The URL can be used to link to this page

17. Cupertino Hillside \.....- '~ /, c, \ I ";~' ~ ~~ City of Cupertino 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 (408) 777-3251 FJLK(408) 777-3333 Community Development Department CUPERTINO SUMMARY . Agenda Item No. ,-' Agenda Date: September 18, 2007 APPLICATION SUMMARY: \- A. Municipal Code Amendment to amend Chapter 19.28 Single Family Residential . (R1) Zones to exclude properties zoned R1-10 with an average slope equal to or greater than fifteen (15) percent slope from hillsjde standar~. B. Municipal Code Amendment to amend Chapter 19.28.050(C)1 of Single Family Residential (R1) Zone' regarding hillside development standards for buildings proposed on properties zoned R1-20 located west of the 10% slope line. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Co1I1.1iUssion makes no recommendations to the City Council. BACKGROUND On August 21, 2007, the City Council held a public hearing and discussed the appli~ability of the hillside standards to properties located in the Cupertino foothills that are currently zoned Single Family Residential (R1) and Agricultural Residential (AI). After reviewing the results from the neighborhood meetings and public testimony, the Council decided to take no further action on the A1 zoned properties, leaving them under the A1 Ordinance. The Council also decided to preserve Section 19.28.050C2, which deals with development (over 500 square feet in area) on greater than slopes of 30% since it was never intended to be modified. The City Council directed staff and the Planning Commission to initiate proceedings to delete the R1-10 foothill properties from any hillside standards and consider appropriate hillside standards for the remaining IS' properties zoned Rl-20 located on the Lindy Lane knoll. DISCUSSION \.- Planning Commission The Planning Commission held a public hearing on September 11,2007. After considering public testimony, the Commission recommends the following on the Council's two directives: 17 - 1 MCA-2007"{)l .September 18, 2007 Page 2 Exclusion of the Rl-I0 foothill prqperl~: A motion to exclude the R1-10 properties failed with a 2..2 (Giefer .at'ld ~ · yes; Miller and Wong.. no) vote. No other motions were made to further'darify ~ Planning Co11'l1l\iSSion's formal position. Two Commissioners felt thtt the hilfside protection regulations should be applied to the entire City and to ~ ~ lots located near the creek corridors and floor plain areas as oppose to ju$t. ~ 16ltl hillside parcels. The other Commissioners agreed that the R1-10 toe-of-slope prpperties should be excluded any hillside standards. . -/ Staff: The R1 hillside standards discussion evolves around the General Plan's direction (GP Policy #2-48) to establish building and development standards for the h.illSides th8.t ensure hillside protection. Almost all of the R1-10 (toe-of-slope) properties located near the foothills are already developed and are located in established neighborhoods with smaller lots. Although a few of the toe-of~loped lots may have steep rear yards, the majority of the homes are built on existing flat pads near the street and will not be able to develop on the slope unless an exception is approved by the Planning Commission (Section 19.28.050C2). Generally the R1- 10 homes are not highly visible from the valley floor, and do not contribute to the overall protection of the hillsides. Staff believes that the R1-10 properties should be removed from any hillside development standards discussion. Other creek corridor and floor plain areas J.i\ay also have sloped lots; however generally these are smaller lots that are located in established neighborhoods that afe not physically connected (~ coterminous) to the general hillsides of the Oty. If warranted, special standards could also be developed for these areas. However staff has not received any formal input or expressed concerns from these neighborhoods that there have been iss~es regarding development standards in their area. If the Council finds merit in developing special standards for the other sloped R1 areas in the City, then it should direct the appropriate ordinanCe amendment pubUcprocess so that the neighbors living in these areas may share with the City their neighborh~ values and objectives in order to determine the appropriate changes in development measures. ---' Development Options for the R~ -20 foothill properties: The Commission did not discuss in depth the foothill development standards that were suggested by staff addreSsing the key R1 hillside issues such as hQ\1Se size,.grading, retaining wall, fencing, trees, ~ sec~nd floor size. The majority of the Coriunission felt that the Council should apply hillside standaJ'ds to all Rllots. Two Commissioners support either the complete deletion of the current hillside standards (section 17 _ 2 ~~ MCA-2007"{)1 September 18, 'lOO'7 Page 3 L 19.28.05OC1) or the neighborhood proposal (introduced at the Planning Commission hearing. discussed later in this report). One Commissioner felt that the staffs proposal is more restrictive than the RHS Ordinance. Another Commissioner supported staffs proposal and thought that that it should be applied to th,e 16 Rl-20 foothill properties and that more time should be given for review/discussion if the neighborhood's proposal will be considered. A motion to either delete Section 19.28.05OC1 or consider the neighborhood proposal failed with a 2.2 vote (Mill.er/Kaneda - yes; Wong/Giefer- no). No other motions were made to further clarify the Planning Commission's formal recommendation or position on this matter. Staff: In reviewing the applicability of the R1 hillside standards, the Council previously decided to focus on the remaining 16 properties that are zoned Rl-20 (see map below- properties in purple). These properties are larger in area (over 20,000 sq. ft.) and are located on the Lindy Lane knoll adjacent to the general hillside of Cupertino. There are more significant biological (trees and wildlife) and geological considerations in this area and the properties tend to be more visible from the valley floor area and to the adjacent flat land properties. ~ '\- The potential development impacts from these parcels are also much greater to the hillside than the R1-10 properties. Staff believes that for these above reasons, the Council should adopt a set of hillside development standards to these 16 R1 hillside properties in order to be consistent with the General Plan. Staff believes that by using some of the ideas that came out of the 'neighborhood process, the R1 Ordinance hillside standards (Section 19.28.050C1) can be amended to provide greater flexibility for the property owners while accomplishing the General Plan's policy in preservation of . hillsides. 17 - 3 MCA-2007"{)1 September 18, 2007 Page 4 Neighborhood Comments/Proposal The neighbor's comments at the Planning Commission meeting are summarized as follows: . The 10% hillside transition line is vague and inconsistent. . There are some merits to the staff proposal; however it would only be acceptable if applied to the entire city and other sloped Rllots. In addition, there is a neighborhood compromised proposal. . Not fair to apply special standards to only 16 properties. . The neighborhood would like the rest of R1 therefore Section 19.28.050C1 should be deleted. . LUldy Lane knoll is a hill and therefore should have hillside standards. Some level of standards should be adopted to protect the hill. Neighborhood Proposal Up to this point, staff has had individual discussions and email correspondence with neighbors about hillside stand~d options. In fact, the standards that are being proposed by staff primarily came from suggestions from the individual neighbors. To date, there has not been a formal submittal (with validation of general consensus from the neighborhood) of a neighborhood proposal. At the Planning Commission, one of the neighborhood representatives introduced a slide with the following measures: ---../ 1. RHS second story ~d balcony rules and review process shall apply. . 