The URL can be used to link to this page

CC 08-18-2020 Item No. 12 Petition for Reconsideration RM-2017-39_Written CommunicationsCC 08-18-20 #12 Petition for Reconsideration, Application RM-2017-39 Written Comments 1 Cyrah Caburian From:City of Cupertino Written Correspondence Subject:FW: Reconsideration of the Minor Residential Permit at 21865 San Fernando Avenue Attachments:Application RM-2017-39_OverExtendedHomeRemodel_BillBH_18Aug2020.pptx From: bill bh <wrbhhome@aol.com> Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2020 9:16 AM To: City Clerk <CityClerk@cupertino.org> Subject: Reconsideration of the Minor Residential Permit at 21865 San Fernando Avenue CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hello / Good morning ... Please kindly send me a Zoom invite for tonight's hearing. My public comment deck is attached. Thank you, bill black-hogins +1 (408) 930-2758 ----- Forwarded Message ----- From: Erika Poveda <erikap@cupertino.org> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2020, 09:40:26 AM PDT Subject: RE: City Council Hearing - August 18, 2020 Good morning, As a follow-up to my previous email, I am sending additional information on the hearing format for the August 18th City Council hearing. Please note that there are two phases to this item. In the first phase, Council will decide if the item meets the grounds for reconsideration. The second phase will be the reconsideration hearing itself. Please see below for additional important information. -First Phase: During this phase, Council will determine if the petitioners meet the grounds for reconsideration. The focus of this portion is why the item should be reconsidered. If you wish to speak/present during this phase, you may do so during the Public Comment Period. Each speaker is allowed up to 3 minutes during the Public Comment Period and may only speak on why the item should be considered and the grounds of reconsideration as stated in the Petition.  Mayor introduces agenda item  Staff presents report  Questions from Council  Public Comments (3 mins.)  Council deliberates If Council does not find that there are sufficient grounds for reconsideration during the first phase, the item will be closed. However, should Council find sufficient grounds, they will reopen the item for a reconsideration hearing (second phase), which will have a format similar to the previous City Council appeal hearing. 2 - Second Phase: During this phase, Council will hear the reconsideration itself and will again review the project and impacts. If you wish to speak/present during this phase, you may do so during your allotted time – 10 minutes shared for petitioners and 10 minutes shared for property owner and applicant.  Mayor introduces agenda item  Staff presents report  Questions from Council  Petitioners present (shared 10 mins.)  Property owner and applicant present (shared 10 mins.)  Public Comments (3 mins.)  Mayor invites applicant/appellant to respond to public or Council questions  Council deliberates  Votes & closes hearing If you have any questions about your presentations or the hearing phases, please feel free to contact me. Additionally, if you have a presentation, please send it to the City Clerk (cityclerk@cupertino.org) by 3:00pm on Tuesday. Thank you, Erika Erika Poveda Associate Planner Planning Division ErikaP@cupertino.org (408) 777-3257 From: Erika Poveda Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2020 5:40 PM Subject: City Council Hearing - August 18, 2020 Good evening, You will soon receive a Zoom meeting invitation for the upcoming August 18th City Council meeting for the Petition for Reconsideration of the Minor Residential Permit at 21865 San Fernando Avenue. Once the meeting invitation is sent, I will follow up with you to provide an outline of how the item will be organized as it will be slightly different from the previous appeal hearings. I also wanted to notify you that the meeting agenda has been posted online and we are item #12: https://cupertino.