PC 10-22-64 •
10321 So. Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road 80,000.5
Cupertino, California, 9501/
252-4505
CITY OF CUPERTINO
CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA
S .
TWENTIETH WORK SESSION. ON THE PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE
BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION, : OCTOBER 22, . 1964
PLACE : City Hall
TIME : 8:00 P.M.
Comm. present : Frolich (8 :35 ) , Gates , Hirshon (8:2.5 ) , .Small,
Traeumer, Thomson
Comm. absent : Johnson •
Staff present : City and Traffic Planner Adde Laurin •
Recording Secretary Lois Inwards
Invited Guests : Mr . Frank Spink, Associate Planner, City of Fremont
Mr . Robert Sturdivant, Associate Planner, County
of Santa Clara Planning Department
® Citizens present : Mr . Burrell Leonard, Vallco Park
Mr. Louie Tersini, Developer
The meeting began with the City Planner giving a brief resume of
the recent Underground Power Conference . One of the most signifi-
cant facts brought out at this conference is that underground power
distribution is becoming less and less expensive : about $1 per frcnt
foot right now.
Messrs . Robert Sturdivant and Frank Spink, Jr. , were then intro-
duced to the group by the City Planner .
Mr. Sturdivant explained the bases on which the County has based
their ordinances . They have two types, of regulations to allow the
type of developments they feel should be encouraged. The purpose
of both types is to allow greater flexibility; better site planning,
and better architectural design. Once a developer has decided to
go 'ahead with this type of plan the : County makes sure he sticks to
it . The proposal is judged on net density.
The first type of cluster development is the RPD (Residential-
Planned Development ) , which contains all types of housing plus
enough commercial .area. to serve the development .
-1-
RPD is treated as a zone change . The First Hearing
. consists of a
preliminary plan and a broad proposal where density and land use
are defined.
The Second Public Hearing is conducted when everything has been
put down in detail. Streets , buildings and open space are laid
out, density details are given, etc . The approved development
plan is then approved by the Board of Supervisors and notice of
this plan is filed in the Recorder 's office . It contains very
broad standards and requires development easements over the common
areas .
A second type of ordinance the County is now proposing is a
"Cluster Permit . " This would apply to existing R-1 and R-E zones .
The density would remain the same , but they would provide for
better street patterns and site planning. This type need not go
through the zone change procedure', but a Permit is issued by the
Planning Commission.
The procedure for a Cluster Permit includes two Planning Commission
Hearings; the first for review of a preliminary map, and the second
for review of the subdivision map and the plan itself . The map
is then approved by the Board of Supervisors .
Mr . Sturdivant said that the County will, in most cases , be re-
quiring underground utilities .
Mr . Frank Spink was then asked to speak. He said that the City of
Fremont has two types of concepts :
411
1. The Planned District was designed to allow any kind of planned
district . Fremont 's General Plan is figured in gross rather than
net density. This includes streets, park sites , school sites, etc.
A typical designation would be 4 .5 families per acre . This can be
translated into single family or multi-family, or a range in
between, as long as the overall density within a planning unit
(a set of predetermined areas within logical boundaries ) remain
an average of 4 .5 families per acre .
The first procedural step is a Preliminary Development Plan, which
is a broad use plan. This type of plan goes before the Planning
Commission but is not a Public Hearing. It offers no guarantees
that a final submittal will be. approved. A maximum allowable
density is established here . The services of a professional urban
planner, an architect, a landscape . architect , and a licensed
engineer are required. They must endorse the development plan,
although they are not required to agree to changes made by the
Planning Commission. Townhouses and a high rise , with some minor
commercial to serve the planned .area, is Fremont 's first venture
of this type .
Fremont has no fixed standard in order to not stifle the develop-
ment plan. A 35% maximum increase in density is granted for open
space ; e .g. , 4 .5 plus 35% for open space .
-2-
Mr. Spink said they 've tried to cut the City up into planning units
for the purpose of mathematically calculating where the overall
density in the city is approaching the General Plan 's densities .
The Planning Commission and the City, Council have felt that the
density transfer should be used mostly on the Planned Districts..
Density transfer can be a more attractive incentive than the 35%
increase of population density allowed for a transition of open
space . The City of Fremont requires something better than average
411 in exchange for a density increase .
Fremont Ordinance No. 391 and Resolution No. 1059 delineate the
criteria .
Because the door has been left open for maximum flexibility, the
developments and the documents can become quite involved Consider-
able staff, time is required .
The Planned Unit Development is similar to the Cluster Permit in
Santa Clara County in that it retains the basic density. The
major objective has been to obtain neighborhood parks through the
incentive of reduced lot size .