2. RHS fencing rule apply with no exemption for lots under 30,000 square feet. 3. Retaining walls over 5 feet in height shall be screened. 4. R1 45% maximum house size shall apply except that for buildings located on a building pad that has a slope of 15% or greater, the allowable square footage must be reduced by 1% for each 1% over 15% slope. Said slope adjust maximum FAR may be exceeded through an Architectural and Site Review process approvable by the Planning Commission. It is unclear if the majority of the neighborhood agrees on these measures arid/or if this is a formal proposal. However, the neighborhood proposal is very similar to staff's proposal with the exception of the lack of grading quantity control, more stringent tree protection measures and appropriate method of factoring house size relative to slope. Staff Proposal Staff's proposal is similar to what was presented to the City Council on August 21, 2007 and has been updated slightly to reflect the latest comments received by neighbors: --/ 17 -4 MCA-2007"{)1 September 18, 2007 Page 5 L Second Floor Size and Balcony .:. RHS second floor and balcony rules and process shall apply. Rationale: The RHS Ordinance permits larger second floor. Staff concurs with the neighbors in that this provides an incentive to develop on the' flatter portion of the lot and rilinimize grading "and the need for retaining walls by adding flexibility to permit more square footage on the Second floor. Larger second floor is consistent with the design pattern of the surrounding hillside -neighborhoods. The hillside areas also have different balcony designs than the R1 flat land neighborhoods. Generally there 'are there are minimal balcony privacy impact concerns due to the hillside topography and trees. Neighborhood proposal: Consistent with staff's proposal. Fencing .:. All fences shall be governed by the following regulations: \....... Solid board fencir1,g shall be limited to a five thousand square foot site area (excluding ~ principal bUilding). Open fencinS (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. (Qrd. . 1634, (part), 1993) Rationale: Prevent soliq. board fencing from boxing up the entire hillside property and detract from the open rural character of the hillside area similar to what is o~ered in the RHS Ordinance. This is consistent with the neighborhood proposal. Neighborhood proposal: Consistent with staff's proposal. 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. L Rationale: When retaining walls are warranted, there should be measures to provide visual relief from large retaining walls. 17 - 5 MCA-2007"{)1 September 18, 2W Page 6 Neighborhood proposal: Consistent with staff's proposal. ----./ House Size . .:. Allow up to 45% FAR if the development or expansion are located on the flat pad, portion. of the lot (less than or equal to 10% slope). .:. Allow property owners to b~d off of the flat pad if they conform to the RHS . house size limits. . .) The property owner could request to exceed the RHS house size limits by obtaining an Architectural and Site approval at the Planning Commission level. Rationale: This measure. originated from the neighbors and it offers more flexibility to the hillside . property owners and at the same time provides incentives for new ~eve1opment and expansions to the flatter 'portions of the-lot. Using 10% flat pad slope as the trigger, this would allow property owners to build a home up to a maximum of 45% FAR if they can stay on the flat portion of the lot. If the proposed new development or expansion is off the flat pad, the property owners have the option of either adhering to the RHS slope adjust house size limits or demonstrating to the Planning Commission of the merits of a larger home through a public review process. Staff believes larger homes can be sensitively designed to minimize impacts to the hillside and support the rural character of the area. Staff believes that this is a reasonable compromise between the RHS slope adjust formula and the straight R1 45% FAR rule without any consideration for slope. -..../ Alte~tively, if the Council wishes to add more flexibility, ~t may consider a'measure to allow property owners to build off the flat pad if they either conform to the RHS slope adjust house limit QI if the house is no larger than 5,000 square feet, whichever is greater. The property owners still have option to exceed this limit by going to the Planning Commission. This provides greater flexibility to the pr~perty owners but yet retains the assurance of a public review process if the homes proposed are signific:=antly larger in size. Neighborhood's proposal: The neighbors are now suggesting that this rule be made more lenient and that the FAR calculation be as follows: . Maximum building size shall be up to 45% of the lot size. . . Except for buildings located on a b~ding pad that has a slope of 15% or greater, . the allowable square footage shall be reduced 1% for each 1% .over the 15% slope. . The maximum slope reduction shall be 30% unless if an Architectural and Site Approval is obtained from the Planning Commission. --/ Staff has done some analysis on the neighborhood house size proposal and found that-it will allow extremely large homes on the hillside without any discretionary review oJ.'l7 - 6 MCA-2007"{)1 September 18,2007 Page 7 \.- public input. For example, under the ~ighborhood's proposal, a 20,000 square foot lot (assuming a building pad slope of 20%) may allow an 8,000 square foot house without public notice and review. The same lot with a building slope of 30% may allow a 6,000 square foot house without public notice and review. The remaining parcel (#2) of the Moxley's subdivision is approximately 20,500 square feet. Based on the neighborhood's proposal, Moxley's parcel #2 may be allowed to build a significantly larger home (+ /- 8,000 sq. ft.) than the homes that have been built on lot 1 and 3 without the benefit of going through a public review process. 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 mul~ple driveways shall be divided equally amQng 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 o{ 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 19.40.0SOG. b. A licensed landscape architect shall review grading planS and, in cQnsultation with ,th~ applicant and the City Engineer, shall sub~t ~ plan to prevent soil erosion and to screen out and fill slopes. Rationale: Ensure that there will be grading regulations that will protect the hillside from over excavation and large retaining walls similar to what is offered in the RHS.Ordinance. Controlling grading quantity is vital in minimizing both the physical and aesthetic impact to the hillside from developments. Neighborhood proposal: . The neighborhood is not suggesting any grading limitations. Tree Protection \.......e . .:. Up to two protected trees with a diameter less than 18 inches may be removed to accommodate a building pad subject to the approval of the pirector of Community Development. Removal of protected trees exceeding 18 inches or removal of more than two protected trees requires approval of a tree removal permit by the Planning Commission in accordance with the Tree Ordinance. 