PC PacketCITY OF CUPERTINO
AGENDA
Tuesday, February 9, 2016
10350 Torre Avenue, Council Chamber
PLANNING COMMISSION
6:45 PM
SALUTE TO THE FLAG
ROLL CALL
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1.Subject: Draft Minutes of December 8, 2015
Recommended Action: approve or modify the Draft Minutes of December 8, 2015
Draft Minutes of December 8, 2015
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
POSTPONEMENTS/REMOVAL FROM CALENDAR
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the Commission
on any matter not on the agenda. Speakers are limited to three (3) minutes. In most
cases, State law will prohibit the Commission from making any decisions with respect to
a matter not on the agenda.
CONSENT CALENDAR
PUBLIC HEARING
2.Subject: Use Permit for a separate bar at a proposed restaurant located in the
Ninteen800 (formerly Rosebowl) Mixed Use Development. (Application No .(s):
U-2015-10; Applicant: Alex Miramar (Doppio Zero Pizzeria); Location: 10088 N.
Wolfe Road, #120; APN: 316-20-108)
Recommended Action: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve
the Use Permit (U-2015-10) to allow the operation of the separate bar in accordance
with the draft resolution
Page 1 CITY OF CUPERTINO
February 9, 2016Planning Commission AGENDA
Staff Report
1 - Draft Resolution
2 - Plan Set
3 - Business Description
3.Consider an appeal of Two-Story Permit (R-2015-38) to allow the construction of
a new 2,775 square foot single-family residence. (Application No. R-2015-38;
Applicant: Mike Chen (Patel Residence); Appellant: Biren Shah; Location: 18780
Tilson Avenue; APN: 375-17-036)
Recommended Action: Deny the appeal and uphold the Community Development
Director’s decision to approve the project per the draft resolution
Staff Report
1 - Draft Resolution
2 - Plan Set
3 - Two-Story Permit Action Letter
4 - Appellant's Letter
5 - Comment Letter
OLD BUSINESS
NEW BUSINESS
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Environmental Review Committee
Housing Commission
Mayor’s Monthly Meeting with Commissioners
Economic Development Committee Meeting
REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
4.Subject: Director's Report
Recommended Action: accept report
Director's Report
ADJOURNMENT
Page 2 CITY OF CUPERTINO
February 9, 2016Planning Commission AGENDA
If you challenge the action of the Planning Commission in court, you may be limited to
raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in
this agenda, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Cupertino at, or prior
to, the public hearing. In the event an action taken by the planning Commission is
deemed objectionable, the matter may be officially appealed to the City Council in
writing within fourteen (14) days of the date of the Commission’s decision. Said appeal
is filed with the City Clerk (Ordinance 632).
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), anyone who is planning
to attend the next Planning Commission 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, Planning Commission 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 Planning Commission after
publication of the packet will be made available for public inspection in the Community
Development Department located at City Hall, 10300 Torre Avenue, during normal
business hours and in Planning packet archives linked from the agenda/minutes page
on the Cupertino web site.
Members of the public are entitled to address the Planning Commission 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 Planning Commission on any issue
that is on this agenda, please complete a speaker request card located in front of the
Commission, and deliver it to the City Staff prior to discussion of the item. When you
are called, proceed to the podium and the Chair will recognize you. If you wish to
address the Planning Commission on any other item not on the agenda, you may do so
by during the public comment portion of the meeting following the same procedure
described above. Please limit your comments to three (3) minutes or less. Please note
that Planning Commission policy is to allow an applicant and groups to speak for 10
minutes and individuals to speak for 3 minutes.
For questions on any items in the agenda, or for documents related to any of the items
on the agenda, contact the Planning Department at (408) 777 3308 or
planning@cupertino.org.
Page 3 CITY OF CUPERTINO
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
CITY OF CUPERTINO
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
DRAFT MINUTES
6:45 P.M. DECEMBER 8, 2015
TUESDAY
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
The regular Planning Commission meeting of December 8, 2015, was called to order at 6:45 p.m. in the
Cupertino Council Chambers, 10350 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, CA. byChairperson Winnie Lee.
SALUTE TO THE FLAG
.
ROLL CALL
Commissioners Present: Chairperson:Winnie Lee
Vice Chairperson:Alan Takahashi
Commissioner:Don Sun
Commissioner: Geoff Paulsen
Commissioner: Margaret Gong
Staff Present: Principal Planner: Piu Ghosh
Associate Planner: Kaitie Meador
Associate Planner: Tiffany Brown
Consulting Attorney: Valerie Armento
1.APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Minutes of the November 24, 2015 Planning Commission meeting:
Motion:Motion by Com. Gong, second by Vice Chair Takahashi, and unanimously
carried 4-0-1(Com. Sun abstain), to approve the minutesof the
November 24, 2015 Planning Commission meeting as presented.
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: None
POSTPONEMENTS/REMOVAL FROM CALENDAR: None
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None
CONSENT CALENDAR: None
PUBLIC HEARING:
2.U-2015-08, ASA-2015-25, Use Permit for a separate full service bar and late hours of
19379 Stevens Creek Blvd. operation, and Architectural and Site Approval to allow
(Alexander’sSteakhouse)enhancements to the exterior patio dining area for the
Cupertino Planning Commission December 8, 20152
Owner: Main Street restaurant.
Cupertino Aggregator LLC
Tiffany Brown, Associate Planner, presented the staff report:
Reviewed the application for a Use Permit for a separate full servicebar and hours of operations at a
restaurant located within the Main Street Cupertino development, and Architecturaland Site
Approval to allow enhancements to the exterior patio dining area for therestaurant, as outlined in the
staff report.
She reviewed the project site and surroundings,operationaldetails, architectural and site approval,
parking, proximity to residential use and security. The City’s Public Works Department, Building
Division, Santa Clara County Fire Department, Cupertino Sanitary District, and Cal Water have
reviewed the project and have no objections. The Use Permit is categorically exempt from CEQA
guidelines because the proposed use occurs within the city limits and is surrounded by existing urban
uses. Staffrecommends approval of the project since the project and conditions of approval address
all concerns related to the proposed development and all of the findings for approval of the proposed
project, consistent with Chapter 19.168 of the Cupertino Municipal Code, may be made.
Staff answered questions about the application.
Marc Diamalanta, Applicant:
Presented a visual presentation of a walkthroughof the restaurantincluding the dining area, bar area,
patio area, special amenities. He also discussed the addition of the patisserie.
Com. Paulsen:
Congratulated Mr. Diamalanta on his career with Alexander’s and said he felt it would be a wonderful
place for people to gather.
Chair Lee opened the public hearing.
Jennifer Griffin, Rancho Rinconada resident:
Said Alexander’s move from Vallco was Vallco’s loss and Main Street’s gain. She was pleased that
Alexander’s was moving to Main Street and said she considered it equivalent to a four star restaurant.
She asked for comment on where the Target store was going to be located; and that consideration be
given to serving lunch on Monday and Sunday since it was a prime retail area. She asked how parking
and entrance and exits were being handled. She reiterated that she was happy Alexander’s was
staying and encouraged the high end establishments in Cupertino.
Com. Gong:
Said she felt the newer small location was a factor of what is available; the separate bar is consistent
with the current location; the extended hours are commensurate with the other businesses in Main
Street. Said she supported the project and also supported lunch service for Monday and Sunday.
Com. Sun:
Supported the project; not too many questions to challenge the application. No negative impacts for
residents.
Com. Paulsen:
Question about hours since issue of Sunday lunch was brought up. If Commission approves tonight,
will the hours be set; and willthe applicant be able to change hours just by working with the property
manager?
Cupertino Planning Commission December 8, 20153
Staff:
Theway the use permit is written up, it doesn’t preclude them from opening on any of the other days;
it isjustpart of what they told us; it sets the outside limit that they can serve customers to 1:00a.m. at
the outside and employees can stay until 2:00a.m. It doesn’t preclude themfrom being open at other
normal business hours.
Com. Paulsen:
If these restaurants were open untillater to compete with the Donut Wheel is that something they
would have to come back to the Commission for, or is that a staff decision?
Staff:
If any of the outside hours, the 1:00a.m is granted daily, but if they change it beyond the 1:00a.m.
then they would have to go to the Planning Commission.
Chair Lee:
Said she supported the application for the late hours for the patio enhancement as well as the separate
bar facility.
Vice Chair Takahashi:
Said everyone is in agreement and excited about the project; a lot of carewastakenin the architecture
and layout; it is a great addition and/or we are not losing something we already have as well, said he
felt it was a significant positive.
MOTION:Motion by Com. Cong, second by Com. Paulsen, and unanimously carried 5-0-0, to
adopt resolutions with amendments Use Permit U-U-2015-08 for a separate full
service bar and late hours of operation ancillary to the restaurant as well as
Architecturaland site approval ASA-2015-25 to allow enhancements to the exterior
patio for the existing buildingShop 4 within Cupertino Project,
3.U-2015-09, ASA-2015-26, Use Permit for separate bar, extended hours of operationand live
Marc Diamalanta (Steins entertainment at a proposed restaurantlocatedin the Ninteen800
Beer Garden) Owner:(formerly Rosebowl) Mixed UseDevelopment and Architectural
Property Developer and site Approval to allow exterior patio modifications in
conjunction
I, LLC with the approved restaurant
10088 No. Wolfe Rd, #130
KaitieMeador, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report:
Reviewed the application for a Use Permit for a separate bar, extended hours of operations and live
entertainment at a proposed restaurant located in the former Rosebowl, Mixed Use Development and
Architectural and Site Approval to allow exterior patio modifications in conjunction with the
proposed restaurant, as outlined in the attached staff report.
She reviewed the project site, surrounded primarily by commercial and office uses including Vallco
Mall and the Main Street project. There is a residential mixed use complex directly to the south and
the nearest single family residential home is 830 feet away. The restaurant is a sit-down restaurant
offering lunch and dinner, including ancillary live entertainment and music. The existing parking has
a surplus of 203 spaces. The County Sheriff’s Department has reviewed the plans and does not
foresee any negative impacts. The project is Categorically Exempt from CEQA as it is an existing
facility with minor changes.
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the draft resolutions for the Use Permit and
Architectural and Site Approval.
Cupertino Planning Commission December 8, 20154
Com. Paulsen:
Referredto parklets, where cars used to park. If the restaurant wanted to expand the outdoor eating
area into the part of Wolfe Road that is occupiedby auto traffic now,could they do soor would that
be something theywould workwith Public Works on?
Kaitie Meador:
Said she was not aware of any onstreet parkingon WolfeRd., perhaps on Vallco Parkway. If it did
occur, it would have to go through both Parks and Recreation and Public Works; it would be
improvement within the public right of way.
City Attorney:
Said that City Council may also consider a park-like ordinance.
Kaitie Meador:
Said no comments have been received from residents; thereis one other restaurant with separate bar
facilities approved. The applicant is limiting the hours for outdoor entertainment to 9 p.m. Dining
outside only, no bar outside. Change in hours of operation would require re-noticing.
Marc Diamalanta, Architect:
Acknowledged that he was also the architect on the Beer Garden project as well as Alexander’s. He
described the layout of the restaurant which included 30 beer taps and an excellent menu. He noted
that the proposed restaurant was similar to the Mountain View one, but a little more industrial and
rustic. He provided a background of the operation and said he was excited to capture the energy of
the community for the Cupertinolocation.
