Hung promised to increase the setback, use lighter-looking material on the second story, and build more trees to beautify the neighborhood. But there is one thing he refuses to compromise on: He wants to raise the ceiling of his future living room from the city's recommended 10 feet to 11 feet.

After spending months appealing his design to the planning commission and city council, his design was approved unanimously by the council on July 7.

The one-foot difference in ceiling height may not sound like a big deal, but Hung's case has prompted the city to study whether it is necessary to amend its single-family residential model ordinance, or R1 ordinance, and design guidelines.

The R1 ordinance was amended in 1999 in response to the burgeoning number of "monster homes" in Cupertino. The ordinance requires developers and homeowners to meet height, setback and landscape regulations to ensure new houses are compatible with the neighborhood. Design guidelines with pictures are also available for reference.

The ordinance has caused confusion and drawn criticism from residents, architects and developers.

Resident Malka Nagel was frustrated when she rebuilt her house in 2001.

Although the R1 ordinance was implemented to avoid too much bulk and mass in a home, Nagel actually had to build a bigger first floor than she intended in order to maximize her second floor. The ordinance stipulates that the second story's floor area ratio has to be within 35 percent of that of the first floor. If the ratio exceeds 35 percent, the applicant must receive a special permit from the city's design review committee.

Carry Chien was baffled by the vague definition of "compatibility" when his mother rebuilt her house. The planning staff said the house was too tall and not compatible with the neighbors' houses.

"We need a clear definition of compatibility," Chien said. "The height requirement was frustrating. If you reduce the height, it cuts into the sanctity of personal space. Twelve-foot eave height is good. It is not too low and not too high."

The eave height of many old houses in Cupertino is 9 feet. The R1 ordinance allows new houses' eaves to be as high as 12 feet, but the design guidelines usually ask applicants to have eaves no higher than 10 feet if their neighbors have old houses.

In Hung's case, the height of his living room complies with the ordinance but not the guidelines, so his design was rejected by the city's design review committee.

"Guidelines should not supersede the ordinance," Hung said. "I don't know why I have such a difficult time building the house of my dreams. I want my property rights to be served."

Currently, without clear regulations, the neighbors' approval is an important determining factor when the planning commission and the city council review building projects.

This is especially true in Hung's case. In the July 7 council meeting, four of his neighbors stayed until 10:30 p.m. to voice their support for Hung.

"Through the entire planning process of building his house, Mr. Hung has kept us well-informed," said Adrian Lung, who lives behind Hung's house. "I understand that there is a concern that the new house will not fit into our neighborhood, but this is an old neighborhood that is in a transitional stage, so it doesn't make much sense to me to hold the design of this house to the homes that are at least 30 years old."

Roy Hampton, who lives across from the Hungs, said about Hung: "He has been working on this for months. He is not trying to build 50 homes. And this is not a monster home. As we have diversity in ethnicity, let's have diversity in houses."

The city council agreed with the neighbors, but Mayor Michael Chang wanted people to be aware of the negative connotation of the term "monster home."

"Monster home' is a derogative term," Chang said. "I happen to live in a small house, I wouldn't appreciate people calling it a rat hole or a dog kennel."

Chang further suggested the staff sharpen the guidelines to make it easier for people to comply with them. The city has held three discussions and a study session with concerned residents and the planning staff. The staff will do more research and present a revised version of the ordinance to the planning commission in August.