17 -7 MCA-2007"{)1 September 18, 2007 Page 8 Rationale: The neighbors have expressed that more tree protection is warranted in this area. What is proposed is more stringent than the Tree Ordinance but provides flexibility for discretionary review if more trees must be removed. This measure originated from neighborhood input. . Neighborhood proposal: The neighborhood is not suggesting any additional tree protection measures now. --..-/ SUMMARY Staff believes, with the exception of house size, tree protection and grading limitations, the neighborhood recommendations are reasonable standards that ensure maximum building flexibility, while providing hillside protections envisioned in the General Plan. Prepared by: Gary Chao, Senior Planner Submitted by: Approved by: '. J~ tf3/kL~1 ~ Steve Piasecki Director, Community Development ~ David W. Knapp City Manager ----/ Enclosure: Exhibit A: Planning Commission Staff Report, September 11, 2007 (with attachments) Exhibit B: City Council Draft Ordinance Initial Study Recommendation from the Environmental Review Committee ---------. 17 -8 City of Cupertino 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, Califo~a 95014 CUPERTINO. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT ~iJ;~ ~~ '/ p .... ~ Application: 'MtA-2007-D1, EA-2oo7-D9 Applicant. . City of Cupertino Property Owner: ' .VariOlls Property Location: Cupertino Foothills Agenda Date: September 11, 2007 Application Summary: Amendment to the R1 Ordinan~e (Chapter 19.28.050C1) to: A.' Municipal Code Amendment to amend Chapter 19.28 Single Family Residential (Rl) Zones.to exclude properties zoned R1-10 with an.average slope equal to or greater than fifteen (15) percent slope. B. Municipal Code Amendment to amend Chapter 19.28.050(C)1 of Single Family Residential (R1) Zone regarding hillside development standards for buildings proposed on pro~eszoned Rl-20 located west of ~ 10% slope line. ~ RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission: 1. RecoIiUnend approval to th~ City Council the R1 Ordinance amendment to exclude the RI-IO properties located adjacent to the foothill areas from the Rl hillside development standards; and .2. Identify appropriate hillside development standardS (Section 19.~8.0S0C1) for the Rl-20 zoned properties up slope of the 10% slope line and provide recommendations to the City Council. BACKGROUND On August 21, 2007, the City Council held 'a public hearing and discussed the applicability of the hillside standards to properties located in the Cupertino foothills that are currently zoned Single Family Residential (Rl) and Agricultural Residential (AI). After reviewing the results from the neighborhood meetings and public testimony, the Council decided to take no further action on the Al zoned properties, leaving them 'under the Al Ordinance. So for the purpose of the Rl hplside discussion, the Al properties are not being considered for .any change. The City Council also decided to preserve Section 19.28.050C2, which deals with development (over ,500 square feet in area) on greater than slopes of 30% since it was never intended to be modified. \- The City Council direct~d staff to initiate proceedings to delete the R1-10 foothill properties from any hillside standards and consider appropriate hillside standards for the remain41g 15 properties zoned Rl-20 located on the Lindy Lane knoll. 17 -9 MCA-2007"{)1 September 11,2007 , Page 2 'i;. '~ t.. -/ DISCUSSION Exclusion of the RI-I0 fopthiU prqpertjes: The Rl hillside standards discussion evolves around the General Plan's direction (GP Policy #2-48) to establish building and development standards for the hillsides that enslA'e hillside protection. Alm~st all of the Rl-I0 (toe--of-slope) properties located near the foothills are already developed and are located in established neighborhoods with smaller lots. Although some of the toe-of-sloped lots may have steep rear yards, the . majority of the homes are built on existing flat pads near the street and will not be able to develop on the slope unless an exception is approved by the Planning Commission (Section 19.28.0500). Generally the RI-10 homes are not highly visible from the valley floor, and do not contribute to the overall protection of the hillsides. . The development impacts froin the regular Rl floor area ratio versus the.RHs slope adjUsted floor area ratio is not considered significant and will not change the character . of the foothill areas. For example: . 'r. ';,', '''.,.r..' ,':,~f; , . '"'.;.~.,' ~'i " 10,000 x.45 = 4,500 sq. ft. 4,500 - (4,5OOx.07S) = 4,162 sq. ft. ----- Net difference: 4,500 - 4,162 338 sq. ft. Staff recommends that the RI-10 lots be excluded from Section 19.28.05OC1. -.-/ 17 -10 MCA-2007..{)1 September 11, 2007 Page 3 \..- Development Qp~for ~ ~t -20 (OOt!UUprqperties: . . In reviewing the applicability 01 the R1 hillside standards after the exclusion of the R1- 10 toe-of-slope parcels, the Council decided to focus on t:he remaining 15 properties that are zoned Rl-20(see map below - properties in purple). These prope~es ~ larger in area (over 20,000 sq. ft.) and are located on the Lindy Lane knoll higher in elevation relative to the toe-of-slope lots. There are more significant biological (trees and wildlife) and geological considerations in this area, and some of the upper properties are more visible from the valley floor area then the R1-10 lots. \..- ~ .~ ~ '...,' i. ~. ....-.~.. ~.s:t.... .._......... .1. ,;".,ff~. . - · -~.. -~.. . .~'. ,~.. =- ~... ",.:........."" ........., - .' . . ..... I..'.. " .=-&.. -.'riil.M:1..,-~. .... . -..'..[ . Ii II"..:. .' ......&..A. .'.-. ,.~ ~1!~iiI ,_.'~ ~.- "" .,- - .~~Y II The potential development impacts from the regular R1 floor area ratio versus the RHS slope adjusted floor area are much greater for these parcels: \..- Net difference: 9,000 - 4,714 4,2.86 sq. ft. 17-11 MCA-2007-Q1 September 11, 2007 Page 4 The Council directed the Planning Commission to evaluate the foothill modifi~ hillside J development standards that were proposed by staff (which primarily came from suggestions from individual discussions and email correspondence with neighbors) far the remaining 15 properties that specifically address the following key issues: · House size · Second floor size · Grading · Retaining walls · Fencing · Tree protection MODIFIED FOOTHILL STANDARDS Staff believes that using some of the ideaS that came ou.t of the neighborhood process, the R1 ordinance hillside standards (Section 19.28.05OC1) can be amended to provide greater flexibility for property owners while preserving the intent of the sensitive hillside development with a couple of key meas~s. House Size .:. Allow'up to 45% FAR if the-development or expansion are located on the flat pad portion of the lot (less than or equal to 10% slope)... , . .:. Allow property owne.rs' to. build off oUhe flht pad if they conform to the RHS . house size limits. .:. The property owner could request to. exceed the RHShouse size limits by obtaining an Architectural.and Site approval at the Planning Commission level, with full public notice to the neighborhood. -.-/ Rationale: 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 property owners to build a home up to a maximum of 45% FAR If they qm stay on the flat portion of the lot~ If the proposed . new development or expansion is off the flat pad, the property owners have the option of either adhering to the'RHS house size limits or demonstrating to the Planning Commission the merits of a larger home through a public review process. Staff believes larger homes can be sensitively designed to minimize impacts to the hillside and support the rural character of the area. . Second Floor Size .:. No second floor size limits (but retain the R1 setbacks and articulation rules). .--/' 17 - 12 MCA-2007..{)1 September 11, 2007 Page 5 \.