Mr . Spink said they have found that Homeowners Associations are not
a desirable way to organize maintenance of common area . Therefore,
City policy is presently, to require dedication of common areas .
The Ordinance was changed to require a minimal improvement of the
park sites , such as irrigation, a tree planting program, etc .
Underground wiring and off-site improvements are not. required .
(They are required in the Planned District concept . ) The lot
410 reduction allowed under PUD would not permit a true cluster.
A good example of this PUD is the "Way Out West " development. Lots
are 80 ' x 80 ' (standard approaches would require 8000 sq. ft . or lots
70 x 114) ; houses can be 5 ' from the front property line; 20 '
driveways are required (can be curved).; allows front and rear
patios (adult and children) ; and has an 18,' minimum rear yard. Two-
story homes must have a wider side yard than single story homes in
the same district . .
Mr . Spink displayed a plot plan for a very large planned district
in Fremont, including three Planned Unit Developments , with a
pedestrian parkway running through the center for over two miles .
The commercial district is in the center, with homes at cul-de-
sacs on either side and a large community park at one end. Fremont
plans to have a city-wide park., community parks and neighborhood
parks .
Fremont 's standards for landscaping, are that the development. of the
parks is to be of a low-maintenance type . . .The city staff is doing
research and setting up prototypes on the most desirable types of
plants and landscaping and offering these plans to the developers .
To recap., Mr . Spink said in the case of PD they negotiate all the
conditions of approval; in the case of PUD, they keep hands off many
of the details but encourage and discourage where they see fit .
When the final map is filed the developer can start building.
-,_
Comm. Traeumer asked the opinions of the two speakers in regard to
dedication versus non-dedication: "Where no increased density is
allowed, will they ever find a developer willing to come in and
put in the amenities? " Mr. Sturdivant ; aid they probably would in
the mountain areas . Mr . Spink said that in Fremont they get less
credit for undeveloped than for developed open space . The objec-
tive is to encourage building to the contour of the hills rather
than a straight grid pattern.
In Fremont, a PC can be a twenty-year plan, but they require the
first phase to be done within four years.
Each Planned District must be unique unto itself. They evaluate
each proposal on it.s appropriateness .
I Fremont says that a developer is required to give access from his
development to a major street . They will give the developer the
City 's right of condemnation, but he pays all the costs .
Mr. Sturdivant says "in lieu payment " seems to be the best solu-
tion to the problem, but it is not legal and would need a change
in the State Law.
Conditions of an approval : To make them reasonable in terms of
granting the approval, not in terms of whether it will be profit-
able to the developer .
The City Planner said he certainly agrees with the concepts of a
Planned Community as outlined by Fremont and the County. He feels ,
however, that the complete concept of a PD in Cupertino would 41)
need the support of the complete new Ordinance and a more
thoroughly studied General Plan. He is in doubt that a one-man
office can handle the work 'load created by the PC concept . What
Cupertino is trying to do for the moment is to introduce the
equivalent of the County 's Cluster Permit and Fremont 's Planned
Unit Development in an Interim Cluster Ordinance .
Mr. Spink also felt the PD is a very time consuming thing for the
City Staff. PUD is not so time consuming, however . The more
people you can have working on the project in the staff on the
ground rules the more flexibility can be achieved . Density and
procedures are two important factors to be ironed out .
The report by the City Planner regarding density, etc . , in the
Clustered Zone was then reviewed by the Commission. It was
argued that when the same side yard and front yard setbacks are
maintained, the result may be pretty much the same grid pattern.
Chairman Thomson suggested front and side yard setback reductions
to allow the architect more flexibility.
The City Planner said. he liked Comm. Frolich 's thought to have a
basic, rule that the Planning Commission and the City Council may i
consider variation in the rules on the merits of the project .
Mr . Spink said that any change in density increase must go through
the zoning procedure ; any other approach would appear to violate
the• California Zoning Law.
-4-
411
Comm. Traeumer felt it would be necessary for Cupertino to have two
Cluster Ordinances : one with the same density and one with in-
creased density.
It was moved by Comm. Small and seconded by Comm. Hirshon to keep
the overall density the same and vary the lot sizes for this
interim ordinance .
This motion was amended by Comm. Small and seconded by Comm.
Hirshon to have an escalator clause to allow increased overall
density with consideration to design.
Amendment carried, 6-0
Motion carried, 6-0
Chairman Thomson said the next work session would be held on
Thursday, November 5th, 8:00 P.M. , at City Hall.
Meeting adjourned at 10 :40 P.M.
APPROVED :
/s/ Scott Thomson
Chairman
ATTEST :
adde ,C)&14 -4,‘
City and Traffic Planner
410
-5-