding the maximum permitted height within the
required front yard setback.
Analysis:
Project Location and Surrounding Uses
The project is located on the corner
along North Stelling Road. Single-
family residential homes are located
to the north and east of the property,
and the Abundant Life Church is
located behind the property to the
south. The Commons Townhomes is
located west of the property across
North Stelling Road.
ALVES DR.N. STELLING COMMONS
TOWNHOME ABUNDANT
LIFE CHURCH
QUINLAN
COMMUNITY
CENTER
EXC-2017-01 20984 Alves Drive August 3, 2017
The setback requirements for the fence was illustrated in the redlined landscape plan
from the applicant’s building permit set prior to construction. The setback from the street
side property line for the as-built wall along North Stelling Road varies from 41 inches (3
feet 5 inches) close to Alves Drive, to 50 inches (4 feet 2 inches) close to the Abundant Life
Church. The minimum setback requirement is 60 inches (5 feet). The wall within the front
yard setback is located along the front property line. The columns of the three-foot tall
wall within the front setback measure up to 42 inches in height.
The applicant has offered the following as rationale for retaining the wall in its
constructed location in the application for a fence exception:
1. The fence/wall was installed incorrectly due to a contractor error;
Staff Comments:The applicant had indicated that the wall was built in the wrong
location even though the correct setbacks were measured and the wall placement was
identified prior to construction. This rationale does not support the findings that need
to be made to support a Fence Exception as it would establish precedence, if
approved. An error made by the applicant’s representative does not negate the
setback requirement.
2. Conflicts with a Cupertino Sanitary cleanout cover located about five feet from the
street side property line;
Staff Comments:While the updated site plan (Attachment 3) submitted with the Fence
Exception application reflects the location of the cleanout and the as-built wall, it
differs from the original grading and drainage plan (Attachment 4) approved with the
building permit plans in March 2015.Originally, the cleanout was shown to belocated
approximately two feet from the street side property line. Therefore, the City did not
provide comments on the wall placement in relation to the cleanout at the time of
initial building permit approval. The location of cleanout cover does not affect the
placement of the wall. The side property line wall can be constructed to accommodate
the location of the cleanout cover without encroaching into the public right-of-way.
3. Conflicts with three existing trees, approximately ten feet in height and varying
between four to eight inches in diameter breast height (DBH), located approximately
five feet from the street side property line;
Staff Comments:It appears that the location of these trees were incorrectly shown on
the original landscape plan (see Attachment 2). The plan indicated that the wall would
be constructed to the east of the trees. However, the wall was constructed to the west
of the trees. In addition, these trees, which include two fruit trees and one flowering
tree, are not protected trees under Chapter 14.18, Protected Trees, of the Cupertino
Municipal Code and could possibly be removed or relocated.
EXC-2017-01 20984 Alves Drive August 3, 2017
These conflicts would have been apparent when the setbacks were first measured out by
the applicant for the contractor to construct the walland should have been communicated
to the City to determine alternatives and do not adequately justify approving a fence
exception. The applicant has also indicated an unwillingness to break up the wall plane
in order to avoid these conflicts or build the wall setback farther from within the property
line. However, alternate options that would warrant lesser modifications or
intensification from the regulations in the Fence Ordinance could have been pursued
including:
1. Encroaching into the setback only for the areas affected by the location of the sanitary
cleanout cover and existing trees or
2. Relocating the wall to a location that avoided these conflicts.
Other Department/Agency Review:
The City’s Building Division, the Santa Clara County Fire Department, and the County’s
Sheriff’s Office reviewed the project and indicate that the fence complies with relevant
and applicable codes.
Environmental Assessment:
The use permit is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) per section 15303 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) of the
CEQA Guidelines.
Public Noticing and Outreach
The following table is a brief summary of the noticing done for this project:
Notice of Public Hearing and Intent,Site
Notice & Legal Ad
Agenda
Site Signage (14 days prior to the hearing)
Legal ad placed in newspaper (at least 10 days
prior to the hearing)
Eight public hearing notices mailed to
adjacent property owners (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
website (one week prior to the hearing)
No public comments have been received as of the date of production of this staff report.
Permit Streamling 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.
EXC-2017-01 20984 Alves Drive August 3, 2017
Project Received:March 29, 2017; Deemed Incomplete:April 6, 2017
Project Received:April 27, 2017; Deemed Incomplete: May 3, 2017
Project Received:May 9, 2017; Deemed Complete:May 25, 2017
Since this project is Categorically Exempt, the City has up to 60 days from the date of
deeming the project complete (until July 25, 2017) to make a decision on the project.
However, the applicant had made a request per an email dated July 11, 2017 to reschedule
for a hearing date after July 20, 2017.