Ted Kim, Co-owner of Stein’s Beer Garden:
Described the layout of the facility, said the restaurant was active in the community, and they were
eager to promote special events. He said they were mindful of residents who may live upstairs of the
establishment. In Mtn. View the residents were opposed to the restaurant before it was built, but they
have not had any complaints in the three years they have been operating. The neighbors even have
held special events at the restaurant.
Chair Lee:
Explained that if the owners wanted to consider asking to extend the operating hours to be more in
line with neighboring businesses, the item could be continued so that public notice could be given of
the proposed change in hours, so that they could return with such a request. The owner stated he
would be interested, but would submit a new application for change in operating hours.
Mr. Kim:
Said they would be interested in holding special events in Cupertino especially an Octoberfest; very
interested in being part of the community.
Com. Paulsen:
Said he would be willing to work with the restaurant people and Public Works on a proposal to take
over some of the asphalt in the street and devote to more outdoor dining.
Chair Lee opened the public hearing.
JenniferGriffin, Rancho Rinconada resident:
Cupertino Planning Commission December 8, 20155
Said she was opposed to the ash trees on the corner being removedand not in favor of any reductions
of lanes on Wolfe Road.Wolfe Road is being negatively affected with the many changes going on;
Vallco is dismantling itself and going into implosion mode; a new restaurant with outdoor dining will
be an asset but she did not want to see any infringement into the double row of ash treesas it is public
right of way. Businesses on Wolfe Road shouldnot be open until 1:00 a.m.
Said they needed to be cognizant of the traffic, people should not be wandering out in the road. It is a
good location for the restaurant,but she felt it was not wise to be open pastmidnight, as there are
tenants above the business paying high rents. Said she welcomed Stein’s, but didn’t want the ash
trees removed or Wolfe Road reduced further as it was already difficult for residents on the east side
to get anywhere.
Chair Lee closed the public hearing.
Com. Paulsen:
Said he felt the 20% outdoor seating requirement in the seating ordinance was unreasonable for
California, and asked the reason behind the ordinance and what would be involved in eliminating it.
It wouldn’t haveto be necessarily a loud outdoor area but just a larger outdoor area that would be
permitted.
City Attorney:
Said it would requirea municipal code amendment; there are also issues with proximity to residential
in a mixed use environment especially in connection with an entertainment use; there are many
factors that would need to be considered in an ordinance amendment.
The requirement is limited to 20% without a conditional use permit; however with a conditional use
permit you could go 100% outdoor seating; the conditional use permit allowsthe city to place
conditions on the operations which include security concerns, noise concerns, any other concerns that
the city might seeand that’s the reason why they have the process. Anyone is welcome to apply; they
just have to go throughthe process and making sure they comply with all the conditions that are
imposed; it is just the way of the city managing expectations from the public as well interms of how
the operationswill be conducted.
Com Paulsen:
Asked what the additionalburden was to the restaurant owner in terms of fees and time delays for the
conditional usepermit.
Kaitie Meador:
It is the processing time for any permit; it does require routing to different agencies, in this case the
Sheriff’s Dept. all the other departmentsthat review the building and there are fees associatedwith it;
cost recovery of the staff time that is expendedand actual review of the project; it’s not just the
Planning Dept., it’s all the other departments which include Building, Public Works, and Fire, etc.
City Attorney:
Said that it would be appropriate to have further discussion on the issue of changing the ordinance to
allow for more flexibility at another meeting.
Com. Sun:
Said he felt the operating hours for Main Street could beextended to 1:00a.m. butdid not want to
convey the wrong impressionthat the other one would be the same to the 1:00 a.m. closing.
Said he was personally concerned about the second and third floor residents and the noise control
issue; He said they try to reach a balance and want the business to prosper, but also want to address
theconcerns of the nearby residents. Said he supported both applications.
Cupertino Planning Commission December 8, 20157
Com. Gong:
Said she felt it was wise to maintain the midnight closing time to demonstrate theirintention to be a
good neighbor. Said that she felt the space is well suited for the business and welcomed it to
Cupertino.
Com. Paulsen:
Said he shared the previous commentsand felt the project would be a great addition to Cupertino.
Said he was ambivalent about the hours; whatever works for business and certainly no business is
going to want to purposely continue to be a bad neighbor; it is up to the applicant whether he wants to
come back with a request for later hours or more spaces. He said he would work offline to encourage
more outdoor dining because of the beautiful climate.
Vice Chair Takahashi:
Said everyone sees the benefits of theproject and thesuccess already in place in Mountain View and
bringing it to Cupertino is definitely a win for the city. Relative to the hours he said he was not as
concerned with a 1:00a.m. closing.
Relative to potential concerns about noise and residents, as a resident there, given it is a new
developmentand generally a mixed use place such as this will have a lot of activity and a
resident should expect that. Given the rent you would make that choice and therefore he
didn’t believe there would be a future conflict.
The area of thecity is turning into an active night life area; for now there may be asituation
that when you close at 12:00everyone will go to where it closes at 1:00a.m.
The outdoors are enjoyable; when there is an option to be outside on a nice night, it is
difficultto beat. Said he supported the project.
Chair Lee:
Said she shared her colleagues’ concernsand was hopeful that patrons of the restaurant wouldbe
respectful of the residents. Said she supported the application relative to the hoursof operation, live
entertainment,andoutdoor patio.
Motion: Motion by Com. Gong, second by Vice Chair Takahashi, and unanimously carried 5-0-0
to approve U-2015-09 and ASA-2015-26.
OLD BUSINESS: None
NEW BUSINESS: None
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Environmental Review Committee: No meeting.
Housing Commission: No meeting.
Economic Development Committee Meeting: No meeting.
Mayor’s Monthly Meeting With Commissioners: No meeting.
Cupertino Planning Commission December 8, 20158
REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT:
Piu Ghosh:
Reported on the Water Efficiency Landscape Ordinance: The state recently updated its model
efficiency ordinance; Cupertino has to look at what amendments they may have to make to the local
ordinance adopted that they believe is just as efficient as the state’s model ordinance, and are in the
process of identifying what changes they may need to make or coming up with a recommendation
they should default to the state’s model efficiency ordinance. They had to adopt an ordinance by
December 1st; because of the tight timelines given by the state they were not able to do that; they have
to default to the state’s ordinanceat this time. Theyare looking to bring back the ordinance for City
Council consideration by the end of Feb.early March.
City Counciladopted General Plan Amendment authorization procedures and the Council will be
looking at projects twice a year for projects that propose General Plan amendments; at this point
deadline for applications was November 16th; the City reviewed2 applications; one from the Oaks
and one from Goodyear Tire Site for a hotel. The application materials are online at
www.cupertino.org/GPAauthorization. It is anticipated that the two applications will be submitted to
City Council on February 2nd.
ADJOURNMENT:
The meeting was adjourned to the January 12, 2016 Planning Commission meeting at 6:45 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted: ____________________________________
Elizabeth Ellis, Recording Secretary
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item No. Agenda Date:February 9, 2016
SUBJECT
Use Permitfor a separate bar at a proposed restaurant located in the Ninteen800 (formerly
Rosebowl) Mixed Use Development. (Application No.(s): U-2015-10; Applicant: Alex Miramar
(Doppio Zero Pizzeria); Location: 10088 N. Wolfe Road, #120; APN: 316-20-108)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commissionapprovethe UsePermit (U-2015-10) to allow the
operation of the separate bar in accordance with the draft resolution.
PROJECT DATA:
General Plan Designation:Commercial/Residential
Zoning Designation:P(CG, OP, Res)
Special Area:South Vallco Park Gateway within the Heart of the City Special
Area
Commercial Building Area:45,004 square feet
Restaurant Area:2,841 square feet
Number of Employees:12
Parking Spaces
Required:33 (see parking discussion for details)
Available:33
Hours of Operation:
Sunday –Saturday 11am –11pm
Project Consistency with:
General Plan:Yes
Zoning:Yes
Environmental
Assessment:
Categorically Exempt
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
PLANNING DIVISION
CITY HALL
10300 TORRE AVENUE •CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255
(408) 777-3308 • FAX (408) 777-3333
U-2015-10 Doppio Zero Pizzeria February9, 2016
BACKGROUND:
Previous City Approvals
The City Council approved the Nineteen800 Mixed Use Developmentin October 2004 (Permit No.s:
U-2004-10, ASA-2005-03, and TM-2006-08).Constructionon the development was completed in
October 2015 and several tenantsare currentlyinoperation.
Existing Center and Surroundings
The project site is located within the South Vallco ParkGateway within the Heart of the CitySpecial
Area, on the south-east corner of N.Wolfe Road and Vallco Parkway. To the west of the site is
Vallco Mall, former Searsand Bay Club; future Main Street project to the east; Vallco Mall/JC
Penneyand office buildings to the north; and a residential mixed use development(Metropolitan)
and an office complex to the south. The nearest single-family residential property is approximately
830feet away from the site.
Application Request
The applicant, Alex Miramar, representing Doppio Zero, is requesting a Use Permit to incorporate a
separate bar within the restaurant. The General Commercial (CG) Ordinance requires that the
Planning Commission review and approve requests for separate bar facilities.
DISCUSSION:
OperationalDetails
Doppio Zerois a sit-down restaurant that offers lunch and dinner options to customers. The
proposed floor plan includes a separate bar areaintegrated within the restaurant.The proposed
hours of operation are 11:00am to 11:00pmdaily. The applicant proposes to have 70table seats, 8
bar seats and a maximum of 12employees per shift. See attachment 3for the business plan
provided by the applicant.
Proximity to Residential Use
The new restaurant will be located in the South Vallco Park Gateway within the Heart of the City
Special Area which is envisioned to serve as a gathering place that supports the creation of a Main
Street style environment with a downtown feel. The vision for the area and project site encourages
regional commercial offices and an entertainment center with daytime and nighttime entertainment
activities, with supportive residential development.
The closest single-family residential property is located approximately 830 feet to the west and a
residential mixed use development is located directly to the south. The residential portion of the
project has separate pedestrian and parking entrances from the retail portion of the project and the
applicant has adequate measures incorporated into the operations to ensure that there is adequate
buffering from the residencesand residentsabove, including installation of an odorabatement
system. Therefore, the project is not anticipated to impact the residential units within the project
nor the nearby residential neighborhoods.
U-2015-10 Doppio Zero Pizzeria February9, 2016
Security
The Santa Clara County Sheriff’s office has reviewed the projectincluding the restaurant’s
proposed security planand does not foresee any security concerns or negative impacts to the
surrounding neighborhood. A condition of approval has been added to require the property owner
to address security concerns, to the satisfaction of the City,in the event that they arise and pay for
additional Sheriff’s enforcement time if required.
Parking
The project wide parking supply was reviewed and approved by the City Council in October 2004.
The following table summarizes the parking provided for the Nineteen800 development, including
the proposed restaurant:
Required Parking Ratio Parking
Required
Existing Food Uses within
development
1 space/4 seats + 1 space/employee
+ 1 space/3 seats (bar)
120.45
Vacant Commercial Areas
(33,848sq. ft.)
