Loading...
23. R1 ordinance report CUPERTINO Agenda Item No. 23 City of Cupertino 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 (408) 777-3251 FAX (408) 777-3333 Community Development Department SUMMARY Agenda Date: August 21, 2007 Application Summary: Report on the R1 ordinance regarding neighborhood meetings on the Residential Hillside Ordinance RECOMMENDATION: The Plmming Commission recommends that the City Cow1Cil delete Section 19.28.050(C)(1) & (2) of the R1 Ordinance. BACKGROUND: In January 2005 the City Cow1Cil incorporated RHS development rules into the R1 ordinance revisions for properties upslope from the 10% line and with average slopes of 15% or greater. Following these actions residents. in the affected areas stated they were not aware that the Cow1Cil might apply these hillside development standards to their properties. Consequently, the Cow1cil directed that staff revisit the process to provide ample opportunity for input. On April 2005 the City Council discussed the R1 hillside development standards and decided to preclude all R1 properties east of the General Plan 10% hillside transition line. 3D Aerial Map of the Lindy Lane Rl Hillside Area from Google Earth (illustrative purposes only not intended to be to scale) The Cow1cil asked the neighbors upslope of the 10% line to get together to discuss options and try to reach consensus on an approach to development in the area. The additional notice. and neighborhood discussions have occurred and some progress seems to have been made on condensing the issues and arriving at suggestions for approaches that may achieve the overall objectives of protecting the hillsides while preserving the property owners' development options. The Planning Commission reviewed the issue on Tuesday, August 14, 2007. M CA - 2006-01 R 1 Hillside Ordinance Page 2 August 21, 2007 DISCUSSION: The City of Cupertino General Plan contains goals and policies to preserve hillside areas as follows: Goal UF" Hillside Protection Policy 2-48: Hillside Development Standm'ds Establish building and develop111.ent standm'ds t01' the hillsides that enSU1'e hillside pl'otection. 1. Ordinance Regulations and Development Approvals. Apply ordinance regulations and development approvals that limit developm.ent on ridgelines, hazardous geological areas and steep slopes. Control colors and materials, and minimize the illumination of outdoor lighting. Reduce visible building mass through such means as stepping structures down the hillside, following the natural contours, and limiting the height and mass of the wall plane facing the valley floor. 2. Slope-density F01'1nula. Apply a slope density formula to very low intensity residential development in the hillsides. Density shall be calculated based on the foothill modified, foothill modified 1/2acre and the 5-20 acre slope density formulae. Actual lot sizes and development areas will be determined through zoning ordinances, clustering and identification of significant natural features and geological constraints. r,j ...... "-:';"'=-'-. ~'-~ ~-~ " Strategies: The strategies that are outlined in the General Plan to help control hillside development impacts are as follows: .:. Limit development on ridgelines .:. Limit development on steep slopes .:. Limit development on hazardous geological areas .:. Control color and material .:. Reduce visible building mass MCA-2006-01 R1 Hillside Ordinance Page 3 August 21,2007 .:. Contour development with the natural terrain .:. Limit the height and mass of wall plane facing the valley floor .:. Avoid mass grading .:. Retain significant trees The RHS ordinance applies to almost all properties in the hillsides and contains special development standards that are designed to address these issues. Upon reviewing the R1 Ordinance amendments in 2005, the Council was concerned that some areas in the hillsides retained Rl zoning and had none of the above hillside protections. The R1 ordinance is designed for flatter valley floor lots with typically smaller lot sizes, in areas that are not as environmentally sensitive aI1d have limited development opportunities. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS After hearing concerns about the notice and opportunities for input, the City Council directed the neighbors to get together and attempt to reach consensus on an approach to protect the hillsides. Two neighborhood meetings were held on June 20, 2007 and July 19, 2007. During the first meeting, neighbors were asked to identify the common objectives for the areas. A summary of the common objectives are summarized as follows: .:. Property Value .:. Equity .:. Preservation of hillside .:. Rural character .:. Simplify rules for the toe of slope properties At the second meeting, the neighbors were presented with a number of options: 1. Revert back to the R1 hillside development standards pre-2005. 2. R1 foothill modified standards. 3. Retain current Rl hillside development standards (2005). 4. Rezone to RHS. Neighbors were not able to reach a consensus at that meeting. However, there were some benefits that came out of the meeting. It helped us identify some of the values and common objectives in the area. PLANNING COMMISSION The Planning Commission met on August 14,2007, took public testimony and reviewed the staff report on the neighborhood meetings. The Planning Commission recommended to the City Council with a 2-1-2 (Wong and Miller - Yes, Giefer - No, Kaneda and Chien - Absent) vote to delete Section 19.28.050(C)1&2 for the following reasons: MCA-2006-01 R 1 Hillside Ordinance Page 4 August 21, 2007 .:. If the toe of slope lots were taken out, the affected properties by the R1 hillside rules would decrease from 124 parcels to 22 parcels. .:. Hillside preservation measures should be applied to the entire City. .:. There were some unintended consequences from the R1 15% overlay resulting from the 2005 R1 Ordinance Amendment. .:. The 15% overlay triggered more development. .:. The 15% overlay triggered more trees cutting. .:. The current rules are more complex then they should be. .:. Concerned with the issue of fairness in terms of applicability of the rule. .:. The rule should apply equally to all that are on hill regardless of geographical location. The one Commissioner that voted no on the deletion of Section 19.28.050(C)1&2 provided the following comments: .:. The toe of slope lots (R1-10 lots) should be exempted from this discussion since they do not contribute to the overall preservation of the hillside. .:. Concerned with the lack of fairness and wanted the discussion to also how the R1 hillside lots compare with all of the RHS lots located also upslope of the 10% hillside line that consist of similar character and topography as the hillside R110ts in discussion. .:. Concerned that by deleting the 15% R1/RHS overlay, that some of the RHS property owners would argue in fairness that they should be rezoned to R1 due to equal treatment of properties with similar characteristic and geographical locations. PUBLIC INPUT Numerous neighbors spoke at the August 14, 2007 Commission meeting. The majority of the neighbors wanted the removal of the 15% R1 /RHS overlay citing unfair treatment, negative property value impacts and unintended consequences. Only a few neighbors expressed that some measures still should be retained in this area to protect the hillside and that what was presented by staff at the meeting is acceptable. ORDINANCE OPTIONS If you imagine the R1 and RHS ordinance being placed on the opposite ends of a section (see diagram below) you can visualize the possible options for development control in the hillside areas. The current 2005 R1/RHS hillside development standards trigger is probably between the midpoint of the spectrum and full RHS. MCA-2006-01 R 1 Hillside Ordinance Page 5 August 21, 2007 - R 1 development standards - < 30% average slope triggers hillside develoDment - Controls Density - House size adjustment based on slope - Hillside development Standards Rl and RHS Development Control Spectrum Short of deleting all of the hillside development standards, the Cow1C;il has the following options: 1. Revert back to the R1 hillside development standards pre-2005. 2. R1 foothill modified staI1dards. 3. Retain current R1 hillside development standards (2005). 4. Rezone to RHS. If the Council decides to retain some hillside development standards on the R1 hillside properties, staff believes you can incorporate some of the ideas that came out of the neighborhood process. The R1 hillside standards can be amended to provide greater flexibility for the property owners while preserving the intent of the sensitive hillside development. Even though neighbors were unable to reach consensus, the discussions clarified the areas of disagreement leading to subsequent individual discussions and emails with suggestions for possible solutions to house size, setbacks and trees. The following outlines the staff approach: MCA-2006-01 Rl Hillside Ordinance Page 6 August 21, 2007 STAFF PROPOSAL: The Council directed the neighbors and the Commission to provide input and recommendation on the section of the R1 Ordinance relating to hillside development (Section 19.28.050C1 - 15% R1/RHS overly rule) that was revised during the 2005 R1 Ordinance Amendment process. The Commission's recommendation focuses on removing the past Council action and offers no compromise or consensus on alternative solutions. Additionally, it deletes Section 19.28.050C2 which deals with development on excessive slopes in excess of 30%. This section has been effective since 1999 (Ord. 1834) and was not revised during the 2005 R1 Ordinance. Staff recommends that Section 19.28.050C2 be retained. Section 19.28.050C2 states that "no structure or improvements shall occur on slopes of thirty percent or greater unless an exception is granted in accordance with Section 19.40.140, unless no more than five hundred square feet of development, including grading and structures, occurs on an area with a slope of thirty percent or greater. " Staff recommends the Council apply a modified foothill standard to the 22 parcels located in the Lindy Lane/Mt. Crest Place area that represents the best of compromise and consensus given all of the comments received from neighbors during the neighborhood meetings and during the Planning Commission meeting. Staff recommends that all parcels currently zoned R1-10 be removed from the modified hillside rules and treated as conventional R1 zoning rules. MODIFIED FOOTHILL STANDARDS \Nhat we heard from the neighbors: More flexibility on FAR and review process if the development is located on a flat pad or conforms to RHS house size Potential Ordinance Solution: .:. Allow up to 45% FAR if the development or expansion is located on the flat pad portion of the lot (< or =10%). .:. Allow property owners to build off of the flat pad if they conform to the RHS house size limits. .:. If not, then an Architectural and Site approval is required at the Planning Commission level. Rationale: Larger homes can be sensitively designed to minimize impacts to the hillside and support the rural character of the area. It is unlikely homes will maximize their FAR with the setback and offset requirements but it provides added flexibility for the property owners and a public process to review the details. MCA-2006-01 Rl Hillside Ordinance Page 7 August 21, 2007 Wl1at 'ive heard from the neighbors: Flexibility on second floor size Potential Ordinance Solution: No second floor size limits but retain the R1 setbacks and articulation rules. Rationale: Provides an incentive to develop on the flatter portion of the lot and minimize grading and retaining walls by adding flexibility to permit more square footage on the second floor. Larger second floor is also consistent with the design pattern of the surrounding hillside neighborhoods. Wl1at we heard from the neighbors: Fencing, grading, retaining wall standards more appropriate to the hillside Potential Ordinance Solution: Retain the RHS fencing and grading standards. Add a requirement that all solid walls over 5 feet must be screened by landscaping or siding materials. Rationale: Adopt the same prote,ction that is offered in the RHS Ordinance. Provide visual relief from large retaining walls. What we heard from the neighbors: More tree protection Potential Ordinance Solution: Planning Commission approval if more than two specimen trees are removed. Rationale: More stringent than the current Tree Ordinance but adds flexibility for discretionary review if more trees must be removed. The Council may want to consider if the tree size should be a factor. For instance, you may want a very large Oak to be preserved or at least subject to public review under any circumstances. Wha t we are hearing from the neighbors: Simplify development standards for the toe of slope lots Potential Ordinance Solution: Exempt all properties located in the R1-10 zoning district from any hillside development measures. Rationale: Homes at the toe of slope are largely built out with full fencing and are not visible to the valley floor properties. They do not contribute to preservation of the hillside ~nvironment. The majority of these homes are approximately 10,000 square feet which would allow a house size up to approximately 4,500 square feet. Only a f~w are larger than 10,000 square feet. If the R1-10 lots are exempt from this discussion, the total number of affected properties is reduced from 124 to 22 (see diagrams below). MCA-2006-01 R1 Hillside Ordinance Page 8 August 21, 2007 Exempt RI-I0 Properties Affected Approximate .. .. Current Rl Ordinance Approx. 124 Properties Affected 22 Al PROPERTIES The Council also directed the staff and the PI aIming Commission to evaluate rezoning the Al properties to Rl and include them into the Rl hillside development. discussion since there are rs approximately seven Al properties that are located on the hillside upslope of the 10% hillside transition line. Staff believes that these properties should be rezoned to Rl with lot size minimums equal to their existing lot size and be subjected to the same Rl hillside guidelines because they share the same hill and similar topography. The Plam1ing Commission did not make any recommendations on the Al properties. Alternatively, the Cow1Cil could direct that all of the changes to the Rl ordiI1aI1ce be incorporated into the existing Al ordinance. MCA-2006-01 R1 Hillside Ordinance Page 9 August 21,2007 EFFECTIVE DATE OF ORDINANCE CHANGES On May 1, 2007 the council asked the neighbors to work together to arrive at some consensus regarding potential solutions for their neighborhood (see attached minutes of May 1, and April 3, 2007). Staff has been unable to anticipate the direction of the potential ordinance changes that is necessary to begin the public notice process. Several residents want to begin processing remodel plans for their homes and are concerned about how. long it will take for any ordinance amendments to take effect. Once the direction is provided it typically takes three to four weeks to provide public notice, draft the ordinance changes and schedule a public hearing before the Planning Commission. It takes two weeks to forward the recommendation of the Planning Commission to the City Council two weeks for the second reading and 30 days prior to the ordinance taking effect. Therefore, the total time from Council direction to the effective date of the ordinance changes can take about three to four months. If the Council reaches consensus on Tuesday and directs specific ordinance changes they probably will not be effective until the end of this calendar year. In the meantime, the Council could invite any of the affective residents to file either exception ans/ or variance applications from the current R1 ordinance if their application otherwise conforms to all of the provisions contemplated by the Council. While you cannot provide absolute assurance that the application would be approved the exception/variance procedure would allow residents to immediately begin processing remodel applications ahead of the actual effective date. RECOMMENDATION Provide direction to staff to begin processing ordinance changes reflecting the Planning Commission recommendation or the alternative Foothill Modified standards. Staff prepared very preliminary ordinance wording to facilitate your review reflecting both recommendations as exhibits A and B attached. Prepared by: Gary Chao, Senior Planner Submitted by: Approved by: ~ w Steve Piasecki Director of Community Development David W. Knapp City Manager MCA-2006-01 R1 Hillside Ordinance Page 10 August 21, 2007 Attachments Exhibit A: Draft ordinance wording reflecting the Planning Commission recommendation Exhibit B: Draft ordinance wording reflecting the Foothill Modified standards Exhibit C: Minutes from the City Council meetings of April 3 and May 1, 2007 Exhibit D: Existing Rl, RHS and Al Ordinances Exhibit E: Email from Marshall Wang, dated August 8, 2007 Exhibit F: Neighborhood Petition received August 14, 2007 Exhibit G: Planning Commission report of August 14, 2007 with attachments Exhibit H: Existing Ordinance (Section 19.28.050C) Exhibit A Exhibit A Draft Ordinance Reflecting the Planning Commission's Recommendation: ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL AMENDING CHAPTER 19.28.050 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONES (R-1), REGARDING HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS ON PROPERTIES WITH AN AVERAGE SLOPE EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN FIFTEEN PERCENT LOCATED WEST OF THE 10% HILLSIDE SLOPE LINE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Chapter 19.28 of the Municipal Code of Cupertino is hereby amended to read as follows: 19.28.050 Development Regulations (Site). C. Development on Properties with Hillside Characteristics. 1. Buildings proposed on properties located Vlest of the 10% hilloide slope line ao defined in the Cupertino Ceneral Plan, that have an average slope equal to or greater than fifteen percent shall be deyeloped in accordance ,^.,'ith the site development and design otandardo specified in Sections 19.10.050 through 19.10.110 of the Residential Hillside ordinance, Chapter 19.10, or the R1 zoning ordinance, Chapter 19.28, whichever opecific regulation is more restrictive. 2. No structure or improvements shall occur on slopes of thirty percent or greater unleso an exception is granted in accordarL<:e ,,\Tith Section 19.10.110, unleos no more than fh.T hundred oqu;1I'e feet of development, including grading and structures, occuro on an area with a dope of thirty percent or greater. C. f).;. An application for building permits filed and accepted by the Community Development Department (fees paid and permit number issued) on or before March 1, 2005 may proceed with application processing under the ordinances in effect at that time. (Ord. 1886, (part), 2001; Ord. 1868, (part), 2001; Ord. 1860, ~ 1 (part), 2000; Ord. 1834, (par!), 1999; Ord. 1635, ~ 1 (part), 1993; Ord. 1601, Exh. A (part), 192) Exhibit B Exhibit B: Draft ordinance wording reflecting the Foothill Modified standards-staff proposal 19.28.050 Development Regulations (Site). C. Development on Properties with Hillside Characteristics. Buildings proposed on properties located west of the ten percent hillside slope line as defined in the Cupertino General Plan, that have an average slope equal to or greater than fifteen percent and are zoned for lot sizes greater than 10,000 square feet shall be developed in accordance with the following site development and design standards: 1. Thirty Percent Slopes. No structure or improvements shall occur on slopes of thirty percent or greater unless an exception is granted in accordance with Section 19.40.140, unless no more than five hundred square feet of development, including grading and structures, occurs on an area with a slope of thirty percent or greater. 2. Site Grading. All site grading shall be limited to a cumulative total of two thousand five hundred cubic yards, cut plus fill. The two thousand five hundred cubic yards includes grading for building pad, yard areas, driveway and all other areas requiring grading, but does not include basements. The graded area shall be limited to the building pad area to the greatest extent possible. Grading quantities for multiple driveways shall be divided equally among the participating lots, e.g., two lots sharing a driveway will divide the driveway grading quantity in half. The divided share will be charged against the grading quantity allowed for that lot development. A maximum of two thousand square feet of flat yard area, excluding driveways, may be graded. a. All cut and fill areas shall be rounded to follow the natural contours and planted with landscaping which meets the requirements in Section 19.40.050G. b. A licensed landscape architect shall review grading plans and, in consultation with the applicant and the City Engineer, shall submit a plan to prevent soil erosion and to screen out and fill slopes. 3. Floor Area. 3.a. The maximum floor area ratio shall be forty-five percent of the net lot area for development proposed on the flat pad portion, defined as pad areas equal to or less than 10% slope, of any lot. Formula: A = 0.45 B: where A = maximum allowable house size and B = net lot area. 3.b The maximum floor area for development where any portion of the building is proposed on a slope area exceeding 10% shall be four thousand five hundred square feet plus 59.59 square feet for every one thousand square feet over ten thousand square feet of net lot area. In all cases the maximum floor area shall not exceed six thousand five hundred square feet without an exception. Formula: A=((B-10,000)/1,000)(59.59)+4,500: where A = maximum allowable house size prior to instituting the maximum 6,500 square foot building size and B = net lot area. 3.c The floor area ratio may be exceeded for development on pads exceeding 10%, if a site and architectural permit is approved by the Planning Commission in accordance with Chapter 19.134 of the Cupertino Municipal Code. 4. Second Floor Area The amount of second floor area is not limited provided the total floor area does not exceed the allowed floor area ratios. 5. Retaining Wall Screening. Retaining walls in excess of five feet shall be screened with landscape materials or faced with decorative materials such as split-faced block, river rock or similar materials subject to the approval of the Director of Community Development. 6. Fencing. All fences in an RHS zoning district shall be governed by the following reg u lations: 6.a. Solid board fencing shall: 1. Be limited to a five thousand square foot site area (excluding the principal building) for lots exceeding thirty thousand square feet in net lot area. 2. Open fencing (composed of materials which result in a minimum of seventy-five percent visual transparency) shall be unrestricted except that such fencing over three feet in height may not be constructed within the front yard setback. (Ord. 1634, (part), 1993) 7. Tree Protection. Up to two specimen trees with a diameter less than 18 inches may be removed to accommodate a building pad subject to approval of the Director of Community Development. Removal of specimen trees exceeding 18 inches or removal of more than two specimen trees requires approval of a tree removal permit by the Planning Commission in accordance with the Tree Ordinance. April 3, 2007 Cupertino City Council Exhibit C ~aYo.r Wang reordered the agenda to take up items 20, 21, and 22 next. BUSINESS. . . . ~~bl 20.