- ". Rationale: . . ." Provides an incentive to develop on the flatter portipn o~ the lot and Ininimize grading and the need for retaining walls by adding flexibility to permit more square footage on the second floor. Larger secondflool' is cor\sis.tent with ~e design pattern of the surrounding hillside neighborhoods, and is therefore allowed for other hillside properties .zoned RHS. Grading \- . . .:. All site grading shall be limited tO,a cumulatiyet~ of two thousand five " hundred cubiC yards, cut plus fill. The two thousand five hunqred cubic yards includes grading for building pad; yard areas, driveway and all other areas requiring grading, but does not include basements. The gr~ded area shall be limited to the building pad area to the greatest extent possible. Grading quantities for multiple driveways shall be divid~d equally among the participating lots, e.g., two lots sharing a driveway will divide the driveway grading quantity in ~a1f. The divided share will be charged against the grading quantity allowed for that lot development. .A maxi.triUlJl 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 ~d to screen out and fill slopes. Rationale: Grading is one of the most significant impact of hillside development. Special attention is necessary to protect the hillside from over excavation and. large retaining walls similar to what is offered in the RHS Ordinance: Retaining Wall Screening .:. Re~g 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. Rationale: Neighbors felt strongly that when retaining walls are warranted, there should be . . measures to provide visual relief from taller, more visible retaining wallS. \.- Fencing .:. All fences shall be governed by the following regulations: 17 - 13 MCA-2007-o1 . September 11, 2007 Page 6 . Solid board fencini shall be limited to a five thousand square foot site area (excluding theprirlcipal building). ~ Open fenciitg (composed 'of materials which result in a minimum of seventy-five percent visual transparency) 1thallbe unrestricted except that such fencing over three feetin height may not be constructed within the front yard setbacl<. (Ord. 1634, (part), 1993) , Rationale: . Prevent solid board fencing frOtn boxing up the entire hillside property and detract from the open rural 'character of the hillside area similar to what is offered. in the RHS Ordinance. . Tree Protection .) Up to two -protected ,trees with a diameter less than 18 inches may be removed to accommodate a building pad subject to the 'approval of the Director of Community Development. Removal of protected trees exceeding 18 inches or removal of more thalt:tWo protected trees requires approval of a tree removal permit by the Planning ColiuniSsion in accordance with the Tree Ordinance. . , ---./ Rationale: . The neighbors have expressed that more tree protection is warranted- in this area. What is proposed is more stringent than the Tree Ordinance but provides fleXibility for discretionary review if more trees must be remo\Ted. Summary Staff believes, these recommendations from the neighborhood are reasonaBle stan,dards that ensure maximum building flexibility, while providing hillside protections envisioned in the General Plan. Prepared by: . Approved by: Gary Chao, Senior Planner ~ I' Sb:!ve Piasecki, Director of Community DeVelop.Ll~ Enclosures: Exhibit A: Planning Commission Model Ordinance reflecting the exclusion of the R1-10 foothill properties Exhibit B: Planning Commission Model Ordinance reflecting the foothill modified standards . Exhibit C: City Council Staff Report, August 21, 2007 (with att~chments) City Council Draft Meeting Minutes, August 21, 2007 (available at the meeting) Initial Study Recommendation from the Environmental Review Committee 17 -14 L L \......, MCA-2007-01 aTY OF CUPERTINO . 10300T6rre Avenue' cupertmo,Califomia 95014 RESOLUTION NO. OF TIlE PLANNING COMMISSION OF TIlE CITY OF CUPERTINO RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNOL,APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 19.28.050 OF THE CUPERTINO MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING THE EXCLUSION OF THE R1-10 FOOn-ntL PROPERTIES The Planning Corni1lission recommends approval of the Ordinance Amendment as shown in Exhibit A. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 11th day of September 2007, at a Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino by the following roll call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: . COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: APPROVED: ATTEST: Lisa Giefer, Chairperson Planning Commission Steve Piasecki Director of Community Development 17 - 15 MCA-2007-01 CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 9501~ RESOLUTION NO. . OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF nIB CITY OF CUPERTINO RECOMMENDING THAT THE. CITY COUNCIL APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 19.28.050 OF THE CUPERTINO MUNIClP AL CODE REGARDING FOOTHILL MODIFIED STANDARDS The Planning Commission recommends approval of the Ordinance Amendment as shown in Exhibit B. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 11th day of September 1.007, ata Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino by the following roll call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ---.-/' APPROVED: ATIEST: Lisa Giefer, Chairperson Planning .C~mmission Steve Piasecki Director of Community Development 17 - 16 L Exhibit A (draft ordinance ~flectm8t1le exdUJlon of the &1-10 foothill properties) . . 19.28.050 Develop~t Regulations (Site). c. Develop11\ellt on Properties with Hillside QulraderistiCs. 1. ~ei~er:::~~~~::we$t ~=:~.t;;~~\~~~wcst -+_ go~_~_____~_~JB~eCli,eftiftSCet\eral . Pleft; that have an average slope equal to or greater thari fifteen perCent shall be developed in accordance with the site development and design standarci$ ~ed in Sections 19.40.050 through 19.40.140 of the Residential Hi.11side ord.iJ;\ance, Chapter 19.40, or the R1 zoning ordlnan:ce, Chapter 19~.2&,whichever specific regulation is more restridive. 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, unles$ no 11\Ol'fe tha.n6.ve hundred square feet of development, indud.ingsr~aqdst,a:uctures, occurs on an area with a slope of thirty ~t ot pater~ (Ord. 1886, (part), 2001; Ord. 1868, (part), 2001; Ord. 1860, S 1 (part), 2600; Ord. 1834, (part), 1999; Ord. 1635, i 1 (part), 1993;Ord. 1601, Exh. A (part), 192) . \.- L ..........~ ~~. .... .- ~~~.....:ti.~.I..I...IJ;.. .'.......... ~. . .~..I.. ..1" ""_f ~,~,.. =_: Q~~!.[ ~......:: . =~.....'" .r....... a~1 . · ..I~~..~_I' 1i\1_~. 11.. - i..r:.11.... . , ...) . ..t. ..11 . .'. llItl' 111-. . . Ii .rA. . .1,... ~). ~r~~K~ ~~..' /'.~.~...,,-... ~III.~' ~ . ~ 17 - 17 Exhibit B: Draft ordi1W\c:e worc1.in8 reflectiD.& tb,e foothill Modified standards 19.28.050 Development Regulations (Site). C. Development on Prooerti~. wittlJlillsick CbAracteristktf, Buildings proposed On properties generally located south 'and west of Santa Teresa Drive, west of Terra Bella Drive and West and North of Lindy Lane (see map below) 'zoned Rl-20, that have an a.ver~ge slope equal to or ~r than fifteen per~t and are zoned fat Jot sizes ~ater than io,ooo square feet shall be developed in accordBrtce with the following ~j.te deve~oPment standards: . ~bIl -/ -.--/ 2. JhirtY Pe~ent stapl. Nostructul'lJ~r improvetnents shall occur on slopes of thirty percent or greater unless an exception is granted in accordarice with Section )9.to.liQ, uftles8 n~ more than five ~undred square feet of development ind:tiding gtadfug and structures, occ~ on an area with a slope of ~~t or greater. Site Gradw.a. All site gra.d.irt8 s1Wl be lhnited to a cumulative total of two thousand five hundred cubic yards, eut plus fill. The two thousand five hundred cubic yards indude$ grading fOr building pad, yard areas, driveway and all other ~ ~ gr,ading, but does not include basements. The graded areashaU be limited to the building pad area to the greatestexten.t possible. Gradirig quan~ties for multiple driveways shall be divided ~y ~~gthe participating lots, e.g., two lots sharing a driveway will divide the drlvewaygtading quantity in half. The divided share will be charged against the grading quantity allowed ~' 1. 