1 space/250 sq. ft. 135.39
Doppio Zero Pizzeria:
70 indoor seats 1 space/4 seats 17.5
8 bar seats 1 space/3 seats 2.67
12 employees/shift 1 space/employee 12
Doppio Zero Pizzeria Total:32.17
Total Parking Required:320.18
Total Parking Provided:475
Total Parking Surplus:154.82
Other Department/Agency Review
The City’s Public Works Department, Building Division, and the Santa Clara County Fire
Departmenthave reviewed the project and have no objectionsto the proposed plans.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
The use permit is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per
section 15301(Existing Facilities) of the CEQA Guidelinesbecause the proposed use occurs within
an existing facility and minor alterations will be made within an urban, developed environment.
U-2015-10 Doppio Zero Pizzeria February9, 2016
PUBLIC NOTICING & OUTREACH
The following table is a brief summary of the noticing done for this project:
Notice of Public Hearing, 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)
Notices mailed to property owners adjacent to
the project site (300 foot)(10 days prior to the
hearing)
Posted on the City's official notice
bulletin board (five daysprior to the
hearing)
Postedon the City of Cupertino’s
Web site (five daysprior to the
hearing)
PERMIT STREAMLINING ACT
This project is subject to the Permit Streamlining Act (Government Code Section 65920 –65964).
The City has complied with the deadlines found in the Permit Streamlining Act.
Project Received: December 7, 2015
Deemed Incomplete:January 7, 2016
Deemed Complete:January 19, 2016
Since this project is Categorically Exempt, the City has 60 days (until April 9, 2016) to make a
decision on the project. ThePlanning Commission’s decision on this project is final unless appealed
within 14 calendar days of the decision.
CONCLUSION
Staff recommends approval of the project since the project and conditions of approval address all
concerns related to the proposed developmentand all of the findings for approval of the proposed
project, consistent with Chapter 19.168 of the Cupertino Municipal Code, may be made.
Prepared by: Kaitie Meador, Assistant Planner
Reviewedand Approvedby:
/s/Piu Ghosh
Piu Ghosh
Principal Planner
ATTACHMENTS:
1 –DraftResolution for U-2015-10
2–Plan Set
3–Business Description
U-2015-10
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
DRAFT RESOLUTION
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
APPROVING A USE PERMITTO ALLOW A SEPERATEBARAT A PROPOSED
RESTAURANTLOCATED IN A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENTAT 10088 N WOLFE ROAD
SECTION I: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Application No.:U-2015-10
Applicant:Alex Miramar(Doppio Zero Pizzeria)
Location:10088 N. Wolfe Road#120
SECTION II: FINDINGSFOR DEVELOPMENTPERMIT:
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application for a
Conditional UsePermitas 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 Planning Commission has held at least one public hearing in
regard to the application; and
WHEREAS, the project is determined to be categorically exempt from the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and
WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proofrequired to support said application; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds as follows with regard to this application:
1.The proposed use, 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;
The proposed location of the restaurantislocated within the South Vallco Park Gateway within the
Heart of the City SpecialArea which encourages daytime and nighttime entertainment activities.
Additionally, the closestsingle-family residential propertyis located approximately 830 feet from the
proposed restaurant. To further mitigate impacts the applicant shall incorporate adequate measures into
the operations to ensure that there is adequate bufferingfrom residences including installation of an odor
abatement system. Adequate security measures are incorporated into the proposed project. Therefore, the
proposed use will not be detrimental to the public health, safety,and welfare.
2.The proposed use will be located and conducted in a manner in accord with the Cupertino
Comprehensive General Plan and the purpose of this title.
Draft Resolution U-2015-10 February 9, 2016
The conditions of approval of the project ensure that the proposed restaurant use will be conducted in a
manner in accord with the City’s General Plan and Municipal Code.The restaurant proposes to operate
in a Zoning District that allows this use and will remain open between 11:00 a.m. and 11:00 p.m.
Therefore, additional review for late night operations is not required at this time. Adequate parking is
beingprovided for the proposed use. Outdoor seating is not proposed at this time.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That after careful consideration ofthe maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and otherevidence submitted
in this matter, subject to the conditions which are enumerated in this Resolution beginning on PAGE
2thereof:
The application for a Use Permit, Application no. U-2015-10is herebyrecommended for approval
andthat the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this resolution are
based and contained in the Public Hearing record concerning Application no. U-2015-10as set forth
in the Minutes of Planning Commission Meeting of February 9, 2016, and are incorporated by
reference as though fully set forth herein.
SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT
1.APPROVED EXHIBITS
Approval recommendation is based on the plan set received Janurary 12, 2016consisting of 3
sheets, labeledA-0, A-1, and A-2entitled, “Doppio Zero Pizzeria, 10088 N. Wolfe Road, Suite
120, Cupertino” drawn by Miramar Design; except as may be amended by conditions in this
resolution.
2.ACCURACY OF PROJECT PLANS
The applicant/property owner is responsible to verify all pertinent property data including but
not limited to property boundary locations, building setbacks, property size, building square
footage, any relevant easements and/or construction records. Any misrepresentation of any
property data may invalidate this approval and may require additional review.
3.ANNOTATION OF THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
The conditions of approval set forth shall be incorporated into and annotated on the first page
of the building plans.
4.EXPIRATION
If the use for which this conditional use permit is granted and utilized has ceased or has been
suspended for twoyear or more, this permit shall be deemed expired and a new use permit
application must be applied for and obtained.
5.OPERATIONS
a.The restaurant shall be operated within the area delineated on the site plan exhibit.
Draft Resolution U-2015-10 February 9, 2016
b.The allowed hours of operation are 11:00am to 11:00pmdaily. Including employeecleanup
hours.
c.Changes to the bar/restaurantoperations determined to be minor shall be reviewed and
approved by the Director of Community Development.
6.OUTDOOR SEATING & PATIO AREA
No outdoor patio area or seating is approved as part of this application. Additional
review and approval will be require by the Director of Commnetiy Development prior
to installation of outdoor patio areas or seating. All patio areas and seating shall be
consistent with the General Commerical Ordinance and the Nineteen800 Retail Design
Guidelines.
7.MODIFICATION OF RESTURANT OPERATIONS
The Director of Community Development is empowered to makeor allowadjustments to the
operation of the restaurantto address any documented problem or nuisance situation that may
occuror changes proposed by the restaurant operator that are determined to be minor.
8.REVOCATION OF USE PERMIT
The Director may initiate proceedings for revocation of the Use Permit in any case where, in
the judgment of the Director:
a.Substantial evidence indicates that the conditions of the conditional use permit have not
been implemented, or
b.Complaints are received related to the tenantunder this use permit, and the complaints are
not immediately addressed by the property management and/or the tenant, or
c.Where the permit is being conducted in a manner detrimental to the public health, safety,
and welfare, in accord with the requirements of the municipal code.
9.LAW ENFORMENT SUPPORT
The property owner shall address security concerns in the event that they arise to the
satisfaction of the City. The property owner shall pay for any additional Sheriff enforcement
time resulting from documented incidents in the development at the City’s contracted hourly
rate with the Sheriff Department at the time of the incident.
The City reserves the right to require additional security patrols and/or other measures as
prescribed by the Sheriff’s Office or Code Enforcement.
10.BUSINESS LICENSE
The business ownershall obtain a City of Cupertino business licenseprior to building permit
issuance.
11.STOREFRONT WINDOWDETAILS
The storefront windows shall be kept open and transparent to the greatest extent possible. The
final floorplan, storefront design and window display shall be reviewed and approved by the
Director of Community Development prior to issuance of building permits.
Draft Resolution U-2015-10 February 9, 2016
12.SIGNAGE
Signage is not approved withthis use permit application. Signage shall conform to the City
Sign Code.
13.RESTAURANT ODOR ABATEMENT
Applicant shall installanodor abatement system to reduce odor impacts from the restaurant to
the adjacent community. The odor abatement system shall be installed prior to final occupancy.
Detailed plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development
prior to issuance of building permits.
14.MECHANICAL AND OTHER EQUIPMENT SCREENING
To the extent possible, unless demonstrated otherwise, to the satisfaction of the Director of
Community Development, all mechanical and other equipment shall be placed in areas not
visible from the public street areas. In the event that it is not possible to locate such equipment
away from the public street areas, all mechanical and other equipment on the building or on
the site shall be screened so they are not visible from public street areas or adjoining
developments. Screening materials/colors shall match building features and materials. The
height of the screening shall be taller than the height of the mechanical equipment that it is
designed to screen. The location of equipment and necessary screening shall be reviewed and
approved by the Director of Community Development prior to issuance of building permits.
15.CONSULTATION WITH OTHER DEPARTMENTS
The applicant is responsible to consult with other departments and/or agencies with regard to
the proposed project for additional conditions and requirements. Any misrepresentation of any
submitted data may invalidate an approval by the Community Development Department.
16.INDEMNIFICATION
Except as otherwise prohibitedby law, the applicant shall indemnify and hold harmless the
City, its City Council,andits officers, employees and agents (collectively,the “indemnified
parties”) from and against any claim, action, or proceeding brought by a third party
againstone or more of theindemnified partiesor one or more of the indemnified partiesand
the applicant to attack, set aside, or void this Resolution or any permit or approval authorized
hereby for the project, including (withoutlimitation) reimbursing the City its actualattorneys’
fees and costs incurred in defense of the litigation. Theapplicant shall paysuch attorneys’ fees
and costswithin 30 daysfollowingreceipt of invoices from City. Suchattorneys’ fees and
costsshall include amountspaid to counsel not otherwise employed as City staff and shall
include City Attorney time and overhead costs and other City staff overhead costs and any
costs directly related to the litigation reasonably incurred by City.
17.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
Draft Resolution U-2015-10 February 9, 2016
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.
SECTION IV: CEQA REVIEW
The project was determined to be categorically exempt in accordance with the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seqper Section 15301
(Existing Facilities) of the CEQA Guidelines because it relates to interior improvements to an
existing facility in a development, urban environment.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 9thday ofFebruary,2016,Regular Meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN:COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT:COMMISSIONERS:
ATTEST:APPROVED:
Piu Ghosh Winnie Lee
Principal Planner Chair, Planning Commission
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item No. Agenda Date:February 9, 2016
SUBJECT:
Consider an appeal of Two-Story Permit (R-2015-38) to allowthe construction of a new
2,775square foot single-family residence.(ApplicationNo. R-2015-38; Applicant: Mike
Chen (Patel Residence); Appellant: Biren Shah; Location:18780 Tilson Avenue; APN: 375-
17-036)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commissiondeny the appeal and uphold the
Community Development Director’sdecision to approve the projectin accordance with the
draft resolution(Attachment 1).
PROJECT DATA:
General Plan designation Low Density (1-6 DU/Ac.)
Zoning designation R1-5
Environmental review Categorically Exemptfrom CEQA
Net lot area 6,169square feet
Project consistency with:
General Plan Yes
Zoning Yes
Allowed Proposed
Lot coverage 3,084 square feet (45%+ 5% for
eaves/roof overhangs and
covered patios)
2,735 square feet (44.33%)
FAR 2,776square feet (45%)2,775 square feet (44.98%)
Height 28’ 24’ –8”
Setbacks:First Floor Second Floor First Floor Second Floor
Side 5’& 5’Combined 25’5’ & 5’15’& 15’
Front 20’25’20’–8”26’–4”
Rear 20’25’34’–9”46’–3”
OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
CITY HALL
10300 TORRE AVENUE •CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255
(408) 777-3308 • FAX (408) 777-3333 • planning@cupertino.org
R-2015-38 Appeal of a Two-Story Permit February 9, 2016
BACKGROUND:
On September 24, 2015, the applicant, Mike Chen,applied for a Two-Story Permitto allow
a new 2,775square foot single-family residence located at 18780 Tilson Avenue(see
Attachment 2). The project property is located inthe R1-5zoning district thatpermits two-
story homes with a maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 45%,up to 28 feet in height. The
applicant is not proposing to have any outdoor sheds etc., which would increase the FAR
beyond 45%. The project is consistent with all aspects of the Single-Family Residential (R1)
Ordinance and other pertinent City ordinances. In addition, the project is not subject to
design review since the proposed second floor is less than 66% of the square footage of the
first floor and provides at least15-footside yard setbacks on the second floor.