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx. Please let me know if you have any questions in the meantime. Warm regards, Erika 8/18/2020 1 What is ‘Harmonious’ ? “The proposed project is ‘harmonious’ in scale and design with the general neighborhood … “ Bill B‐H California Contractors State Licensing Board H.I.S. License # 125384 SP .. Exp. 30 Jun 2020 18 Aug 2020 Reference: 21865 San Fernando Avenue Application RM‐2017‐39, RESOLUTION 20‐036, Page 3 (11 May 2020) Harmonious: Definition Harmonious …. circa ~1540AD Adjective har·mo·ni·ous | \ här‐ˈmō‐nē‐əs Definition of ‘harmonious’ 1 : having agreement among musical components: musically concordant (agreement among constituent elements) 2 : having the parts agreeably related : congruous (consonant, agreeing) 3 : marked by accord in sentiment or action Reference: https://www.merriam‐webster.com/dictionary/harmonious 1 2 8/18/2020 2 Harmonious: Definition Harmonious …. circa ~1540AD Adjective har·mo·ni·ous | \ här‐ˈmō‐nē‐əs Definition of ‘harmonious’ 1 : having agreement among musical components: musically concordant (agreement among constituent elements) 2 : having the parts agreeably related : congruous (consonant, agreeing) 3 : marked by accord in sentiment or action Reference: https://www.merriam‐webster.com/dictionary/harmonious Project is NOT harmonious in scale / design 3. The proposed project is harmonious in scale and design with the general neighborhood; and The project is located within the R1-7.5 (Single Family Residential) zoning district and will be compatible with the surrounding uses of the neighborhood. The purpose of the R-1 Ordinance is to enhance the identity of residential neighborhoods, to ensure the provision of light, air, and a reasonable level of privacy to individual residential parcels, to ensure a reasonable level of compatibility in scale of structures within the neighborhood, and to reinforce the predominantly low-intensity setting in the community. The project meets the building development regulations of the R-1 Ordinance including lot coverage, setbacks and other applicable development standards. Furthermore, the City Council added Condition #3 requiring that the depth of the second-story deck be reduced to no more than 12’ as measured from the second-story rear wall for a harmonous scale. Overall, the proposed project, as conditioned, maintains a single-family home scale and is compatible with the general neighborhood. Reference: 21865 San Fernando Avenue Application RM‐2017‐39, RESOLUTION 20‐036, Page 3 (11 May 2020) a) compatible with the surrounding uses of the neighborhood NOT a true statement; no similar example exists b) enhance the identity of residential neighborhoods Misappropriation of intended neighborhood identity c) compatibility in scale of structures within the neighborhood NOT a true statement; scale is many times larger d) reinforce predominantly low-intensity community High-Intensity project; beyond scale of neighborhood home e) second-story rear wall for a harmonous scale Conjecture; NO architectural (measurement) definition exists f) is compatible with the general neighborhood NOT a true statement; no similar (compatible) example exists 3 4 8/18/2020 3 Final Comments 1) NO example within the ‘neighborhood’ exists that shows a home with similarly disproportional harmonious‐in‐scale dimensions 2) Inconsistent, confusing (zone) usage of the definition of (general) ‘neighborhood’ may be impacting the consideration scope. Extensive study with comparative measurements should be conducted before ruling on actual permit measurements 3) Ruling will set precedent for future build permit requests and will clearly forever change original ‘identity’ of the neighborhood 4) Future use (new owners, renters, etc.) of a large open space balcony certainly will risk / impact future neighborhood harmony and may become detrimental / injurious to the neighborhood vicinity. Thank You for your time & support ! ﺍﺭﻛﺷ Cheers! Gracias Danke Merci 🙏 🙇Grazie 谢谢 Tacka dig Obrigado Falemnderit Շնորհակալություն Təşəkkür Edirəm Eskerrik Asko Hvala благодаря Děkuji TakSalamat Hatur Nuhun Cảm ơn Bạn ﺎﻣﺷ ﺯﺍ ﺭﮑﺷﺗ ﺎﺑ Terima Kasih Asante Sağol הדות 有難う御座います बŠत धɊवाद् 5 6 1 Cyrah Caburian From:City of Cupertino Written Correspondence Subject:FW: City Council Hearing - August 18, 2020 Attachments:City Council Hearing 200818.pptx From: David Tsai <dtsai612@yahoo.com> Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2020 12:22 PM To: City Clerk <CityClerk@cupertino.org> Cc: Erika Poveda <ErikaP@cupertino.org>; Francis T Kun <frank@atdes.net>; Ting Tsai <splendidlifet@gmail.com> Subject: Fw: City Council Hearing ‐ August 18, 2020 CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hi, Attached is my presentation for Second Phase tonight if needed. Thanks, David ----- Forwarded Message ----- From: Erika Poveda <erikap@cupertino.org> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2020, 09:40:26 AM PDT Subject: RE: City Council Hearing - August 18, 2020 Good morning, As a follow-up to my previous email, I am sending additional information on the hearing format for the August 18th