DRC Reso 02825 -ASA -00
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
RESOLUTION 28
OF THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
APPROVING AN ARCHITECTURAL SITE APPROVAL FOR FRONTAGE
FACADES AND FENCE LOCATIONS FOR LOTS #1 & #7 OF AN
APPROVED 7 -LOT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
AT 22020 HOMESTEAD ROAD
SECTION I: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Application No.: 25 -ASA -00
Applicant: Hossain Khaziri
Location: 22020 Homestead Rod&
SECTION I1: FINDINGS
WHEREAS, the Design Review Committee of the City of Cupertino received an application for an
Architectural and Site Approval, as described in this Resolution; and
WHEREAS, the Design Review Committee finds that the changes are beneficial and compatible with
the surrounding area;
1. The proposal, at the proposed location, will not be detrimental or injurious to property or
improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general
welfare, or convenience;
2. The proposal is consistent with the purposes of the zoning ordinance, and the General Plan.
3. The design creates a more appealing frontage appearance to this development and integrates it
better with the surrounding neighborhood.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this
matter, the application no. 25 -ASA -00, is hereby approved; and
That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this Resolution are based
and contained in the public hearing record concerning Application 25 -ASA -00 as set forth in the
Minutes of the Design Review Committee Meeting of December 13, 2000, and are incorporated by
reference herein.
Resolution No. 25 -ASA -00 December 13, 2000
Page 2
SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
1. APPROVED EXHIBITS
Approval is based on submitted plan sets entitled "PROPOSED SEVEN NEW HOMES FOR
MICHAEL AMINIAN & HOSSAIN KHAZIRI" dated May 1999, and consisting of three sheets
labeled A-1, A-2 & A-6.
2. NOTICE OF FEES, DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS OR OTHER EXACTIONS
The Conditions of Project Approval set forth herein may include certain fees, dedication
requirements, reservation requirements, and other exactions. Pursuant to Government Code
Section 66020(d) (1), these Conditions constitute written notice of a statement of the amount of
such fees, and a description of the dedications, reservations, and other exactions. You are hereby
further notified that the 90 -day approval period in which you may protest these fees, dedications,
reservations, and other exactions, pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(a), has begun. If
you fail to file a protest within this 90 -day period complying with all of the requirements of Section
66020, you will be legally barred from later challenging such exactions.
3. FENCE LOCATION
On lot #7, the easterly portion of the fencing shall be pulled back so it aligns with the easterly
building line of the proposed house.
4. LANDSCAPING
The applicant shall prepare a landscape plan for the project that will be reviewed and approved by
the Community Development Director in conjunction with the building permit.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 13th day of December 2000, at a Regular Meeting of the Design
Review Committee of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:
COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN:
COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
ATTEST:
Ciddy Wor ell
City Planner
g:/p1anning/dre/25-ASA-00 reso.doc
Doyle,, Chairperson Stevens
APPROVED: 2 - 0
Jerry vens
Design Review Committee
To: Design Review Committee Date: December 13, 2000
From: Peter Gilli, Associate Planner
,Subject. Application: 13-R-00
vocation: 10519 Gascoigne Drive
Project Description. Exception to Section 19.28.060 to allow a 378 square foot addition to an existing two
story residence resulting in a floor area ratio of 56%.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial subject to the model resolution.
BACKGROUND
The applicant proposes a 378 square foot, single story surnroom to an existing 2,816 square foot, two-story
residence. The residence was built in Santa Clara County in 1996, prior to annexation into the City of
Cupertino.
DISCUSSION:
Accuracy of the Provided Information
The applicant states that the home is 2,816 sq ft on a 6,019 sq ft lot. The site plan provided by the applicant
'shows incorrect lot dimensions. Staff did a rough calculation of the lot area based on the Assessors Parcel Map,
which resulted in a lot size between 5,400 and 5,700 sq ft. Those figures are 5-10% less than the figure
provided by the applicant. Attached is a copy of the Assessors Parcel Map, with the subject site highlighted.
assuming the floor area figures provided by the applicant are accurate, the current floor area ratio is about 49%
nd the addition results in a floor area ratio of 56%.
]Exception to the R-1 Ordinance
The R-1 Ordinance allows for exceptions to the prescriptive regulations for unusual circumstances. The
findings for an exception are described below, with staff comments:
1. The literal enforcement of the provisions of this chapter will result in restrictions inconsistent with the spirit
and intent of this chapter.
The R-1 ordinance was written with the clear intent of limiting development to no more than a 45% floor
area ratio (FAR). Property owners that maximize their development potential with the construction of 45%
FAR homes sacrifice future expansion and future construction of accessory structures.
2. The granting of the exception will not result in a condition that is materially detrimental to the public health
safety and welfare.
If the exception were granted, it would set a precedent that would result in numerous requests to exceed the
FAR limitation in the ordinance. The City Council stated that mass and bulk are elements that affect the
public welfare of a residential neighborhood. Therefore, this exception, and the precedent it would set,
would be detrimental'to public welfare.
3. The exception to be granted is one that will require the least modification of the prescribed design
regulation and the minimum variance that will accomplish the purpose.
The exception requires considerable modification to the FAR limit. Considering the existing residence
exceeds the maximum allowed floor area ratio, staff would not support any expansion of the residence.
4. The proposed exception will not result insignificant visual impact as viewed from abutting properties.
The proposed exception does not result in significant visual impacts as viewed from abutting properties;
however, the end result of the precedent set by this request would result in significant visual impacts.
Staff discussed this request with the applicant on two occasions; both times indicating that staff would strongly
recommend denial of the project.
Prepared by: Peter Gilli, Associate Planner
Approved by: Ciddy Wordell, City Planner
Attachments
Model Resolution
Applicant Letter dated November 6, 2000
Staff Letter dated November 27, 2000
Assessor's Map
Plan Set
g:/planning/dre/]3-R-00 SR. doc
2