PC 03-30-64
10321 So. Hwy 9, Cupertino, Calif., 95014
252-4505
C I T Y 0 F CUP E R TIN 0
CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA
MINUTES OF THE ¡.flEETING vnTH COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND FIRST_WORK
SESSION ON PROPOSED ZONING Ö'RDINANCE Wü'H WILSEY, HAM AND. BLAIR
TIME:
7:30 P.M., Monday, March 30, 1964
PLACE
Board Room, Cupertino School District Office
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Adamo, Fitzgerald, Rampy (8:30), Small,
Snyder, Frolich
COMMISSIONER ABSENT: Thomson
ST AFF PRESENT:
Assistant City Engineer
Chief Building Inspector
Mr. W. Eric Carruthers, Santa Clara County Planning Department,
was present to show colored slides and describe the role of the County
Planning Department. He gave a progress report of the County's 701
Planning Prögram, which has been golng on for about two years. They
are concerned with population ch2.~lgr~s, zoning, etc. Their main ob-
jectives have been:
1. To provide a data bank for businesses, cities, etc., on which
they can call for statistics. He said we are living in a
dynamic time and area and that this data is essential to intel-
ligent growth and development of Santa Clara County.
2. They wanted to see if the County could stimulate themselves to
formulate policies to fit in with t118 policies of the various
cities involved. Rather than the County trying to do city
planning, their aim is to asslst the individual cities in any
way they can. They have free j,r,formation available to everybody.
Mr. Carruthcrs then distributed copies of a brochure called
"Framework for Policy" and a statistical index to members of the
Commission, the staff, and the reporters present. He explained that
the sewer systems, freeways and expressways are making more and more
land accessible. Each year 40,000 to 50,000 people are coming to
Santa Clara County and by 1980 there will be a population of
1,125,000. There are 85,000 people working in "durable goods" in
Santa Clara County and in the 1970's there will be 125,000. In
future land development, streets will take up 25%, commercial and
industrial zoning will comprise another 25%, and 50% of the land
will be used for residential purposes.
The hazards of strip commercial zoning were brought to the
fore by Mr. Carruthers. He said it was typically bad for traffic,
seldom provided enough parking spaces, and is usually ugly.
In Mr. Carruthers I closing statementl1, he asked for the Cuper-
tino Planning Commissionls participation in policy planning, the
reaching of common objectives and policies regarding land development,
and urged that the lines of communication between city and county
planning officials be kept open.
-1-
Mr. Ray Schoenfeld began the study session by going through
the first draft of the "Proposed Zoning Ordinance" with the Commis-
sioners and touching upon certain sections.
Section l,ADOPTION A~ID APPLICATION, and Section 2, ESTABLISH-
MENT AND DESIGNATION OF ZONING DISTRICTS, serve as an introduction.
Section 3, DEFINITIONS, clarifies nomenclature in the Ordinance. It
was felt that the present zoning designations could be shortened.
On Page 70, Section 24, SPECIAL PROVISIONS RELATING TO MISCEL-
LANEOUS PROBLEM USES, the consultant stated that by specifically
spelling out the rules that must be followed it wi.ll he,lp to eliminate
future problems, This section sets up the minimum criteria.
Comm. Snyder asked how closely the new ordinance resembles the
existing sign ordinance. The consultant said that it parallels it,
although it is not exactly the same. He suggested the Commission
compare the two sign ordinances and make recommendations to the
Council for any substitutions or alterations.
Section 28, AMENDMENTS TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE, was set up to
allow changes, in zoning. However, a $50 fee is recommended to ac-
company a rezoning application to divert frivolous zoning changes
which are time consuming to the governing bodies. A favorable vote
requires 5/7 of the Commission and a simple majority (or 4/7) is
required for a denial.
It was pointed out that under Section 29, VARIANCES, there is
quite a difference from what we now have. Certain matters should be
left to the staff. This will be covered in detail at one of the
other study sessions.
Section 32, ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE PLAN APPROVAL, suggests
some changes from the way it is presently set up. It should be
comprised of a building inspector, a planning director, a member
of the Planning Commission, an architect who is a member of AlA,
and an artist or designer of established reputation or a landscape
architect.
Section 33, "s" INTERIM STUDY DISTRICT, was set up to. freeze
a district. on a temporary basis while its ultimate use is being
considered·.
Section 34,FUTURE WIDTH AND SPECIAL BUILDING LINES, encom-
passes a list of all major thoroughfares shown on the adopted
General Plan and a list of all cases where building setback lines
greater than the future street or highway width lines are required
for safety and other lawful purposes.