17 - 1t \......- 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 n~tural contours and planted with landscaping which meets the requirements in' Section 19.40.05OG. ' ~ 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 squar~ 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_I0,oOO}/1,OOO}(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 ratio. 5. Retaining Wall Screening. Retaining walls in excess of five feet shall be screened with 1andscape 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. \......- 17 -19 2 6. Fencing. ---./ All fences shall'be governed by the following regulations: 6.a. Solid board fencing shall: 1. Be limited to a five thousand square foot site area (excluding the principal building). 2. Open fen~g (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 protected 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 protected trees exceeding 18 inches or removal of more than two protected trees requires approval of a tree removal permit by the Planning Commission in accordance with the Tree Ordinance. ---./ ---./' 17 - 2~ Exhibit C , City of Cupertino 10300 "E<?rre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 (408) 717-3251 FAX (408l777-3333 Community Development Department \.- CUPERTINO SUMMARY Agenda Item No~ __ Agenda Date: Aupt 21. 2007 '- Appuc.tlPn ~ :RepOrt on !he Rl orc\inante regarding neighborhood meetings on the Residential Hillside ()rc!inance RECOMMENO..nON: 1he PIaMlnS ~ recommends that the City Council delete Section 19.28.0SO(C)(1)& (2) of the R1 Ordinance. BACKGROUND: In January 2005 the City Council incorporated RHS develop~ ' rules into the R1 ordinance revisions for properties upslope from the 10% line and with averagt;! slopes of 15% or grea~. Following, these actions residents' in the affected areas stated they were not aware that the Council might apply these hillside development standards to their properties. Consequently, the . Council directed that staff revisit the process to pr<Wlde 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 Gener~l Plan 10% hillside transition line. ~D Aerial Map of the , Lindy Lane R1 Hillside Area from Google Earth (illustrative purposes only not intended to be to scale) \- The Council asked the neighbors upslope of the 10% line to get together to discuss options and try to reach consensus on an approach to deve10pment ;it 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 protectinil the hillsides while preserving the property owners' development options. The Planning Commission reviewed the issue on Tuesday, August 14, 2007. 17 - 21 MCA-2006-01 Rt Hillside ()rdi88nce Pap 2 August 21.2007 ----./. DISCUSSION: The City of Cu.pertino General Plan contains goals and policies to preserve hiJ.)jide areas AS fullows: GoalllF' Hillside Protection Policy 2-48: Hillside Development Standards . Establish building and development standards for the hillsides that ensure hillside protection. 1. Ordinance Regulations and Development ApJ'ro'D~. Apply ordinance regulations a1'u1 development approvals that limit development 011 ridgelines, hazImlousgeologicrllareas and steep , slopes. Control colors and nuzttriJlls, and minimize the illumination of outdoor liglmng. Reduce visible building.m4SS thtoughsuch ~ tIS stepping structures down the hfl.lsitk, following tire natural contours, and limiting the height and mass of the waU p14ne facing the valley floor.< 2. Slo'l!-dmsity formuJ~ Apply a slope density formula to very low intensity residen.ti4l development in the hillsides. Density shall be calculated based on t1U! foothill modified, foothill nwdified l~re and the 5-20 aCre slope density formulae. Actual lot sizes an.d developmtnt areas will be determined through zm1ing ordinances, clusteri1!g and identification of significant natural features a1'zd geological constraints. 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 ...J 17-22 August 21. 2007 MCA-2006-01 Rl Hillside OrdinliIlce Page 3 \- .:. 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 rev~ewing the Rl Ordinance amendments in 2005, the Council was concerned that some areas in the hillsides retained Rl' zoning an~ had none of th~ above hiliside 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. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS After hearing concerns about the notice and opportunities for input~ the City Council mrected the neighbors to get together and attempt to reach consensus on an approach to protect the hillsides; Two neighborhood mee!ings were held on June 20, 2007 and July 19, 2007. During the first meeting, neighbors were asked to identify the common objeclives for the areas. A summary of the common objectives are summarized as fu~~: . L .:. Property Value .:. Equity , .:. Preservatio11- 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 Rl hillside development standards pre-2005. 2. R1 foothill modified standards. 3. Retain current R1 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 Plannmg 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: 17 - 23 August 21. 2007 MCA-2006-01 Rl Hillside Ordinance ' Page 4 <0> 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. <0> 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 ternis of applicability of the rule. <0> The rule should apply equally to all that are on hi11 'i"gardless of geographical location. The one commisSioner that voted no on the deletion of Section 19.28.050(q1&2 provided the following comments: <0> The toe of slope lots (Rl-lO lots) should be ~mpted 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"10 hillside line that consist of similar character and topography as the hillside R1lots in discussion. <0> 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 rieighbors spoke at the August 14, 'JJXY7 Commission meeting. The majority of the neighbors wanted the removal of the 15"10 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 OnIONS If you imagine the Rl and RHS ordffiance 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 Rl/RHS hillside development standards trigger is probably between the midpoint of the spectrum and full RHS. -..-/ 17 - 24 Aupt~1.2OO1 , MCA-2006-01 R1 Hillside ()rdiuanc:e page S '-- \........ .;. ControI& DenSil:)' - HOuse ~ adjustment baged on s\clp8 - HIIIslQe de'IEllapment , ~ . 'i,~"..I< ' Rt and RHS Development Control Spectrum Short of deleting all of the 'hillside development standards, the CounQl has the following options: 1. Revert back to the Rl hillside development standards pre-2005. 2. Rl foothill modified standards. 3. Retain current Rlh.il1side developmen~ standards (2005). 