During the public review period, Biren Shah, theproperty ownerto thesouthof the
proposedproject, expressed concerns aboutprivacy impacts from two windows proposed
on the rear of the house.After considering the neighbor’s concerns, the applicant offered to
reduce the size of one of the windowsand raised the sill height of that window to 5 feet to
minimize privacy impacts.
The project was approved by the Community Development Director on December 17, 2015
with the reduced size and the higher window sill(see Attachment 3).The last day to appeal
the project wasDecember 31, 2015.However, this date was extended toJanuary 6, 2016 due
to the City Hall closure from December 24, 2015 through January 3, 2016. Biren Shah, the
property owner to the southappealed the approvalof the Two Story Permiton January6,
2016(see Attachment 4).
DISCUSSION:
Basis of the Appeal
The appellant'sbasis of appeal issummarized below. Where appropriate, staff'sresponses
are in italics.
1.“There are two large windows on the second floor as mentioned on South Elevation.
These two windows are so large that it will put my entire family room and living rooms
and my family at risk from privacy point of view. For 2nd story windows on the south
facing side, please make the master bedroom window size of 4ft x 4ft or 4ft x 4ft 6in.”
One of the principal purposes of the R1 Ordinance is to ensure a reasonable level of privacy to
individual residential parcels. This is achieved by having developments adhere to a set of specific
development parameters incorporated in the R1 Ordinance such as requiring larger second story
setbacks(25 feet)than first story setbacks(20 feet whichmay be reduced to 10 feet under some
circumstances) andrequiring privacy planting if the windowsmeet any of the following criteria:
R-2015-38 Appeal of a Two-Story Permit February 9, 2016
Have a sill heightbelow five feet sill height or
Are not obscure, non-openable
Do not have permanent exterior louvers up to a height of five feet above the second floor
Are not non-operable and obscure up to a height of five feet above the second floor.
The intent of the privacy protection planting requirement is to plant trees and/or shrubs that
would provide substantial screening within three years of planting.
The second floorsetback of the proposed project is 46 feet 3 inches from the rearproperty line
where the allowed rear setback is 25 feet. The applicant is also planting adequate privacy
planting trees in conformance with the R1 ordinance. The proposed project conforms to all
aspects of the R1 Ordinance. Additionally, the bedroomwindows must meetsthe requirements of
the building code for egress. The maximum sill height may not be more than 44inchesfrom the
floorand must have minimum opening requirements-both of which the proposed window
complies with.
2.“There are two large windows on the second floor as mentioned on South Elevation.
Please make the master bathroom window 6ft from finished floor with maximum
length 3ft with obscured glass.”
Additionally, prior to project approval, the applicant considered the concerns raised fromthe
neighbors during comment period and voluntarily elected to reducethe size of the bathroom
window from five feet by four feetwith a sill heightof four feetto five feetby two feet ten inches
and raised the sill height to five feet to address the appellant’s concerns.As previously
mentioned, the R1 Ordinance exempts privacy screening to be planted for windows with a sill
height above five feet.A condition of approval requires the applicant to modify the privacy
planting plan, subject to review and approval of staff, prior to issuance of building permits in
order to ensure that the privacy protection requirements are met or he has the option of
increasing the sill height of the window in order to not have to plant privacy trees and/or shrubs
for thiswindow.This change in the size of the window continues to comply with the R1
ordinance.
3.“Please move bathroom window to west elevation.”
This request was also discussed during the comment period for the Two Story permit between the
appellant and the property owner.By re-locating a window, the proposed project would
potentially create new impacts for the neighbor to the west. Any changes to the location of
windows would require a separate permit (likely a Director’s Minor Modification)with
additional re-noticing and comment period. However, the applicant decided not to make changes
in order to ensure new privacy concerns were not generated dueto the relocation of a window to
an elevation which is setback only 15 feet from the property line.
R-2015-38 Appeal of a Two-Story Permit February 9, 2016
4.“My entire family room and kitchen windows are facing the proposed two story house.
I do not want my neighbor to see all day and all night into my family room and kitchen
from their second story windows. It’s a huge privacy issue and risk. I’m not sure trees
wouldprovide necessary cover.”
The proposed project adheres to the requirements for privacy plantings. Additionally, the
proposed windows are located 46feet3inchesfrom the rear property line and approximately 70
feetfrom the closestbuilding wall lineof the appellant’s property. In addition,as previously
indicated,privacy plantings will be planted in the rear yard for all windows with a sill height 5
feet and under.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
The project 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 & OUTREACH
The following table is a brief summary of the noticing done for this project:
Notice of Public Hearing, Site Signage & Legal Ad Agenda
9public hearing notices mailed to property
owners adjacent to the project site (10 days prior
to the hearing)
Legal ad placed in newspaper
(at least 10 days prior to the hearing)
Site Signage (placed on site prior to initial noticing
for the Two Story Permit and remains on site)
Posted on the City's official
notice bulletin board (one week
prior to the hearing)
Posted on the City of
Cupertino’s Web site (one week
prior to the hearing)
Prior to staff report publication, staff also received an email from an adjacent neighbor who
also raised concerns about the two windows on the rear elevation and the assertion that
they signeda privacy planting waiver without being provided information about the
second story windows (see Attachment 5). This address was included in the notification
about the proposedtwo story home with the Two-Story Permit application (including a site
plan and elevation drawings) and the subsequent appeal.
PERMIT STREAMLINING ACT
The appeal 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.
ProjectReceived: September 24, 2015
Deemed Complete: October 7, 2015
R-2015-38 Appeal of a Two-Story Permit February 9, 2016
The Planning Commission’s decision on this project is final unless appealed within 14 days
of the decision.
CONCLUSION
Since the proposed project complies with all aspects of the R1 Ordinance, staff recommends
that the Planning Commission deny the appeal and uphold the Community Development
Director's decision to approve the Two-Story Permit.
Prepared by: Sarah Filipe, Assistant Planner
Reviewed by:Approved by:
/s/Piu Ghosh /s/Aarti Shrivastava
Piu Ghosh Aarti Shrivastava
Principal Planner Community Development Director
ATTACHMENTS:
1 -Draft Resolution
2–Plan Set
3 –Two-Story Permit (R-2015-38) action letter dated December 17, 2015
4-Appellant’s letter
5-
R-2015-38
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
DRAFT RESOLUTION
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
DENYING AN APPEAL AND UPHOLDING THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT’S DECISION TO ALLOWTHE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW 2,775
SQAURE FOOT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCEAT 18780 TILSON AVENUE
SECTION I: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Application No.:R-2015-38
Applicant:Mike Chen (Patel Residence)
Appellant:Biren Shah, 18781 Barnhart Ave.
Location:18780 Tilson Ave. (APN 375-17-036)
SECTION II: FINDINGSFOR A TWO STORY PERMIT:
WHEREAS, the City of Cupertino received an application for a Two-Story Permit as
described in Section I of this Resolution;
WHEREAS, the necessary notices were given and the comment period forthe application
was provided as required by the Procedural Ordinance of the City of Cupertino;
WHEREAS, the City was able to make the findings required under Section 19.28.140B and
the application was approved with conditions on December 17, 2015; and
WHEREAS, the notice of decision was mailed to the appropriate parties notifying them
about the possibility of appealing a project; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an appeal for the
Community Development Director’s approval of theTwo-Story Permit; and
WHEREAS, the necessary public notices have been given as required by the Procedural
Ordinanceof the City of Cupertino, and the Planning Commission has held at least one
public hearing in regard to the appeal; and
Draft Resolution R-2015-38 February 9, 2016
WHEREAS, the appellant has not met the burden of proof required to support said appeal;
and
WHEREAS, the project is determined to be categorically exempt from the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds as follows with regard to this application:
a)The project is consistent with the Cupertino General Plan, any applicable specific plans,
zoning ordinance and the purposes of this title.
The project is consistent with the regulations and intent of the Cupertino General Plan and
Single-Family Residential (R1) Ordinance. The project complies with all established and
required setbacks, privacy protection planting requirements and other Municipal Code
requirements. In addition, The proposed development meets all prescriptive development
requirements of the Parking, Landscape, and Fence ordinances; and the two-story non-
discretionary permit procedural requirementsin the R1 ordinance.
b)The granting of the permit will not result in a condition that is detrimental or injurious
to property or improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public
health, safety or welfare.
The granting of the permit will not result in a condition that is detrimental or injurious to
property improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or
welfare as the projects is located within the R1-5 (Single Family Residential) zoning district, and
will be compatible with the surrounding uses of the neighborhood.The purpose of the R1
ordinance is to provide light, air and a reasonable level of privacy to individual residential
parcels, ensure a reasonable level of compatibility in scale of structures within the neighborhood
and reinforce the predominantly low-intensity setting in the communitythrough prescriptive
requirements incorporated in the R1 ordinance. The neighborhood is in transition and there is
healthy mix of single story and two story homes making the proposed project compatible with the
neighborhood.
c)The proposed project is harmoniousin scale and design with the general neighborhood.
The proposed project is located in a residential area consisting of single family homeswith a mix
of single story and two story homes. The proposed project maintains the single family home scale
found compatible with the general neighborhood.
d)Adverse visual impacts on adjoining properties have been reasonably mitigated.
Any potential adverse impacts on adjoining properties have been reasonably mitigated through
the privacy protection plantings and installation of a front-yard tree as required.
Draft Resolution R-2015-38 February 9, 2016
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence
submitted in this matter, subject to the conditions which are enumerated in this Resolution
beginning on PAGE 2thereof,the appeal of an application for a Two-Story Permit,
Application no. R-2015-38is herebydenied and the Director of Community Development’s
approval of the Two-Story Permit is upheld;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
no.R-2015-38as set forth in the Minutes of Planning Commission Meeting ofFebruary 9,
2016, and are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein.
SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPT.
1.APPROVED PROJECT
This approval is based on a plan set entitled, “Patel Residence, 18780 Tilson Ave.,
Cupertino, Ca. 95014”consisting of sixsheets labeled “A-1.0 to A-4.0 and C.0 (a
Topographic Survey Map)” except as may be amended by conditions in this resolution.
2.ANNOTATION OF THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
The conditions of approval set forth shall be incorporated into and annotated on the
buildingplans.
3.ACCURACY OF THE PROJECT PLANS
The applicant/property owner is responsible to verify all pertinent property data
including but not limited to property boundary locations, building setbacks, property
size, building square footage, any relevant easements and/or construction records. Any
misrepresentation of any property data may invalidate this approval and may require
additional review.
4.PRIVACY PLANTING
The final privacy-planting plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning
Division prior to issuance of building permits. The variety, size, planting distance shall
be consistent with the City’s requirements.
