Loading...
DRC 10-16-02Cupertino, CA 95014 (408) 777-3308 Design Review Committee October 16, 2002 AMENDED AND APPROVED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE HELD ON OCTOBER 16, 2002 ROLL CALL Committee Members present: Marc Auerbach, Chairperson Taghi Saadati, Commissioner Committee Members absent: None Staff present: APPROVAL OF MINUTES: October 2, 2002 Minutes of the October 2, 2002 Design Review Committee approved. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: POSTPONEMENTS/REMOVAL FROM CALENDAR: 1. ASA-2002-05, V-2002~02; Arkady Faktorovich, 10130 Craft Drive Request removal from calendar ORAL COMMUNICATION: None CONSENT CALENDAR: None OLD BUSINESS: None NEW BUSINESS: None PUBLIC HEARING: Gary Chao, Assistant Planner ASA-2002-05, V-2002-02 Arkady Faktorovich 10130 Craft Drive 1. Application: Applicant: Location: Design Review Committee October 16, 2002 Architectural and Site approval for a new garage for an existing three-unit apartment building. Variance to allow a three foot separation between buildings instead of five feet in accordance with Chapter 19.80 of the Cupertino Municipal Code. Design Review Committee decision final unless appealed Request removal from calendar MOTION: SECOND: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: VOTE: Commissioner Saadati moved to remove ASA-2002-05, V-2002~02 from the calendar. Chairperson Auerbach None None Removed 2 - 0 Application: Applicant: Location: R-2002-13 Dick Fang 10583 Felton Avenue Residential Design Review of a new 3,579 square foot single-family residence. Design Review Committee decision final unless appealed Staff Presentation: Gary Chao, Assistant Planner, briefly described the project to the Committee. This project complies with the R1 Ordinance. It also generally complies with the single-family design guidelines with the exception of the exterior wall height and the placement of the second story. The applicant is proposing an eave height of 12 feet from the natural grade, which is taller than the eave heights of the houses to the left and the right of the property. Staff recommends that the exterior wall height be reduced to 10 feet or to a height comparable to the eave heights of the immediate adjacent homes. This has been made a condition of approval. In addition, the proposed second story mass is oriented next to an existing single story residence to the south. Staff recommends that the floor plan of the proposed residence be "flipped" to place the second story closer to the existing second story residence to the north. Since the Design Review Committee packet went out, Staff received a letter from the neighbor to the north of the applicant in opposition of the second floor closer to their home for privacy intrusion concerns and also causing the sunlight to be blocked. In response to the letter, the privacy intrusion is more of a concern on the single story home side to the south and there is no provision in the code to protect sunlight exposure. The proposed project meets the minimum daylight plane requirements. 3 Design Review Committee October 16, 2002 Privacy protection trees are proposed to be planted to screen all new second story windows. Staff recommends approval with the suggested changes to the house as conditioned. Commissioner Saadati asked if the privacy protection trees would still be planted to screen the second story windows if the house was flipped. Mr. Chao answered yes and stated that the applicant would have to modify the landscape plan to accommodate Staff's recommendations. Mr. Chao went on to explain that if the house were to be flipped, the second story windows would not be visible to the south neighbor, the second story house. This was illustrated in some diagrams shown to the Commission. The bay window on the north elevation in the second bedroom on the second floor would require privacy screening. If this were not a bay window, it would not require privacy screening. Chairperson Auerbach was concerned about the complexity and number of the roof angles and lines. Mr. Chao explained some ways to simplify the roof. For example the bay window could be straightened. Mr. Auerbach stated that the rooflines should be simplified to match the neighborhood. Mr. Saadati agrees that there are a lot of rooflines. Dick Fang, Architect, stated that the living room is 11 feet. Mr. Saadati asked if the room could be lowered to 10 feet, also reducing the exterior front elevation from 12 feet to 10 feet. Dick Fang explained that he and his applicants had worked closely with Staff. Mr. Saadati asked if there was going to be enough privacy protection along the side. Mr. Fang believes that there is a 7-1/2 foot setback on the applicant side and an 8-1/2 setback on neighbor's side for a total of 16 feet. He believes that the eaves match the neighbor's eaves. Mr. Fang went on to discuss the roof stating that if he tried to simplify the roof, the home would be too tall. Mr. Auerbach asked Mr. Fang how he felt about not changing the second floor roofline and simplifying only the first floor roofline. Mr. Fang thinks that if