~,hedule an interview date for the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission and Community Development Block Grant Committee vacancies. , , ." Council concurred to set an application deadline of Friday, April 27, and to conduct interviews for these vacancies on Tuesday, May 22, along with other interviews already scheduled to begin at 3:00 p.m. Council asked that staff schedule a 45-minute .dinner break at approxim~tely 6:00 p.m. 21. Consider canceling the City Council meetings in July and/or August. (No documentation in packet). Council concurred that they would plan to hold both regular meetings in July (July 3 and July 17); and that they.would cancef the regular meeting of Tuesday, August 7. ORDINANCES ,,1' ~ " ~ '" 22. Conduct the second re"i~O" of Ordinance No. 07-1999: "An Ordinance of the city of Cupertino, Amend~ .f Title 11, Section 11.24.140 of the Cupertino Municipal Code (Parking for Purp~es of Servicing or Repairing, Regarding For-Sale Signs in Cars), to "" Conform the Provisions of the Code to the Requirements of Current Case Law, and Conform the,,fovisions of the Cocie to be Consistent With Present City Practices." Lowen,Lahoney moved and seconded to read the ordinance b'Y'til!e only and that the Ci~p;;;. reading wonld constitnte the second reading thereof. '~es: Lowenthffi, " oney, Sandoval, and Wang. Noes: None. Absent: Kwok.'" " LowenthallMahoney moved and seconded to enact Ordinance No. 07-1999. Ayes: Lowenthal, Mahoney, Sandoval, and Wang. Noes: None. Absent: Kwok. 19. Consider a Municipal Code Amendment of Chapter 19.28 Single-Family Residential eR1) Zones regarding buildings proposed on properties with an average slope equal to or greater than fIfteen percent, Application Nos. MCA-2006-0l and EA-2006-12 City of Cupertino, Citywide: a) Open and close the public hearing with possible continuance to an adjourned regular meeting on April 4 at 6:45 p.m. for a decision b) Adopt a Negative Declaration c) Conduct the fIrst reading of Ordinance No. 07-2000: "An Ordinance of the Cupertino City Council Amending Chapter 19.28.050 of the Municipal Code, April 3, 2007 Cupertino City Council Page 7 Single Family Residential Zones (Rl) Regarding Buildings Proposed on Properties with an Average Slope Equal to or Greater than Fifteen Percent, Application No. MCA-2006-01" The City Clerk distributed the following: (1) A letter dated April 2 from T.E. and Marion Schmidt regarding item No. 19 asking that the Council revert the R-1 ordinance to reflect 30% slope parameters; and (2) A letter from "The Arzeno Voters and 21902 Lindy Lane" regarding item no. 19 asking Council to retain the 15% slope overlay. Director of Community Development Steve Piasecki presented a brief background, and said that in 2005 the Council had approved amendments to the R1 Ordinance applying hillside standards to Rl lots with an average slope of 15% or greater. Those hillside. standards were intended to reduce house size, grading and retaining walls. The issue of geographical applicability was also under discussion including properties west of the hillside transition line and the Rl sloped properties along the Stevens Creek floodplain. The Planning Commission made the following recommendation to Council: Revert the R1 hillside standards prior to the 2005 R1 Ordinance where only developments on slopes of 30% or greater would be subjected to the hillside standards regardless of geographical locations. The following spoke in favor of keeping the 15% overlay: Bob Rodert, John James, Robert Berti, Sara Arzeno, Jennifer Griffin and Julia James. They believed that more hillside protection measures were consistent with the General Plan policies and goals and the 15% overlay would protect the hillsides for the benefit and enjoyment of all. The following spoke in favor of removing the 15% overlay: Kit Chan, Shabbir Nomanbhoy, Mark Santoro (speaking also for Suzette Pangrle, Chuck Lee and Jim Black), Homayour Hasheim, Ming Shan Yang, Farzad Haghigh, Eva Wong, Harold Sinzig, Homa Govashiri, Arya Hashemi, Viktor Sinzig, Doug Knirck, Shan Zhu, Sinzig Iriva, Simon Ko, Frank Sun, Barry Pangrle, Sherry Fang, Bill Guangerich, Tim Maslyn and Jim Hol1. They cited the following concerns: property owners' rights, property values, confusion at having two sets of regulations and difficulty in remodeling under 15% overlay rules. They also did not think the overlay protected the hillsides. Councilmember Mahoney suggested the establishment of a new category that would recognize the unique features of these properties including those zoned agricultural. For now he suggested leaving the overlay in place and drawing the line at the 10% slope and removing it from everything else. Councilmember Sandoval agreed with Councilmember Mahoney. The overlay was not working and she suggested utilizing the talents of the neighbors in arriving at a mutually agreeable solution. She also noted.that spot zoning was not effective and the agricultural properties should be included in the discussion. Councilmember Lowenthal agreed that the properties on the valley floor should be discussed separately. He also agreed with working with the neighbors on this issue and April 3, 2007 Cupertino City Council Page 8 recommended that staff ask the community to identify a working committee of nD more than 15 people to represent them. The preservation of hillsides was important and the issue of grading needed to be addressed as well as the issue of house size. Councilmember Lowenthal recommended telling the Planning Commission that Council would like to see this matter back the second meeting in August. Lowenthal/Sandoval moved and seconded to adopt a Negative Declaration. The motion carried 4-0 with Kwok absent. Lowentha1lMahoney moved and seconded to amend Section 19.28.050, C.l of the ordinance to read: "Buildings proposed on properties located west of the 10% hillside slope line, as defmed in the Cupertino General Plan, that have an average slope equal to or greater than fifteen percent, shall be developed in accordance with the site development..."; that the ordinance be read by title only, and that the City Clerk's reading would constitute the first reading thereof. Ayes: Lowenthal,Mahoney, Sandoval, and Wang. Noes: None. Absent: Kwok. Council also directed staff to remand this matter back to the Planning Commission to consider a possible specific treatment, including properties zoned A-I; to devdop a plan with input from the neighbors, and to report back to the City Council on August 21. UNFINISHED BUSINESS - None " STAFF REPORTS ., 23. Response to cOnlments made during Oral COnllnunications, March 20, 2007 by Grace and Tony Toy~ Director of Parks and Recreation Therese Smith stated that there had been many inaccuracies in the Toy's comments at the March 20, 2007 meeting concerning the Sports Center and she referred Council to the 27 -page staff report prepared in response to these inaccuracies. She further stated that management of the facility, charges, accessibility and the terms of conducting business in a public facility were all very important issues and ones that she believed were well addressed regarding the Sports Center. Ed Hirshfield noted that he was a long time participant in the Cupertino Tennis Club and he thanked Council for their support of the Sports Center.. He believed the complaints registered by only two people in the last ten years were destructive to the public interest and had 'cost the city a lot of staff time and money. /1 ,f Grant Gower, past president of the Cupertino Tennis Club, thanked Council and the Parks and Recreation Department for their assistance and support. He believed the Sports Center was an excellent asset in the community. He particularly referred to the summer tournament which included over 400 participants and in 2005 and 2006 had been named 'the tournament of the year'. Mr. Gower also commented on the excellent customer service provided by the staff. May 1, 2007 Cupertino City Council Page 8 '.""~'~ During Postponements, Kwok/Mahoney moved ang s~<;.:onded to (1) Table this item, since ': . ellant had withdrawn his aRJ?~f.l,k and (l}'birect staff to place an item on the May 10 Coun ".. '. . "discuss policies and procedures regarding the appeal of _,.ad;~~},Y&d~' ISlons:-' ~~eame4UBE!flimouslY, '~~~CES 17. Conduct the second reading of Ordinance No. 07-2000: "An Ordinance of the Cupertino City Council Amending Chapter 19.28.050 of the Municipal Code, Single Family Residential Zones (Rl) Regarding Buildings Proposed on Properties with an Average Slope Equal to or Greater than Fifteen Percent, Application No. MCA-2006-01." (Continued from April 17). Patrick Kwok stated for the record that although he was not at the meeting when this was last discussed, he did read the staff report and watch the videotape of the meeting. Community Development Director Steve Piasecki noted that at their April 17 meeting Council had continued this item to allow the neighbors to reach some agreement on the RI hillside zoning issue. Piasecki said that staff had not had the opportunity to fully review their suggestions, but he highlighted them and their possible ramifications. Mark Santoro (speaking also for Suzette Pangrle, Sherry Fang, and Frank Sun) stated that a lot of information had been received from the neighbors, and the consensus was that they did not want to be separated from the rest of the city; they wanted the issue resolved tonight; they did not want spot zoning; they did not want the matter to go back to the Planning Commission; they wanted to stay RI; and they believed there was confusion regarding the 10% line. They were requesting that Section 19.28.050, Section CI and C2 of the RI ordinance be removed and replaced with the following: The following rules apply to buildings whose slope within the footprint of the proposed building are over 15%: 1) allowable floor area be reduced by 1 % for each percentage of slope over 15% within the building footprint. The maximum floor area reduction shall be 50%. and 2) in order to reduce the footprint of buildings on hillsides the size of the second floor of a two story building may exceed the 45% RI limit however it shall not exceed 100% of the first floor. Mr. Santoro concluded that the recommendation of the north side (including some members of the south side) was to remove Section 19.28.050, Sections C1 and C2 from th~ RI Ordinance. However, they were willing to accept the south side's proposal. James Seay noted that their home was built in 1979 and he currently wanted to do a remodel which would include an elevator. He would be negatively impacted by this ordinance. Bob Rodert questioned what the problem was with the current ordinances. He could not support changes that were not directed at solving specific community-wide problems. He recommended maintaining the current ordinances. May 1, 2007 Cupertino City Council Page 9 Emily Maslyn supported adopting the ordinance before Council. She noted that their property was near a creek bed not;1 hillside and this process was holding up their building permit. Ron Berti commented that the neighbors had tried to work together and they should be given the opportunity to continue to try to reach consensus. He did believe the hills should be treated differently and did not support adopting the ordinance before Council. Jim Holl noted that his house had been built in 1971 and should be designated RI. There was no reason for the overlay and the area should not be separate. Furthermore, he did not think this issue should be sent back to the Planning Commission. Jennifer Griffm expressed her concern about the possible loss of second story setbacks and questioned whether this would be setting a dangerous precedence. The City Attorney noted that legally Council was unable to take action on any recommendations made at tonight's meeting. Any new ordinance changes would need to be noticed (including the agricultural properties) and sent back to the Planning Commission for review. The .only issue before Council at this meeting was adoption of the ordinance on this agenda. Council commended the neighbors for working together on this issue and suggested that their recommendations and comments be reviewed by staff and the Planning Commission in a study session format to facilitate better commurllcation between all parties. Mahoney/Kwok moved and seconded to read the Ordinance No. 07-2000 by title only and that the City Clerk's reading would constitute the second reading thereof. Ayes: Kwok, Lowenthal, Mahoney, Sandoval, and Wang. Noes: None. Mahoney/Kwok moved and seconded to enact Ordinance No. 07-2000. Ayes: Kwok, Lowenthal, Mahoney, Sandoval, and Wang. Noes: None. STAFF REPORTS ";~ r <:V{WGll^Jl~2ORIS,_..__ ~ ,; '-~', '? ~ ';i.a.~~ J:- Council members higgIighted the 'activities of their committees and various community events. 'fP'~;;'-''''' , ~",.r;I1 _. .c.<rfm .",,. , ..:~. Exhibit' 0 Proposed text is underlinef/.. Deleted text is struck through. ORDINANCE NO. 07-2000 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL AMENDING CHAPTER 19.28.050 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE, SINGLE FAlVUL Y RESIJ)ENTIAL ZONES (R-l), REGARDING BUILDINGS PROPOSED ON . PROPERTIES WITH.AN AVERAGE SLOPE EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN FIFTEEN PERCENT, APPLICATION NOS. l\1CA-2006-01 THE CITY COUNCIL.oF THE, CITY OF CUPERTINO DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Chapter 19.28 of the Municipal Code of Cupertino is hereby amended to read as follows: 19.28.050 Development Regulations (Site). A. Lot Area Zoning Designations. 1. Lot area shall correspond to the number (multiplied by one thousand square feet) following the Rl zoning symbol. Examples are'as follows: Minimum Lot Area Zoning in Square Symbol Number Feet R1 5 5,000 RI 6 6,000 R1 7.5 7,500 R1 10 10,000 R1 20 20,000 2. Lots, which contain less area than required by subsection A(l) of this section, but not less than five thousand square feet, may nevelihel~ss be used as building sites, provided that all other applicable requirements of this title are fulfilled. B. Lot Width. The minimum lot width shall be sixty feet measured at the front-yard setback line, except in the RI-5 district where the minimum lot width is fifty feet. C. Development on Propeliies with Hillside Characteristics. I. Buildings proposed on properties located west of the 10% hillside slope line as defined in the Cupeliino General Plan, that have with an average slope equal to or greater than fifteen percent,- shall be developed in accordance Ordinance No. 07-2000 with the site development and design standards specified in Sections 19.40.050 through '19.40.140 ofthe Residential Hillside ordinance, Chapter 19.40, or the Rl zoning ordinance, Chapter 19.28, whichever specific regulation is more restrictive. Dtlilclill~J 15ra15o.'3e.cl on a parnell af a15t -;/ith .'31515':'.'3 oftlrirty pef'ceftt or groater shall be dClvoloped m aoeordanec -,r;ith the site dc';c1ojll1lcflt and cle.'3i~l StMlclMel~ .'3p...cificcl in EJections J 9..40.050 Ll.u\JU~l 19.40.140 u[ LlJ.\.o 'Residential HillsidB ordinanoB, ChaptCf' '19.40, or the R 1 ~omng ordin1lll08, ChaptCf' 19.28, 7;hicllC'/Cf' 3jle.cifie r.:.,gulati611 i.'3 m,01 [, 1';:'51:1'1,;:.t1 .i:. 2. No structure or improvements shall occur on slopes of thirty percent or greater unless an exception is granted in accordance with Section 19.40.140, unless no more than five hundred square fe~t of developp.lent, including grading and stl1lctures, occurs on an area with a slope of thirty perce~ltor greater. (Ord. 1886, (part), 2001; Ord. 1868, (part), 2001; Ord. 1860,S 1 (pali), 2000; Ord. 1834, (part), 1999; Ord. 1635, S 1 (part), 1993; Ord. 1601, Exh. A (part), 192) D. An application for building pemlits filed and accepted by the COllliiiunity Development Department (fees paid alid pennit number issued) on or before March 1, 2005 may proceed with application processing under the ordinances in effect at that time. ************* PUBLICA TrON CLAUSE: The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published at least once in' a newspaper of general circulation published alid circulated in the City within 15 days after its adoption, in accordance with Govem111ent code S 36933, shall certify to the adoption of this ordinance alid shall cause this ordinaliCe and her certification, together with'proof of publication, to be entered in the Book of Ordinances of the Council oftlus City. This ordinaliCe shall take effect and be in force tlurty (30) days after its passage. Ordinance No. 07-2000 INTRODUCED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino the 3rd day of April 2007 and ENACTED at a regular meeting ofthei City Council of the City of Cupertino the 1st day of May 2007, by the following vote: Vote: Members of the City Council Ayes: Noes: Absent: Abstain: Wang, Kwok, Lowenthal, Mahoney, Sandoval None None None ATTEST: APPROVED: /s/ Kimberly Smith /s/ Kris Wang City Clerk Mayor Check with the. Public Works Department regarding potential street dedication prior to designing a new home or an addition. 19.28.010 CHAPTER 19.28: SINGLE-FA:MILY RESIDENTIAL (Rl) ZONES Section 19.28.010 19.28.020 19.28.030 19.28.040 19.28.050 19.28.060 19.28.070 19.28.080 19.28.090 19.28.100 19.28.110 19.28.120 Purposes. Applicability of regulations. Permitted uses. Conditional uses. Development regulations (site). Development regulations (building). Landscape requirements. Permitted yard encroachments. Minor residential permit. Two-story residential permit. Exceptions. Development regulations-Eichler (Rl-e). Development regulations-(R I-a). Interpretation by the Planning Director. 19.28.130 19.28.140 19.28.010 Purposes. R-l single-family residence districts are intended to create, preserve and enhance areas suitable for detached dwellings in order to: A. Enhance the identity of residential neighborhoods; B. Ensure provision of light, air and a reasonable level of privacy to individual residential parcels; C. Ensure a reasonable level of compatibility in scale of structures within residential neighborhoods; D. Reinforce the predominantly low-intensity setting in the community; (Ord. 1954, (part), 2005; Ord. 1868, (part), 2001; Ord. 1860, ~ 1 (part), 2000; Ord. 1834, (part), 1999; Ord. 1601, Exh. A (part), 1992) 19.28.020 Applicability of Regulations. No building, structure or land shall be used, and no building or structure shall be hereafter erected, structurally altered or enlarged in an R-l single-family residence district other than in conformance with the provisions of this chapter and other applicable provisions of this title. (Ord. 1954, (part), 2005; Ord. 1860, ~ 1 (part), 2000; Ord. 1834, (part), 1999; Ord. 1601, Exh. A (part), 1992) 19.28.030 Permitted Uses. The following uses shall be permitted in the R -1 single- family residence district: 2005 S-4 A. Single-family use; B. A second dwelling unit conforming to the provisions. standards and procedures described in Chapter 19.82, except for those second dwelling units requiring a conditional use permit; C. Accessory facilities and uses customarily incidental to permitted uses and otherwise conforming with the provisions of Chapter 19.80 of this title; D. Home occupations in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 19.92; E. Horticulture, gardening, and growing of food products for consumption by occupants of the site; F. Residential care facility that is licensed by the appropriate State, County agency or department with six or less residents, not including the provider, provider family or staff; G. Small-family day care home; H. The keeping of a maximum of four adult household pets, provided that no more than two adult dogs or cats may be kept on the site; 1. Utility facilities essential to provision of utility services to the neighborhood but excluding business offices, construction or storage yards, maintenance facilities, or corporation yards; J. Large-family day care homes, which meet the parking criteria contained in Chapter 19.100 and which are at least three hundred feet from any other large-family day care home. The Director of Community Development or his/her designee shall administratively approve large day care homes to ensure compliance with the parking and proximity requirements; K. Congregate residence with ten or less residents. (Ord. 1954, (part), 2005; Ord. 1860, ~ 1 (part), 2000; Ord. 1834, (part), 1999; Ord. 1688,93 (part), 1995; Ord. 1657, (part), 1994; Ord. 1601, Exh. A (part), 1992) 19.28.040 Conditional Uses. The following uses may be conditionally allowed in the R-l single-family residence district, subject to the issuance of a conditional use permit: A. Issued by the Director of Community Development: 1. Temporary uses, subject to regulations established by Chapter 19.124; 29 19.28.040 Cupertino - Zoning 30 2. Large-family day care home, which otherwise does not meet the criteria for a permitted use. The conditional use permit shall be processed as provided by Section 15.97.46(3) of the State of California Health and Safety Code; 3. Buildings or structures which incorporate solar design features that require variations from setbacks upon a determination by the Director that such design feature or features will not result in privacy impacts, shadowing. intrusive noise or other adverse impacts to the surrounding , area; - 4. Second dwelling units which require a conditional use permit pursuant to Chapter 19.84; 5. Home occupations requiring a conditional use permit pursuant to Chapter 19.92 of this title. B. Issued by the Planning Commission: 1. Two-story structures in an area designated for a one-story limitation pursuant to Section 19.28.060 G(6) of this chapter, provided that the Planning Commission determines that the structure or structures will not result in privacy impacts, shadowing, or intrusive noise, odor, or other adverse impacts to the surrounding area; 2. Group care activities with greater than six persons; 3. Residential care facilities that fall into the following categories: a. Facility that is not required to obtain a license by the State, County agency or department and has six or less residents, not including the providers, provider family or staff; b. Facility that has the appropriate State, County agency or department license and seven or greater residents, not including the provider family or staff, is a minimum distance of five hundred feet from the property boundary of another residential care facility; c. Facility that is not required to obtain a license by the State, County agency or department and has seven or greater residents, not including the provider family or staff, is a minimum distance of five hundred feet from the property boundary of another residential care facility; 4. Congregate residence with eleven or more residents, which is a minimum distance of one thousand feet from the boundary of another congregate residence and has a minimum of seventy-five square feet of usable rear yard areaperoccupant. (Ord. 1954. (part). 2005; Ord. 1860, g 1 (part), 2000; Ord. 1834, (part), 1999; Ord. 1784, (part), 1998; Ord. 1688, 93 (part). 