5.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 consistent
with the R-1 Ordinance, for all windows with views into neighboring yards and a sill
Draft Resolution R-2015-38 February 9, 2016
height that is 5 feet or less from the second story finished floor.The precise language
will be subject to approval by the Director of Community Development.Proof of
recordation must be submitted to the Community Development Department prior to
final occupancy of the residence.
6.LANDSCAPE PROJECT SUBMITTAL:
The applicant shall submit a full landscape project submittal, per sections 490.1, 492.1,
and 492.3 of the Department of Water Resources Model Water Efficient Landscape
Ordinance, for projects with landscape area more than 500 square feet;the applicant
shall submit either a full landscape project submittal or submit the Prescriptive
Compliance Checklist per Appendix D of theDepartment of Water Resources Model
Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance for projects with landscape area more than 500
square feet and less than 2,500 square feet. The Landscape Documentation Package or
Prescriptive Compliance Checklist shall be reviewed and approved to the satisfaction of
the Director of Community Development prior to issuance of building permits.
7.CONSULTATION WITH OTHER DEPARTMENTS
The applicant is responsible to consultwith other departments and/or agencies with
regard to the proposed project for additional conditions and requirements. Any
misrepresentation of any submitted data may invalidate an approval by the Community
Development Department.
8.EXTERIOR BUILDING MATERIALS/TREATMENTS
Final building exterior treatment plan (including but not limited to details on exterior
color, material, architectural treatments and/or embellishments) shall be reviewed and
approved by the Director of Community Development prior to issuance of building
permits.The final building exterior plan shall closely resemble the details shown on the
original approved plans.Any exterior changes determined to be substantial by the
Director of Community Development shall require a minor modification approval with
neighborhood input.
9.INDEMNIFICATION
Except as otherwise prohibitedby law, the applicant shall indemnify and hold harmless
the City, its City Council,andits officers, employees and agents (collectively,the
“indemnified parties”) from and against any claim, action, or proceeding brought by a
third party againstone or more of theindemnified partiesor one or more of the
indemnified partiesand the applicant to attack, set aside, or void this Resolution or any
permit or approval authorized hereby for the project, including (without limitation)
reimbursing the City its actualattorneys’ fees and costs incurred in defense of the
litigation. Theapplicant shall paysuch attorneys’ fees and costswithin 30
daysfollowingreceipt of invoices from City. Suchattorneys’ fees and costsshall include
Draft Resolution R-2015-38 February 9, 2016
amountspaid to counsel not otherwise employed as City staff and shall include City
Attorney time and overhead costs and other City staff overhead costs and any costs
directly related to the litigation reasonably incurred by City.
10.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 this9th dayofFebruary, 2016, Regular Meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN:COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT:COMMISSIONERS:
ATTEST:APPROVED:
______
Piu Ghosh Winnie Lee
PrincipalPlanner Chair, Planning Commission
v
JUN.22/'15
Jw.DE cN aEVRw
4- u Ma io t 5
2+1' x FIO'T) d'
Ssp./)t 15
v Y • Y •
r • 1 • • • • • Y
r W • • Y ' • • r r
1 A • • r • '
r
r • • •,
v • a . •
r . . r.
N,TMJ I.AYI N,r`i•.%*` • Z
1 i 4Q sf +s . . .
y . . . . . r--".T ...._...
y.,. . . . .. . . n
y k
r . . . i. . . .
p/,//.p.y/. . . . yI ry iY Z R/Vf VR f1P'1\ ' • ' TVV
PATE RESIDENCE
Z . ,- . . +. . . • jM. ._,. ` .. . . Y
i. y; ,:•r,Jy,.,. '•
4
r`..
o :
i, ':i i 1.f :j• t 7
a: , ,J .
y;r L' .f.'a' •,.J) r..>' ,''t,N•
m 'v` ;,,
i.« ;}:
0 O L.O
o
y. ,+,' `
t.
I
4 3'
p C G O 1 Oo Q g 0 l 4 x,. .
9
X :.:
v `'
N J
t J
j2—0/,5`—,3 3__z N ,
Q i' .,; •.c W N
V N Ys : a o '
a .-. r, !t Zlia W
i` R . _ ._...__. _ =_._ _ _....._..,... y
g a Q
f.,, F ; f _-- t 5'........... v '
o Q A z ziO
N o
i'n`';
J `:
N N „a v, @
e.... ..., ....
y.).a,..,,e .
o =::, 2nd Fioor sY f j Q U Y
Q P7 , U Q E
N w x s
o 3 1 St\v
a
Z ,r, Fioor
1. Q ^ n w
POIICMDRAWINGINDEXPROJECTDATA.
0. APN 375-17-036 18780 TILSON AVE.
1, LOT SIZE: 6,169 SF
A-1.0 SITE/LANDSCAPE PLAN 2. ZONING: R1-5, (2ND FLOOR SET BACK: 15ft MIN.) A-1.1 DEMOLITION PLAN 3. CONSTRUCTION TYPE: V-8(W/ FlRE SPRiNKLER) 3A-2.0 FLOOR PLANS W
A-3.0 ELEVATIONS
OCCUPANCY GROUP: R-3/U
ppIVACYSCR[ENINOMATERIFu,$
Z
4. BLDG COOES: 2013 California Residential Codse
A-4.0 SECTIONS&ROOF pLAN g,p qREq; ST
2ND FL. AREA: 883 SF A a,,, „'1 l,a,b
C-0.0 SURVAY MAP 472 SF B MMN nanra e.A psesk 30 a 5 e
c.NnaNn v m.-rorn naa zaxs ,a
o uaawmsPaYe m.na.. wa o s e
L CYMI IIIO'anCemP.C/Il rx 3D' 00 20'
MYW MeMa 70 7b /4 K
S C 0 P E 0 F W 0 R K S•
O NpnMl e a Mwe•MNyn Mqdb a
PORCH 34+388): 422 SF E ilr mWmun gze s ql M 2N OeM mmum sN mnn a e,gn pN'Aw h/n 1 '+ x
Qi
1 ST FL. 24" EAVE AREA 421 SF W S
l.EX.BU I LA I NG S AND I MPRO VEM E N T TO REM V E(UND ER S EPA RA T E g• 2 N 0 L. T S T Fl-. A R E P R AT I O: A 8''C 4 6.g 7 Z
n m E' 0 10 ` i;+ ++++wC,aiun 167o e i 4 i + t t N a
PERMI'I').7 LOT COVERAG • 2,735(B+C+E+F 6 189 44.337 D^^^^m°°°^.^ , ° 8
nFlp ++ ++
V d-
8: FAR; 2,775 / 6 169 44.987G
s5""DeN1""'.'" ° " °
r ream r c,...nrw av ma +v2.PROP O S ED A NEW SING LE F ANIIL Y DWELL I N G W/ATT A C HED G A RA GE, o r n,°,u,s„u m-.,w,w a a a +o P A
9. FRONT YARD IMPERVIOUS AREA RATIO: W+ "a 'o PERv1 US) ;; ' t`'+ +++ +++ W ' 0
35.617i (SEE FRONT YARD CALS)
ti'
TM mlNTum d,ru vze M 0 16 Yvion m mun ma n.r c s r,q irp M9m. i + + i + + y +
10.EX. HOUSE (1078 SF') c GARAGE(27S SF (1952 BUiI
t++ .`
60, 0pyrpncmemouiyumeyoeseprdeopwdeyu» 4 t } t
ervious Surface Notes: VI I 1 VVIt7l'K11. Jh!'Q T.Q Qf IQ q mpprwe a anerp Tenles biYlf on I e
N
y++
i + R ,P HEiMUMawvicem.eoaeenMaLrascaoenrwYaw qme'e,eme pK aw u C, w V
g
9
L a
s e„n..vab.e'c+v m aYr am,,tirw.re
X. 0
nagnt sptid{ena 9rcw
J
TM/a ptlPwiaenPuttlpMl lta3 M
dce r
D
red to iristall one of more of t}le followui d ei measures;
THE DEAOUNE FOR,THE SUBMISSION OF PUBUC COMMENTS v a p
e un ff Z
N
all detached
f
Te fa
o homee
hiCh C'eate or re lece z,5oo ef or more ot tous surface N ELEC. COPY OF THE PtANS IS AVAlLABLE BY REQUEST.
F+
g `@
SHALL BE TWO WEEKS AFTER THE DATE OF THE NOTiCE W b. Dired roof runoff intp tistems or reln barrels for reuse;
PD p ,. 28 20. C C. Dir ct ruru ff fromlldewalks,wallcways,and/or patios cmto vegetatrd areas; y1 1801, DESCRiPT10N
d. DireCt runoff from driveways attd/or uncovered parking lote onto vegetdted areas. F.Gjw»'„
e• Constntd sidewalks,walkways and/or parioe with pern eable 6urfac s TURF AREA P
r•"""` Q,,, w
P.wtrric ae p O
t,ands ape and s te work noce:
VINICITY MAP Puwrnrc nRen SpN
Pv a °° V1, The property owner shall recotd a covenant on the property
for the new and existing ptivacy trees and the required e&
front yard tree.
2,Following completion of construction,an af'adavit from an GRAVEL(oN COMPAG7ED 9qL) SITE LANDSCAPE PLAN vr••
sISA-certified arborist shall be provided confirming that the PAVINp AREA(PERVIOUS)
new trces have been planted properly and according to plan, 9 .. 1 1 L
and that the existing trees to remain are in good health. 2'X2'X2' CONC. STONE(Spi11 PERVI ) r::,
3, A planning Division nspection s required to verify extenor N
materisl/finishes,trees,lattdseaping and site work. b J:.,,.,,,,M.,r,, CpNC. PAVINO
NOTES:
Mc
OTiNai'""
1. Qdqreen d dclist hdl be d d as a part of eon tructi dpcuments.AS No1 D
n n,,,n, 2. Prlor to (s uance of b P it, the lond cape 1NetK-Effici ncy Checkilft in
Appe dix A Of Chr tK 14.15 wtp need t0 be filled out•
n,qeOfAV
w a w.o.••.•s a...r s .. ..s 3. l,a ding In ide yord shall Ot exceed 1S' abow the finiah qrode.
Q „, ,,,,,r . . w
4. Prlor to rance of flnal occuponcy. th property ow er aho11 record a
a eo ant hatrictinp the futur nclosur pf porCh,
O yd 1uqpN Av m
R Q p """"' """' • " " th Okector of Community Developm nt moy waive th• iront y ord tree bas d on a rport
0 ,,,„, „ ,, irom on int rnationa ly-c t(iled orborist citN Q conAiet wfth exlstik q matur tree canoptes r . Oonit or in th public riqht-of-way.
a
N.87'39'S3"W. r.''. .
50.30' z
uo./s2/,s
o'' d`g` 13-9" ai.o ar w x
o''a
4
G °' ' ,,o• 23'-3" s o•/>>/'sIG,k 9
d1+ 4
G •}
p'h' 1
10,
i
oti
oti' •------- 20'-3"
ih
Q'
9 p'1'' 1
1. .1l,
i 0 i
i
o Q' t7' 8; 322 sf
1 a'
ro1
i p
4 Cy O r,+.`r`r`.•r`r`r`•r•.•r•r•r,,+,.
N r . . . + . .. . . . . . . • . . . .JAWZZI ,
s
r • • • • • v • Y • r
1 k , N O r/
SY
I i _q'" ti°°v 1
Go.. v,
A• NATURAL LAWN••• 6i ,11 FG'Sp
M
r •' r . • • • • r . .ti
o ,,
ti' 1 42 sf. . . . . . F,
32'-»
2. . . .. . . . .
u .