4. Rezone to RHS. U the Council decides to retain some hillside development standards on the Rl hillside properties, staff believes you can incorpOrate some of the ideas that came out of the nelghbodwod process. The. R1 hiI1side 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 ~t leading to subsequent individual dJscuss!ons and emails with suggestions for possible solutions to house siie, setbacks and trees. The following outlines the staff approach: 17 - 25 MCA-2006-01 R1 Hillside Ordinance Page 6 August 21, 2007 ,-,/ STAFF PROPOSAL: The Council., dir~Cted 'the neighbors and the Commission to provide input and reeQnun~tiOrl on the! section of:'the Rl's:>rdinance,'relating to hillside developri\ent (Section 19.28.05OC1 - 15~fRltRHS overly11.de) that was revised during th~ 2005 R1 Ordinance Am.en~ent,' pi'c;>cess. ' ,:,',.,The Co~on's , recommendation focuses on remo~g the ,past Cou.ilcil ictioI\and;,offets no compromise or consensus onalternatlve solutions. Additionally, it d~letesSection 19.28.050C2 whi~ deals with dev(!lopment on excessive slopes in ex~ss of 30%. ,'I:ijs section has been effective since 1999 (Ord. 1834) and was not revised during the 2~1{1 Ordinance. Staff recommends that Sectiori 19.28.050C2 be retained. " Section 19.28.0S'OC2 states that "no strufture or improvements shall occur on slopes of thirty percent or greater U71less an exception is granted in accordance with Section 19.40.14O,.unless no more than five hundred square feet of development, includinggradi71g 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 Barcels located in the Undy 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 moclliled hillside ,Alles and treated as conventional R1 zoning rules. . ---/ MODIFIED :fOOTHILL STANDARDS What we heard from the neighbors: More flexibility on FAR and review process if the development is located on a flat pad or conforms toRRS house size Potential Ordinance Solution: .:. Allow up to 45% FAR if the development or expansion is located OR 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 !tomes 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. ..J 17-26 MCA-2006-01 Rl Hillside Ordinance Page 7 August 21. 2007 \.- What we heard from the neighbors: Flexibility on second floor size Potential Ordinance Solution: No second floor size limits but retain the Rl 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. What 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 re,quirement that all solid walls over 5 feet must be screened by landscaping or siding . materials'. , Rationale: Adopt the same prote~on that is offered in the RHS Ordinance. Provide L- visual relief ~om large retaining walls. What we he~d from the neighbors: More tree protection Potentjal Ordinance Solution: Planning Commission approval if more thart 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. Fo~ instance, you may want a very large Oak to be preserved or at least subject to public review under any circumstan~s. What 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 environment. 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 few 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). 17 -27 MCA-2006-01 Rt Hillside Ordinance Page 8 August 21, 'JOO7 Exempt RI-10 Properties Affected Approximate .. ---../' .. Current Rt Ordinance Approx. 124 Properties Affected 22 J At PROPERTIES The Council also directed the staff and the Planning Commission to evaluate rezoning the Al properties to R1 and include them into the RI hillside development discussion since there are approximately seven Al p~perties that are located on the hillside upslope of the 10% hillside transition line. Staff believes that these properties should be rezoned to R1 with lot size minimums equal to their existing lot size and be subjected to the same RI hillside guidelines betause they share the same hill and similar topography. The Planning Commission did not make any recommendations on the Al properties. Alternatively, the Council could direct that all of the changes to the RI ordinance be incorporated into the existing Al ordinance. 17 - 28 MCA-2006-01 Rl Hillside Ordinance Page 9 August 21. 2007 \.- EFFECTIVE DATE OF ORDINANCE CHANGES On May 1, 2007 the council aske.d the neighbors to work together to arrive at some consensus regarding potential solutio~ 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 meantinle, 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 confonris 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: ~, \- Steve Piasecki Director of Community Development David W. Knapp , City Manager 17-29 MCA-2006-01 Rl Hillside Ordinance Page 10 August 21.2007 Attachments Exhibit A: Draft ordinance wording reflecting the Plannirig Coriumssion recpmmendation Exhibit B: Draft ordinance wording reflecting the Foothill Modified standards , t Exhibit C: Minutes from the City CoUncil meetings of April 3 and May 1, 2007 Exhibit D: ExiSting R1, 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 Or4inance (Section 19.28.0SOC) ---' ---/ 17-30 EDltiIt A' Exhibit A ~ Draft Ordinance Reflecting the Planning Conimission's Recommendation: ORDINANClf,NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL AMENDING . CHAPTER 19.18.0S00F THE MtJNIClPAL CODE, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONES (R-l), REGARDING HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS ON PROPERTIES WITH AN A'VERAGE 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 cis follows: 19.28.050 Development Regulations (Site). ~, C. De\Oelop'ment 00 :P:ropertieswith Hillside Cftaratt-cristiCG. 1. Buil9ings proposoo. OR properties located v.~ of thelO% hillside slope line aG defined in the Cupertino CCRa-al Plan, that have an LlVexage slope cqaal to ,or g1'ea~ &an fiftcen percent shall be developed in ilCCOJeIaftee with the site dC9:elepment and design standa:rdB specified i:R SectionB 19.40.(;)90 thfoOllgR 19.40.11:0'0{ the Residential HiJlGide ordmance, Chapter 19.40, or the R1 zonmg ordinanec, Chaptu 19.28, vimeaevcl' specifil:: regulation is more reGtrictive. 2. No structure or im.prO'Jcmenm shall occW' on slopes of thirty percent or great-er unless an ~eeption is gmnted in accordance with Section 19.1.0.14:0, unless l1Q more than fi9:e hundred square {-cet of development, includiRg grad:iRg and structures, occurs on an Mea 'with a slope of thirty percent or greater. C. Po An application for. building permits filed and accepted by the Community Development Dep'artment (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, Ii 1 (partt 2000; Ord. 1834; (part), 1999; Ord. 1635, Ii 1 (part), 1993; Ord. 1601, Exh. A (part), 192) \.- 17 - 31 Exhibit B Exhibit B: Draft ordinance wording reflecting the Foothill Mo~ied standards-staff proposal . , 19.28.050 Development Regulations (Site). C. Development on Properties with Hillside Charac;teri8tics. 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 perce~t 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, occufS on an area with a slope 'of thirty percent or greater. 2. Site Grading. All site grading shall be limited to a cumulative to~1 of two thousand five hundred 'cubic yards, cut plus fill. The two thousand fIVe , hundred cubic yards includes gradfngfor building pad, y(ird areas, ,. , driveway and all other areas requiring grading, but dges not include basef!1ents. The graded area shall be limited to the building pad area to the greatest extent possible. Grading qua.ntities 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 arid fill areas shall be rounded to follow the,natural qontours and planted with landscaping which meets the requirements in Section 19.40.050G. ----./ 17 - 32 \.....- 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 ca~es the maximum floor area shall not exceed six thousand five hundred square feet without an, exception. Formula: A=((B-10,OOO)/1,ooo)(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 L The amount of second floor area is not limited provided the total floor area does not exceed the allowed floor area ratios. ' 17-33 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 regulations: 6.a. Solid boar:d 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. ' -..-/ 17 - 34 April 3, 2007 Cupertino City Council Exhibit C '--' ayor Wang reordered the agenda to take up items 20, 21, and 22 neXL ., iF I.' 'If . .~. " " hedule an interview date for the Biqycle Pedestrian Commis~n and Community 'I: ' .. De~elopment Block Grant Committee vacancies. ,Xi' . 