1995; Ord. 1657, (part), 1994; Ord. 1618, (part), 1993; Ord. 1601, Exh. A (part), 1992) 19.28.050 Development Regulations (Site). A. Lot Area Zoning Designations. 1. Lot area shall correspond to the number (multiplied by one thousand square feet) following the R-1 zoning symbol. Examples are as follows: 2006 S-9 Repl. Zoning Symbol Number Minimum Lot Area in ( Square Feet R1 5 5,000 Rl 6 6,000 R1 7.5 7,500 R1 10 10,000 Rl 20 20,000 2. Lots, which contain less area than required by subsection A(l) of this section, but not less than five thousand square feet, may nevertheless be used as building sites, provided that all other applicable requirements of this title are fulfilled. B. Lot Width. The minimum lot width shall be sixty feet measured at the front-yard setback line, except in the Rl-5 district where the minimum lot width is fifty feet. C. Development on Properties with Hillside Characteristics. 1. Buildings proposed on properties with an average slope equal to or greater than fifteen percent shall be developed in accordance with the site development and design standards specified in Sections 19.40.050 through 19.40.140 of the Residential Hillside ordinance, Chapter 19.40, or the Rl zoning ordinance, Chapter 19.28, whichever specific regulation is more restrictive. 2. No structure or improvements shall occur on slopes of thirty percent or greater unless an exception is granted in accordance with Section 19.40.140, unless no more than five hundred square feet of development, including grading and structures, occurs on an area with a slope of thirty percent or greater. D. An application for building permits filed and accepted by the Community Development Department (fees paid and permit number issued) on or before March 1, 2005 may proceed with application processing under ordinances in effect at that time. (Ord. 1954, (part), 2005; Ord. 1886, (part), 2001; Ord. 1868, (part), 2001; Ord. 1860,91 (part), 2000; Ord. 1834, (part), 1999; Ord. 1635, 9 1 (part), 1993; Ord. 1601, Exh. A (part), 1992) ( 19.28.060 Development Regulations (Building). A. Lot Coverage. The maximum lot coverage shall be forty-five percent of the net lot area. An additional five percent of lot coverage is allowed for roof overhangs, patios, porches and other similar features not substantially enclosed by exterior walls. B. Floor Area Ratio. The objective of the floor area ratio (FAR) is to set an outside (maximum) limit for square footage. The FAR shall be used in conjunction with the residential development standards and guidelines in this ordinance in determining whether the mass and scale of the project is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. ," (, 31 Single-Family Residential (Rl) Zones 19.28.060 1. The maximum floor area ratio of all structures on a lot shall be forty-five percent. 2. The maximum floor area of a second story shall be forty-five percent of the existing or proposed first story floor area, or seven hundred fifty square feet, whichever is greater. 3. Interior areas with heights above sixteen feet, measured from the floor to the top of the roof-rafters, have the mass and bulk of a two-story house and shall be counted as floor area. a. If the house is a two-story house, this area will count as second story floor area; otherwise, the area will count as first floor area. C. Design Guidelines. 1. Any new two-story house, or second-story addition to an existing house, shall be generally consistent with the adopted single-family residential guidelines. The Director of Community Development shall review the project and shall determine that the following items are met prior to design approval: a. The mass and bulk of the design shall be reasonably compatible with the predominant neighborhood pattern. New construction shall not be disproportionately larger than, or out of scale with, the neighborhood pattern in terms of building forms, roof pitches, eave heights, ridge heights, and entry feature heights; b. The design shall use vaulted ceilings rather than high exterior walls to achieve higher volume interior spaces; c. There shall not be a three-car wide driveway curb cut. d. No more than fifty percent of the front elevation of a house should consist of garage area. e. Long, unarticulated, exposed second story walls should be avoided since it can increase the apparent mass of the second story. f. The current pattern of side setback and garage orientation in the neighborhood should be maintained. g. When possible, doors, windows and architectural elements should be aligned with one another vertically and horizontally and symmetrical in number, size and placement. h. Porches are encouraged. i. Living area should be closer to the street, while garages shot]Jd be set back more. j. All second story roofs should have at least a one- foot overhang. D. Setback-First Story. 1. Front Yard. The minimum front yard setback is twenty feet; provided, that for a curved driveway the setback shall be a minimum of fifteen feet as long as there are no more than two such fifteen-foot setbacks occurring side by side. 2. Side Yard. The combination of the two side yard setbacks shall be fifteen feet, except that no side yard setback may be less than five feet. 2005 S-4 a. For a comer lot, the minimum side-yard setback on the street side of the lot is twelve feet. The other side yard setback shall be no less than five feet. b. For interior lots in the R1-S district, the side yard setbacks are five feet on both sides. c. For lots that have more than two side yards, the setback shall be consistent for all side yards between the front property line and the rear property line. 3. Rear Yard. The minimum rear yard setback is twenty feet. a. With a Minor Residential Permit, subject to Section 19.28.090, the rear setback may be reduced to ten feet if, after the reduction, the usable rear yard is not less than twenty times the lot width as measured from the front setback line. 4. Garage. The front face of a garage in an RI district shall be set back a minimum of twenty feet from a street property line. a. For projects with three-l;ar garages oriented to the public right-of-way, the wall plane of the third space shall be set back a minimum of two feet from the wall plane of the other two spaces. ,E. Setback-Second Story. 1. Front and Rear Yards. The minimum front and rear setbacks are twenty-five feet. 2. Side Yard. The combination of the side setbacks shall be twenty five feet, except that no second-story side setback may be less than ten feet. a. In the case of a flag lot, the minimum setback is twenty feet from any property line. b. In the case of a corner lot, a minimum of twelve feet from a street side property line and twenty feet from any rear property line of a single-family dwelling. 3. Surcharge. A setback distance equal to ten feet shall be added in whole or in any combination to the front and side-yard setback requirements specified in this section. F. Basements. 1. The number, size and volume of lightwells and basement windows and doors shall be the minimum required by the Uniform Building Code for egress, light and ventilation, except that in the case of a single-story house with a basement, one lightwell may be up to ten feet wide and up to ten feet long. 2. No part of a lightwell retaining wall may be located within a required setback area, except as follows: a. The minimum side setback for a lightwell retaining wall shall be five feet; b. The minimum rear setback for a lightwell retaining wall shall be ten feet. 3. Lightwells that are visible from a public street shall be screened by landscaping. 4. Railings for lightvvells shall be no higher than three feet in height and shall be located immediately adjacent to the lightwell. 19.28.060 Cupertino - Zoning 32 5. The perimeter of the basement and alllightwell retaining walls shall be treated and/or reinforced with the most effective root barrier measures, as determined by the Director of Community Development. G. Height. 1. Maximuill Building Height. The height of any principal dwelling in an R1 zone shall not exceed twenty- eight feet, not including fireplace, chimneys, antennae or other appurtenances. 2. Building Envelope (One Story). a. The maximum exterior wall height and building height on single-story structures and single-story sections of two-story structures must fit into a building envelope defmed by: 1. A ten-foot high vertical line from natural grade measured at the property line; , 2. A twenty-five-degree roof line angle projected inward at the ten-foot high line referenced in subsection G(2)(a)(1) of this section. b. Notwithstanding the building envelope in subsection G(2)(a) of this section, a gable end of a roof enclosing an attic space may have a maximum wall height of seventeen feet to the peak: of the roof as measured from natural grade, or up to twenty feet with a Minor Residential Permit. 3. Second Story Wall Heights. Fifty percent of the total perimeter length of second story walls shall not have exposed wall heights greater than six feet, and shall have a minimum two-foot high overlap of the adjoining first story roof against the second story wall. The overlap shall be structural and shall be offset a minimum of four feet from the first story exterior wall plane. a. The Director of Community Development may approve an exception to this regulation based on the findings in Section 19.28.110 D. 4. Entry Feature Height. The maximum entry feature height shall be fourteen feet. 5. Areas Restricted to One Story. The City Council may prescribe that all buildings within a designated area be limited to one story in height (not exceeding eighteen feet) by affixing an "i" designation to the R1 zoning district. H. Second Story Decks. All new or expanded second story decks with views into neighboring residential side or rear yards shall file for a Minor Residential Permit, subject to Section 19.28.090, in order to protect the privacy of adjoining properties. The goal of the permit requirement is not to require complete visual protection but to address privacy protection to the greatest extent while still allowing the construction and use of an outdoor deck. This section applies to second-story decks, patios, balconies, or any other similar unenclosed features. 1. A second-story deck or patio may encroach three feet into the front setback for the principal dwelling. 2005 S-4 2. The minimum side-yard setback shall be fifteen feet. 3. The minimum rear-yard setback shall be twenty feet. I. Solar Design. The setback and height restrictions provided in this chapter may be varied for a structure utilized for passive or active solar purposes, provided that no such structure shall infringe upon solar easements or adjoining property owners. Any solar structure that requires variation from the setback or height restrictions of this chapter may be allowed only upon issuance of a Minor Residential Permit subject to Section 19.28.090.. (Ord. 1954, (part), 2005; Ord. 1868, (part), 2001; Ord. 1863, (part), 2000; Ord. 1860, ~ 1 (part), 2000; Ord. 1834, (part), 1999: Ord. 1808 (part), 1999; Drd. 1799 ~ 1, 1998; Ord. 1784, (part), 1998; Ord. 1637, (part), 1993; Ord. 1635, (part), 1993; Ord. 1630, (part), 1993; Ord. 1601, Exh. A (part), 1992) 19.28.070 Landscape Requirements. To mitigate privacy impacts and the visual mass and bulk of new two-story homes and additions, tree andlor shrub planting is required. The intent of this section is to provide substantial screening within three years of the planting. A. Applicability. This requirement shall apply to new two-story homes, second-story decks, two-story additions, or modifications to the existing second-story decks or existing windows on existing two-story homes that increase privacy impacts on neighboring residents. Skylights, windows with sills more than five feet above the finished second floor, windows with permanent, exterior louvers up to six feet above the finished second floor, and obscured, non-openable windows are not required to provide privacy protection planning. B. Privacy Planting Plan. Proposals for a new two- story house or a second story addition shall be accompanied by a privacy planting plan which identifies the location, species and canopy diameter of existing and proposed trees or shrubs. 1. New trees or shrubs shall be required on the applicant's property to screen views from second-story windows. The area where planting is required is bounded by a thirty-degree angle on each side window jamb. The trees or shrubs shall be planted prior to issuance of a final occupancy permit. a. New tree or shrubs are not required to replace existing trees or shrubs if an Internationally Certified Arborist or Licenses Landscape Architect verifies that the existing trees/shrubs have the characteristics of privacy planting species, subject to approval by the Director or Community Development. 33 Single-Family Residential (Rl) Zones 19.28.070 b. Affected property owner(s) may choose to allow privacy planting on their own property. In such cases, the applicant must plant the privacy screening prior to issuance of a building permit. 2. Waiver. These privacy mitigation measures may be modified in any way with a signed waiver statement from the affected property owner. Modifications can include changes to the number of shrubs or trees, their species or location. C. Front-Yard Tree Planting. Applicants for new two-story homes and two-story additions must plant a tree in front of new second stories in the front yard setback area. The tree shall be 24 inch-box or larger, with a minimum height of six feet. The Director of Community Development can waiver this front-yard tree if there is a conflict with existing mature tree canopies on-site or in the public right- of-way. D. Species List. The Planning Division shall maintain a list of allowed privacy planting trees and shrubs. The list shall include allowed plant species, minimum size of trees and shrubs, expected canopy or spread size, and planting distance between trees. E. Covenant. The property owner shall record a covenant with the Santa Clara County Recorders Dffice that requires the retention of all privacy planting, or use of existing vegetation as privacy planting, prior to receiving a fInal building inspection from the Building Division. This regulation' does Dot apply to situations described in subsection B(l)(b) of this section. F. Maintenance. The required plants shall be maintained. Landscape planting maintenance includes irrigation, fertilization and pruning as necessary to yield a growth rate expected for a particular species. G. Replacement. Where required planting is removed or dies it must be replaced within thirty days with privacy tree(s) of similar size as the tree(s) being replaced, unless it is determined to be infeasible by the Director of Community Development. (Ord. 1954, (part), 2005) 19.28.080 Permitted Yard Encroachments. A. Where a building legally constructed according to existing yard and setback regulations at the time of construction, encroaches upon present required yards and setbacks, one encroaching side yard setback may be extended along its existing building lines if the addition receives a Minor Residential Permit and conforms to the following: 1. The extension or addition may not further encroach into any required setback and the height of the existing non-conforming wall and the extended wall may not be increased. 2. The maximum length of the extension is fIfteen feet. 2005 S-4 3. The extension of any wall plane of a first-story addition is not permitted to be within three feet of any property line. 4. Dnly one such extension shall be permitted for the life of such building. 5. This section applies to the fIrst story only and shall not be construed to allow the further extension of an encroachment by any building, which is the result of the granting of a variance or exception, either before or after such property become part of the City. B. Architectural features (not including patio covers) may extend into a required yard a distance not exceeding three feet, provided that no architectural feature or combination thereof, whether a portion of a principal or auxiliary structure, may extend closer than three feet to any property line. (Ord. 1954, (part), 2005; Drd. 1886, (part), 2001; Ord. 1868, (part), 2001; Drd. 1860, ~ 1 (part), 2000; Ord. 1834, (part), 1999; Drd. 1808, (part), 1999; Ord. 1618, (part), 1993; Ord. 1601, Exh. A (part), 1992) 19.28.090 Minor Residential Permits. Projects that require a Minor Residential Permit shall be reviewed in accordance with this section. The purpose of this process is to provide affected neighbors with an opportunity to comment on new development that could have significant impacts on their property or the neighborhood as a whole. A. Notice of Application. Upon receipt of a complete application, a notice shall be sent by first class mail to all owners of record of real property (as shown in the last tax assessment toll) that are adjacent to the subject property, including properties across a public or private street. The notice shall invite public comment by a determined action date and shall include a copy of the development plans, eleven inches by seventeen inches in size. B. Decision. After the advertised deadline for public comments, the Director of Community Development shall approve, conditionally approve, or deny the application. The permit can be approved only upon making all of the following findings: 1. 'The project is consistent with the Cupertino General Plan, any applicable specifIc plans, zoning ordinances and the purposes of this title. 2. The granting of the permit will not result in a condition that is detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare. 3. The proposed project is harmonious in scale and design with the general neighborhood. 4. Adverse visual impacts on adjoining properties have been reasonably mitigated. 19.28.090 Cupertino - Zon.ing 34 C. Notice of Action. The City Council, Planning Commission, applicant and any member of the public that commented on the project shall be notified of the action by first class mail or electronic mail. Any interested party may appeal the action pursuant to Chapter 19. 136, except that the Planning Commission will make the final action on the appeal. D. Expiration of a Minor Residential Permit. Unless a building permit is flIed and accepted by the City (fees paid and control number issued) within one year of the Minor Residential Permit approval, said approval shall become null . and void unless a longer time period was specifically prescribed by the conditions of approval. In the event that the building permit expires for any reason, the Minor Residential Permit shall become null and void. The Director of Community Development may grant a one-year extension without a public notice if an application for a Minor Modification to the Minor Residential Permit is filed before the expiration date and substantive justification for the extension is provided. E. Concurrent Applications. At the discretion of the Director of Community Development a Minor Residential Permit can be processed concurrently with other discretionary applications.(Ord. 1954, (part), 2005) 19.28.100 Two-Story Residential Permit. Two-story additions or two-story new homes require a Two-Story Residential Permit in accordance with this section. Two-story projects with a floor area ratio under 35 % shall require a Level I Two-Story Residential Permit, while a two-story project with a floor area ratio over 35 % shall require a Level II Two-Story Residential Permit. A. Notice of Application (Level I). Upon receipt of a complete application, a notice shall be sent by first class mail to all owners of record of real property (as shown in the last tax assessment toll) that are adjacent to the subject property, including properties across a public or private street. The notice shall invite public comment by a determined action date and shall include a copy of the development plans, eleven inches by seventeen inches in size. 1. Posted Notice. The applicant shall install a public notice in the front yard of the subject site that is clearly visible from the public street. The notice shall be a weatherproof sign, at least two feet tall and three feet wide firmly attached to a five-foot tall post. The notice shall remain in place until an action has been taken on the application and the appeal period has passed. The sign shall contain the following: a. The exact address of the property, if mown, or the location of the property, if the address is not mown. b. A brief description of the proposed project, the content of which shall be at the sole discretion of the City; c. City contact information for public inquiries; 2005 S-4 d. A deadline for the submission of .public comments, which shall be at least fourteen days after the date the notice is posted; . e. A black and white orthographic rendering of the front of the house, at least eleven inches by seventeen inches in size. The City shall approve the illustration or rendering prior to posting. B. Notice of Application (Level II). Upon receipt of a complete application, a notice shall be sent by first class mail to all owners of record of real property (as shown in the last tax assessment toll) that are within three hundred feet of the subject property. The notice shall invite public comment by a determined action date and shall include a copy of the development plans, eleven inches by seventeen inches in size. 1. Posted Notice. The applicant shall install a public notice consistent with subsection A(l) of this section, except that a colored perspective rendering shall be required instead of a black and white orthographic rendering. C. Story Poles. Story poles are required for any Two-Story Residential Permit. D. Decision. After the advertised deadline for public comments, the Director of Community Development shall approve, conditionally approve, or deny the application. The permit can be approved only upon making all of the following fmdings: 1. The project is consistent with the Cupertino General Plan, any applicable specific plans, zoning ordinance and the purposes of this title. 2. The granting of the permit will not result in a condition that is detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare. 3. The proposed project is harmonious in scale and design with the general neighborhood. 