C'J
v • . v r . . • . .
r . . • . . • . . • . • • . •
r . r • • • • • • • . • • . • • .i O W • v • • • • r . • • + • • •
I v • • • • • • . •
k 0-9• a
LANDSCAPE AREA CALS: I
oti' 12'-3"
I
i
Hi, o ti• SECTION AREA z ,o
o
A 1242 Q z o
ZND FLOOR AREA CALCULATION: e
1 ST FLOOR AREA CALCULATION.
LAVI V AREA 242 s.F.C ; 1878 ON AVENUE 1 8=1 -0 1/8=1 0 N p Q
i FF= 103.50
ry 8 32Z
a
w
k
P
i`'` '' .:._.. ..-_: •...:----. FLOOR PLAN AREA CALCULATION• i C 1fi8 Q <
o d''r N
G Ex9
e '!'l.6? 3XL V W 4
6
e SECTION DIMENSIONS AREA pr o
x 4 a f
i
n
ti,Q d t ' l / '/A 13.76X4.0 E 1 x :
o
p" ,.. , G P....R....w_._._ 83 55.73 c.: Q W
9`1 • ' y
ry
f"` ;r, x f 1
8
0 o,
a : 1 d( 8 20.35 39.5 Sp0.14 40
C e a f-
O 90,.o r,._a.-..,......__,o......_.,..r„
C 10.75X2.2s 28.46 CO
o .
t •.
o
p.. o•,',., o W Z
N o 6 r7 2nd FLOOR AREA 883 S.F, N PLANTING AREA 804 S.F.
o ' N
6 Z 0 1SX23.33 350 TOTAL LANDSCAPE AREA
Z
o o Fo 4 ory E 17Xt 2 203.88
v . •ec' .. ' I, Y G 4 ,,.,,,F?., awro.. -.,,_
F
o'+ `5 o'`• h c'` r ,;
1: f 3°t,;; n 23.25X33.083 769.08
G 1 p kJ; 4 i a r
J (>r,J Sii.1 I i Y'S A f l w i -i 1
l '
G• ,
p • " • C+p'• z d
1•4 G i!
r'., i wh Ilt A f1. 1 5u
V
o o. o .. ' .. ,.
o' w , ,,; 32.?5X16.S 540.12F
i lf ' r i! iM . ;t f J t
AREA = 6 169 SQ.FT. I k
r ,
kti I i 1,;i F.`4 f'I 1 Z.ZsX2.17 28.55
6
G.. t:
y
1'?,4',d c5 F+
6 I.
f
t':
j y* ,. ; 1st fL00R AREA l,892 S.F.V
eo . , e oo 1,;; I •_ 1.1.
1
i'F 4.KDIh t.wtrlrr`•
r
r: "
D '•' ':. ,
o`' , i'
4(
t TOTAL FLOOR AREA Q,775 S.F.
I y'
k' +• . '
oo
R`
26p
o1- '
r
f y oo
d
7
f,, v
I •.•• .. . '! ;,+ 24'TREE ' ,1.
V
O t + + t
A• .-. •. a Y
r,e
I'
D• .
rI ww ww
V:'T fYNf
FRONT YARD PA G GALS. Oa + a + .
K M1O 120N Front Yard Area•
4=
f + + + + A
o....
utw.'"
a
s.3 x 2 s . •f q
AR7if1C1AL LA 14 + +
M-iJt + + O ' ' q0. 1,Atw m ry oa,wa a,oyendon.wna aor.h.q ren w,u a,d m.lman,Ar e.ch
d t t + +
O `
w.S1ElPIi9W11/NUCtIQI/IIQArtMYG11'O MIl/'j Paver(per ) sa:d+wh..oiralrlArmxal riwa(lhsutMi InxKeuna(CiCLlwY4 aneeMpraathRnlneatwuetimnalvqy.Thai7t'liie bWa Ck.3DYep WV Ar
i + i i i + i i iII11E/IN dYtl}eNfO(IAODUIt11141MIPId11 l11CI111Y1,SGwI1b(W IINIWLufulRftlW} 415'2.7t14+9.5+29+59+2.s rj42 t + ; ; a + a a O W
M
Z,AII paecahe(Ml1 ba in plsa prior to aa rewiwm+rM ntr+Y Ma work wd rwiwln phor u ul attaAu oontruWon rotlN[9 m Ae I f
26
a t
cQ' •---''' TREE FENCE W b°^°^'"°" Impervious are: 0 sf t + ` +
R, Prwocbw Gn mn tw«.a a b)nwt 7 c airy vnibMy wr/M.n a.c vee palennn.p Mtcd m a c faroo rvRY 4()i
M
8-4 rwtMiwch r aweocprlyvrswwwkyq rw wka aeauwna0u4r ofrnwKy-ors(ulteM,sr Paving ratlo at Front Yard:8 j
r
h)Aall iMd`Tne
I 1+1 '-i v
rnkcaw.n;Kaoax'.
I 0/ 1 060 Q'64,tl snw s.h pawaierawbwlfwed yrid,y mbeixrull d wln i ulawlfa k diriNv ul'draiMruaia.
2.a• i G).r,...-•
W
3.tn WwYm Ioro pn loctoA ra tat da ra tlw MnniaOtMorcR M Y endoa owMuc'we al tl a io y be M da of 4+c akuWiun aqpprna l cY oQ a wtivlq.tlrc od trNolm Q waeaunqoe ll ptoloet Illc IIa w1Yi l'i4"hm Eor Noiobd w IMw n a Mw
bY
n q t M MK dtau IM Irs Th iMwt it Y rnqci f4 trridt nf IM u ir nwinu w cwaiu conun l hryc coo ctbn N IeY+poac i
Q 1j M,.,.6.MYn I 10.«r No aw.rto w pwwawa a!n.w I.k iwadc/!or r i aaiwrratloe or vWe mrn4lr ccux 4Wl dao q aa+wiae a
r
M drw litr u I M pl ud'll Mhf II N IIMd 0 IF OfiIfHl fUlll l Dq((M''(MM CNA M. I
IY w
7. i CIar N-vuldr» 7tandc,hdxdny.uteYou IMrN ncr,ysl n.dL ahaw,npw1. Otol:542 N v
r.Wipnee Mn d D(ciape iarrtA llbeckmeAanba
cawnlw Lt s ca ynr iMYtt ds Ayoil Yd ot dbwYd b A6M iN0 tlN otiUtll roal LIY a(1 qatabA bbG Q.% 4'1 •
OMTraAaMwi.n b cMwa, wuseN iwun.hu1 eo nc Maa o ry pdoGed meedpr,wirM a oh p oihcr Orr tlwc M w
9.Vddmlor 7Y A{r.hi wliarYr r64r aorCuutlnn ryuipaal u flk w prkiry 11 Mke p4oe wi M n ihs aitk l mr x»d x y pmlaAed 2 O I r".
y~
C
n.e ulkv h.oe er;Mi,c wnia wwiw»
9.5 efDemo(i t i o n n • ' • 1 D Na Mrvr yu.M isprdie D p 1p NW tu auctti trwMu,t d Iw MI k4ara wu v ur.iW Ipr u qu,a wqea caupra ww v 0 mxl haMtr,dwll bv dlaMod Ui1d LAe hp law uf xY IRuIaWJ 4w w anY aM ualu au O"1/8=1 -0
i.c.a caw s:N.w.w aui n.r...,,r,m i w tcne.i..r.w o n.t r.a+d.,, Notes:t. all. improvement dt bldg shall be removed. b q w dwdw e+b.n Mllwotr.
1 z,M,owvwui tir:r+u iiq.r pMl4 cmenw a alw impwr w»Mwwly drq I pMal wfYMn M Ilniu oCIM wnfa t roa xaw a/ 4
L AN AP
ntroctor/ owner shall ep ly a eeporate demo. permit P,„„,y yy y.d Yy Uwpuhha ru I DSC E AREA CALS o1/P 1'-piandobtainJ . I1 1lu t hvn AM ooM 1ro inclw a Irvw in Jiaumq wl Kh pr a pwsd i iwdt d uan Ayy a a her aavMim/NIJ bc wt og'y ve
wnh n YMxryrw vlwn Mr+d wr an lir vR alwil.a arnl M1w(w!^I wi.l iw I w.i'v l wl e.rw
1 O O 1 O 2 3 014.All zbUc kkw i ii 6 1;ICIYII;OpoR,Itfa 4!f I.tar fix wbli ac cee.ui Icr k•a.c:,pa.ih4d Dy ihp p hYc WqFu pt
i =TA N
F'NT YARD PAV'G CALS: a r
i REVISED Slt3 '
CI I Yc)NCUPLR 17N0
nrvaov nnY:" nA1:3 3.a•aS'!'AtiDAItU ULI'All.S c'r w
i
r v B er
I
JUN./22/'15
PREUM.DESIGN REVIEW
Aug./22/'15
PRELIM.DESICN REVIEW 2
I Sep./11/'15
DESIGN REVIEW
11/11/'15
I DESIGN REVIEW COM ENTS
38 _ 3>> 5 B 4
I / IT— — — r u
i o 38'-3
IXI IXI IXI I o
I I L I L I
I I 15'-0" 9'-6" 13'-9"
L
di,,
d
i
x' ,
i PORCH
l Z I13'-9"
20'-3'
6'-6"
I f/W ° EF. I v'a,lay S P,
4,
I I I I
I5- I
o
I° . KIT. * JIIJI
o a
j
i 4-o" NOOK FAMILY RM. I z Q oI3 z w
I I J a -
i C _ > 0
I I I
X -
I L—
BR. z - <
i i y Q
i
I
N ;
I a ¢ ¢
Q 'UIDININGR . o Y
I i
M.BATH I o U 0. v
C :
I
I I 14'-3"
v ¢ cD
N C I 2 a s 2 a rys wIW
I
LIVING RM. I ii Iii
WH
I
i
i
n P I
I 4-11"
BA. #2 I I
o F
G
A-A
I
I _4
I
A= I. A_A
I
I 3-3 8
4
4
II
uNEN
I I I
I I
I
I I N M.C.
I BA. #
I
I
PORCH i Z d-
i
I
I
I i GARAGE Q
i
a
o _ o o
i
U'
i
W
BR. 2 I 2ND LOOR 7,-6 O O
i Q
BR. #3 i I i O '
i N i
I 9 i i p o o
w.,
i 9' 6"
I BR. #1 i
C1, U
J
I
V
I 4
20'-6"zz-3
I
4 I
a ii S — IIf L R PLANr s ii4 i o• 1 T L R P L A N s ii4•=i--o•
M
alEca., N
a
AS NOTED
I C 7— /.
N
1f 0 10 0 30
r
A 2. 0
i
m
JUN./22/'15
R I 1
n PREl1M.D61GN REVIEW
L Aug./22/'15
10 4 6 4 W u n cl e r l i c h D r i
PREUM.DESIGN REVIEW 2
Sep./11/'15
DESIGN REVIEW
2
ELEVATI N NOTES 15
Ol ROOF: CONC. TILE ROOF('EAGLE ROOFING'ESR1900-ICC OR APPRO. EQ.) DESIGN REVIEW COM ENTS
ACCENT WALL ON (2)30 LB BLDG FELT OVER PLYWOOD SHEATING.
