DRC 02-06-02Cupertino, CA 95014
(408) 777-3308
Design Review Committee
February 6, 2002
APPROVED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE DESIGN
REVIEW COMMITTEE HELD ON FEBRUARY 6, 2002
ROLL CALL
Committee Members present:
Committee Members absent:
Staff present:
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Marc Auerbach, Chairperson
Taghi Saadati, Commissioner
None
Peter Gilli, Associate Planner
1. January 16, 2002
Commissioner Chen noted that on page 3, paragraph 4, line 8 should readfloor
area ratio exceeding 35%.
Minutes of the January 16, 2002 Design Review Committee meeting approved as
amended.
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS:
POSTPONEMENTS/REMOVAL FROM CALENDAR:
ORAL COMMUNICATION: None
CONSENT CALENDAR: None
OLD BUSINESS: None
NEW BUSINESS: None
PUBLIC HEARING:
2. Application:
Applicant:
Location:
R-2002-01
Robert L. Harrison
10536 Davison Avenue
Design Review Committee
February 6, 2002
Residential design review of an 835 square foot second-story addition to
an existing single-story residence resulting in a floor area ratio of 44%.
Design Review Committee decision final unless appealed
Staff Presentation: Peter Gilli, Associate Planner, briefly explained that all of the
ordinance requirements are met. The only item in question is that it is not certain
if 50% of the perimeters of the second story walls are less than 6 feet. Staff will
add a condition stating that the plans will be reviewed at the building permit
stage to re-ensure that it does conform to the ordinance. If it is over 50%, the
applicant may have to make a minor adjustment in order to bring it into
conformance, but it would not affect the overall design of the house. Mr. Gilli
explained that most of the homes along this street in this neighborhood are
single-story. The few two-story homes were built prior to the new second story
ordinance. The two projecting elements on the second story do have a good
relationship with the projecting elements on the single-story. The only concern
that staff has with the design is the bay window on the master bedroom. Staff
prefers that it either be centered on the master bedroom, aligning it with ground
floor elements or be removed. Larry Cannon, Architectural Consultant, has
reviewed the plans and the applicant has addressed those concerns. Staff would
like the Committee to consider the applicant and the application regarding the
bay window.
Mr. Gilli also stated that the second story deck in the front usually requires a
deck exception. But in this case, the deck has no views into neighboring yards so
no exception is needed. Regarding privacy protection, only one bedroom
window requires screening on the rear of the property. The applicant is
proposing trees along the rear property line that conform to the ordinance.
Commissioner Taghi Saadati asked Mr. Gilli about the deck exception
exemption. He also inquired about Mr. Cannon's comments about the rooflines.
Mr. Gilli explained that Mr. Cannon's recommendation was to simplify the roof
form and the applicant had already addressed that concern by changing the hip
roof to a gable on the rear. Mr. Saadati also inquired about the use of frosted
glass for privacy protection. Mr. Gilli stated that a window would be exempt
from privacy protection if the window were obscured and un-openable.
Robert L. Harrison, applicant, stated that he would really like to have the second
story deck and is working with staff with the second story ordinance. The bay
window offset works better with the current floor plan. He feels that the
addition will enhance the neighborhood. Marc Auerbach, Chairman, noted for
the record that Mr. Harrison had received a letter from Cathy Lynam-Rohrs,
10520 Davison Avenue and realtor, generally supporting the addition. Mr.
3 Design Review Committee
February 6, 2{)02
Auerbach asked if the window were centered on the roofline, how would that
change the roof pitch. It was determined that it would change the design of the
bedroom and it wouldn't leave room for sitting in that area.
Victor Montes, 10590 Glenview Avenue, lives behind the applicant and is
concerned about the bay window dimension. Mr. Harrison stated that is a 4 x 4
in the front and 2 x 4 in the rear of the property. Mr. Montes's second concern is
the second story privacy.
Yudong Sun, 10580 Glenview Avenue, also lives behind the applicant. He feels
that the location of Mr. Harrison's property is in a very special location. The
backyard is in a very crowded area because there are two properties that back up
to the rear of the property and second story is not a good idea. He believes that
Mr. Harrison is breaking the restrictions of the neighborhood because he is
conduction business out of his home. Mr. Sun feels that the second story deck in
the front yard is unattractive. He also feels that there is a privacy concern with
the window on the side of the addition facing his home.
Mr. Auerbach feels that second story is in conformance with the ordinance and
that conducting business out of a home is legal. He stated that in the future, a
neighbor can contact the Code Enforcement Department to discuss possible
violations including noise levels. Regarding privacy, the second story window is
five feet above the floor level and is typically more difficult to look out of. Mr.
Gilli explained that the ordinance states that if the window has a sill height of
over five feet from floor level, privacy protection is not required.
Mr. Saadati feels that the bay window adds character to the design of the house.
He feels that even if the window were centered, it still wouldn't line up. Mr.
Auerbach presented some pictures that showed good and bad examples of
second stories. He had some concerns regarding the exterior appearance of the
bay window. He feels the applicant has worked well with the constraints of the
code.
Commissioner Saadati moved to approve R-2002-01 with condition 2 removed
and a new condition regarding second story visible wall heights stating that staff
will review the project for conformance when construction drawings are
submitted.
MOTION:
SECOND:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
VOTE:
Commissioner Saadati moved to approve R-2002-01
Chairperson Auerbach
None
None
Approved 2-0
4
Design Review Committee
February 6, 2002
Respectfully submitted:
Kiersa Witt
Administrative Clerk
g:planning/DRC Committee/Minutes020602