11\",. ..,i"" 20. -,., . :' Council' cQPcurred to set an application deadline of Fri4aY, April 27, and to conduct interviews ~r these vacancies on Tuesday, May 22, algng with other interviews already scheduled to Besin at 3:00 p.rn. Council asked ~'staff schedule a 45-minute dinner break at apprmdriililt.ely 6:00 p.rn. . j' ". , ~~~: ./ 21. Consider canCeling th~:!G~~ Council meetinpi~ July and/or August. (No documentation in packet). -, Yo"':'. '.I.;' ':--~~ ..,~ . Council concurred that they ~U41@~ to hold both regular meetings in July (July 3 and July 17); and that they.would canqftlJe regular meeting of Tuesday, August 7. ' ORDIN~CES~/' '. '\'!",' , '22. "(':1 of Ordinance No>Q1-1999: "An Ord41ance of the City of Cupertino, Amen' TItle 11, Section 1l.24.14t\"of the CupertiI1.o Municipal Code es of Servicin or R airin Re~~g For-Sale Signs in Cars), to ',", visions of the COde to the RequireIIi~!1~ of Current Case Law, and visions of the Code to be Consistent With ~nt City ~actices." \.- L9wen , ahoney moved and seconded to read the ordinance H' ~ ; e only and that the City" erk's reading would constitute the second reading thereof. .',....0.:: : Lowenthal, 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 Sin~e-Family Residential (R.l) Zones regarding buildings proposed on ,properties with an average slope equal to or greater than fifteen percent, Application Nos. MCA-2006-01 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.rn. 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, , 17 - 35 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-l ordinance to reflect, 30% slope parameters; and (2) A letter from 'The ~eno 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 Rl 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 Rl hillside standards prior to the 2005 Rl Ordinance where only developments on slopes of 30.% or greater would be subjected to the hillsi~ standards regardless of geographical locations. The following spoke' in favor of keeping the 15% overlay: Bob Rodert, John James, Robert Berti, Sara Arzeno, Jennifer Griffm and Julia James. They believed that more hillside protection measures were consistent with the General Plan policies aijd goals and the 15% overlay would protect the hillsides for the benefit and enjoyment of all. ---./ The following spoke 41 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, Eya Wong, Harold Sinzig, Homa Govashiri, Arya Hashemi, Viktor Sinzig, Doug Knirck, Shan Zhu, Sinzig Iriva, Simon Ko, Frmlk Sun, Barry Pangrle, Sherry Fang, Bill Guangerich, Tim Maslyn and Jim Holl. 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 ~qu~ features of these PI'9perties 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. Councilmem.bq' Sandoval agreed with Co\lncilmember 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 ----,,' 17 - 36 April 3, 2007 Cupertino City Council :Page 8 \- reconimended ,that staff ask the community,to identify a working committee of no more than 15 people to represent them. The preServation' of hillsides was important and the issue of gradii1g needed to be ; addressed as well as the. is'sue' of house size. Councilmember Lowenthal recommended telling the Plamimg 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 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..."; that the ordinance be read by title only, and that the City Clerk's reading would constitute the first reading thereof. Ayes: Lowenthal, ~ahoney, 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 develop a pian with input from the neighbors, and to report back to the City Council on August 21. \..- UNFINISHED BUSINESS - None ~REPORTS "- .~.... ':.~... 23. ResPo~e to- comments made during qtal Cominunications, March 20, 2007 by Grace and Tony Toy~ . ".... .J" Director of Parksao:d Recreation" Therese Smith stated that there had been many , inaccuracies in the Toy's comments at the March 20, 2007 meeting concerning the Sports Cen.ter and she referred C6Unci1 to the 27 -page staff report prepared in resP9nse to these inaccuracies. She furtli'er stated that mAnagement of the facility, charges, accessibility and the terms of cpnducting business in a public' facility were all very important issues and ones that sJ.1ebelieved were well addressed regarding the Sports Center. \-- Il. Ed Hirshfield noted that he was a long time particip.ant 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. J 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 theispmmer tournament which included over 400 participants and in 2005 and 200~ had been '~ed 'the tournament of the year'. Mr. Gower also commented on the excellent customer service provided by the ~taff. 17 - 37 May I, 2007 Cupertino City Council , Page 8 During Postponements, KwokIMahoney moved an.d _~ndedto"m'faljl;clus item, since llant had wi~wnhis a . ,amtll)"n1fect staff to place an item on the May 1 0 C scuss policies and procedures regarding the appeal of , ',ously. ~~'~~';Io"1I...' , , '.'iiI<."''4.''-'''',"u"",,"-__ '---~ lIDINANCES ' ~~.. 17. Conduct the second reaQing 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 (R!) Regarding Buildings Proposed on Properties with an Average Slope Equal to or Greater than Fifteen Percent, A.pplication 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 discusse4, 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 sorne agreement on 'the RI hillside zoning issue; Piasecki s~d that staff had not bad the opportunity to fully review their suggestions, but he highlighted them and their possib1e.ramifications. Mark Santoro (speaking also for'Suzette Pangrle, Sheny 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 regar(iing the 10% line. They 'were requesting that Section'19.28.050, S~tion 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 Cl and C2 from th~ RI Ordinance. However, they were willing to accept the south side's proposal. --../ James Seay noted that their home was builtin 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 cuirent ordinances. He could not support changes that were ,~ot directed at solving specific community-wide problems. He recommended maintaining the: current ordinances. 17 - 38 May 1, 2007 Cupertino City Council Page 9 L Emily Maslyn supported adopting the ordinance before Council. She noted that their property was near a creek bed not !i 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 ti:> continue to try tQ. reach CQnsensus. He did believe the hills should be trea~ differently-and di4 not support adopfuig the ordinance before Council. ., \I . Jim Roll noted that his house had been built in 1971 and should be designated Rl There was no reason for th~ overlay and the area should not be separate. Furthermore, he did not think this issue should be sent back,to the Planning Commission. Jennifer, GI#Iin' 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 recommendati<?ns .made at to~ght's meeting. ~y 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 commumcation between all parties. Mahoney~wok 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. MahoneylKwok moved and seconded to enact Ordinance No. 07-2000. Ayes: Kwok, Lowenthal, Mahoney, Sandoval, and Wang. Noes: None. STAFF REPORTS ,;""'~ "'VTT~.Tcrrli'~_ ".'. . . ~~~.,~~:;;,~~_., :.~.~.~.-.~:. Council members' hi ;ie"acti~ities oftheif'~()Iiiriiitteesand various community events. \- 17 - 39 ExhlbU' 0 , -, Proposed text is uruierline{i. Deletl!d text is struck through. ~ ORDINANCE NO. 07-2000 . AN ORDINANCE OF THE CUPERTINO crrv COtJNCILAMENDING , CHAPTE:R 19.28.050 OF rim MUNlCIPAi- COnE, SINGLE FAMILY ,RESII)ENTIAL ZONES &-1), REGARDING BUll.DINGS PROPOSED ON. ' PROPERTIES WITH'AN AVERAGE SLOPE EQUAL TO O,R GREATER THAN . FIFrEEN PERCENT, APPLICATION NOS. l\1CA-2906-01 THE CITY COUNCa ,OF THE. CITY OF CUPERTINO DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: , . , Chapter 19.28 of the Mwiicipal 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 Rl 5' .5,000 Rl 6 6,000 - Rl 7.5. 