@FRONT FACADE
O 5" 26 GA. G.I. PROFILE GUTTER ON 2X8 S4S SURFACE FASCIA BOARD
o a WITH DOWNSPOUT AT PROPER LOCATIONS(ALL ROOF DRAINS SHALL
A , ' 9 <-,. BE DRAINED TO STREET DIRECTLY)
12 12 3' I c``.
O DOUBLE GLAZED WINDOWS(TYP.), 2"RECESSED iN 2X6 WALL.3,5
1
5 I CUSTOM SOLID CORE DOORS.
C L g r a -` ' xN _ v , ;, w O 3-COAT CEMENT PLASTER IN 17 GA. STUCCO NETIING ON 2 LAYERS
t ,; GRADE'D'BLDG PAPER. (WITH 26 GA. G.I. 'Z' FLASHING AT TOP
I b
F''b `"
EDGE OF BLDG PAPER).
s `i r
I
O o O STUCCO SILL OR 1RIM. bi,i,ds ,i.cF€sx.irs.r'r P.evA^" o
o v sf + O SCREEN VENT WITH 1/4" WIRED MESH (TYP.) N i
I I 9 r,f. N aj
5' a i;'` O WEEP SCREED(TYP.) c' p fi .
t M h. zOIIF/
1Q
y ,/ w' ' S• AW I fS ¢ Zr y 'i O CULTURED STONE
d w
k-=,ol-gf a .5''r ,/ ,<- ,r .p §
r''l Jai '`r h x /". ` "^ri'`vrr / ko' r;C P'
Y r''` " ` ,,, STUCCO COLUMN
i'' ' 1 t FL, 103,50 F<< `; r" .; , >
i <,-'"` 5 s Il DIRECT VENT FIREPLACE
Note: a
An ro osed chaan es to the a roved colors and materials
J
EX, GRADE 4 9
Y P P PP J
N R T H E L E V A T I N e S 1/4•--o• on tn s sub;t Shal be r W a by th c ty of cupert no
Planning Division prior to installation/application. o
W M
z c 10 0 10 0 30 Q
U a j ov
iz R z°, z
a n w ,
s:.:a5-- y'..,,:,.:W.,_. 51J1 ink'a"'47D R I 3 /' ... ' ' c — V o < v E
a
6:;C...t.8E"`"-••---a ' 'i ir'P"i.Tui o
I ; .:. o V r :7
C'w4 1..''-------- I
I — — —
C F
S
f
E
i"
t', 'w..,.., 1-, fl.i .. .
X .F!Vi Q7
G V oC N
i L'7iU -_`i. ,.'
r `"`
y' I Q `_'' '.' F- L-.]
1 , I
I
3'^"„ `'\.4 r ...
J ..
6
N
t f ,`` /
3
1 a
3 , ,., i "`' 15Tt`"4f U E h., , `'!'
N _
I _ — — M _
Fi !Y
z
i ,., ,
v
µTr'
IS. 3 t:"`
c:_.
a
f i l
I i.2 tV.v..
s'._."
f!' f.
r !' .
Vo^.. y ..,.
Y
E '.3-V iw:.>
3 .
F k L X 7v iGo".Y,..
f St i'v:i6'
h' ,_,,,..._.....,
7
i`
t TY'fi"_ v.'
i?"':
01 vC'!
aF.T r.rL'i.
0 4'tsG',.C3 r 1:
8----•-- f ;,-;•5'
o 3!s',!2-- ., , , 2 tc.1."7 S7"d+.'"a Q CiC..`ya.' Y/r
s I ".,"'•, ' i 4k7""J C.AB-?"=_N:'i7i;:'':t3C
3J i f
Q sr'';.1°`"" ;.. ,
ti, P G'a Gi.,4a5LLjrr
i
J 5,
z T P,!t??1`[.1. ETAI. u..:s;,=_ua T'P.JII D t i!F EA[R DET I s:-,_e° S U T H E L E V A T I N s: 1 4•---o• p
w YOii d
tt,}. it 1 '\ , 1_
Z
U
QQO i. `
w
pE+ p
a r---
s. o,
s o i w a.0 u.ap---- ,
I,....,
c; aa.
oc n f I s;;:_c p
e—i r
s- cA&I+C,8=
i i y:'pc.':it:
J::
I
a S 1l.
AtiT- .-`
y-` _ - x,
c.:
A, =^ i i'\ vv.
v r { ,! ,
MC f
ca S ``!\/,1
MC i
i
t a.
iE l _ \„/„'
v AS
NOTED X r,t, 1 n
ecxe AS
NOTED
t___ ..._..... .. ...... r.
n xb KR G 5`,
ID STCD(_ sxb W7JD S':..'
r----
1 ixd'RI"9"{=
R5
T
l CaSEr'L!Y'U'
NDCLJ
GGSB o A— .
0 E A S T E E/A T I N L UVER D
R S 1/4'=1'-p MP, GL.
DR, TYP.WINDOW JAMB DETAIL SCALE:3"-"-
u" aF a
v
JUN./24/'1 S
1 1,OL'6K RE,M
Auy./22/'1S
JY.O a+n l[w
Sep, 1) 1S
Eyy
vi
I .i--------------i i—_..----!__.
J 6„J T
I
V
n IDHLEAVE 4/12 ny r,,
i Iia,
I u "
1--------- ------ _,
I I
I a
ELEC. METER j J
W E S T E L E/A T I N s v•i--o• I g
C. N
I I \/ z 0.Q'
I i zIa w
lJ//
I Q .]
pp
i+a.!r;....
a !`/
V 4F-..........e......,....
I Q I C" ? O
t r 4/12 I 0 ° z Q
C it f - -........,:.u..V.._... .....__..._... _
2 I N 6a °° LBA.
w ra al {P _..-s Y:-.s . a o X
r i N i v < c
Ca7 CL ( rv O I I
F„ '""
l.su...._,_e... ,,..
a.. ......- V o o (
q
I \ Af''•,r:1 I I I T OL i ;, %
i i Q r' Vi W
I
N N
11 a D I
I
I Il i I
LIVING RM. O1 UUND. UTILITY I I I
A
I I
I I
3' CONC. ! CRAWL SPACE r— —___.--.i W
sEcTIaN A a 5, ,4.. -_0• I I ;
i a i i w •
4/2 I , a j
i 0 i iIi
y------L- V
z
Qoo
I
o r
a o W
M. BR. W.I.C. CLO BR' 2
I O 00
I 4/12 1
p a V
L_J
aw wh
MC
A1C
FAMILY RM. DINING RM.
E
ws No p
Raa PLAN
AS NOTID
N
j A-- 4. 0SECTIN '11 SI 1/4 a1—'
I
i
AC ASPHALi CONCREfE
e""°'"ER pATELiBwBACKOFMGII(
i
a CATCH
SIDENCECMPCORRUGATEDIAETALPIPE
CO CLEAN pUT
i CRN CROWN
DW DRIVEWAY
EC EDGE OF CONCREfE
EM ELECTRIC MEfER
EP EDGE OF PAVEMENT
FcoR FENCE CORNER 18780 TILSON AVENUE
FD FOUND jp]TINO,CA
FlNISHW FLOOR APN:375-17-036,375-17-037owurN87'39'53"W. 50.30' FlRE HYORM T
o.F C'oS' E ti' FW FRONT OF WALK
o" p,y, 6> /, - ______ ,__
G GROUND
a^ o i oy' o GC G4RACE CORNER
o +oti' 6`' , ' o GF G4RAGE fACE T
y'` 9'fREE
oti' t4 o o I CFC CROUND AT FENC
N
W E Cp•
G ry$
6 i
o
JP `°y
GM GAS MEfER
i g`' ti5 i HCR HANDICAP MMP A•t 0 C 1 A T•
r'—--—.__, INV INVERT
o s 0 2o I o'
6 P R
1b23M1DDLEFIELDRD#658o
otip
doirrr PqE
ti I c uP ov our pALO AL70, CA 94306
PC PROPERIY CORNERdpu
G j
o
G 6
o/H OVERHEAD
TFL; (650,823-6466
h i' + +°
ti
Rw aEraNn c wu.FAX; (650 887•1294
F ti p N SL STREET UGHT
1p'L oti JACU221
I
SSCO SANITARY SEWER CLEANOUf
dy SSMH SANITlJ Y SEWER MANHOLE
A1 ` '1°' i SDAIH STORM ORNN MANHOLE
GD y'
p ry
T8C TOP 8Aq(ROLIED CURB
Oti o 6 TC TOP OF CURB
p , G o
ry
i TQE TOE Of BMIK1I0TPTOPOFPAVEMENT
c 1 i G TRC TOP OF ROLLED CURB
TW TOP OF WALL
U/G UNDERCROUND
I DEC
WV
WAERIED
Y PIPE
F, ' a I WM WATER METER 80X
1° CN- CABLE TELEVISiON LIN
i E- EIECTRICAI IJNE
G- G4S LINE
I
1 /01 .,o p'L i SS- SANITARY SEIYER LWE
LICEN9t?9TAMP3 ATJb S)GNATURFT- ORLEPH ORAM 1 LE1NE
W- WATER LNrE
18780 TILSON AVENUE i Q
BA OFBEAFWJ(F1YJ I
I
I EXISTINC MOUSE O ANp SG
I
O FF y 1 OZ.S5 I i LINE
OB
F WUNDERL CH DRIVE,AS SHOWN ON w
2•
A '
iHAT CERTAIN AIAP FI EO W THE OFFICE OF ' ',
I G
k
THE RECORDER OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY, L
I
STATE Of GUFORNIA,IN 800K 40 OF M PS
I o`
0 G
i AT PAGE 30,WAS USED AS THE BASIS OF
l
L 0?J5 '
I 2 oe 0 U BEARINGS$HOWN ON THIS MAP.
J`
a
j SS °
ryo
GL.y9
CAL1F'
o, BI S{1T I 1 D° ,
o }`
ry 3 I
W I iBN ELEV 100.00(ASSUNED)
I I
p
1p 10,
t
o,
Qo,O oQ°°
j
6
i
199UED
I O
j `
1 N 6
m E•
No. De orytlon D k
I Z
O e o },oti O
O _
L> ,°
i,
o
UNDERGROUND UT1UTlE5, SHOWN PER
l o c` o o ,ti SURFACE EVIDENCE AND RECORD MAPS.
f y y1 r w9 MAY BE D FERENT THAN AS$HOWN.
F
A'
a YA W
w...x_. _./.....,.-.......r..., ._...._:..,.».,..,_.,.
G ,
4,'S 4., ,
6
101
D
o,
h '
GO a` ' SERNCE
EALERTA(
USA)1-e00-
842G-
244 4
D , G O, +1
1
r 1? _ . _ _ AREA = 6,169tSQ.F7. 1... .
D iI ,', ;,_ '. l`Q-
y•'
ls FG 6 a Q 7°j • 6
4G
1p
J° p
y
1.UfAAJREMENT OF BUILDINC LINE IS 70
Y,dm,..- o °
s t oD q +Go` o'` ,. THE FACE OF STUCCO OR SIDING
r cJ;:.
O `'
S yq F t s j:.t
G`ya
D
e
O
22 TREE O IC 8 ZD S
P'
p
Rz26•
0'!'' c,q
I 1"•10'
o,
t•
3 , , co
I I D • ° M
5 24'TREE O
Mry
G k5 I 7
i
1on+
oo
D ,,
SSCo pG,
l0078
I o I
CP
st eer rm,e,
e
G(P
I 1,
E`cQ' OI n"1 1
I
N
o°
eo
f-- o, TOPOGRAPHICa.