Conclusion
Staff recommends denial of the project and that the wall be brought into compliance as
the necessary findings to grant approval of the exception consistent with Chapter 19.48
Fences of the Cupertino Municipal Code cannot be made. Granting approval would set a
precedent for future constructions and create unequal treatment of other properties in the
City that had experienced similar situations but complied with rules and regulations.
Next Steps
The Design Review Committee’s decision on this project is final unless an appeal is filed
within 14 calendar days of the decision, on August 18, 2017. If appealed, the City Council
will be the approval authority on the appeal.
If approved, the approval will expire on August 3, 2018, at which time the applicant may
apply for a one-year extension. However, since the wall is already constructed, the
decision to approve will simply affirm the location of the existing fence.
Prepared by: Jeffrey Tsumura, Assistant Planner
Reviewed by: Piu Ghosh, Principal Planner
Approved by: Benjamin Fu, Assistant Director of Community Development
ATTACHMENTS:
1 – Draft Resolution for EXC-2017-01
2 – Landscape Plan (Sheet L1.0), approved March 24, 2015
3 – Revised Site Plan (Sheet A1), submitted June 20, 2017
4 – Grading and Drainage Plan (Sheet C2), approved March 24, 2015
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
RESOLUTION NO. XX
OF THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
DENYING A FENCE EXCEPTION TO ALLOW A SIX-FOOT TALL WALL
WITHIN THE REQUIRED STREET SIDE SETBACK AND A WALL WITH
COLUMNS EXCEEDING THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED HEIGHT WITHIN
THE REQUIRED FRONT YARD SETBACK AT A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE
LOCATED AT 20984 ALVES DRIVE (APN 326-31-023)
SECTION I: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Application No.: EXC-2017-01
Applicant: Santha Chittajallu
Location: 20984 Alves Drive (APN 326-31-023)
SECTION II: FINDINGS:
WHEREAS, the Design Review Committee of the City of Cupertino received an
application for a Fence Exception from the Residential Single Family Zoning regulations
as described in Section I of this Resolution; and
WHEREAS, the necessary public notices have been given as required by the Procedural
Ordinance of the City of Cupertino, and the Design Review Committee has held at least
one Public Meeting in regards to the application; and
WHEREAS, the project is determined to be exempt from the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA); and
WHEREAS, the applicant has not met the burden of proof required to support said
application; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds as follows with regard to this application:
Resolution No. XX EXC-2017-01 August 3, 2017
1. The literal enforcement of the provisions of this chapter will result in restrictions
inconsistent with the spirit and intent of this chapter.
The strict compliance of the setback and height regulations in the Fence Ordinance
would not have caused unnecessary hardship or deprived the residents of the safety,
privacy, and property protection rights intended in the chapter. There are no special
circumstances applicable to the subject property (e.g. location, irregular shape,
topography) that would have prevented the street side wall from being located behind
the five-foot setback. Additionally, the column heights on the front yard wall provide
aesthetics but do not not serve a functional purpose for security or privacy.
2. The granting of the exception will not result in a condition which is materially
detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare.
The wall is not detrimental to the health, safety or welfare bevause the fence is
otherwise consistent in design and material with the City’s Fence Ordinance and
provides safety and privacy for the property owners.
3. The exception to be granted is one that will require the least modification of the
prescribed regulation and the maximum variance that will accomplish the purpose.
The six-foot tall wall was built within the required street side setback due to
installation error and does not result in the least modification of the prescribed
regulation. The applicant could have considered alternate layouts resulting in less
setback encroachment to resolve intereference with the Cupertino Sanitary cleanout
cover and the existing trees which include encroaching only for the portions of the
wall where conflicts exist or relocating the wall to an area where no conflicts would
exist. The as-built column heights on the front wall are not a necessity as they do not
serve a functional purpose for safety and privacy.
4. The proposed exception will not result in a hazardous condition for pedestrian and
vehicular traffic.
Public Works has reviewed the project and has determined that the existing wall
location and height will not be detrimental to pedestrian or 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 existing structures on the property, other than the portions of the fence/wall that
are the subject of this Fence Exception, are otherwise consistent with the City’s
General Plan.
Resolution No. XX EXC-2017-01 August 3, 2017
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.
The Santa Clara Fire Department and the Sheriff’s Department have reviewed the
plans and have no issues with the walls. These Departments are normally concerned
when security gates are proposed.
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 2 thereof,:
The application for a Fence Exception to the Residential Single Family zoning regulations,
Application no. EXC-2017-01 is hereby DENIED and that the wall be brought into
compliance, 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-2017-01 as set forth in the Minutes of Design Review Committee Meeting of
August 3, 2017 and are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 3rd day of August, 2017, at the Regular Meeting of the
Design Review Committee of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following
roll call vote:
AYES:MEMBERS:
NOES:MEMBERS:
ABSTAIN:MEMBERS:
ABSENT:MEMBERS:
ATTEST:APPROVED:
/s/Jeffrey Tsumura /s/Geoffrey Paulsen
Jeffrey Tsumura Geoffrey Paulsen, Chair
Assistant Planner Design Review Committee
8
4
.