City Council hearing. Please note that there are two phases to this item. In the first phase, Council will decide if the item meets the grounds for reconsideration. The second phase will be the reconsideration hearing itself. Please see below for additional important information. -First Phase: During this phase, Council will determine if the petitioners meet the grounds for reconsideration. The focus of this portion is why the item should be reconsidered. If you wish to speak/present during this phase, you may do so during the Public Comment Period. Each speaker is allowed up to 3 minutes during the Public Comment Period and may only speak on why the item should be considered and the grounds of reconsideration as stated in the Petition.  Mayor introduces agenda item  Staff presents report  Questions from Council  Public Comments (3 mins.)  Council deliberates If Council does not find that there are sufficient grounds for reconsideration during the first phase, the item will be closed. However, should Council find sufficient grounds, they will reopen the item for a reconsideration hearing (second phase), which will have a format similar to the previous City Council appeal hearing. - Second Phase: During this phase, Council will hear the reconsideration itself and will again review the project and impacts. If you wish to speak/present during this phase, you may do so during your allotted time – 10 minutes shared for petitioners and 10 minutes shared for property owner and applicant.  Mayor introduces agenda item 2  Staff presents report  Questions from Council  Petitioners present (shared 10 mins.)  Property owner and applicant present (shared 10 mins.)  Public Comments (3 mins.)  Mayor invites applicant/appellant to respond to public or Council questions  Council deliberates  Votes & closes hearing If you have any questions about your presentations or the hearing phases, please feel free to contact me. Additionally, if you have a presentation, please send it to the City Clerk (cityclerk@cupertino.org) by 3:00pm on Tuesday. Thank you, Erika Erika Poveda Associate Planner Planning Division ErikaP@cupertino.org (408) 777-3257 From: Erika Poveda Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2020 5:40 PM Subject: City Council Hearing - August 18, 2020 Good evening, You will soon receive a Zoom meeting invitation for the upcoming August 18th City Council meeting for the Petition for Reconsideration of the Minor Residential Permit at 21865 San Fernando Avenue. Once the meeting invitation is sent, I will follow up with you to provide an outline of how the item will be organized as it will be slightly different from the previous appeal hearings. I also wanted to notify you that the meeting agenda has been posted online and we are item #12: https://cupertino.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx. Please let me know if you have any questions in the meantime. Warm regards, Erika 8/18/2020 1 City Council Appeal Hearing #2 David & Yiting Tsai 8/18/20 1 Our Family ‐ Reason for the Addition 2 1 2 8/18/2020 2 Meets and Exceeds all Code/Guidelines plus… Numerous Accommodations for our neighbors' preferences: 1. Moved 2nd floor addition forward – extra cost/time, much more distractions to kids 2. Reduced balcony size and removed stairs 3. Reduced garage from 3‐car to 2‐car 4. Replace privacy trellises with proper privacy screening 5. Added 5’ privacy wall on the balcony 6. Flattened roofline and reduced posts width of carport 7. Agreed to remove a tree we love in our front yard 8. Increased balcony railing height beyond requirement with privacy wood sidings (Planning Commission Hearing) 9. Limited depth of the balcony to 12’ (City Council Hearing) 3 Our Neighbor (left side) – Mr. & Mrs. Fang 2 stories w/ many windows, 3‐car garage and parking… without any privacy screening. 4 3 4 8/18/2020 3 Our Neighbor (right side) – Mr. Huang 2 stories, balcony with stairs, BBQ, just 4 feet from the fence… without any privacy screening. 5 Many Balconies 6 5 6 8/18/2020 4 Summary •Meets and Exceeds all Code/Guidelines •Made so many voluntary accommodations for our neighbors' preferences over last 4 years already •Since we are reconsidering: •Will the 12’ max deck depth be reinforced on all our neighbors, too? •If not, please remove our 12’ deck depth limit and extra‐high railing •Neighbors working together for all our privacy: •All pitching in for 8' side fences •Add some privacy screening from neighbors’ sides as well 7 Backup 8 7 8 8/18/2020 5 Our Backyard Good privacy screening on both sides and a 7' fence. 9 9