4. Adverse visual impacts on adjoining properties have been reasonably mitigated. E. Notice of Action. The City Council, Planning Commission, applicant and any member of the public that commented on the project shall be notified of the action by first class mail or electronic mail. Any interested party may appeal the action pursuant to Chapter 19.136, except that the Planning Commission will make the final action on the appeal. F. Expiration of a Two-Story Permit. Unless a building permit is filed and accepted by the City (fees paid and control number issued) within one year of the Two- Story Permit approval, said approval shall become null and void unless a longer time period was specifically prescribed by the conditions of approval. In the event that the building permit expires for any reason, the Two-Story Permit shall become null and void. The Director of Community Development may grant a one-year extension, without a 35 Single-Family Residential (Rl) Zones 19.28.100 public notice, if an application for a Minor Modification to the Two-Story Permit is filed before the expiration date and substantive justification for the extension is provided. G. Concurrent Applications. At the discretion of the Director of Community Development, a Two-Story Permit can be processed concurrently with other discretionary applications. (Ord. 1954, (part), 2005) 19.28.110 Exceptions. Where results inconsistent with the purpose and intent of this chapter result from the strict application of the provisions hereof, exceptions to section J9.28.060, 19.28.070 and 19.28.120 may be granted as provided in this section. A. Notice of Application. Upon receipt of a complete application, the Community Development Departrrient shall set a time and place for a public hearing before the Design Review Committee and send a notice by first class mail to all owners of record of real property (as shown in the last tax assessment toll) that are within three hundred feet of the subject property. Properties that are adjacent to the subject site, including those acrosS a public or private street.. shall receive a reduced scale copy of the plan set with the public notice. B. Decision. After closing the public hearing, the decision-maker shall approve, conditionally approve, or deny the application based on the findings in this section. Any interested party can appeal the decision pursuant to Chapter 19.136. C. Expiration of an Exception. Unless a building permit is filed and accepted by the City (fees paid and control number issued) within one year of the Exception approval, said approval shall become null and void unless a longer time period was specifically prescribed by the conditions of approval. In the event that the building permit expires for any reason, the Exception shall become null and void. The Director of Community Development may grant a one-year extension, without a public notice, if an application for a Minor Modification to the Exception is filed before the expiration date and substantive justification for the extension is provided. D. Findings for Approval. 1. Issued by the Director of Community Development. The Director of Community Development may grant exceptions from the prescriptive design regulation described in Section 19.28.060 G(4) upon making all of the following findings: a. The project fulf1lls the intent of the visible second-story wall height regulation in that the number of two-story wall planes and the amount of visible second story wall area is reduced to the maximum extent possible. b. The except 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. 2005 S-4 c. The proposed exception will not result in significant visual impact as viewed from abutting properties. 2. Issued by the Design Review Committee. The Design Review Committee may grant exceptions from the prescriptive design regulations described in Section 19.28.060, except 19.28.060 G(4) and Section 19.28.130 upon making all of the following findings: a. The literal enforcement of this chapter will result in restrictions inconsistent with the spirit and intent of this chapter. b. The proposed development will not be injurious to property or improvements in the area, nor be detrimental to the public safety, health and welfare. c. 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. d. The proposed exception will not result in significant visual impact as viewed from abutting properties. (Ord. 1954, (part), 2005) 19.28.120 Development Regulations-Eichler (Rl-e). R I-e single-family residence "Eichler districts" protect a consistent architectural form through the establishment of district site development regulations. Regulations found in the other sections of this chapter shall apply to properties zoned R1-e. In the event of a conflict between other regulations in this chapter and this section, this section shall prevail. Nothing in these regulations is intended to preclude a harmonious two-story home or second story addition. A. Setback-First Story. 1. The minimum front yard setback is twenty feet. B. Building Design Requirements. I. Entry features facing the street shall be integrated with the roof line of the house. 2. The maximum roof slope shall be three-to-twelve (rise over run). 3. Wood or other siding material located on walls facing a public street (not including the garage door) shall incorporate vertical grooves, up to six inches apart. 4. The building design shall incorporate straight architectural lines, rather than curved lines. 5. Section 19.20.060 G(4) shall be considered a guideline in the R1-e district. 6. The first floor shall be no more than twelve inches above the existing grade. 7. Exterior walls located adjacent to side yards shall not exceed nine feet in height measured from the top of the floor to the top of the wall plate. C. Privacy Protection Requirements. 1. Side and Rear Yard Facing Second Floor Windows. In addition to other privacy protection requirements in Section 19.28.070, the following is required for all second story windows: 19.28.120 Cupertino - Zoning 36 a. Cover windows with exterior louvers to a height of six feet above the second floor; or b. Obscure glass to a height of six feet above the second floor; or c. Have a window sill height of five feet minimum above the second floor. (Ord. 1954, (part), 2005; Ord. 1868, (part), 2001; Drd. 1860, ~ 1 (part), 2000) 19.28.130 Development Regulations-(Rl-a). R1-a districts are intended to reinforce the semi-rural setting in neighborhoods with large lots. Regulations found. in the other sections of this chapter shall apply to properties zoned R1-a. In the event of a conflict between other regulations in this chapter and this section, this section shall prevail. A. Lot Area Zoning Designations. The minimum lot size is ten thousand square feet. B. Lot Width. The minimum lot width shall be seventy-five feet measured at the front-yard setback line. C. Second Story Area. A second floor shall be no more than forty percent of the first floor, except as follows: 1. A second floor may be at least seven hundred square feet in area. 2. In no case shall a second floor be more than one thousand one hundred square feet in area. D. Setback - First Story. 1. Front Yard. The minimum front yard setback is thirty feet. 2. Side Yard. The minimum side yard setback is ten feet. 3. Rear Yard. The minimum rear yard setback is twenty feet. E. Setback - Second Story. 1. Front Yard. The minimum front yard setback is thirty feet. 2. Side Yard. The combined side yard setbacks shall be thirty-five feet, with a minimum of fifteen feet. 3. Rear Yard. The minimum rear yard setback is forty feet. 4. The setback surcharge in Section 19.28.060 E(3) does not apply in this district. F. Second-story Regulations. 1. Second story decks shall conform to the second- story building setbacks, and may be located on the front and rear only. 2. The second-story shall not cantilever over a first- story wall plane. 3. The front-facing wall plane(s) of the second-story must be offset a minimum of three feet from the fIrst-story wall plane(s). The intent of this regulation is to avoid a two- story wall plane on the front elevation. G. Front Yard Paving. No more than fifty percent of the front yard setback area may be covered with a combination of impervious or semi-pervious surfaces. No 2005 5-4 more than forty percent of the front yard setback area may be covered with an impervious surface such as concrete or asphalt. H. Heights. The maximum exterior wall height and building height on single-story structures and single-story sections of two-story structures must fit into a building envelope defmed by: a. A twelve-foot high vertical line measured from natural grade and located ten feet from property lines; b. A twenty-five degree roof line angle projected inward at the twelve-foot high ljne referenced in subsection H(2)(1) of this section. 1. Variation from the R1 and R1-a regulations shall require a Variance pursuant to Chapter 19.124 of the Cupertino Municipal Code in the R1-a district. J. Design Review. All two-story development shall require discretionary review based on Section 19.28.100, except that the Design Review Committee shall approve or deny the project at a public hearing based on the findings in subsection N(l) of this section. K. Design Guidelines. The guidelines in this section shall be used in conjunction with the City I s Single Family Residential Design Guidelines. In cases where there may be conflict between the two sets of guidelines, this Section shall take precedence. Nonconformance with the guidelines shall be considered acceptable only if the applicant shows that there are no adverse impacts from the proposed project. 1. Second-story windows. Windows on the side elevations should be fixed and obscured to a height of six feet above the second floor, should have permanent exterior louvers to a height of six feet above the second floor or should have sill heights of five feet or greater to mitigate intrusion into a neighbor I s privacy. 2. All second story wall heights greater than six feet, as measured from the second story finished floor, should have building wall offsets at least every twenty-four feet, with a minimum four-foot depth and ten-foot width. The offsets should comprise the full height of the wall plane. 3. Section 19.28.060 G(4) shall be considered a guideline in the R1-a district. 4. Garages. The maximum width of a garage on the front elevation should be twenty-five feet, which will accommodate a two-car garage. Additional garage spaces should be provided through the use of a tandem garage or a detached accessory structure at the rear of the property. L. Permitted Yard Encroachments. 1. Where a principal building legally constructed according to existing yard and setback regulations at the time of construction encroaches, upon present required yards, one encroaching side yard setback may be extended along its existing building line. a. The extension or addition may not further encroach into any required setback and the height of the existing non-conforming wall and the extended wall may not be increased. 37 Single-Family Residential (Rl) Zones 19.28.130 b. In no case shall any wall plane of a fIrst-story addition be placed closer than three feet to any property line. c. This section does not apply to attached accessory structures such as attached carpo$. d. This section applies to the fIrst story only and shall not be construed to allow the further extension of an encroachment by any building, which is the result of the granting of a variance or exception, either before or after such property become part of the City. 2. Architectural features (not including patio covers) may extend into a required yard a distance not exceeding three feet, provided that no architectural feature or combination thereof, whether a portion of a principal or auxiliary structure, may extend closer than three feet to any property line. 3. Front Porch. Traditional, open porches are encouraged in this zone. When viewed from the street, a porch should appear proportionately greater in width than in height. A porch differs from an entry element, which has a proportionately greater height than its width. Use of this yard encroachment provision shall require the approval of the Director of Community Development. a. Posts. Vertical structural supports, such as posts, for porches are allowed to encroach two feet into the required front setback~ Structural supports must be designed such that the appearance is not obtrusive or massive. b. Columns. The use of large columns or pillars is discouraged. c. Fencing. Low, open fencing for porches are allowed to encroach two feet into the required front setback area. d. Eave Height. The eave height for a front porch should not be significantly taller than the eave height of typical single-story elements in the neighborhood. e. Detailing. Porch elements should have detailing that emphasizes the base and caps for posts and fence elements. f. The porch platform and roof overhang may encroach five feet into the required front setback. M. Landscaping. 1. Landscaping plans shall be required for all additions or new homes. The purpose of the landscaping is to beautify the property and to achieve partial screening of building forms from the street and adjacent properties. Specific measures' are not prescribed. Generally, the landscaping may include shrubbery, hedges, trees, or lattice with vines on fences. ' 2005 8-4 2. Landscaping plans for two-story development shall include specific mitigations for impacts from mass, bulk and privacy intrusion as required in Section 19.28.070 of the Cupertino Municipal Code, except that: a. Privacy planting shall have a minimum setback from the property line equivalent to one-quarter of the spread noted on the City list. b. Privacy trees shall have a minimum height of twelve feet at the time of planting. c. Front yard tree planting shall be placed suchthat views from second-story windows across the street to neighboring homes are partially mitigated. d. The Director may waive the front yard tree based on a report from an internationally certified arborist citing conflict with existing mature trees. N. Design Review Findings. 1. Findings. The Design Review Committee may approve a design review application for two-story development only upon making all of the fmdings below: a. The project is consistent with the Cupertino General Plan and Title 19 of the Cupertino Municipal Code. b. The granting of this permit will not result in detrimental or injurious conditions to property or improvements in the vicinity, or to the public health, safety or welfare. c. The project is generally compatible with the established pattern of building forms, building materials and designs of homes in the neighborhood. d. The project is consistent with the City's single- family residential design guidelines and the guidelines in this chapter and any inconsistencies have been found to not result in impacts on neighbors. e. Significant adverse visual and privacy impacts as viewed from adjoining properties have been mitigated to the maximum extent possible. (Ord. 1954, (part), 2005) 19.28.140 Interpretation by the Planning Director. In Rl zones, the Director of Community Development shall be empowered to make reasonable interpretations of the regulations and provisions of thischapter consistent with the legislative intent thereof. Persons aggrieved by an interpretation of the chapter by the Director of Community Development may petition the Planning Commission in writing for review of the interpretation. (Ord. 1954, (part), 2005; Ord. 1860, ~ 1 (part), 2000; Drd. 1834, (part), 1999; Drd. 1808, (part), 1999; Drd. 1601, Exh. A (part), 1992) Landscape Mitigation Measures PRIV ACY SCREENING MATERIALS I. NON-DECIDUOUS TREES A. Cedrus Deodara - Deodara Cedar B. Melaleuca Linarifolia-Flaxleaf Paperbak C. Pinus Helipensis - Aleppo Pine D. Eucalyptus Polyanthemos - Silverdollar E. Cinnamomom Camphora-Camphor F. Arbutus Marina G. Magnolia Grandiflora-Southern Magnolia .~ Height to 80' 30' 40-60' 20-60' 50' 40' 80' Spread 40' @ ground 12-15' 20-25' 10-15' 50' 35' 40' Planting Distance- Maximum 20' 6' 10' 5' 20' 15' 20' The minimum tree size shall be 24" box minimum and a minimum of 8' high planted height. See Page 2 of Appendix A for minimum planting distance from City street trees for planting in the front yard setback. II. NON-DECIDUOUS SHRUBS A. Pittosporum Eugenoides B. Pittosporum Tenuifolium C. Pittosporum Crassifolium D. Pittosporum Undulatum - Victoriari Box E. Cupressus Sempervirens-Italian Cypress F. Podocarpus Gracilior-Fem Pine G. Privet Ligustrum-Glossy Privet H. Laurus Nobilis-Grecian Laurel 1. Rhus Lancia - African Sumac 40' 40' 25' 15-40' 60' 60' 35-40' 15-40' 25' 20' 20' 15-20' 15-40' 3-6' 20' 20' 20' 20' 5' 5' 8' 8' 5' 10' 10' 10' 10' The minimum shrub size shall be 15-gallon minimum and a minimum of 6' high planted height See Page 2 of Appendix A for minimum planting distance from City street trees for planting in the front yard setback. Notes: The Community Development Department may use other species than those listed above subject to approval. Applicant shall be required to submit adequate documentation in order for approval of other planting materials. Documentation shall include a letter from an Internationally ~ertified Arborist or Landscape Architect stating that the materials proposed will meet or exceed height, spread criteria and growth rate of listed materials and that they are suitable for planting on the applicant's property. The goal is to provide a partial screening after three years' growth following planting. The purpose of this list is to give the minimum planting distance betvveen the required street tree/shrub planting in front yard setbacks and the City street tree. CITY STREET TREE SPREAD PLANTING DISTANCE- MINIMUM A. St. Mary Magnolia* B. Crape Myrtle C. Privot D. California Buckeye E. Birch F. Holly Oak G. Aristocrat Flowering Pear* H. Flowering Plum* 1. May ten J. Melaleuca K. Eastern Redbud* L. Brisbane Box* M. Liquid Amber N. Carob O. Geigera P. Rhus Lancia Q. Lirodendron R. Chinese Pistacio* S. Ginko* T. Chinese Hackberry* V.Elm V. Sycamore W. Mulberry X. Silk Tree Y;-Raywood Ash Z. Medesto Ash AA. Shammel Ash BB. Camphor cc. Zelkova 20' 20' 20' 20' 20' 20' 30' 30' 30' 30' 30' 40' 40' 40' 40' 40' 40' 50' 50' 50' 50' 50' 50' 50' 50' 50' 50' 60' 60' 10' 10' 10' 10' , 10' 10' 15' 15' 15' 15' 15' , 20' 20' 20' 20' 20' 20' 25' 25' 25' 25' 25' 25' 25' 25' 25' 25' 30' 30' *Denotes tree currently on street tree list. Other trees previously on list and may currently exist as a street tree. (Drd. 1860, S 1 (part), 2000; Ord. 1834, (part), 1999) Release of Privacy Protection Measures Single-Family Residential Ordinance Ordinance 19.28 (Single-Family) requires that after September 21, 1998; all new two-story additions or homes be required to complete privacy protection measures. Staff may grant a modification or deletion to this requirement if the adjacent affected property owners sign a release agreeing to modify or delete the requirement. Date Property Location Address I agree to waive or modify the privacy protection measures required of the Single-Family Residential Ordinance as follows: Property Owner: Address: Phone: Signature: (Ord. 1860, S 1 (part), 2000; Ord. 1834, (part), 1999) Privacy Protection Planting Mfidavit Purpose: To assure the decision-makers and neighbors that the privacy protection planting has been installed according to the planting plan. Validation: An Internationally Certified Arborist or Licensed Landscape Architect shall certify the design and accuracy of the privacy protection planting. A reduced eleven by seventeen copy of the approved planting plan shall be attached. SubmittaIof this form shall be required prior to final inspection of the residence. Planting Certification: I certify that the privacy protection planting and irrigation is installed at: address and it is consistent in design, height and location with the landscape planting and irrigation plans dra'wn by: dated (attached). Name Title Professional license # Date (Ord. 1868, (part), 2001; Ord. 1860, 91 (part), 2000; Ord. 1834, (part), 1999) Section 19.40.010 19.40.020 19.40.030 19.40.040 19.40.050 19.40.060 19.40.070 19.40.080 19.40.090 19.40.100 19.40.110 19.40.120 19.40.130 19.40.140 19.40.145 19.40.010 CHAPTER 19.40: RESIDENTIAL HILLSIDE (RBS) ZONES* Purpose. Applicability of regulations. Permitted uses. Conditional uses. Site development regulations. Building coverage, setbacks and height restrictions. Design standards. Fencing. Permitted yard encroachment. Geologic and soils report procedures. Private roads and driveways. Solar design. Interpretation of planning director. Exceptions for development of certain individual hillside lots. Applicability . * Prior history: Ord. 1601. 19.40.010 Purpose. The purpose of the RHS zoning district is to regulate development commensurate with community goals, as described in the General Plan, to preserve the natural setting in the hillsides. This chapter utiliZes performance standards and specific regulations to ensure that the utilization of land for residential uses is balanced with the need to conserve natural resources and protect life and property from natural hazards. Specifically, this chapter is intended to accomplish the following objectives: A. Enhance the identity of residential neighborhoods; B. Ensure the provision of light and air to individual residential parcels; C. Ensure a reasonable level of compatibility in scale of structures within residential neighborhoods; D. Maintain spatial relationship between structures and within neighborhoods; E. Reinforce the predominantly low-intensity setting of the community; F. Maintain a balance between residential development and preservation of the natural hillside setting; G. Promote compatibility of colors and materials of structures and the surrounding natural setting. (Ord.1634, (part), 1993) 19.40.020 Applicability of Regulations. No building or structure or land shall be used, and no building or structure shall be hereafter erected, structurally altered or enlarged in a residential hillside (RHS) zone, otherwise than in conformance with the provisions of this chapter and other applicable provisions of this title. Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter to the contrary, structures which were legally constructed prior to the effective date of the ordinance codified in this section shall be deemed legally conforming; provided, however, that any structural alteration, enlargement or remodeling of such existing structure shall either comply with the site development regulations (building coverage, setbacks, height restrictions and design standards) of this chapter or shall obtain an exception as provided in Section 19.40.140. (Ord. 1725, (part), 1996; Ord. 1634, (part), 1993) 19.40.030 Permitted Uses. The following uses shall be permitted in an RHS. zoning district: A. Single-family dwelling units with not more than one dwelling unit per lot; B. A second dwelling unit which conforms to the procedure, standards and requirements of Chapter 19.84 of this code; C. Home occupations which conform to the procedure, standards and requirements of Chapter 19.92 of , this code; D. Accessory buildings which conform to the procedures, standards and requirements of Chapter 19.80 of this code; E. Small-family day care home; F. Residential care facility with six or less residents not including the provider, provider family or staff, that has a license from the appropriate State, County agency or. department; G. The keeping of animals as follows: 1. Household pets limited to one animal per three thousand square feet of lot area except: 51 19.40.031l) Cupertino a ZoJmiJmg 52 a. Adult dogs are limited to a maximum of two for lots less thm one acre and four for lots greater than one acre, b. The number of geese, ducks, chickens, rabbits and other farm ~nim~lg are not limited on a site greater than one acre, 2. Small household pets, 3. Large :mimlll!l:, such as horses, cows, sheep, and goats, limited as follows: Ill. Two large animals for the first forty thousand square feet of land area, except mules and donkeys which require eighty thousand square feet for the first animal, b. One additional large animal for each twenty thousand square feet of land area, c. One additional large animal if said animal is raised for a 4H project, a project sponsored by recognized agricultural organization or a sc~ool project, 4. The required lot area for a large animal shall not be included in the required lot area for a household pet or vice versa, except that a maximum of two household pets may be kept with large animals, 5. All :mimah: must be kept and maintained in accordance with other Cupertino or Santa Clara County codes and ordinances, 6. No animal!; kept and maintained in an RHS zoning district may be raised for commercial purposes, 7. Crop, tree or horticultural farming for personal use. Produce grown on the site may be sold if the business activity is con,!lucted in a manner consistent with the home occupation ordinance; H. Large family day care home which meets the parking criteria contained in Chapter 19.100, and which is at least three hundred feet from any other large-family day care home. The Director of Community Development or his/her designee shall administratively approve large day care homes to ensure compliance with the parking and proximity requirements; 1. Congregate residence with ten or less residents. (Ord. 1658, (part), 1995; Ord. 1688, ~ 3 (part), 1995; Oni. 1657, (part), 1994; Ord. 1634, (part), 1993) 19.40.040 Conditional Uses. The following uses may be conditionally allowed in the RHS zoning district subject to the issuance of a conditional use permit: A. Issued by the Director of Community Development: 1. Temporary uses subject to regulations established by Chapter 19.128 of this code, 2. Large-family day care home which otherwise does not meet the criteria for a permitted use. The conditiona1 use permit shall be processed as provided by Section 1597.46(3) of the State of California Health and Safety Code, 3. The keeping of any animal not otherwise permitted in Section 19.40.0300, 4. Home occupations that require a conditional use permit pmswmt to Chapter 19.92 of this code, 5. Buildings or structures which incorporate solar design features that require VariatiODS from setbacks, u.pon a determination by the Director that the design feature or features will not result in privacy impacts, shadowing, or intensive noise, odor. or other .lJJdverse impact!! to the surrounding area, 6. Second dwelling units which require a conditionW use permit pursuant to Chapter 19.84 of this code, 7. Crop, tree or horticultural farming for commercial purposes; B. Issued by the Planning Commission: 1. Limited commercial recreation uses, such u riding clubs and related stables and trails, golf coursr;:s, swimming and picnic grounds, . 2. Residential care facility, that is not required to obtain a license by the"State, County agency or department and 'has six or less residents, not including the provider, provider family or staff, 3. Residential care facility, that has the appropriate State, County agency or department license and has seven or greater residents, not including the provider, provider family or staff, is a minimum distance of five hundred feet from the property boundary of another residential care facility , 4. Residential care facility, that is not required to obtain a permit from the State, County agency or department license and has 'seven or greater residents, not including the provider. provider family or staff, is a minimum distance of five hundred feet from the property boundary of another residential care facility and has a minimum of seventy-five square feet of usable rear yard area per occupant, 5. Congregate residence with eleven or more residents, is a minimum of one thousand feet from the boundary of another congregate residence and has a minimum of seventy-five square feet of usable rear yard area per occupant. (Ord. 1658, (part), 1995; Ord. 1688, ~ 3 (part), 1995; Ord. 1657, (part), 1994; Ord. 1634, (part), 1993) 19.40.050 Site Development R.egulations. The following guidelines are a compilation of policies described in the General Plan and are intended to govern the preparation of development plans in RHS zones. All provisions of this section, except subsections A, B and C, may be deviated from upon an exception granted by the Planning Commission in accordance with Section 19.40.140. A. Dwelling Unit Density. 1. The residential density for development within an 53 ResidellllWll Rillsitiille (lRBS) Zones 1'.40.(j)50 RHS zoning district shall be determined by the General Plan, based upon slope density standards descn'bed therein. 2. Upon recordation of a subdivision map or pa.rcel map in an RHS zoning district. density credits derived from application of a slope density formula to a lot or group of lots may not be transferred to property outside the subdivision or pucel map boundary. B. Lot Area. 1. The m.iIDmum lot area foJ[' al specific property shall correspond to the number following the RHS zoning symbol (multiplied by one thousand square feet). Examples are as follows: Zoning Symbol Number :MiJmimWlll Lot Area In Square Feet RHS 20 20,000 RHS 40 40,000 RHS 80 80,000 RHS 120 120,000 RHS 180 180,000 RHS 200 200,000 RHS 400 400,000 2. For purposes of subdivision, the minimum lot area shall be the average lot area computation for a zero percent slope gradient as contained in Appendix E of the General Plan. unless clustered in accordance with Section 18.52.030 (Hillside Subdivisions). These lot sizes are approximately tWelve thousand square feet for the Foothill Modified. twenty-one thousand square feetfor the Foothill 1/2 acre modified and two hundred eighteen thousand square feet for the 5-20. The minimum lot size in a clustered subdivision is ten thousand square feet. Lots which potentially are subdividable will be assigned a lot size number at the time of subdivision. 3. The minimum lot area for legally-created; developed lots, which are not subdividable, shall reflect the existing lot size. C. Lot Width Minimum. The minimum lot width in an RHS zoning district is seventy feet, measured at the front. setback line; provided, however, that there is no minimum lot width for lots served by a private driveway and which do not adjoin a public street. D. Development on Substandard Lots. No structures or improvements proposed on existing, vacant legal lots in the Foothill Modified and Foothill Modified Half Acre slope density designations of the General Plan which are substandard in size, shall occur unless an exception f~; granted. E. Lots Adjoining Public Open Spaces. For lots adjacent to public open space preserves or parks, the driveway and building shall be located in a manner to be set as far as feasible from the preserve or park and designed in a maImer tominim;,',e impacts 0111 the preserve or park. F. Site Grading. 1. All site grading shall be limited to a cumulative total of two thousand five hundred cubic yards, cut plus fill. The two thousand five hWldlred Cillbic yards includes gradmg for building pad, yard areas, driveway and !ill other areas requiring grading. but does not include basements. The graded area shall be limited to the building pad area to the greatest extent possible. Grading quantities for multiple driveways shall be divided equally among the participating lots, e.g.. two lots sharing a driveway will divide the driveway grading quantity in half. The divided share will be charged against the grading quantity allowed for that lot development. A maximum of two thousand square feet of flat yard area. excluding driveways, may be graded. All cut and fill areas shall be rounded to follow the natural contours and planted with landscaping which meets the requirements in Section 19.40.0500. 2. A licensed landscape architect shall review grading plans and, in consultation with the applicant and the City Engineer, shall submit a plan to prevent soil erosion and to screen out and fill slopes. G. Landscaping. 1. A licensed landscape architect shall prepare a tree planting plan for the site which will screen grading areas, and residential structures, to the greatest possible extent, as well as to reintrodUce trees on barren slopes which were denuded by prior agricultural activities. 2. Landscape improvement shall meet the requirements as established in the Xeriscape Landscaping Ordinance, Chapter 14.15 of this code. 3. Landscape improvements shall be installed prior to occupancy unless such installation is impracticable, in which case, the applicant shall post a bond, cash or other security to insure installation within an eighteen-month period from occupancy. All such landscape areas shall be properly maintained. 4. No specimen sized trees may be removed without a permit as provided for in the Heritage and Specimen Tree Ordinance, Chapter 14.18 of this code. Native trees should be integrated into the site design to the greatest extent possible. H. Watercourse Protection. 1. Any watercourse identified in Figure 6-J of the Cupertino General Plan and its existing riparian vegetation must be shown on all development plans. 2. All new development, including structures, grading and clearing. must be set back at least fifty feet on lots which are less than one acre in size and one hundred 19.40.050 CMpertmO a ZoDfumg 54 feet on lots which are greater than one acre. The setback shall be measured from the top of bank of the watercourses or.from existing riparian vegetation. whichever is greater. The setback from riparian vegetation will be measured from the drip line perimeter. 1. Development Near Prominent Ridgelines. 1. The development of new, independent structures shall not disrupt a fifteen percent site line from a prommem ridge as identified in Appendix A. The frfteen percent sire line shall be measured from the top of ridge at the closest point from the structure. 2. Additions to legally existing homes located within the fifteen percent site line of a prominent ridgeline may not further encroach into the site line, e.g., the addition may not add height or bulk which may increase the disruption to the fifteen percent ridgeline site line. 3. Should these requirements become impractical, alternatives will be considered through the exception process. J. Development on Slopes of Thirty Percent or Greater. 1. Site plans for all development proposals shall include topographical information at contour intervals not to exceed ten feet and a horizontal map scale of one inch equals two hundred feet or larger. Areas where slopes exceed thirty percent shall be identified on the site development plan. 2. No structure or improvements shall occur on slopes greater than thirty percent unless an exception is granted or unless no more than five hundred square feet of development, including grading and structures, occurs on an area with a slope greater than thirty percent. K. Trail Linkages. 1. Among other items required to be identified on the site plan, the site plan shall identify trail linkages as shown in the General Plan Trail Plan, on and adjacent to the site. 2. If a trail linkage, as shown in the General Plan Trail Plan, is identified across a property being developed, no development shall take place within that area except if approved. through the exception process. L. Views and Privacy. It is not the responsibility of City Government to ensure the privacy protection of the building permit applicant or owners of surrounding properties that may be affected by the structure under constructien. Hewever, the Director of Community Development may confer with the building permit applicant to. discuss alternate means of preventing privacy intrusion and preserving views. (Ord. 1725, (part), 1996; Ord. 1658, (part). 1995; Ord. 1634, (part), 1993) 19.40.060 Building Coverage, Setbacks &md Height Restrictions. All provisiens of this section may be deviated from upon an exception granted by the PlaJrming Commission in. accordance with Section 19.40.140. A. Floor Area. 1. a. Fer lots with less than ten thousand square feet of net lot area the maximum floor area ratio shall be forty-five percent ef the net let area. Fermula: A = 0.45 B A = Maximwnlillowabne house &ize. B = Net lot area. b. For lots with more thm ten thousand square feet of net lot area the maximum floor area shall be four thousand five hundred square feet plus 59.59 square feet for every one theusand square feet over ten thouslmd square feet of net let area. In all cases the maximum floor area shall not exceed six thousand five hundred sqUMe feet without an exception. Formula: A = ((B-l0,OOO)I1,OOO)(59.59) +4,500 A = Maximum allowable heuse size prior to instituting the maximum 6,500 square foot building size. B = Net lot area. 2. Lots Within Clustered Subdivisions Containing Common Open Space. Lots within clustered subdivisions in which land is reserved as common open space, may count a: proportionate amount of the reserved private open space for calculating the allowable house size, except that no developable lot would be subject to greater than a ferty-five- percent floor area ratio prier to slope consideration. The average slepe of a lot within a clustered subdivision shall be calculated on the developable lot. 3. Slope Adjustment Criteria. For lots with an average slope greater than ten percent, the allowable floor area, prior to instituting the maximum six thousand five hundred square foot allowable building size, shall be reduced by one and one-half percent for each percent ef slope ever ten percent. Fer lots with an average slope over . thirty percent the allowable floor area shall be reduced by a constant thirty percent. Formula: C = A= A x (1-(1.5 x (D - 0.1))) Maximum allowable heuse size . based on subsectien 1 above prior to instituting the maximum , 6,500 square foot building size. Maximum allowable building fer lots with greater than 10% average slope. Average percent slope of net lot area. C= D= 55 R.~delllltial Hillside (RHS) ZoIme5 1'.40.060 Ave. slope Reducti@n 10% or less 11% 12% 13% 14% 15% 16% 17% 18% 19% 20% 21% 22% 23% 24% 25% 26% 27% 28% 29% 30 % or greater 0% 1.5% 3% 4.5% 6% 7.5% 9% 10.5% 12% 13.5% 15% 16.5% 18% 19.5% 21% 22.5% 24% 25.5% 27% 28.5% 30% B. Setbacks-First Floor. 1. Front Yard. The minimum front yard setback is twenty feet, except that if the grade exceeds twenty percent within the first twenty feet from the street elevation, the minimum front yard setback may be ten feet. The driveway and garage must be designed to enable vehicles to park off- street. 2. Side Yard. The minimum side yard setback is ten feet, provided that a minimum of fifteen feet shall be provided on the street side of a comer lot. 3. Rear Yard. The minimum rear yard setback shall be twenty feet. C. Setbacks-Second Floor. 1. Front Yard. The minimum front yard setback shall be twenty-five feet. 2. Side Yard. The minimum side yard setback shall be fifteen feet. 3. Rear Yare. The minimum rear yard setback shall be twenty-five feet. 4. Downhill Elevation. The downhill elevation shall be offset in the following manner: at least seventy-five percent of the second story downhill facing wall plane shall be set back an average of seven and one-half feet and in no case less than five feet from the first story downhill wall plane. The remaining twenty-five percent may not extend past the first story wall plane. 5. Should the downhill contours not be confined to one elevation, then the downhill offset shall be applicable to the primary setback affected. 6. A secooo story offset may be measured firom the outside perimeter of the first-story roofed porches. The roof of the porch must match, in pitch and style, the roof of the main structure. The porch must also be at least five feet in width and extend the length of the wall on which. it is located. D. Setback-Habitable Third Floor. The minimum setbacks for a habitable third floor shall be the same as those for a second floor, except that the minimum side yard setback shall be twenty feet. E. Height of Principal Buildings and Structures. 1. The maximum height of a principal building in an RHS zone shall be thirty feet (excluding chimneys, antennae, or other appurtenances). 2. Heights exceeding twenty feet shall be subject to the setback regulations prescribed in Section 19.40.06OD andE. 3. The maximum wall height on the downhill elevation shall be fifteen feet. (Ord. 1725, (part), 1996; Ord. 1658, (part), 1995; Ord. 1634, (part), 1993) 19.40.070 Design Standards. All provisionS of this section may be deviated from upon an exception granted by the Planning Commission in accordance with Section 19.40.140. A. Building and Roof Forms. 1. . The, building shall follow as closely as possible tl1e primary natural contour of the lot. The main building mass shall be on the upslope side of the building and the roof pitches shall trend downslope. 2. Second story dormers are permitted within the second story setbacks as long as they are minor in shape and size. 3. The downhill elevation of the main structure shall have a minimum of four offset building and roof elements. These requirements are intended to provide varied building forms to produce shadow patterns which reduce the impact of visual mass. 4. Wall planes exceeding one story or twenty feet in height, whichever is more restrictive, must contain architectural elements which provide relief and break up expansive wall pianes. B. Colors. Exterior colors of all structures on the lot shall use natural earth tone and/or vegetation colors which complement the natural surroundings and shall not exceed a reflectivity value of sixty on a flat surface. Natural earth-tone and vegetation colors include natural hues of brown, green and shades of gray. C. Outdoor Lighting. All outdoor lighting shall be identified on the site development plan. No high-intensity lights are permitted for tennis courts or other recreational 19.40.010 CillperfuAo ~ Zomng 56 purposes. Movement-activated security lights, not to exceed one hundred watts, are permitted but muSt be shielded to avoid all off-site ~ioll1. All other lights must be directed. to meet the particular need. (Ord. 1725, (part), 1996; om. 1634,(P~), 1993) , 19.40.080 Fencllllg~ All provisions of this section may be deviated from upon an exception grmted by the Pla.xming Commission i:m1 accordance with Section 19.40.140. All fences in an RHS zoning district shall be governed by the following regulatiom: A. Solid board fencing shall: 1. Not be limited on lots of less than thirty thousand square feet net area; 2. Be limited to a five thousand square foot area (excluding the principal building) for lots exceeding thirty thousand square feet in net lot area. B. Open fencing (composed of materials which result in a minimum of seventy-five percent visual transparency) shall be unrestricted except that such fencing over three feet in height may not be constructed within the front yard setback. (Ord. 1634, (part). 1993) 19.40.090 Permitted Yard Encroachment. All provisions of this section may be deviated. from upon an exception granted. by the Planning Commission in accordance with Section 19.40.140. A. Architectural features (not including patio covers) may extend into a required yard a distance not exceeding three feet, provided. that no architectural feature or combination thereof, whether a portion of a principal or accessory structure, may extend closer than three feet to any property line. B.. Additions to Existing Structures. Except for structures located within the prominent ridgeline site line, where a single-family dwelling legally constructed according to existing yard and setback regulations at the time of construction encroaches upon present required yards, one encroaching side of the existing structure may be extended along the existing building lines even when the existing first floor setbacks do not meet the requirements of this chapter. Only one such extension shall be permitted for the life of such building. This applies to the first story only. This section shall not be construed to allow the further extension of an encroachment by any building which is the result of the granting of a variance, either before or after such building becomes part of the City. The extension or addition may not further encroach into any required setback; e.g., a single story may be extended along an existing five- foot side yard setback even though the other side yard does not equal ten feet. However, in no case shall any wall plane of a first story addition be placed closer than three feet to any property line. (Ord. 1634, (part), 1993) 19.40.100 Geologic and Soils Report JProcedm"es. A. A geologicllll report prepared by a certified engineering geologist and a soils report prepared by a registered civil engineer qualified in soils mechanics by the state shall be submitted prior to the issuance of a building permit for construction of any building or structure which: 1. Is located on property in an RHS zoning district which has been designated by the General PIlllD to be within a geological hazard area; and 2. Where an addition, allteration OIl repm of an existing bWlding or structure include at least one of !he following: a. The improvements include increasing the occupancy capacity of the dwelling such as adding a bedroom or secondary unit, or b. The cost of the completed addition, alteration or repairs will, during any period of twelve months, exceed twenty-five percent of the value of the existing improvements as determined by the building official based on current per foot value of the proposed structure to the existing structure's value on a parcel of property. For the purposes of this section, the value of existing improvements shall be deemed to be the estimated cost to rebuild the improvements in kind, which value shall be determined by the building official. B. These reports shall be filed in conjunction with a site development plan and, in addition to the requiremeJllts of Chapter 16.IZ of this code, shall contain: 1. All pertinent data, interpretations and evaluations, based upon the most current professionally recognized soils and geologic data; 2. The significance' of the interpretations and evaluations with respect to the actual development or implementation of the intended laild use through identification of any significant geologic problems, critically expansive soils or other unstable soil conditions which if not corrected may lead to structural damage or aggravation of these geologic problems both on- and off-site; 3. Recommendations for corrective measures deemed necesSary to prevent or significantly. mitigate potential damages to the proposed project and' adjacent properties or to otherwise insure safe development of the property; 4. Recommendations for additional investigations that should be made to insure safe development of the property; 5. Any other information deemed appropriate by the City Engineer. C. No building permit shall be issued for the construction of any building or structure on property which is subject to regulation under this section, unless the building and site plans incorporate the above-described corrective measures and unless the plans are approved by the City Engineer. (Ord. 1634. (part), 1993) 57 ResidenftW Hillside (RHS) ZoJmelil 19.4@.U@ 19.4<<>>.110 Private Roads uld Driveways. All provisions of this section may be deviated from upon an exception granted by the Planning Commission in accordance with Section 19.40.140. A. Pavement Width and Design. The pavement width and design for a private road or common driveway serving two to five lots and a single-lot driveway shall comply with development standalrds contained in the Hillside Subdivision Ordinance, Chapter 18.52 of this cooe. R Reciprocal Jrngress/Egress. An applicant for a 'building permit for a lot served by a private road or common driveway shall record an appropriate deed restriction guaranteeing reciprocal ingress! egress easemelllt to adjoining property owners who utilize the private road or common driveway for the primary access to their lot(s). C. Reciprocal Maintenance Agreement. The applicant for a building permit for a lot served by a private road or common driveway shall record an appropriate deed restriction guaranteeing participation in a reciprocal mainte~ce agreement with other lot owners utilizing the private road or common driveway for primary access. D. Gates. Gates may be used. to control access to private roads and driveways provided that the design of the gate, including location, dimension and the locking devices, are approved by the Director of Community Development after consultation with the Central Fire District. (Ord. 1784, (part), 1998; Ord. 1634. (part), 1993) 19.40.120 Solar Design. The setback and height restrictions provided in this chapter may be varied for a structure utilized for passive or active solar purposes; provided, that no such structure shall infringe upon solar access or propertY rights of adjoining property owners. Any solar structure which requires variation from the setback or height restrictions of this chapter may be permitted upon issuance of an exception by the Planning Commission. (Ord. 1634, (part), 1993) 19.40.130 Interpretation of PhU'1Il11ing Director. The Director of Community Development shall be empowered to make reasonable interpretations of the regulations and provisions of this chapter, consistent with the legislative intent thereof. Persons aggrieved by an interpretation of this chapter by the Director of Community Development may petition the Planning Commission in writing forreview of the interpretation. (Ord. 1634, (part), 1993) 19.40.140 Exception for Development of Certam InmvidW1l1 Hillside Lots. A. With respect to a request for development of a legally created individual hillside lot which does not meet the development requirements contained in Sections 19.40.0500 through M and 19.40.060 through 19.40.090 and 19.40.110 through 19.42.120 of this chapter. the Planning Commission shall grant am exception to allow development if the subject property cannot be merged with adjacent property purswnnt to Government Code SectiolllS 66451.10 - 66451.21 and if the commission, based upon substantial evidence, makes all of the following findings: 1. The proposed development will not be injurious to property or improvements in the area nor be detrimental to the public health and safety. 