Section 35, APPEALS, defines how they are made and enforced.
In summary, Mr. Schoenfeld stated he has tried to give an
ordinance which, if adopted, 'would give Cupertino a vehic.le fo):'
upgrading the community and for implementing the General Plan,
Coupled with t.he Zoning Map, this zoning ordinance will point in
the same direction as the General Plan. He then asked for questions
from the Commission, cautioning that they should be kept ina general
vein at this first study session.
-2-
Chairman Frolich felt there would be considerable discussion
on the zoning ordinances. lIe wanted it confirmed that under Sec-
tion 28, any rezoning done once this map and text are completed,
will be' termed amendments to the zoning ordinance. Answer was in
the affirmative.
Comm. Snyder suggested the Sections be divided up among the
Commissioners, to have them thoroughly study the sections designated
to them and be prepared to lead in the discussion of them at future
study sessions.
Comm. Fitzgerald asked if this zoning ordinance would void all
the existing ordinances. The consultant answered that it would
unless they are specifically spelled out in recommendations to the
City Council and they go along with it.
Chairman Frolich requested the Assistant City Engineer obtain
copies of the most recent parking time limit and trailer parking
ordinances and send them to the Commissioners and the consultant.
Chairman Frolich suggested each Commissioner prepare a chart
for a given zoning district comparing the existing ordinances to
the proposed ones. He requested Mr. Schoenfeld check the MI-PH and
PA-PH ordinances against what he has written.
Comm. Snyder suggested members of the staff type up these
analyses and send copies to the Commissioners and Mr. Schoenfeld
previous to the study sessions. Comm. Small offered to have these
analyses reproduced on the Xerox 914 at his office.
Comm. Fitzgerald asked the consultant how he compiles these
regulations. Mr. Schoenfeld said that his 3 main sources of data
are the Santa Clara County Ordinances, Bay Area Community Ordinances
(growth areas) and Amendments to Cupertino Ordinances. He then
analyzes this information as to what are the main objectives -- what
we are trying to accomplish.
Chairman Frolich pointed out one case in the workings at the
present time where the present ordinances seemed inadequate and wanted
to know if these new zoning ordinances would be more comprehensive.
Mr. Schoenfeld referred to Section 24.6, DWELLING GROUPS, as covering
for such cases.
To the question of pyramiding, Mr. Schoenfeld said these
ordinances will be more clearly defined. Comm. Adamo said he under-
stood the County had abandoned pyramid zoning. The consultant said
that the trend is to mix low density with medium density to relieve
the feeling of sameness in an area.
Chairman Frolich asked the Commissioners if a good way to
divide up the "homework" would be for each of the present Commis-
sioners to cover a given ordinance and study and compare it with
the existing ordinance. They were all agreeable to this.
-3-
COMMISSIONER EXISTING ZONING NEW ZONING
Rampy PO-H, PA-PH P-O
Snyder MI-PH, ~I-I-H R-D, LM
Frolich PC PC
Sma 11 R-l, R-2 R-l, R-2
Adamo R-3, R-24 R-3, R-4
Fitzgerald C-l C-l, C-2
Comm. Fitzgerald asked for a definition of Accessory Use.
Mr. Schoenfeld explained that it was incidental to the main use of
the property; it. is subordinate to the principal use, like a tool
shed, etc. A Use Permit is required in some instances'.
Mr. Schoenfe Id was then a,sked tö define B & Y COMBINING
DISTRICTS, noted on page 2. He explained that B, SPECIAL BUILDING
SITES DISTRICT, would be used in those areas for various reasons
where it is necessary for public safêty to require larger lots, as
in the, case of steep hillsides, etc. Should the Monta Vista area
be annexed to Cupertino, this ordinance may apply because of some
of their small lot sizes.
Y, YARD DISTRICT, would prevail on a small, minor street where
the setback is 15' while the ordinance requires 25'. Then a special
YF15 would be set up for that'particular block where that. condition
occurred. This avoids breaking down the regulations you want to
work toward and also avoids political headaches.
Comm. Fitzgerald wanted clarificat.ion of the C-2 Use Permit.
This will be brought up at the second study session.
The Chairman announced the next study session \1ill be held
at the City Hall at 8 P.M., Tuesday, April 7th.
.The meeting was adjourned at lO:05'P.M.
APPROVED :
Isl Donald Frolich
Chairman
ATTEST:
léJJ-rk¡~
Robert s: Snook' , ,
Secret.ary, 'Planning Commission
-.4-