I EE SURVEY
Q'
1 r PVM'S
I 1 DD.O Q-
O
i S}iEET N0.
I i y
O
1 S
C.0
December 17, 2015
HMC Associates, LLP
Attn: Mike Chen
12280 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Rd #209
Saratoga, C a. 95070
SUBJECT: TWO STORY PERMIT ACTION LETTER – Application s R-2015-38
This letter confirms the decision of the Director of Community Development, given on December 17,
2015; approving a Two-Story Permit (R-2015-38) to allow the construction of a new 2,775 square foot,
two-story single family residence located at 18780 Tilson Avenue, with the following conditions:
1. APPROVED PROJECT
This approval is based on a plan set entitled, “Patel Residence, 18780 Tilson Ave., Cupertino, Ca.
95014” consisting of six sheets labeled “A-1.0 to A-4.0 and C.0 (a Topographic Survey Map)” except
as may be amended by conditions in this resolution.
2. ANNOTATION OF THE CON DITIONS OF APPROVAL
The conditions of approval set forth shall be incorporated into and annotated on the building plans.
3. ACCURACY OF THE PROJ ECT PLANS
The applicant/property owner is responsible to verify all pertinent property data including but not
limited to property boundary locations, building setbacks, property size, building square footage,
any relevant easements and/or construction records. Any misrepresentation of any property data
may invalidate this approval and may require additional review.
4. PRIVACY PLANTING
The final privacy-planting plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Division prior to
issuance of building permits. The variety, size, planting distance shall be consistent with the City’s
requirements.
5. 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 consistent with the R -1 Ordinance, for
all windows with views into neighboring yards and a sill height that is 5 feet or less from the second
story finished floor. The precise language will be subject to approval by the Director of Community
Development. Proof of recordation must be submitted to the Community Development Department
prior to final occupancy of the residence.
OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
CITY HALL
10300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255
(408) 777-3308 • FAX (408) 777-3333 • planning@cupertino.org
Two -Story Permit Action Letter Page 2
R-2015-38
6. LANDSCAPE PROJECT SU BMITTAL:
T he applicant shall submit a full landscape project submittal , per sections 490.1, 492.1, and 492.3 of
the Department of Water Resources Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance, for projects with
landscape area more than 500 square feet ; the applicant shall submit either a full landscape project
submittal or submit the Prescriptive Compliance Checklist per Appendix D of the Department of
Water Resources Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance for projects with landscape area more
than 500 square feet and less than 2,500 square feet . The Landscape Documentation Package or
Prescriptive Compliance Checklist shall be reviewed and approved to the satisfaction of the Director
of Community Developmen t prior to issuance of building permits.
7. CONSULTATION WITH OTHER DEPARTMENTS
The applicant is responsible to consult with other departments and/or agencies with regard to the
proposed project for additional conditions and requirements. Any misrepresentati on of any
submitted data may invalidate an approval by the Community Development Department.
8. EXTERIOR BUILDING MATERIALS/TREATMENTS
Final building exterior treatment plan (including but not limited to details on exterior color, material,
architectural treatments and/or embellishments) shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of
Community Development prior to issuance of building permits. The final building exterior plan
shall closely resemble the details shown on the original approved plans. Any ex terior changes
determined to be substantial by the Director of Community Development shall require a minor
modification approval with neighborhood input.
9. INDEMNIFICATION
Except as otherwise prohibited by law, the applicant shall indemnify and hold harmless the City, its
City Council, and its officers, employees and agents (collectively, the “indemnified parties”) from
and against any claim, action, or proceeding brought by a third party against one or more of
the indemnified parties or one or more of the indemnified parties and the applicant to attack, set
aside, or void this Resolution or any permit or approval authorized hereby for the project, including
(without limitation) reimbursing the City its actual attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in defense of
the litigation. The applicant shall pay such attorneys’ fees and costs within 30 days following receipt
of invoices from City. Such attorneys’ fees and costs shall include amounts paid to counsel not
otherwise employed as City staff and shall include City Attorney time and overhead costs and other
City staff overhead costs and any costs directly related to the litigation reasonably incurred by City.
10. 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), h as 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.
Please note that if this permit is not vested within a year, it shall expire on December 17, 2016.
Two -Story Permit Action Letter Page 3
R-2015-38
Staff received comments from three adjacent neighbors during the comment period identifying concerns
related to the potential privacy impacts of the second-story windows on the norther n , southern and
western elevation. To resolve the concerns, staff reviewed the plan sets with one neighbor by clarifying
that the windows affecting their property are measured at 5’ from finished floor and would not require
privacy plantings and the property owners of 18780 Tilson Avenue personally addressed the other two
neighbors by proposing to add wall accents to the two front second story windows and to reduce the
sizes of the two rear second story windows.
The architect modified the plan set to include wall accents to the two front second story windows to give
the windows a recessed look to the satisfaction of the affected neighbor. Since these wall accents are
architectural features, these accent additions did not affect the floor area calculation. Additionally, the
architect reduced the bathroom window to 2’10” x 5’ and increased the sill height from finished floor to
5’. Due to building code regulations governing emergency egress, the bedroom window could not be
reduced in size. All privacy plantings will still b e in place for all windows with sill heights below 5’ from
finished floor .
Staff has made all the findings that are required for approval of a Two -Story Permit as required and no
additional conditions were placed as a condition for appro val by Cupertino's Municipal Code, Cha pter
19.28.140 (B).
1. The project is consistent with the Cupertino General Plan, any applicable specific plans, zoning ordinances
and the purposes of this title.
The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan as the project is within the Low
Density land use area. There are no applicable specific plans that affect the project. The
project has been found to be consistent with the requirements of Cupertino Municipal Code
Chapter 19.28 Single Family (R-1) Residential.
2. The granting of the permit will not result in a condition that is detrimental or injurious to property
improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare.
The granting of the permit will not result in a condition that is detrimental or inju rious to
property improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety
or welfare as the projects is located within the R1 -5 (Single Family Residential) zoning district,
and will be compatible with the surrounding uses of the neighborhood.
3. The proposed project is harmonious in scale and design with the general neighborhood.
The proposed project is located in a residential area consisting of single family homes. The
proposed project maintains the single family home scale found compatible with the general
neighborhood.
4. Adverse visual impacts on adjoining properties have been reasonably mitigated.
Any potential adverse impacts on adjoining properties have been reasonably mitigated
through the privacy protection plantings a nd installation of a front -yard tree as required.
Also, please note that an appeal of this decision can be made within 14 calendar days from the date of
this letter. If this happens, you will be notified of a public hearing, which will be scheduled befo re
the Planning Commission.
Two -Story Permit Action Letter Page 4
R-2015-38
Sincerely,
Sarah Filipe
Assistant Planner
City of Cupertino
Enclosures:
Approved Plan Set
CC: Urja Patel, 18780 Tilson Ave , Cupertino Ca 95014
Megan Sun, 18785 Tilson Ave, Cupertino Ca 95014
Samit Pal, 10 464 Wunderlich Dr, Cupertino Ca 95014
Biren Shah, 18781 Barnhart Ave, Cupertino Ca 95014
1
Sarah Filipe
From:chang kim <24hrdrainpro@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, February 01, 2016 9:32 PM
To:Piu Ghosh
Cc:Sarah Filipe; 24hrdrainpro@gmail.com
Subject:18781 Tilson Ave -- appeal - huge windows
Hi Piu,
My name is Steve Kim and I live on 18771 Barnhart Ave.
Our neighbor, Urja Patel & Ajay, who live on 18781 Tilson Ave came to our house and explained to us that
their "plum tree is dying & they want to cut it and all the neighbor has signed the waiver" and ask us to sign the
waiver too. My wife signed the waver paper based on their words and being a good neighbor. But purposely
they didn't mention anything about the window sizes of second story building they are planning to build and
hence they got our signature based on false information. We have privacy concerns IF they are planning to
have huge windows.
We have seen their two story building plan and we would like to appeal the decision because their Master
Bedroom window size is huge (8 feet x 4 feet 6 inches) and THEY MUST REDUCE THE SIZE of the window
to resolve our privacy concerns.
We would like planning commission to consider this concern during the appeal process and public hearing
which is scheduled on 9th Feb.
We will try our best to attend the meeting in person but if we can not for any reason, we would like to make
sure these concerns are considered and our neighbor, Urja Patel, reduces the size of master bedroom window to
address our privacy concerns.
Thanks,
Steve
Subject: Report of the Community Development Director
Planning Commission Agenda Date:Tuesday, February 9, 2016
Water Efficiency Landscaping Ordinance (WELO):
PerGovernor Brown’s Drought Executive Order (EO B-29-15), the Department of Water
Resources (DWR) updated the State’s Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance
(MWELO) which included revisions such as lowering the threshold size for landscapes
subject to the ordinance from 2,500 sq. ft. to 500 sq. ft. and specifying other landscape and
irrigation design standards to promote efficient landscaping. Local agencies haduntil
December 1, 2015 to adopt a local ordinance or default to the State’s MWELO.Agencies,
that work together to develop a Regional Ordinance,have until February 1, 2016 to adopt
an updated ordinance.ARegional Ordinance was not prepared in the Santa Clara County
this time around. Bay Area Water Supply & Conservation Agency (BAWSCA), however,
distributed their draft in early December.
Due to the reduced timeline available for development and adoption of a local ordinance,
the City defaultedto the State’s MWELO on December 1, 2015. Upon reviewofthe draft
distributed by BAWSCA, a local draft Landscape Ordinance has been prepared and is
available online at: www.cupertino.org/savewater. In addition, communityengagement
has been conducted at a community meeting on February 1, 2016. Outreach was conducted
on various social media platforms, Cupertino Radio and Television, Cupertino Scene and
the City’s website. Five people attended the community meeting and were interested in the
resources available for improving/installing drought tolerant landscaping.The updated
ordinance will be presented to the City Council tentatively onMarch 1, 2016.
GPA Authorization Application Process:
The Council adopted policies on processing applications that propose General Plan
Amendments in September 2015. On February 2, 2016, the City Council reviewed the2016
First Cycle applications that had been received by the November 16, 2015 deadline. The
two applications received were for a new hotel at the Goodyear Tire site(10931 N. De Anza
Blvd.)and a mixed use development with office, commercial, hotel and retail uses at the
OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
CITY HALL
10300 TORRE AVENUE •CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255
(408) 777-3308 • FAX (408) 777-3333 • planning@cupertino.org
2
Oaks Shopping Center (21255-21755 Stevens Creek Blvd.)The City Council denied
authorization of both the applications. Both applicants may revise their project and
resubmit by the deadline for the 2016 Second Cycle in (tentatively) May 2016.
Marijuana Cultivation & Dispensary Ordinance:
On February 2, 2016, The City Council conducted the second reading and enacted
Ordinance #16-2140: “An Ordinance Of The City Council Of The City Of Cupertino
Amending Section 19.08.030 And Adding Chapter 19.98 Of Title19 Of The Cupertino
Municipal Code Regarding Medical Marijuana Dispensaries, Marijuana Cultivation
Facilities, Commercial Cannabis Activities, And Medical Marijuana Deliveries”. This
Ordinance prohibits the cultivation, delivery and dispensing of medical marijuana in most
cases.The Ordinance will go into effect on March 3, 2016.