2. The proposed development will not create III hazardous condition for pedestrian or vehicular traffic. 3. The proposed development has legal access to public streets and public services are available to serve the development. 4. The proposed development requires an exception which involves the least modification of, or deviation from, the development regulations prescribed in this chapter necessary to accomplish a reasonable use of the parcel. 5. AU alternative locations for development on the parcel have been considered and have been found to create greater environmental impacts than the location of the proposed development. 6. The proposed development does not consist of structures on or near known geological or environmental hazards which have been determined by expert testimony to be unsafe or hazardous to structures or persons residing therein. (See General Plan Policies 2-49.) 7. The proposed development includes grading and drainage plans which will ensure that erosion and scarring of the hillsides caused by necessary construction of roads, housing sites, and improvements will be minimized. (See General Plan Policies 2-53, 2-54 and 2-57.) 8. The proposed development does not consist of structures which would disrupt the natural silhouette of ridgelines as viewed from established vantage points on the valley floor unless either: a. The location of a structure on a ridgeline is necessary to avoid greater negative environmental impacts; or b. The structure could not otherwise be physically located on the parcel and the size of the structure is the minimum which is necessary to allow for a reasonable use of the parcel. (See General Plan Policies 2-46, 2-47 and 2-48.) 9. The proposed development consists of structures incorporating designs, colors, materials, and outdoor lighting which blend with the natural hillside environment and which are designed in such a manner as to reduce the effective visible mass, including building height, as much as possible without creating other negative environmental impacts. (See General Plan Policies 2-46,2-50, 2-51 and 2-52.) 10. The proposed development is located on the parcel as far as possible from public open space preserves 19.40.140 CU!l.pertmo .. Zoniml~ 58 or parks (if visible therefrom), riparian corridors, and wildlife habitats unless such location will create other, more negative environmental impacts. (See General Plan Policies 2-55, 5-14 and 5-28.) 11. The proposed development includes alandscape plan which retains as many specimen trees as possible, which utilizes drought-tolerant native plants and ground covers consistent with nearby vegetation, and which minimi7.es lawn areas. (See General Phm Policies 2-54, 5-15 and 5-16.) 12. The proposed development confines solid fencing to the areas near a structure rather than around the entire site. (See General Plan Policy 5-17.) 13. The proposed development is otherwise consistent with the City's General Plan and with the purposes of this chapter as described in Section 19.40.010. B. An application for exception must be submitted on a form. as prescribed. by the Director of Community Development. The application shall be accompanied by a fee prescribed by City Council resolution, no part of which shall be refundable, to the applicant. Upon receipt of an application for an exception, the Director shall issue a Notice of Public Hearing before the Planning Commission for an exception under this chapter in the same manner as provided in Section 19 . 120.060 (relating to zoning changes). After a public hearing, and consideration of the application in conjunction with the mandatory findings contained in subsection A above, the Planning Commission shall approve, conditionally approve or deny the application for an exception. The decision of the Planning Commission may be appealed to the City Council as provided in Section 19.136.060. C. An exception which has not been used within two years following the effective date thereof, shall become null and void and of no effect unless a shorter time period shall specifically be prescribed by the conditions of such permit or variance. An exception permit shall be deemed to have been "used" in the event of the erection of a structure or structures when sufficient building activity has occurred and continues to occur in a diligent manner. D. In addition to any other remedies, the City Attorney is authorized to commence and maintain a civil action to enforce the provisions of this chapter or any copditioDs attached to the granting of any permit or exception granted under this chapter. (Ord. 1725, (part), 1996; Ord. 1634, (part), 1993) 19.40.145 Applicability. This chapter shall apply to any permit filed after April 8, 1996, provided, however, that an exception previously granted, and for which building permits are obtained two years after the effective date of the ordinance codified in this section, is exempt. (Ord. 1725, (part), 1996) . }\PPENDIX.A PROMINENT RIDGELINES Chapler 19.~O of the Cupertino Municipal Code Adopter by the Cily COllncillllHler Ordinance 16]~. OClober II, 199] 19.20.010 CHAPTER 19.20: AGRICULnJRAL-RESIDENTIAL (A-I) WNES Section 19.20.010 19.20.020 19.20.030 19.20.040 19.20.050 19.20.060 19.20.070 19.20.080 19.20.090 Purpose. Applicability of regulations. Permitted uses. Conditional uses. Excluded uses. Site development regulations. Permitted yard encroachments. Solar design. Interpretation by the Planning Director. 19.20.010 Purpose. Agricultural-residential zones are intended to preserve agriculture or forestry activities in areas suited to that purpose, and to include therein residential development of a semi-rural character. (Ord. 1601, Em. A (part), 1992) 19.20.020 Applicability of Regulations. No building, structure or land shall be used, and no building or structure shall be hereafter erected, structurally altered or enlarged in an agricultural-residential (A-I) district other than in conformance with the provisions of this chapter and other applicable provisions of this title. (Ord. 1601, Exh. A (part), 1992) 19.20.030 Permitted Uses. The following uses shall be permitted in an A-I ~m~: - A. Agriculture, horticulture, viticulture and forestry, including but not limited to, the following uses: 1. Field and truck crops, including drying and storage, 2. Orchards and vineyards, including bottling and storage, 3. Tree farms, botanical conservatories and arboreta, 4. Barns and sheds, 5. Keeping of draft IIn1mllh: and animals providing products used on the property, and household pets; B. Single-family dwelling unit; C. Residences of farm workers and their families whose primary employment is incidental and necessary to agricultural operations conducted on the same parcel of land on which such residences are located; D. A second dwelling unit conforming to the provisions, standards, and procedures of Chapter 19.84 of this title, except for a second dwelling unit requiring a conditional use permit; E. Noncommercial stables, and the keeping of DO more than three riding horses. except that additional foals may be retained for a period of six months after birth; F. Accessory facilities and uses, customarily incidental to permitted uses and otherwise conforming with the provisions of Chapter 19.80 of this title; G. Home occupations. when accessory to other permitted uses and otherwise conforming to the provisions of Chapter 19.92 of this title, and subject to any conditional use permit requirements continued in that chapter; H. Small-family day care home; I. Large-family day care home. which meets the parking criteria contained in Chapter 19.100, and which is at least three hundred feet from any other large-family day care home. The Director of Community Development or hislher designee shall ;admini!:tratively approve large day care homes to ensure compliance with the parking and proximity requirements; J. Residential care facility that is licensed by the appropriate State, County agency or department with not more than six residents, not including the provider, provider family or staff; K. Congregate residence with ten or less residents. (Ord. 1688, 13 (part), 1995; Ord. 1657, (part), 1994; Ord. 1601, Exh. A (part), 1992) 19.20.040 Conditional Uses. The following uses may be conditionally allowed in the A-I zoning district, subject to the issuance of a conditional use permit: A. Issued by the Director of Community Development: 1. Temporary uses subject to regulations established , by Chapter 19.128, 2. Animal breeding, . 3. Home occupations requiring a conditional use permit pursuant to Chapter 19.92 of this title, 23 19.20.040 Cupertino - ZoDing 24 4. Buildings or structures which incorporate solar design features that require variations from setbacks upon a determination by the Director that the design feature, or features will not result in privacy impacts, shadowing, or intrusive noise, odor, or other adverse impacts to the surrounding area, 5. Large-family day care home, which otherwise does not meet the criteria for a permitted use. The conditional use permit shall be processed as provided by Section 1597.46 (3) of the State of California Health and Safety Code; B. Issued by the Planning Commission: 1. livestock ranches and dairy farms, 2. Processing of dairy products produced on the property, 3. Fur farms, 4. Poultry raising and hatcheries, 5. Apiaries, 6. Nurseries, greenhouses and landscaping gardens, 7. Boarding kennels, 8. Transmission Jines, transformer stations, television and radio towers, and other public utility and communication structures, 9. Noncommercial stables for riding horses in excess of the number permitted by Section 19.20.030E of this chapter, 10. Residential care facility that is not required to obtain a license by the State, County agency or department and has six or less residents, not including the provider, provider family or staff, 11. Residential care facility that has the appropriate State, County agency or department license and seven or greater residents, not including the provider, provider family or staff, is a minimum distance of five hundred feet from the property boundary of another residential care facility , 12. Residential care facility that is not required to obtain a license by the State, County agency or department and has seven or greater residents, not including the provider, provider family or staff, is a minimum distance of five hundred feet from the property boundary of another residential care facility, 13. Congregate residence with eleven or more residents which is a minimum distance of one thousand feet from the boundary of another congregate residence and has a minimum of seventy-five square feet of usable rear yard area per occupant; C. Issued by the City Council after consideration of the Planning Commission's recommendation: 1. Ret.".ul sale of wine, fruit and berries produced on the property, 2. Cemeteries, crematoriums, mausoleums, and columbaria, 3. Mines, quarries and gravel pits, 4. Riding academies, commercial stables, and the boarding of horses, 5. Guest ranches, 6. Golf courses and driving ranges, 7. Cbmmercial swimming pools and picnic areas, . 8. Public and quasi-public buildings and uses. (Ord. 1822, (part), 1999; Onl. 1688, f 3, 1995; Ont. 1657, (part), 1994; Old. 1601, Em. A (part), 1992) 19.20.050 Excluded Uses. The following uses shall not be permitted in an A-I zoning district: A. Hog farms; B. Cattle farms mainly depending upon feed brought onto the property; C. Slaughterhouses, fertilizer yards, feed yards, boneyards, or plants for the reduction of animal matter; D. Commercial feed sales; E. Other semiagricu1tural uses mainly depending on raw materials, semifinished products, or feed brought onto the property; F. Other agricultural uses which, in the opinion of the Director of Community Development. create a private or public nlli!:8IJCe. (Ord. 1601, Em. A (part), 1992) 19.2.0.060 Site Development Regulations. A. Lot Area Zoning Designations. In A-I zones, the minimum lot area shall correspond to the number (multiplied by one thousand square feet) followingthe A-I ioning symbol. Examples are as follows: ZoDing Symbol Number Minimum Lot Area in Square Feet A 43 A 215 43,000 215,000 B. Minimum Lot Area. 1. The minimum lot size for a lot in an A-I zoning district having no incidental residential use is two hundred fifteen thousand square feet. 2. The minimum lot size for a lot in an A-I district having incidental residential use is forty-three thousand square feet per dwelling unit on the lot. Dwelling units in farm labor camps for temporary laborers, and second dwelling units, shall not be counted for the purpose of determining required total area under this section. C. Required Lot Shape. Each lot in an A-I zone shall have a shape that a square with a side of two hundred feet can be inscribed in the lot. D. Lot Coverage, Building Setbacks, and Height. Restrictions. 1. The maximum building coverage is forty percent of the net lot area. 25 Agricultural-Residential (A-1) Zones 19.20.060 2. The maximum floor area ratio is forty-five percent of the net lot area. 3. Minimum Setbacks. a. First Floor. i. The minimum front-yard setback is thirty feet, ii.. The minimum side-yard setback is twenty feet, ill. The minimum rear-yard setback is twenty feet. b. Second Floor. i. The minimum front-yard setback is thirty feet, ii. The minimum side-yard setback is twenty feet, ill. The minimum rear-yard setback is twenty-five feet. E. Height of Principal Buildings and Structures. 1. The maximum height of a principal building or structure is twenty-eight feet. Fireplace chimneys, antennae, or other appurtenanCeS are excluded from this restriction. 2. Heights exceeding twenty feet shall be subject to the setback regulations in subsection D of this section. 3. The City Council may prescn"be that all buildings in a designated area be limited to one story in height (not to exceed eighteen feet) by affixing to the, A-I zoningdistrict symbol the designation "i." 4. Exception for Hillside Areas. Notwithstanding any provision of subsection D of this section to the contrary, uponrecoJDIDeDdationofthe Planning Commission, the City Council may approve building heights in an A-I zoning district greater than twenty-eight feet upon making all the following determinations: a. The subject property is in a billside area and has an average slope of ten percent or greater; b. Topographical features of the subject property make an exception to the standard height restrictions necessary or desirable; and c. In no case, shall the maximum height exceed thirty-five feet for a principal structure or twenty feet for an accessory structure; d. In no case, shall the maximum height of a structure located on a prominent ridge1ine as defined by Section 19.40.05006 relating to RHS zoning districts, or above the four-hundred-fifty-foot contour, exceed twenty feet in height. (Oni. 1630, (part), 1993; Ord. 1601, Em. A (part), 1992) 19.20.070 Permitted Yard Encroachments. A. In A-I zones, where a building legally constructed according to existing yard and setback regulations at the time of construction encroaches upon present required yards, one encroaching side of the existing structure may be extended along existing building lines even when the existing first-floor setbacks do not meet the requirements of this chapter. Only one such extension shall be permitted for the life . of such building and shall only apply to the first story. This section shall not be construed to allow the further extension of an encroachment by any building which is the result of the granting of a variance, either before or after such property becomes part of the City. B. The extension or addition may not further encroach into any required setback; e.g., a single story may be extended along an existing five-foot side-yard setback even though the other side yard does not equal ten feet. However, in no case shall any wall plane of a first-story addition be placed closer than three feet to any property line. C. Architectural features (not including patio covers) may extend into a required yard a distance not exceeding three feet; provided that no architectural feature, or combination thereof, whether a portion of a principal or accessory structure may extend closer than three feet to any property line. COrd. 1601, Em. A (part), 1992) 19.20.080 Solar Design.. The setback and height restrictions provided in this chapter may be varied for a structure utilized for passive or active solar purposes in A-I zones, provided that no such structure shall infringe upon solar access or property rights of adjoining property owners. Any solar structures which vary from the setback or height restrictions of this chapter shall be allowed only upon issuance of a conditional use permit by the Director of Community Development pursuant to Section 19.20.040A4ofthis chapter. (Ord. 1601, Em. A (part), 1992) 19.20.090 Interpretation by the Planning Director. The Director of Community Development shall be empowered to make reasonable interpretations of the regulations and provisions of this chapter, consistent with the legislative intent thereof. Persons aggrieved by an interpretation of the chapter by the Director of Community Development may petition the Planning Commission in writing for review of the interpretation. (Ord. 1601, Em. A (part), 1992) Exhibit E -----Original Message----- From: Marshall Wang [mailto:marshallw@signiatech.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2007 5:37 PM To: City of Cupertino Planning Dept. Subject: Please Remove the Unfair Ordinance 19.28.050.C Importance: High Dear Planning Commissioners, In January 2005 a section of new Rl Ordinance was passed without public input. This unfair section (19.28.050.C) effectively rezoned our Rl properties and lowered my property value. Please remove this unfair ordinance. Thank you. Marshall Wang 21822 Lindy Lane Cupertino, CA 95014 ExhibU F Dear Cupertino City Council and Planning Commission members, We the undersigned are AGAINST the 15% RHS overlay ofRl properties. Please treat everyone equally in Cupertino and REMOVE section 19.28.050.C (both Cl and C2) of the Rl ordinance. Name Address c.0 it "DA:tI(j") Gl'<t'~ (oJ'I'b ~ eX, ~ Sv,\.\e.-"\"t)lor ~fe.~ ItJ36S> ~-n"b~ C-{-. ~'n;;o I r2-rvL I~ Ie? yo 7 /)NIsr/O!) cr.~f's-R7/N'V. ~ W'~~ ~ 6<..J fie /;6t '- { C) ~/ ~ o~ h-X'e 5otv~WO-{~ p}1lMd D\o\~c\ar t1l6ti h J, 1., ~ kl1'UV\ Rct1'1f?- Smite>. RQYIL- _~elj" ~ w(P ) P..-ti,in", t^ ~""n'U.. 1.c;:Qt. uu~ nuprl'!:l." 10377 ~c:l cJ::-~ /04,,7 /f~/ Ul." UyUAPittJ $.> i? 6' t,c tku At€. ~'fip, vvY&tf 1/00 ~ u.r~').. ~JJJ;;G ~ \10< S ItVfLCvf~fw \D65} ~tM,~ lLACA~ ~~ ~.~)b1 RJ..c.u.r' '75"eIL t06~<; 54Y\tcc LucAQ Rd I ~. q~O}~ .JF /06(> A"~~crt.. J<3,l., G..p. "l so I"t- .. I t1-G)l~ 5M,,.I.w~A F-J.. CMf~ q5>l4> Dear Cupertino City Council and Planning Commission members. We the undersigned are AGAINST the 15% RHS overlay of RI properties. Please treat everyone equally in Cupertino and REMOVE section 19.28.050.C (both Cl and CZ) of the Rl ordinance. Name 4 Le/ f ~ Address !1PI(I/j1EP )'f/OV& 106;;-' >A#'rjJ L UCLA ~ 7d" )~ 1-10..( If{ sh 0 vt1 It;q (Oh;;;-) 4J47 ~ t.. oc. r4 I( 'D - 'vi tel A.I / A (}u uUtl d/&I / . I A:\ c/ / 1 / ~I ? 5U L./ U ~" C-:A/ !..c/.)/-. 6-v ~"'-J 4....., ~C( ""~ ~'1- - ) <--... .." -",- .. ... L, r 1_(' Yrt _A-C4 L,...A. c... 't. "("~ \O_)g ~Cy MYPD /O-:r/s ~ 1-u.C-TA tPd A ,. ~ ----- - (YI (1 rt' f\"l (2/f.UA ff'1 tp 7 IJ-.t) ~ ~ ~ /,~o. fLcA.-.., 1-'~ (, "'l.-~ ~0; V\tl tw- I ~ 1- ~ 5 ~ VI +-/1i. L...J( i c,- U- k01>~ I,' J1lA.ClJ"'i)-- (0(23 Set? (i, Ll<CiOL I?o{ b.,- 0JeLc;a" /' /07'( ( <;"..&JT ^ L.....u:.\1I ~~ 5am/{- S'.h1::o/v,ll {ol '1 ( s~~ L VCA'c( tJ \!~..,g"M~ lo7S-1 S~G L~ Rd. oiJ~-IL {OlSI Sa.-v--kUu...;(!, i!J. p,.ti-tinn t..... rPrnnu.,. I,~ 'J1A~ n...u~rhn' Dear Cupertino City Council and Planning Commission members, We the undersigned are AGAINST the 15% RHS overlay of Rl properties. Please treat everyone equally in Cupertino and REMOVE section 19.28.050.C (both CI and e2) of the R 1 ordinance. Name Address er:w~ C.HA~ ~ '2LCfl.{3 '-;4J t'> Y Lr.J)~toi( ~ NIJR~HALL WA40 21 ~ 22 L1-IV or LN'I ~fe,iI"~ 1 cA~( '- kVTUf3> M~~ 2.18'$2.- L, 1\1 D 'f [,N I Cv PGR..71.~J CA q::: tltt//;,( a.rn-~/ IIZ~--#/ ~/-~./~'c#~ 7];.;4 {;./J:j;7!,/ / / / / /./ /' ./ amA &~4- // ~n.&d~~ // // C/fJ2.-!f C#fJ M ilb/~~ dLu~.e ~ // // // // // ~I1M(~ Y~(/..J7 ;U~ df: 8USilh L/h 1120 (, fVl f (12-13s-r PIL uAp~17PO/( qrTJIy l t l fa? LIOM. 'V 1$;7fT ~ C'1'~-,J7) O}-~ ) / /llfo'll/,JdOJ thst-o- VI< Cu~,j q6b. '1/7) 1. LrAl~f LANe: c V//~7,.~ e'/lqJb/; //;)1"'/ 1f71. U esT P/.1t;;p ';z 0 v II 9ro/L.; PI'tifinn tn ,".PftV\",. t ,(I. Dl-t~ n.""'Jorlo'1.: Dear Cupertino City Council and Planning Commission members, We the undersigned are AGAINST the 15% RHS overlay oiRI properties. Please treat everyone equally in Cupertino and REMOVE section 19.28.050.C (both CI and C2) of the Rl ordinance. - ~~...,........ S'/#,/? Address --417 %1 [j f/jJ yLv, ') eu (Jerfw 0 ! I ' 9SV;'/- '''50!,! ~/ 'j)'$cO fi,....r~c. .J::7- cu~ft~ ,.- '7 '..F'Z' . ft~~? . ;;;u-z~ Jlh ;u::j cL ll- - ~~~ 'J)c-: ~ 'i? . ;2/J1'.? t1 ~,/'~c-e ~ -ve. a~~"'y14', ~ ?~ Zlff 3<) T~I-~ "<- ~. C-):ZIl.R.J{.,h<J ?S' f I ~qrl. L ~ h1- L (I Cr 4:w, /~/< ,;lJfeq "'- G.~, L~~. S ru),/ d- J OS- ReOl1.,..A 72 J . /~""r.....+i..o 9.10/' P.-.i..,," In ""'1T1,.n,,:~ J';;;O,&. PJ.l"~ n1f~rl';l1" Dear Cupertino City Council and Planning Commission members, We the undersigned are AGAINSI' the 15% RHS overlay of Rl properties. Please treat everyone equally in Cupertino and REMOVE section 19.28.050.C (both Cl and C2) of the RI ordinance. Name 'rJr~I/(Z ,J O~J9;J Ght>y rfWNIM- AI()'1Ar1~~ I'" Sf 'f 'hi pJ~HAN ~/fo., S'1t'~H. ,Jo~;ru.8 lhrj ~~ ta-4 ~ir-to ~olpfL KD /'-. So~ lC- B^1~~ lL/~'-L. p~ ;Ba.rr! ~{'\e- <Si tvLovv Ko ~f fl, \A~ ~...-e" -->"'~ ~L' 'D~titinn tn. ,-,:IImn1.'':'' 1 ,I'.&. Que;: ,..",:a.rlQ'L> Address ~ / J 2- S-Iy rl T o::€s-r PL Cu 1'e,erJ,...Io./ cA' ..YD / 't' jJp".., A?J.b #0 'f.5 ~ /.H;),.., A- ~ '- . ~ (/1 21- Lmd~ l/;:?f::.tA f>h ~Ynt? eA qr-o/7L " I ?J 1 h...';-NAP. t A 1 +. Qrv ~ t-C n...o . Q,~ ., rt> { if- ",ol} JIIi.M@ ~4{~ "':)7 ~~ '^"~ J()v . ~ J C-~ q.('Oltt- R~K _ sF ~ '1/tHoGo. Cof-\-. 11 /47 Lo'llf./'I. ~')' ).. I)",. bk J~~ e )e.~f (\DjQ.J -C,,:,~ '" "" 1/1S"7 L{~ -U sT17- 'PiA- 2{ ~~ L;;-wJV I tJ.Ae -P XlillAlvJllJ1~f){). c-M 2,/,r I L-IhJy Lv. C 4,)le-rj.p,1j C,4 Cfra'f( ;1/i31 L/~/ Gt.o1J! c'~WI.f/g/M'#-- Dear Cupertino City Council and Planning Commission members, We the undersigned are AGAINST the 15% RHS overlay of R1 properties. Please treat everyone equally in Cupertino and REMOVE section 19.28.050.C (both CI and C2) of the Rl ordinance. Name ~ r~~ i ,- ...\A.J,~ Ut^'~ W l~ '3 . fAJ. 'l&V Address -z"q-f~ f{'~ ~d .~~"'.:l>) ~ .q50(4. ~~s ~ ~'^. ~SOI4- ,j C!4fp~~} :; /7;), 6 ^l:5i:> '" A-'VL F< IJ . .,~ 0 J Lf J3;Jj J~N 7- ~ r "7"3.5 K (Jkq6;-f (? J) I ~d'arl-I";c. t:tS!J 14 (fJ.......~ ~\73S <J(11~~' e'{f".Ri"~1> qSD1~ .~ f..&r~ 21~0"2. L.:~ Ltt ~WJt,\- ~e.fJ6'~ 04if~ 21fJP{). Livr/j LY).Cape$.,u<1PI) S(2/ent( L) 'h / /J" If lilt. (!/es I Pi IUp;.'~o t!II?J · c5ttt. c.t-; /I~W ~SlN w:uJ CY. ~7i;U7A.ba4/ftJ/~ r,A-R 7 AD II 4 ~/I,-.? /1/. 7 f 8/0 -r; r"r""~~ O....:tl, I C.. f,..-A"..e> CA- cr 5~ fLI S"U~(/I ~~ e OIl{ iei \rOOf h0J2S -JJ e... lj)t;. /I /ft>) If a s Of- I~ I ~. q~~ V~QOY'fffvc::.lfltuHJCrf/)' 2rVbd /rrr4U1 An,t/(l C.f.//0~/ (II- /t{'dL, [IJNIIY AI OJ II UJ ~ HI. C~~7.JJrR. Ccf6'(J/7JNV / LA4 'f rD lLj P_tit."n In. I"Prnnup. t "q. 'Dl-I~ rn/-.r}Q'U Dear Cupertino City Council and Planning Commission members, We the undersigned are AGAINST the 15% RHS overlay of Rl properties. Please treat everyone equally in Cupertino and REMOVE section 19.28.050.C (both CI and C2) of the Rl ordinance. Name ~do;; ~ ":cy, <;;r~"'" ':'"YI,.'I<. J /'<f<i'''d ~hrl.'L 2.. tvh ~'j?d'Y\ ~ hn? :7", cl . S()",^,,- L a.J..;. ~ ~ktu~~ ~~ Sl1.S~ ~.o~~ N{L~: lJ~,~-k- tv: 11 ;4.~ c~ W.eJ/J ~ ~, p,.titinn tn rPrn"'17'" 1":;:Q&. J)J.JC;: ^"Prl"::ll" Address "fro cMY().N V~~ C~llcL-G-. , (;<<f8'I2-rz.JJ 1:>, C:;;Q. 9h 19 IfD.fft Tom!, *:UlLHI13 I Utfu11;,.;> cA 'fPI'f · ( 2-1, 'Fell.. g.( Ii <V, F I). 'I e. V' . '-:: a <.t" ~'rr~ "n r ". c:r-S ta f L I JI:2'Cl le,tyZ:L obelia 't:>r. C.'-'Vf"7~"h11,"l Ct ~o I q t 13 0 S'" -r .t..:rl.rr~ 8.eU ~ ?.,.... ~~ ~\.A..D 1l3o$" -1<MD- ~ j)..... ~""'" )~lo ~~tAo....~t C~QP-\tI\O }1)42.-' /rve.vuc.tk- ~ ~"H.D /64-3G flv~'),'o\~ L~ CVp.D4t;"o J 0 lfo"1 o..Jvn~<!L . -BUM. ~ &~~ / () r /7 7 a ;~.. #If, 1-4.,,': r ~~~;,,-, I f')<f lie. AVeAJlbA J.JJ. C-u~~A. T/J{)t) Dear Cupertino City Council and Planning Commission members, We the undersigned are AGAINST the 15% RHS overlay of Rl properties. Please treat everyone equally in Cupertino and REMOVE section 19.28.050.C (both CI and C2) of the Rl ordinance. Name t .1nJ.< rGL -Yt;LIl) MOt zCL o(.{ ~ . .ecl/lrt ~~ ~' f$ \ .... /1 )J1(}.> 1, 2mAJ(?v d~IA ~~ C~l.^, ~;~~-L .,..-:'71/}/F .' t./ -;.-,/[,.] ,,' -..ce' /i , , '1 tf;~it ~ y~~ ~JJ_ O~ l>.otitinn t^ ~"""'v_ 1,~ J1'U<:' ....v..rl'~nr Address 73.15 Or"if2 B/~soP1 Pr - Ct~i'e..-t1w, I if-q GU\Jl-efI'1iX vJo...j CU-perf1: 7 7 o~ Qc. Ie tv( l2",d.t.Lv fuvX-) Cu~i'fl 0 II v: 71J &,[I}t.I;;/,.~ !e'yyt::l f.R Pj/. /:(/blJl)-f/7~"> " rq,'j, rtl /~l? C~lArIN JQ/1r-ft.tA) LccfA{ C_-f~_A~ 11t}\ ~I /~ Grv<t,~ ; ,/' . '1 ,/,,t; " -"?,..,A A ./ /t"o .~);' ...1,.. ,..,. . ~~W.[<; l~k7 / / //b #y/Pr ;1~d ( . / 117! YII~I(.sih,. et ~pl'1tiJllJ 11" YCJYtsJJ~ C7: 4H~ Dear Cupertino City Council and Planning Commission members, We the undersigned are AGAINST the 15% RHS overlay of Rl properties. Please treat everyone equally in Cupertino and REMOVE section 19.28.050.C (both Cl and C2) of the R 1 ordinance. Name Address I< d- a.. f11 11"UJ b fi4 7. C/lts-:J7 .pIL. 6V~ 7"...-0 ~. q501'f ~ ;ttA1 ).. : 1/~3J. -r~4 JJ.JIIt j}y 1 / ~N. ~~e.:l-1.'1 '. -/ fIc~ ~h ~ ---- /'"") ( ~1 7~1 !2../-rc(2 !-tu#V L/ N.f)C( /-AHB <i5"ol4 q f 9JO, ~ fffl't u tJ JJ ( L4wf tjJo if- P.otttinn tn 1"lPrnn.,,'p 1,q;. DUe:: n."p.r1~v Dear Cupertino City Council and Planning Commission members, We the undersigned are AGAINST the 15% RHS overlay of Rl properties. Please treat everyone equally in Cupertino and REMOVE section 19.28.050.C (both CI and C2) of the Rl ordinance. Name Address 'i",L 5;L --.lJ 2.55 !lkt Ctze.('[ PL ~ II~k~lL. . A-,/w -<-K ~ tJ Ct,-f--cJ fQA/t ~ ^---'---- J-IYDI1J ~ 11l-4 ~~ (1 ... /IJ; "' L> r:)~ N,e~ ~Q M~ik~~k C.~~~ C~~~ tA\\d. ~ Ned;.,: So..v~"( P"..t;tin.n tn T'Prnnup 1 ,Q&.. DUe;: ^,,.....l.l'.n.: // J..lJ.~ A?ooA/-rc.P_~-r l. A .-.0 PI"'~1itb ~l Zi 0 Wt,u.../7 (:.1'",,~r V'f' '-'"", - -- - CA- Cf J7)/ y; ~~/ /J.::J..I 0 /Yl ~ Cl'LUt 0/"1 C;4- 9st>I'Y \\'L~~ 1'b~ ~4.1JJl ,Cu~1L\IV\1d I CA. G"S"o 14 ~/6S:z J.~~) ~J;~ J.-\b&"2- ~vd\.i~' &fent:. /t\.Q c:J\95o/f..} ).:J-l b I Li ~ 1>-_ G..~+,;~ cA q5{) l t /pST.P 7'r"ikdiivc:f- ~ 1'50 'f)~g1 {;-v.'sk G- ~ 'tS-o{j Exhibit G City of Cupertino 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014 C U P.E RT IN 0 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT Application: Applicant: Property Owner: Property Location: MCA-2006-01 City of Cupertino Various City-wide Agenda Date: August 14,2007 Application Summary: Report on the Rl Ordinance regarding neighborhood meetings on the Residential Hillside overlay. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission: 1. Take public testimony; and 2. Explore options to allow flexibility while preserving the hillsides 3. Provide recommendations to the City Council. BACKGROUND In January 2005 the City Council incorporated RHS development rules into the Rl ordinance revisions for properties upslope from the 10% line and with average slopes of 15% or greater. Following these actions residents in the affected areas stated they were not aware the Council might apply these hillside development standards to their properties. Consequently, the Council directed that the staff revisit the process to provide ample opportunity for input. Additionally, the Council asked the Lindy Lane neighborhood to get together to discuss options and try to reach consensus on an approaches to development in the area. The additional notice and neighborhood discussions have occurred and some progress seems to have been made on condensing the issues and arriving at suggestions for approaches that may achieve the overall objectives of protecting the hillsides while preserving the property owners' development options. A more detailed discussion of the background is discussed on the attached exhibit B. 3D Aerial Map of the Lindy Lane Rl Hillside Area from Google Earth (ill ustrative purposes only not intended to be to scale) MCA-2006-01 August 14, 2007 Page 2 Hillsides and Valley Floor Development Standards The hillsides are special places and more sensitive to development because they typically have steeper slopes, more sensitive geology, more wildlife, heavier vegetation and trees, and contain larger lots they are more likely to be visible to the valley floor. The City of Cupertino has a long standing policy of ensuring that hillside development is sensitive to these special conditions as stated in the General Plan policy 2-48 and supporting strategies which read as follows: GOAL F HillSIDE PROTECTION Policy 2-48: Hillside Development Standards Establis h building and development standards for the hillsides that ensure hillside protection. Strategies: 1. Ordinance Reflulations and Development Approvals. Apply ordinance regulations and development approvals that limit development on ridgelines, hazardous geological areas and steep slopes. Control colors and materials, and minimize the illumination of outdoor lighting. Reduce visible building mass through such means as stePPing structures down the hillside, following the natural contours, and limiting the height and mass of the wall plane facing the valley floor. 2. Slope,densit'V Formula. Apply a slope density formula to very low intensity residential development in the hillsides. Density shall be calculated based on the foothill modified, foothill modified 1/2acre and the 5, 20 acre slope density formulae. Actual lot sizes and development areas will be determined through zoning ordinances, clustering and identification of significant natural features and geological constraints. MCA-2006-0l August 14, 2007 Page 3 The hillside RHS ordinance contains development standards that are designed to address these issues. The Ordinance is intended to control hillside development impacts: .:. Limit development on ridgelines .:. Limit development on steep slopes .:. Limit development on ,hazardous geological areas .:. Control color and material .:. Reduce visible building mass .:. Contour development with the natural terrain .:. Limit the height and mass of wall plane facing the valley floor .:. Avoid mass grading .:. Retain significant trees Upon reviewing the Rl Ordinance amendments in 2005, the Council was concerned that some areas in the hillside retained Rl zoning and had none of the above hillside protections. The Rl ordinance is designed for flatter valley floor lots with typically , smaller lot sizes, in areas that are not as environmentally sensitive and have limited development opportunities. POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS Ordinance Options If you imagine the Rl and RHS ordinance being placed on the opposite ends of a spectrum (see diagram below) you can visualize the possible options for development controls in the hillside areas. There are basically four ordinance options in the spectrum from the previous Rl to RHS that are available for the PlaIU1ing Commission to consider: 1. Revert back to the Rl hillside development standards pre-2005 R1. 2. Hybrid ordinance tailored to the Rl hillside area. 3. Retain the current Rl hillside development standards (2005 Rl). 4. Rezone the Rl hillside areas to RHS. The current 2005 Rl/RHS hillside development standards trigger is probably between the midpoint of the spectrum and full RHS (red dotted line) where lots with average slopes 15% or greater will trigger RHS standards. MCA-2006-01 August 14, 2007 Page 4 Valley Floor Rural Hillside / / / Existing R1/I)HS (2005) / / / / / / - 45% max. house size - R1 development standards - 30% or greater average slope triggers hillside development standards - R1 Density - House size adjustment based on slope - 15% or greater average slope triggers Hillside - Controls Density - House size adjustment based on slope - Hillside development Standards Reverting back to the pre-2005 Rl Ordinance could allow large homes with none of the hillsides protection measures. The following is an example illustrating the potential allowable house size difference between the current Rl (2005) vs. pre-2005 Rl: 2005 Rl (current) Pre-2005 Rl Formula: Formula: A. Maximum sq. ft. = 4,500 sq. ft. + 59.59 Maximum sq. ft. = 45% of the net lot size. sq. ft. for each 1,000 sq. ft. over 10,000 sq. ft. (net). B. For lots with an average slope of 20% = 15% reduction from the maximum allowable sq. ft. 4,500 + 59.59(10) = 5,096 sq. ft. 5,096 - 5,096 (.15) = 4,332 sq. ft. 20,000 (.45) = 9,000 sq. ft. MCA-2006-0l August 14, 2007 Page 5 Modified Foothill Standards Staff believes that using some of the ideas that came out of the neighborhood process the R1 ordinance hillside standards can be amended to provide greater flexibility for property owners while preserving the intent of the sensitive hillside development. Neighbors suggested that more flexibility could be offered if the hillside property owners constrained new development and expansions to the flatter portions of the lot. Using 10% as the trigger this would allow a property owner to build a home up to a maximum of 45% FAR if they can stay on the flat portion and still meet all RHS building setbacks and offsets. The R1 ordinance could be reworded to encompass the following: 1. Exempt all properties located in the RI-IO zoning district. These homes are typically located at the toe of slope, are largely built out with full fencing and not visible to valley floor properties. They simply don't seem to contribute to preservation of the hillside environment. They could add on up to the R1 standards with R1 setbacks. Most lots are 10,000 square feet which would give a maximum house size of 4,500 square feet. 2. Retain the requirement that all other new development on lots not zoned Rl- 10 upslope from the 10% slope line on properties with an average slope of 15% must adhere to all of the RHS development criteria, exception of house size, but including all other criteria including locating off of a prominent ridgeline and an exception process if building on slopes in excess of 30%. 3. Give the option of proposing a new home or home addition that does not require a public hearing if either of the following are met: · Complies with the house size requirements of the RHS ordinance. Note from exhibit C that many of the properties in the hillside area would still have ample building addition potential. In this case they could propose building on a slope and the flatter portions of their lot. · All of the building area is located on an existing pad with a slope of less than 10% and the proposed building area does not exceed 45% FAR. The setback and offset requirements will likely reduce the maximum building size 10-25% so it is unlikely flat pad development will result in maximizing the FAR but it provides added flexibility. 4. If the property owner cannot meet the above criteria then they can propose a house size that exceeds the limits of the RHS ordinance or proposes building area that is located off of the flat pad up to a maximum of 45% FAR, provided they submit for architectural and site approval through an advertised public hearing before the Plming Commission. The theory is that a well designed home can be built that is sensitive to the hillside environment but that the applicant would have to show why they should be allowed to build the larger home through the public hearing process. MCA-2006-0l August 14, 2007 Page 6 5. Eliminate the requirement to comply with the Rl setback requirements if they are more restrictive. This is confusing and treats the area differently than other hillside properties. 6. Change the zone of the Al properties to Rl with lot size minimums equal to their existing lot size. With this change they will come under the same requirements. 7. Public hearing if more than two specimen trees removed. Some residents suggested that a pubic hearing also be required for applications that propose to remove more than two specimen trees. This is very restrictive and goes beyond the existing tree ordinance but should be discussed to determine if it has merit. 8. Landscape screening for retaining walls. Some residents want a landscape screening requirement for retaining walls exceeding a specified height. This is currently not required in the RHS ordinance cut could be considered for this area if desired. If it works well then perhaps the RHS should be amended to incorporate a similar requirement. 9. Retaining all other provisions of the RHS ordinance ensures that the hillside development standards apply even if the house size exceeds the FAR provisions. Recommendation The Planning Commission should evaluate this option and any other variations that implement the General Policy of preserving the hillside sides. Prepared by: Approved by: Gary Chao, Senior Planner ~ (I Steve Piasecki, Director of Community Developme~ Enclosure: Exhibit A: Existing Rl Hillside Or~inance Exhibit B: Background Discussion Exhibit C: House Size Comparison (Rl vs. RHS) Exhibit A EXISTING ORDINANCE 19.28.050 Development Regulations (Site). C. Development on Properties with Hillside Characteristics. 1. Buildings proposed on properties with an average slope equal to or greater than fifteen percent shall be developed in accordance with the site development and design standards specified in Sections 19.40.050 through 19.40.140 of the Residential Hillside ordinance, Chapter 19.40, or the R1 zoning ordinance, Chapter 19.28, whichever specific regulation is more restrictive. 2. No structure or improvements shall occur on slopes of thirty percent or greater unless an exception is granted in accordance with Section 19.40.140, unless no more than five hundred square feet of development, including grading and structures, occurs on an area with a slope of thirty percent or greater. (Ord. 1886, (part), 2001; Ord. 1868, (part), 2001; Ord. 1860,9 1 (part), 2000; Ord. 1834, (part), 1999; Ord. 1635,9 1 (part), 1993; Ord. 1601, Exh. A (part), 192) D. An application for building permits filed and accepted by the Community Development Department (fees paid and permit number issued) on or before March 1,2005 may proceed with application processing under the ordinances in effect at that time. Exhibit B BACKGROUND The following is a brief chronological summary of prior events leading up to the current date: Prior to 1993 The City had limited policies and guidelines regulating properties located in the hillside area. General Plan 0(1993 Incorporated more extensive development standards intended to minimize negative impacts on hillside resources. In that same year, the Residential Hillside (RHS) Zoning District was revised with a set of comprehensive hillside development regulations. January 18, 2005 (R1 Ordinance 0(2005) The City Council approved amendments to the R1 Ordinance applying hillside standards to R110ts with an average slope of 15% of greater. The Council voted unanimously to approve the amendments to the R1 hillside development standards. The Council consensus at the time Was that more hillside protection measures are consistent with the Council's general plan policies and goals. Please refer to the online video recordings from the November 16, 2004 public hearing for a re-cap of the Council's sentiments on the issue at the following URL (between the 58:06 to 1:46 video clip position): http://www.cupertino.org/city government/city cha1U1ellwebcasting archives 2004/in dex.asp January 2006 Several affected property owners expressed concerns that the new R1 hillside standards were approved without enough public notice and input opportunities. Consequently, the Council directed staff as part of its work program to re-open the Rl hillside standards for discussion and public input. January 23, 2007 and March 13, 2007 Under the direction from the Council, the Planning Commission reviewed the R1 hillside standards and took public testimony. The Planning Commission voted on a 3-1-1 vote (Miller, Wong and Chien voted aye; Giefer voted not; Kaneda abstained) to recommended reverting the R1 Hillside standards prior to the 2005 R1 Ordinance. April 3, 2007 The City Council discussed the applicability of the hillside standards to properties located in the Cupertino footl1ills that are currently zoned Single Family Residential (R1) and Agricultural Residential (AI). The Council conducted a first reading and amended the body of the R1 Ordinance to preclude all R1 properties east of the General Plan 10% hillside transition line from the residential hillside ordinance standards. The Council clarified that the intent of the R1 hillside standards was not meaI1t to be applicable to the water course area or any area that is east of the hillside transition line. The intent of the R1 hillside regulations is to protect the R1 properties that are located on the coterminous hills up slope (or west) of the 10% hillside transition line. The Council also urged the neighbors residing on the north and south side of Lindy Lane to meet and help define a set of shared ordinance objectives for properties located in the R1 hillside neighborhood area (up slope of the General Plan 10% slope line). The Council directed that this issue be brought back to the Council on August 21, 2007 with Planning Commission recommendations. Aprill7,2007 A courtesy notice was mailed to the neighbors inviting them to identify representatives from varying areas and view points to discuss criteria for the R1 hillside development standards based on the Council's direction. May l, 2007 The City Council conducted the second reading of the R1 Ordinance Amendment to take out the areas east of the General Plan 10% slope transition line from any of the hillside development standards. An informal neighborhood proposal was submitted to the Council for review (see exhibit A) however the Council postpone reviewing the proposal to its scheduled August 21, 2007 hearing. Tune 8, 2007 A second courtesy notice was mailed to the R1 hillside neighbors inviting them to attend a formal neighborhood meeting in order to help facilitate progress on the neighborhood discussion and at the same time meet the Council's schedule. June 20, 2007 and July 19, 2007-- Neighborhood Meetings Neighborhood meetings were held at City Hall on June 20,2007 and July 19, 2007. Neighbors were asked to identify common objectives and to describe issues that are important to them. Their responses are summarized as follows: .:. Property Value .:. Preservation of Hillside .:. Tree Preservation .:. Rural Character .:. Development Standards for Toe Slope Properties .:. Simpler Rules .:. Home Size On the second meeting, the neighbors were presented with some potential ordinance solutions or options with regards to the Rl hillside development standards. The spectrum of options available ranged from reverting back to the pre 2005 Rl, do nothing and retain the current Rl hillside development standards, create a hybrid ordinance that is tailored to the neighborhood, or rezone to RHS. Unfortunately a general consensus could not be reached by the neighbors at the meeting. Several neighbors (representing the north Lindy Lane area) expressed the desire to revert the Rl hillside development standards back to the pre-200S Rl Ordinance where only developments occurring on slopes of 30% or greater is subjected to both the Rl and the RHS Ordinance, whichever is more restrictive. Exhibit C Home Size Comparison between Rl vs. RHS (*assuming 20% avg. slope) Address Net Lot Sq. Ftq Total House Sq. Ftq Rl Max, RHS Max RHS sq. ,fl. potential RHS % of potential Rl sq. fl. potential R 1 % of potential 11205 Mt, Crest 20,959 3,387 9.432 4380,09 993,09 