he were to do that, the proportion will change, causing the garage to be too tall. Cary Chien, applicant, agrees with Mr. Fang's comments. Mr. Chien also stated that he and his family have reviewed all of Mr. Chao's comments and found them very reasonable and sensitive to the neighbors. He feels that they have tried hard to make the project work. Mr. Chien showed the Commission some pictures of homes in their neighborhood showing examples of what they were trying to avoid with flipping the house. He believes that the proposed house fits well with the existing neighborhood. Mr. Chao stated one of the main focuses on the Design Guidelines is transition, streetscape and elevation. He feels that there are many ways to make these 4 Design Review Committee October 16, 2002 modifications without moving the garage and just shifting the second floor a little to the right. In terms of the streetscape, privacy intrusion is a main concern. By shifting the second floor to the right, there will be a smoother transition from the existing second floor to the existing single story to the left. He believes the main concern is the streetscape and neighborhood transition from single story to two stories. Mr. Chao went on to say that in simplifying the single story portion of the roof, a lot of the breakage of roof pitch is from the short roof above the bay windows. The bay windows could be straightened out and that would help with the awkward angles. As far as setbacks are concerned, if the applicant were to flip the house, that wouldn't mean that they couldn't have a different setback on the right side of the house. The applicant could have a 10-foot right side setback on the two-story side and then the 5-foot setback on the left single story side. Mr. Fang explained that if the second floor were shifted, it could impact the first floor plan. Mr. Chao stated that could be avoided by flipping the house. Mr. Saadati agreed and suggested that if the house were flipped with a 12-foot setback it could allow room for a camper. The Committee closed Public Hearing and discussed whether to approve the house as proposed or to flip the house. Both Commissioners agree that flipping the second story would result in a redesign in many ways. They also agree to leave the house the way it is proposed but put the maximum amount of side yard setbacks to the south, the single- story home. Currently the proposed north setback is set at 7.5-feet including the chinmey. They suggested moving the building to the north as close as code will allow, which would be a 3-foot setback at the narrowest point (architectural features). Which would give the south neighbor greater setbacks. As far as lowering the plate height, the Commission would like to see them match the neighbors. To simplify the rooflines, add that as a condition of approval to state that the roofline shall be simplified to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development. Commissioner Saadati moved to approve R-2002-13 with the following amendments: 1. That the house shall be placed as far north on the property as possible. 2. That the wording in condition #2 should read "measured from the natural grade to the plate height or to a height that is visually comparable to the immediate houses in order to be more consistent with the eave heights of the immediate adjacent homes" and the satisfaction of this shall be as determined by the Director of Community Development. 3. That item 3, second story placement condition should be removed and replaced with "Single-story rooflines shall be simplified to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director". MOTION: SECOND: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: VOTE: Design Review Committee October 16, 2002 Comrnissioner Saadati moved to approve R-2002-13 as amended. Chairperson Auerbach None None Approved 2-0 o Application: Applicant: Location: DIR-2002-33 Yezala Abayneh 19725 Parkview Court Director's Minor Modification to a use permit (15-U-96) with referral to the Design Review Committee for a single-story, 280 square foot addition to an existing residence. Design Review Committee decision final unless appealed Staff Presentation: Gary Chao, Assistant Planner, gave a brief description of the project and explained that this project was brought before the Design Review Committee due to neighbor concern. Staff has received complaints from the adjacent neighbor, Mr. Bob Johnson, 836 Shetland Place in Sunnyvale, about the lack of landscape screening between the two properties. Since this is a single-story addition proposal, there are no requirements for landscaping in the ordinance. Staff has recommended that additional landscaping be planted and with that Staff recommends approval. Yezala Abayneh, applicant, stated that he has complied with staff's recommendations. MOTION: SECOND: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: VOTE: Commissioner Saadati moved to approve DIR-2002-33 Chairperson Auerbach None None Approved 2 - 0 Respectfully submitted: Kiersa Witt Administrative Clerk g:planning/DR C Committee~Minutes101602