0
'N. STELLING RD. (WIDTH VARIES)ALVES DR. (60' WIDE)1100.00SET X LIP AT JOB SITE6.27'6.74'S0°00'00"E 112.50'N90°00'00"W 99.16'N0°00'00"E 92.50'L=31.42'R=20.00'Δ=90°00'00"N90°00'00"E 79.16'(N) GASMETER(N) 400AMP.ELECT.METERx x x x x x x x x x
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx x xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxAC DRIVEWAY(E) SHEDREMOVED(E) SHEDREMOVED7"ØDRIP 26'REMOVED#67"ØDRIP 26'# 512"ØDRIP 30'REMOVED # 412"ØDRIP 30'REMOVED # 217"ØDRIP 42'REMOVED # 1x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx(E) BLDG.SETBACKPRIVACY PROTECTION TREESPROPERTY OWNER SHALL RECORD A COVENANT ONTHE PROPERTY FOR NEW TREESSHRUBS PLANTED FOR THE NEW TREES SHRUBSPLANTED FOR THE PURPOSE OFREPLACEMENT TREES, PRIVACY PROTECTION AND REQUIRED FRONT YARD TREE.FOLLOWING COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION, AN AFFIDAVIT FROM AN ISA CERTIFIEDARBORIST SHALL BE PROVIDED CONFIRMING THAT THE NEW TREES HAVE BEENPLANTED PROPERLY AND ACCORDING TO THE PLAN.A PLANNING DIVISION INSPECTION IS REQUIRED TO VERIFY EXTERIOR MATERIAL/FINISHES, TREES, LANDSCAPING AND SITE WORK.WW444666 6 444666 6xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
SITE PLAN
AREA SUMMARY
VICINITY MAP
APPLICABLE CODES revisionsbydrawncheckeddatescalejob no.sheetof sheets1/8" = 1'-0"A1SITE PLANAMSTATEOFCALIFORN
IA
L I C
E
NSEDARCHITECTNOTE:ALL WORK ON THIS PROJECT IS TO SUPERVISED BY ALICENCED GENERAL CONTRACTOR. THE GENERALCONTRACTOR AND HIS SUBCONTRACTORS ARE TO BELICENSED BY THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. ALL CONTRACTORSARE REQUIRED TO HAVE WORKMAN'S COMPENSATION ANDGENERAL LIABILITY INSURANCE COMMENSURATE WITH THESCOPE OF THE PROJECT.PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR ANDOWNER SHALL MEET WITH THE ARCHITECT TO REVIEW ANYQUESTIONS OR CLARIFICATIONS OF THE WORK DESCRIBED INTHESE DOCUMENTS. THE CONTRACTOR'S COMMENCEMENTOF WORK CONSTITUTES ACCEPTANCE THAT THE PROJECT, ASDRAWN, IS BUILDABLE. SEE A1.1 FOR ADDITIONAL GENERALCOMMENTS.WATERPROOFING NOTE:WATERPROOFING MEASURES DELINEATED IN THE PLAN SETARE SUGGESTIONS ONLY. OWNER AND CONTRACTOR SHALLCONSULT WITH A WATERPROOFING EXPERT FOR PROPERINSTALLATION METHODS FOR ALL AREAS REQUIRINGWATERPROOFING NOTES:1. HOUSE SHALL MEET ASHRAE 62.2 STD FOR CONTINUOUSSUPPLY, EXHAUST & BALANCED VENTILATION, WITH ORWITHOUT HEAT RECOVERY.2. REDUCE FORMALDEHYDE IN INTERIOR FINISH TO MEETCURRENT CARB AIRBORNE TOXIC CONTROL MEASURE (ATCM) FORCOMPOSITE WOOD.3. HERS INSPECTION REQUIRED.4. SEE GREEN POINT CHECK LIST ON SHEET GB1. ALL MANDATORY CALGREEN CODES APPLYAUTOMATIC FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEMTO BE UNDER SEPARATE PERMIT ARCHITECT LIC. C 31611
1448 S. STELLING ROAD
CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA
ARCHITECTADITIM@GMAIL.COM
408 455 3793 NORTH NEW RESIDENCE FOR
RAVI GAMPALA & SANTHA S CHITTAJALLU
20984 ALVES DRIVE
CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA
ADITI MUKHERJEEVICINITY MAP ALVES1. 6 .151/8" = 1'-0"2. 9 .1513.6.15111111114.6.174.13.17