29% 6,045 178% 11233 Mt, Crest 21,182 2,908 9,532 4391,39 1.483,39 51% 6,624 228% 11245 Mt, Crest 17198 3,252 7,739 4189.59 937.59 29% 4.487 138% 11254 Mt, Crest 28,558 4,692 12,851 4764,99 72,99 2% 8,159 174% 11244 Mt. Crest 30,700 3,728 13,815 4873,49 1.145,49 31% 10,087 271% 11234 Mt. Crest 19.492 3,181 8,771 4305.78 1124,78 35% 5.590 176% 11206 Mt. Crest 18,030 5,891 8,114 4231.73 1,659.27 -23% 2.223 38% 11204 Mt. Crest 22,652 4,080 10,193 4465,84 385,84 9% 6,113 150% 11191 Santa Teresa 16,801 2,973 7,560 4169.48 1,196.48 40% 4,587 154% 11201 Santa Teresa 18,101 2,939 8,145 4235.33 1,296.33 440/0 5,206 177% 11215 Mt. Crest 30.486 3,737 13,719 4862.65 1,125,65 30% 9,982 267% 11210 Mt. Crest 24,156 3.415 10,870 4542,02 1,127,02 33% 7.455 218% 11206 Mt. Crest 17,376 3,706 7,819 4198.61 492,61 13% 4,113 111% 11255 Mt, Crest 18,567 3.456 8,355 4258,93 802,93 23% 4,899 142% 21830 Santa Teresa 34.996 3.289 15,748 5091,08 1,802.08 55% 12.459 379% 21945 Santa Teresa 55.277 3,138 24.875 6118.35 2.980.35 95% 21.737 693% 22101 Undy 43,560 3,159 19,602 5524,86 2,365,86 75% 16,443 521% 21839 Lindy 30,977 2,942 13,940 4887,52 1,945.52 66% 10,998 374% 21849 Lindy 21,989 2,882 9,895 4432,26 1.550,26 54% 7,013 243% 21950 Lindy 21,780 2.498 9,801 4421,67 1,923,67 77% 7,303 292% 21951 Lindy 76.404 9,853 34,382 7188.46 (2,65454 -2700 24,529 249% 21992 Lindv 9,147 2,057 4,116 3498.73 1,441,73 70% 2,059 100% 11387 Lindv PL 10,454 2,898 4,704 3848.00 950,00 33% 1,806 62% 21962 Lindv 9,583 2,788 4,312 3665.50 877.50 31% 1,524 55% 21952 Lindv 10,018 2,423 4,508 3825.91 1,402.91 58% 2,085 86% 21932 Lindv 10.454 2.502 4,704 3848,00 1,346,00 54% 2.202 88% 21912 Lindv 10.454 2,390 4,704 3848.00 1.458.00 61% 2,314 97% 21902 Lindv 9,583 2,198 4,312 3665.50 1.467.50 67% 2.114 96% 21 882 Undv 8,712 2.724 3,920 3332.34 608.34 22% 1,196 44% 21862 Undv 8,276 2,230 3,724 3165,57 935,57 42% 1.494 67% 21852 Lindv 10.454 2,696 4,704 3848,00 1,152.00 43% 2,008 74% 21842 Lindv 9,583 2,206 4,312 3665,50 1.459,50 66% 2,106 95% 21 832 Lindv 9,583 2,869 4.312 3665.50 796.50 28% 1.443 50% 21 822 Lindv 10,018 2.418 4,508 3825,91 1,407.91 58% 2,090 86% 21802 Lindv 9,583 2.012 4,312 3665,50 1.653.50 82% 2,300 114% 21792 Lindy 9,147 2,570 4,116 3498.73 928.73 36% 1,546 60% 21782 Lindv 10,018 2,354 4,508 3825,91 1.471.91 63% 2,154 92% 21762 Lindv 9,583 2.131 4,312 3665,50 1,534.50 72% 2,181 102% 21723 Und\ 6,534 2,592 2,940 2499,26 (92.74 -40/0 348 13% 21702 Und\ 9,583 2,722 4,312 3665.50 943.50 35% 1,590 58% 21692 Lind 8,712 3,249 3,920 3332.34 83.34 3% 671 21% 21682 Lind 10,890 2.415 4,901 3870,08 1.455,08 60% 2.486 103% 21675 Und 10,018 2.400 4,508 3825,91 1.425,91 59% 2,108 88% 21685 Lindv 8,276 2.206 3,724 3165,57 959.57 43% 1,518 69% 21695 Lindv 10,018 2,168 4,508 3825,91 1,657.91 76% 2,340 108% 21725 ReQnart 10.454 2,721 4,704 3848.00 1,127,00 41% 1,983 73% 21735 Regnart 9,147 2,741 4,116 3498.73 757.73 28% 1,375 50% 21745 Regnart 10,890 2,508 4,901 3870.08 1,362.08 54% 2,393 95% 11117 Linda Vista 14,810 2,074 6,665 4068,63 1,994,63 96% 4,591 221% 11127 Linda Vista 13,939 2,074 6.273 4024.52 1,950,52 94% 4,199 202% 11137 Linda Vista 11,761 2.482 5.292 3914,20 1.432.20 58% 2,810 113% 11147 Linda Vista 8,712 1,890 3,920 3332,34 1,442.34 76% 2030 107% 11157 Linda Vista 7,405 2.255 3,332 2832.41 577,41 26% 1,077 48% 11167 Linda Vista 7.405 2,255 3,332 2832.41 577,41 26% 1.077 48% 11177 Linda Vista 7.405 2,255 3.332 2832.41 577 .41 26% 1,077 48% 11187 Linda Vista 7.405 2,255 3,332 2832.41 577.41 26% 1,077 48% 11197 Linda Vista 7,840 1,890 3,528 2998.80 1,108.80 59% 1,638 87% 11191 Santa Teresa 17.424 2.421 7,841 4201.04 1,780,04 74% 5.420 224% 11201 Santa Teresa 9,583 2,481 4,312 3665.50 1,184.50 48% 1,831 74% . Assumes an averaae slooe of 20% I Exhibit D EXISTING ORDINANCE 19.28.050 Development Regulations (Site). C. Development on Properties with Hillside Characteristics. 1. Buildings proposed on properties located west of the 10% hillside slope line as defined in the Cupertino General Plan, that have an average slope equal to or greater than fifteen percent shall be developed in accordance with the site development and design standards specified in Sections 19.40.050 through 19.40.140 of the Residential Hillside ordinance, Chapter 19.40, or the R1 zoning ordinance, Chapter 19.28, whichever specific regulation is more restrictive. 2. No structure or improvements shall occur on slopes of thirty percent or greater unless an exception is granted in accordance with Section 19.40.140, unless no more than five hundred square feet of development, including grading and structures, occurs on an area with a slope of thirty percent or greater. (Ord. 1886, (part), 2001; Ord. 1868, (part), 2001; Ord. 1860, S 1 (part), 2000; Ord. 1834, (part), 1999; Ord. 1635, S 1 (part), 1993; Ord. 1601, Exh. A (part), 192) D. An application for building permits filed and accepted by the Community Development Department (fees paid and permit number issued) on or before March 1,2005 may proceed with application processing under the ordinances in effect at that time. Exhibit H Exhibit H EXISTING ORDINANCE 19.28.050 Development Regulations (Site). C. Development on Properties with Hillside Characteristics. 1. Buildings proposed on properties located west of the 10% hillside slope line as defined in the Cupertino General Plan, that have an average slope equal to or greater than fifteen percent shall be developed in accordance with the site development and design standards specified in Sections 19.40.050 through 19.40.140 of the Residential Hillside ordinance, Chapter 19.40, or the Rl zoning ordinance, Chapter 19.28, whichever specific regulation is more restrictive. 2. No structure or improvements shall occur on slopes of thirty percent or greater unless an exception is granted in accordance with Section 19.40.140, unless no more than five hundred square feet of development, including grading and structures, occurs on an area with a slope of thirty percent or greater. (Ord. 1886, (part), 2001; Ord. 1868, (part), 2001; Ord. 1860, S 1 (part), 2000; Ord. 1834, (part), 1999; Ord. 1635, S 1 (part), 1993; Ord. 1601, Exh. A (part), 192) D. An application for building permits filed and accepted by the Community Development Department (fees paid and permit number issued) on or before March 1, 2005 may proceed with application processing under the ordinances in effect at that time. B ~ ~ ~ C\1 \ ~ d ~.l L..~..= o s:= - 0 r:/l " ~ ~ 1::: "u; o a A;.... ~~ ~ ~ ~ r:/l ",u..o,," u.,,,,-,-~, ::: E ~ ~ '= ;:::: C (5 v =p..(1)~.......- c: 0 ~ o "~ ~ "~ tI) a ;.... ~ ~ "'0 "u; ~ :::: ~ . .....-4 . .....-4 ~~ ............. ~ A o - r:/l ~ o ~ on s:: . .;:: t'-- Q) 0 Q) 0 ::E N ~ ~ C) N S tn o 5b U ;:l .0< ..... .... U ~ o ~ s:: ~ '€ g &E-< ;:l U N '" u :2 0; ~ ~ ... o -< ~ "5i ,1! !JI' ...-.....=-=.....::... ~ "~ ~ ~ - ~ PO ~ ~ . tI) >- t o A ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r:/l 1;.1 I- ..---. . .,,---- t- o o ~ r- oo ~ ::s a ~ ~ .~ ~ - ~ PO ~ ~ .. '" u ~ ... c 'il ~~ .u ,. C E 8s u- e.:! u~ ~-< 1 ~ u ~ N ~ -< ,; i ~ ,.. M '" ~ 0; ... C ~" B ~~ u'" g~ u- . ~ .E'-g ul:. g-< ~i! g. u 7:..',~.~--;~_ '1'111,'1; WI ::II!I Itll!:;, · j,',!, 'I ' '. 'II' J1 ' 4 rPH!:ll ;~li h!:l' Hl!! :-~I.j'lfl:I!!':"1111'j 1 u lUll. 'II, ',11'1 "oil ,Ill ~ 1',1 ~~iIH ,Ill HIp Ih} :f IJ _, 1'1'1 ,1', j - 'j!!!'l 111'1. Iloj illl . ..., I 'r'l'"1'1 II' I;! II I'll'l liltr .l '" I I- 'I f 'I" ::: 1'lJli :j,Lj HI' Iii ~ I !JIlll, I I'll i l",l !IUl .- 'Ik . I: ihll. I l. f . ..II.., " i,l :I'IJ I. " Q) ~ ~ ... ~ Q) g > N. 0;:; u! ~ -< ~ "II ~ ,.. - ~I II r -T. -=",' If.i ! ..,.:" ~!-.. "': i ' 1."1' ':~'-=':-~ '<> '" ~ ~ 00 0\ ~ ~ ~ A.~ ..9~ r./'J ~ ........0 .9 0......... ~ o .u; ~ ~ t ~ o ;.... A~ ~ ~ ~~ ~= ~ .~ U5~ ............. i · It ~ G. \ I ~ u ;.... .~ u a - ~ - ~ ;.... ~ s:= ~ d =w: --r'1' - -I"~ .. ~~ ,. c 'il ~~ .~ ~ os u- ,~] u u o ,. c-< i ~ u ; J I,' ;( ",I';' i , \" ,.~I /1rc,~ .' . ... , f1". lLJ / '][i ~ N ~ -< ~ "5i ~ ... '" ~ ... o 'il ~M ~~ ~ E 8l! ~i u u r ~ u ~ N " ~ -< ~ ] I- [. I-~' ~ ~.! ... .; ~ '" '" -:",.~~---~!-. .: ~ t.~_.=,-, . -!! 0; ~ 0; 00 0\ ~ ~ ~ "'0 .~ ~ u tI) ;.... - s:= .~ - .~ u .~ ~ .~ ~ r- s:= ~M r- ~ :-a~ ~ 0 S E ~ os u- .~ e-a .~ ~ ~ U 5 ~ .~ g~ tI) 'i! ~ a !t ~ ~ u A ~ ;.... 0 u ~ - ~ r:/l ~ ... ~ Q Q N N 0 N ? ~ I ~ -< ~ -< t ~ ~ ~ 1 l- f-- !.l I'~~~-- !!.\ 1,...,.=- c--. c--. ~ 1:: ~ 0 0.. ~ Q) tI) ~ tI) r- It:: r- 0 tIS 0 ..... ~ 00 ~ .f ... .~ ::l;M ~M 1i~ :r.;~ tI) ~~ tI) ~ E ~ ~ 8.!! L:>.:! ~~] s:= U B s:= '- u u .~ '" 8~ .~ l tI) 8~ Q) i! Q) ~i! ~ s= g. ~ s= ~ ~ u ;.:3 u ~ Q) ~ m Q) - 0.. - 0.. A 0 A ..9 .~ Ci5 .~ 00 ~ Q) ~ Q) - ~ ~ - ~ 8 ::s ..... ~ ..... N ~ "3 .... "3 M ~ ~ ::E ; ,. if ~ -< -< { { ~ g ... i.......j , , . . .:r..~.__:.!.: '" '" ~ I. L!"_.~--:.!.: - " U 'C 0; ............. tI) tI) : ... 'il .~ ~M ~M ~~ :r;~ Ii E ~ E 8.!! os u- e~ ~ ~i tj 5 u u 8~ g~ 'i! 'i! 8- g. u u - - - - ~ ~ .... N ~ 1;; = ~ -< -< i f Ii I- ,: il! r - - __.~__o I~.I l. "'=.0. a - ~ ~~~.,.~ '!"'i ~OroJetnJf&~~ s:= ~ s ~ :s -! "i ~'f...\.\~~ .9 '. !! .... i ].-)( ~:r ',,- .~ ~:i> mi~i~~~ t/) __ C'I "0 ~ SV pC- :.::ii~ ~ (I _ ~ L..... I / J _SI L"" ~-;. ~ ~ '* *~ . u; ~\\~ ,..-..4 ~ :;:: .;,.. ~\\~~ ~~ ,.- ~ N - ~ ;.... ~ ~ ~ d \ I' J . \ i r- I r ~~ re u~ e~ .- c u u .~~ " g. u o s:= .~ s:= t ~ ~- A~ ::s- U ~ ~ ~ o s:= ,oc3 .~ u , - '1'1 .e- Q .- co == Ntr)' ::: = I N "" e .. g N Q) ~~e'';::Q)S ~-""UOl)Ol) = Q Q Q) CI:l ._ uu~U)~.... ~ -< ! ,: ~ '~ ~ cu~ Oc: ~ :I 3&1 - cu c:"O m-- .oJ!! ::53: . I . : - - ~..._~.... '" ,. c '" u ~~ H u- e.:! ~- c u u g~ i! g. u IN J,I '1 1'1 '9~' () '7 Z <( - - c- o:: - <( ~ ~ ~ c. "- - z .... ~ "- " u ,- ~ '-' -< ~ "5i M I- ~.' IJ.- ~ ::l '" u '" I ' ." c: u L~.~~:.-:...:_. 0; ~ IIi. 'J/ II 'J ~ ." I ...---.. 0; s:= ~--- - . ...', I ,I, '(jj , ,-!, 'I 1I1 lp c: 0 ! !lIP 1l1'nJ; 1/ 11 ~ .~ l- t/) I '~~ .~ Q) ~ iillY '0 ;gj 0 tll! II J!II J: ~ s:= 0 a I ' - U .~ ; - E t - ,. - .~ ~ B ~ - - ~M ~ - ~~ 0 l~ ~ ~~ o u 3 E ~ u.= - os e.:! ~ u- s:= u;' U ~~ ;.... u 5 g-< .~~ .~ 'i! ~ ~ " ~ ~ 0 ~ II g. u ~ u ~ ,-., z ,0 d ~ v ;.... ~,I z <( 0 - .~ - c- ~ u 11 r- 0::: - ~ <( ~ ~ ~ co ~ C. ... ~ N ~; :::J z N ~ ! - ! 0 ~ ( , :) -< il ~ f '-' -< ~ 1 l- I- II! 1~.7<"--,--;-~- It.! ~ 0 .~ t/) ~ cE ~ Q 0 ~ u ~ d 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ -B lr) N N '" ~ ;:, < -< ;;; ,; ~ i ,:: !l I- I~.i ~ "'0 .~ t/) - - .~ ~ C 'U; c- s:= ~. ~"'O Q S ~ o~ oPO ~ ............. a ~ ~ li -e~. c.. j.:O 0 (') JI t:! .2 tl . e _ ~ -; ~. rP00ee0e~ .! ~ 5 :a ~C9 .... :$ ( .- ~ .._ J! -.. '- ..! ~<D~ ! <D' '..... .. (!) . - -. lee __~e(!) .. .. ee<D~ ~ . ~ c ~. \ e(j) i ~ "i -5 ~ GYa(j) Q:i2 a. -c: ~ ,. = I; :II' _ """ ] c = ~~:E CO ""~V)~I =~= ~\r) f=,-sV)o .- Cl .!".= ~ a ~ <Il <Il U ~ I>ll ~~~Jlo..~ ... '" I!., I~.,....~...,~- :!l 0; ~ .~ ::;;~ l~ os u- e.;'l U 5 8~ il ~ u ~ ~ -< ;;; 1l ,:: '" '" U '0 0; ~ Q ~ d ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ;:; l -< i ~ ... c 'il ~M ]~ g E os u- ,~1 u u g~ 1 u ~ 8 8 = r.rJ .. ~ (1) = · ,..-.4 ~ ~ o · ,..-.4 ~ · ,..-.4 00 a 0 ~ ~ ~ 00 ~ (1) ::s "'0 "'0 0 S · ,..-.4 ::s '" '" ~ bI) ~ ~ · ,..-.4 ~ · ,..-.4.!::J · ,..-.4 e; ~ .~ ~ ~ ] · ,..-.4 = ~ ~ (lj a &~a.l ,.9~o r.rJ..,..-.4 = ~ of ::s Q ~ .~ o 00 ~ ,...-..I . ,..-.4 ~ ~ (1) ~ 00 ~ ::s t'J (1) ~ -a oS 15 o ~ 00 ~ 00 ~ . ,..-.4 ~ (1) ~ ~ 00 ~ .,..-.4 0 .5 ~ f Q) ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ .~ c .~ '1: t:.~ (1) ~-::: 6 > ~ ~ · ,..-.4 0 ~ ~ -a ~ ~a ~ , R ""'-; o ~ ~ 00 (1) .~ ~ = ~ ~ P"'I .,..-.4 ~ \..) ~ ~ ~ ~ · ,..-.4 '" ~ ~ "'(1) ~.~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~.... ~~ s= .... "" o~ I . .. - N "*1: u "0 .- - 00 o lr) o . 00 N . N ~ ,...-..I bI) .5 8 ~('f') :=N 0"*1: gj u- ~-tj .- c:: U u .~~ i u e o ~ U s= o · ,..-.4 ~ (.) (1) r.rJ. (1) > o e ~ r-- g N ~ - N t; = bI) ~ i ~ . tJ) il'lIiiIIIlilIi' Q) 1M, ::J ~ " ... co .... tJ) ::3 " CD E E ~ ,,'- c ..... il'1iiiiiIiIiii >t 1iSE o~ E () ...., ~co ~= ~ ......,"~"'~ It, .~ en en · ~ 'oS; ~ CD'-' Q) "" ~_ ~" c:- . --'~'" ........,,' Q..! ~ ~..: ~ $l> 5 '" w 0"" CD Q) 0 =,::":, 0 <>>= . EJ:: (I) 0 (I)"; ..Q 0) B 0 '0 ..Q (.) ..Q ~ S.~ S.,~,.,~~ S,-'~~,..,'. S E 0)0 ~,:,~'~,>:~', (Da1 ~ cC)','~,',~.,..,........,," 0,,- 0) (I) ,..,',.,~,.. ...,.....,... ,,'" o~ ' '" lit. jIiiii* J= IiiIiiiIIr '-' ' v ~ ~ ."".., .- oiIiiiiiIIIii Q) .~. (I) ~ 8:3,; ..Q ,,:; 's, 5 & s...',',.".~,',. i~ ~ ~ ~~,~,:~~ ~ i i".,.,',.~ ~f,': ; g '8~~; ~c ~ 5 E ~ ~ o,(J).g e Q..O E 0 0- E' tn .,', -0 '" 0..-." o~"'''', '- , .'," ~ (f),-..., (~ "",-:,Q co .,:"...0 .s:: ,C '" ~ ...... .c. - (.) J::...... >.10 ',..,". :::. $" ~ 0):3 '-- '~"."", ~:;:m ~~i 8~~ 8~ . . . . I- 1\- m~ I ';t: I Q) It- N %190:,.,) I ' \f) 1- :1\\ ~ >< ~q;, ':J.. ~~ 0'< W 0 'i{\ A L '" . ~ .. . r- c:. 'c; '0 - 41 0:: ..)::: o o 0) III ...... Q1 L. o c: o () l '" o ... :.a .... < "tl .. c '" a a: AI >- o . . >- 'i: o .. . .. u c o o w (/) ::> o J: C> Z - l- (/) - X w ~2 >-- i cD ii WJ: g:\ uq o I .... .a W z :5 z> <'0 ...Iz ll._ W...I ....0) 1ii~ ... (ol ~ ... C ....J ::>. "fJ c *1iIiiiIIf ....J <:tJ ~ ....... N ......, co IIiiiIiiiiIiIi CDN "00 00 eLb CD'" (t:cb """"It) o~ 5% ....., . .fa f.1.. ::t;< :;:>, :--E~.'". S!2 0 ~ .6 ,,.., ... ~ ::: l::: 'Q 4' CD ~ ,"V' ,...."""..", ::" .,'~= ~ <I)',,' .c .s::; 0"', .. 0",',' ., ..... ...... v, - - Ih --- "" CD ..... ..... '" ~.... ~ !!l ~ t!.... ...~ ::",.. "~',' ..,. ~ ::....,'~,~", iD",,~','- 0 C .f;.",',. ~~, " ~ ::J 0 ,.,.., ~~,',~ '.. ,CJ.,'~..,' ... ....; _ Q. 0 - '" .$! ~ c -a .... ..., i '!~ i i i~ ~if i ~ ~ o ...,.... =l'; ,,+J i: <I) ~,-," co, <I) (fJ c: 10.. ....; co .. .. cI} Q..o ......-0 1i .s::. <<I W ~,:= ;!: &:. ;...~.,~,'__.,~ ~ E>- ~4' ~ :2 3t "'" . \II E: (/J ~,a; Q) i " ~ ~,','"..',,' ~ E,...." ~,,: ~ ~',.' ~o"~.,','.,~".. ~ ~o..'~.. 1....,,~,u ~I~ ;, =~ ~ :. ~" _,;S.,' ~ 1::'::: p:: en :I: g QJS ~ "C at Q. E 0 <6 tH:Q) ~:e ,S.c . ~ c .~.. " _... q..s::. CD ".c tT (J) l:;;: :!: .:::: .... 1;" , .fa q::: l!! II) ~ .c::: <l> ~ .... Q. (j) 3t ~,"."',.".,: ;a> ::~ $., ]i~ 8. =0:6 e ~8 .S tD ~ as"S; :3 Qg>~ ~ l!! ". t:!'E :2'0 g>g = ;:" _ tD _w _ -.:t . . w 0 8,...' (.)~' <D '" ~','~:,... c>> .~.i t1) ir~ ~tD ~ 5 ~ :a ~ ...:a '" ':;;10 ~ '5: Ol~ ~,(jj ~!stD(J .$ E N ~,~Q i ~~ g:e5 .!i 4;t5 ~1J g S = E cn~.~ ~ (J l!! .= g~ ~l.~! !~ '" E o 0 t::: 0 ~ F. · ! 0 0)5 I- 3t jq::: <:;:) " J2 CD cr . I- ! c;.... .c::: c; eX) 10.. a. 0) ~ . 0) (J) tV I- S . . .. 4= . 0 '" ex> "'0 . .. l s.... Q) -1 0 > 0 I 0 i C I 0 Ii 0 ..... GO CO ;!!: '" '.:c > c: Q) -i: Q) . ~o Q) -C . ..... Q) a: 0 CO . .... I() c: 4= c.. Q Q " < "'- <> : iii Q) 0 ..... 0 C CO . c: Z ~ ." '" . 0 0 tt= " .. 0 0 Q ~. 0 .. .. "" en - II ..... CO 0 ..-.. 0> U --:I Cl r- eo .=0 ~-- ~::r: U Q) > 00 W c.. Q) (J) 0 ..... 0 Q) N 00 ~ (f2. CO ..... LO C C . Q) 0 C> C'\I s.... s.... .C ~ :J ~ee J Ul UO!iDA913 0 II 0 ~ N ~ ~ ~.~ ~ '"- >t ::J ~ " ~E .......o=~ co ..... I ,~,.., " ...," - ,~ ~'M." ~ .~ 0 ~, ,.,. 'I.f ~ "C :e ~ Q.) .s:::; C. 'f'".. ::J ~ (J ii~ ~ ~^ Ii' "-'I ~.~ ~ C ~. CO 0 .~ ~ (1).0 ~~ ~,.s:::; CV ~ ' '" ..,""" e' C c.2' '":-- CD Of iiiiiiif (I) ,It Ii' E: ',Ii ',~" C", ,~,. V'..... V, .. Ii'~-'" rij ,v,~.,-" .t... '-..,'.., (J ~ ~ Lf).,,~ 00) ..Ii " (X).... "!i ~",,', .~, ,..."..,.,',','~"~,.,., WI ~ ,>-.. IIf " ~:.",' '1J '= o~ o ~. .. .o_,,,.~, ~ ~"., (),' ^" 0..... tJ) (I) "~, ,.. ..u ~ ~ .di",.~".. .......... ~ (I)~ (50 Q .~Xt"\H.. ... .181T E;; ~ - 1 FIN1\LlJIW1T C-C-- t/~d ~ I if .L 3 08-20 - 2007 REV. (9) Cupertino City Council Members and Planning Commission Staff Regarding: Tuesday 08-14-2007 Planning Commission meeting at the Cupertino Town Hall Some of the attendees were fooled with a very well orchestrated performance by the "Citizens for Fair Government" (http://www.ccfg.cc) homeowners, which were founded by North Lindy Lane residents. Removing Chapter 19.28.050 Cl & C2 was recommended and approved at the 8-14 Planning Commission meeting. In, my opinion, that recommendation, if approved by the City Council would revert us back to ZERO hillside development standards and protections on Lindy Lane. In my opinion C2 was not supposed to be part of the Planning Commissions discussions for that night. The City Council did not direct the Planning Commission to discuss or make a decision on this section. In my opinion, if the City Council goes BACK to the pre-Moxly subdivision days and approves the two Planning Commissioners recommendations, that will further divide the neighborhood and ruin the hillsides. Two of the Planning Commissioners made the point during their during SHORT DISCUSSION period, "I am in favor of removing the overlay because it allowed the building of large houses and did not protect the neighborhood." I quote one of them to say from the channel 26 web site "THE OVERLAY HAS RESULTED IN MORE DEVELOPMENT RATHER THEN LESS." The City put the overlay and other hillside protections in place to protect the neighborhood AFTER the Moxly houses were approved and constructed. Only three of the five Planning Commissioners attended this very important meeting. Two of the five voted "NO" which was a simple majority. There was NO discussion of the resident and staff proposals presented at the meeting. As a resident who participated in these meetings it made me feel like my opinion didn't matter and that the City had wasted my time. .. 4 S~e~~'j 40~' ~2.R'1400 ~k 4o<6.~g. OD e~ 3/2//07 #;<,3 Cupertino City Ordl..ance Reduce. Your Property Value. EX~ :}BIT "', Background: In January 2005 a section of the new Rl Ordinance was passed without public input. This section (19.28.05O.C) effectively rezoned our Rl properties. Our properties now have TWO sets of building requirements placed upon them. Both the Rl and the Residential Hillside (RHS) ordinances are applied to our properties, and the planning staff chooses whichever item it more restrictive. Essentially, we have been rezoned. How this ordinance lowers your property value? - It reduces the maximum size of a house that could be built on your property. In some cases houses are limited to less than 1/4 of the old Rl limit. Reducing the maximum house size by 4X clearly reduces property val ues. The house size limits have also caused neighbors to sub-divide their lots. If you limit a lot to a smaller house, but they could build two of these smaller houses if the lot was divided, the owners. tend to sub-divide their lots. The results are more homes, more trees cut down, more traffic, etc. We now have 8 new lots on Lindy Lane. Virtually ALL of our homes are out of compliance with the building code at this moment due to this ordinance. Even for a simple bath or kitchen remodel you may need to move your foundation because of the change in setback requirements. This limits remodels causing our neighborhood to decay over time, further reducing value. ~ What can you do to help remove this unfair and misguided ordinance? - Write to your City Council and Planning Commissioners (www.cupertino.org). Tell them that you want this ordinance (19.28.050 Section C) removed. - Attend the next Planning Commission Meeting: August 14, 2007 6:45pm City,Hall - Attend the next City Council Meeting: August 21, 2007 6:45pm City Hall - Visit our web page: www.cct'i.cc for updates. We encourage you to register and vote at the upcoming city council election. You can get a permanent absentee voting application online at Iwww.scc,~ote.orl or call: 866-430-8683. " TI...... ..........:_.._ .tt___ A_A _~.. _____.I .....__.. .1.._11 L.._.c-...... ,c..._ ____.-:..... _""...1:.-. E.-... X'H ~.". ~ ~TA."", ";.--J ", " ,h,;;,,- ......... W Page 1 of 1 t~ If 2/ID7 #23 Gary Chao From: taysi@comcast.net Sent: Monday, August 20, 2007 7:43 PM To: Kris Wang; rlowenthal@cupertino.or; Orrin Mahoney; dsandoval@cupertino.orglgiefer@cupertino.org; Gary Chao; Ciddy Wordell; Steve Piasecki; Colin Jung Subject: Planning Commission Meeting on August 14th 2007 Council Members and Planning Division, As a long time resident of Lindy Lane, I would like to share my disappointment of that evenings meeting. , Back in early Spring the Cupertino City Council asked the residents of this area to get together and to come up with a compromise regarding the hillside. For several years now we have been attending various meetings and trying to come up with a reasonable way to protect these hills from destruction. For my family the starting point for all of this was to see what has happened to the "Moxley" property. I think one point that all involved in this issue would agree that the consequences of the subdivision, the large new homes, the cutting of many trees under the Rl umbrella has already changed the hill forever. Now all we want is a sensible way to develop the remaining areas. We were asked to come up with a compromise. Fair enough. We have attended numerous meetings and also two meetings at the City Hall with our North Side neighbors. Unfortunately no compromise was reached because at the second meeting it became evident that our neighbors, who have ,the majority, would not accept any compromise and insist on being considered Rl just like the rest of Cupertino although they live on a hill. There were three other options offered from the Planning Staff which were not even considered at the August 14th meeting: I.Hybrid ordinance tailored to the Rl hillside area 2.Retain the current Rl hillside area (2005 Rl) 3.Rezone the Rl hillside areas to RHS I am asking you not to forget what happened at the Moxley property. A hill is a hill. It needs to be treated like a hill. What would otherwise prevent other hillside residents living in RHS zones coming to the City in the future and asking to be rezoned Rl ? Please accept a compromise, one that was suggested by your Planning Staff. Thank you, Candan Taysi 21952 Lindy Lane 8/21/2007 EXHIBr~~ r cc../ct - Lf -07 .J:l: q Supplies Requirements Paper Supplies 1. Paper Towels: Minimum 40-60% postconsumer content, unbleached or processed chlorine free 2. Toilet Tissue: Minimum 20-60% postconsumer content; unbleached or processed chlorine free 3. Seat Covers: Minimum 40% postconsumer content Cleaning Supplies 1. All Purpose Cleaner, Window Cleaner, Bathroom Cleaner, and Cleaner/Degreasers: Meet or be certified as meeting Green Seal and Institutional Cleaners Standard (GS-37) 2. Hand and Liquid Soap: Not antiba:cterial, pH between 6 and 8.5, meet , 'National consensus-based criteria 3. Furniture and Wood Polish: meet National ~onsensus-based criteria, similar to Green Seal (GS-37) 4., Carpet Cleaner: Meet or be certified as meeting Green Seal and Institutional Cleaners Standards (GS,:,37) and comply with California Code of Regulations for maximum allowable VOC content levels 5. Floor-Care Products - Finishes & Strippers: Meet or be certified as meeting Green Seal and Institutional Floor-Care Products Standard (GS- 40) 6. Disinfectant: Certified Green Seal and Instructional Cleaners Standard, (GS-37), except for biodegradability 7. Plastic Trash Bags: Minimum 10-100% postconsumer content Special Supplies 1. Granite Floor: Clean Source Daily Cleaner/Conditioner or approved equal 2. Wood Floor: Surtec FP 575 Hi Solids floor finish; Surtec ST 237 Ultra Strip Super cone.; Surtec HC 150 Heavy Duty Cleaner 3. Rubber Flooring: Tuflex TC-l Cleaner as per manufacture recommendations 4. T.C. Orange squeeze Air Freshen There may be more supplies listed for the different sites, these supplies will also be required, this Is only a partial list of the supplies 'required for this contract. Supplies Requirements Page 1 of1