7,500 Rl 10 . 10,000 Rl 20 20,000 2. Lots, which contain less area than required by subsection A(1) of this section, .but not les~ than five thousand square feet, may neverthel~s be used as builc;ling sites, provided that all other applicable requirements of this title are fulfilled. . B. L9t Width. The minimum lot width shall be sixty feet measured at the front-yard . setback line, except in the Rl-S district where the minimum lot width is fifty feet. 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 wHa an average slope equal to or greater than fifteen percent. shall be developed in accordance 17 - 40 Ordinance No. 07-2000 \- with the site development and design standards specified in Sections 19.40.050 tbrougb.19.40.140 oithe Residential ~side ordinance, Cliapter 19.40, or.the Rl zOning ordinance, Chapter 19.28, whichever specific regulation is more restrictive. Dl!H~ pre:p8SM6B a :partie!! ef a let -.vHk ldepes efthirty pereet a1' greater afteR Be' tie~.~elel!ea i:B aeeeraBflse ",i1ft tke sNe ae.,elefJmeBt Mia aa.si&'J!s...liMds specified m t:leetiens .19.48.858 lfu.\JLLgh 19.48.148 of a:...", . Resiaemi.al HiRsitie eMmBBSe, CBal!ter .19. ~ 9, ar tfte R 1 136E:Hrg ef8.!.BBBee, Cftapt~ 19.28, -,vB.iehe-;er 81'eeifi~ regalatie!! i'3 m.ere. restrkti. c! 2. No structure or improvemen"ijl shall occur on slopes of thirtY percent or greater unless an exception is granted in accordance with Section ' 19.40.140, unless no more tha:n:five hundred square fet'?t of developplent, 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; ~ 1 (part), 2000; Ord. 1834, (part), 1999; Ord. 1635, ~ 1 (part); 1993; Ord. 1601, Exh. A (part), 192) . D. An application for building pem1its filed and accepted by the Community Development Department (fees paid and permit nwnber issued) on or before March 1, 2005 may proceed 'with appliCation processing under the ordinances in effect at that time. ' \- ************* PUBLICATION CLAUSE: The qty Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published at least once in. a ]fewspaper of general circulation published and circulated in the City wi~ 15 days after its adoption, in accordance with Govemment code ~ 36933, shall Certify to the adoption of this ordinance and shall cause this ordinance and her certification, together wit1iproof of publication, to be entered in the Book of Ordinances of the Council of this City. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force t11irty (30) days after its passage. L 17-41 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 ENACT~D at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino the 1 st day of May 2007. by the following vote: --.../ Vote: Members of the Citv Qounci1 ' Ayes: Noes: Absent: Abstain: -wang. Kwok. Lowenthal, Maho~ey, Sandoval None None None A '!TEST: IS! Kimberly Smith City Clerk APPROVED: /s/Kris Wang Mayor --./ --./ 17 - 42 Check with the. PubHc Works DepartDlent regarding potential street dedication prior to designing a new home or an addition. \.-. 1'.28.010 CHAPTER 19.28: SINGLE-FAMILY 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 (R1-e). Development regulations-(Rl-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 detacbed 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. (pan). 2001; Ord. 1860. ~ 1 (part). 2000; Ont 1834. (pan). 1999; Ord. 1601. Em. A (part), 1992) \- 19.28.920 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; ora. 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-l 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 custouiarily . 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; P. 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; I. Utility facilities essential to provision of utility services to the neighborhood but excluding business offices. construction or storage yards. maintenaDce facilities. or coIpOration yards; J. Large-family day cai'e bomes. 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 hislher designee shall administratively approve large day care homes to ensure compliance with the parking and proximity requirements; K. Congregate residence with ~n or less 'residents. (Ord. 1954, (part). 2005; Ord. 1869. 11 (part), 2000; Ord. 1834. (part). 1999; Ord. 1688. ~ 3 (part). 1995; Ord. 1657. (pan), 1994; Ord. 1601. Exh. A (part). 1992)' . 19.28.040 Conditional Uses. The following uses may be conditionally allowed in the R,-1 single-faIpily 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; 17 -43 29 19.28.040 Cupertino - Zoning 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 stnlctures which incorporate solar design features that require vari.ations 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 porsuant to Chapter 19.84; S. Home occupations requiring a conditional use pennit 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 DOt 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. FacUity 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. FacUity that has the' appropriate State, County agency or department license and seven or greater residen~, not including the provider family or staff, is a minimum distance of five hundred feet from the property boundary of another residential care facUity; c. FacUity 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 distanee of one thousand feei from the boundary of another congregate residence and bas a minimum of seventy-five square feet of usable rear yard areaperoccupant. (Ord. 1954, (pan), 2005; Ord. 1860, g 1 (part), 2000; Ord. 1834. (part). 1999; Oni. 1784. (part), 1998; Ord. 1688, i 3 (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. 30 " , Zoning Symbol Number Minimum Lot Area In Square Feet Rl 5 5,000 R1 6 6,000 Rl 7.5' 7.500 Rl 10 10,000 Rl 20 20,000 , 2. Lots, which contain less area than required by subsection A(1) 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 R 1-5 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 grea~r 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. tlle Rl zoning ordinance, ChapteT 19.28. which~ver specific regulation is more restrictive. 2. No structure or improvements sbail 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, OCCWS on an area with a slope of thirty percent or giCater. D. An application for building pennits filed and accepted by the Community Development Department (fees paid and permit number i5sued) on or before March 1. 200S ' may proceed with application processing under ordinances in effect at that time. (Ord. 1954, (part), 2005; Oni. 1886, (part), 2001; Ord. 1868, (part), 2001; Ord. 1860, U (part), 2000; Ord. 1834, (part), 1999; Ord. 1635, Ii 1 (part), 1993; Ord. 1601, Exh. A (part). 1992) 19.28.060 Dev~lopment Regulations (Building). , A. L0t Coverage. The maximUD1lo~ 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) liInit for sqUare footage. The FAR shall be used in conjunction with the resideptial development staDdards and guidelines in this ordinance in determining whether the mass and scale of the project is compatihle with the surrOunding neighborhood. 17.44 ;' -.---' /' 31 SIDgle-FamUy'Resldentlal (R1) Zones 1'.28.060 \...-' 1. 1bemaxhnum floor area ratio of all structures on a lot.shall be forty-five percent. 2. The maximum floor aiea of a second story shall be forty-five percent of the existing or ~posed first story floor area,or seven hundred fifty square feet, whicheveI: 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 ~econd story floor area: otherWise, the area will count as first floor area. ' '. C: Design Guidelines. 1. Aily new two-story house, or seco~d-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 wi~ the predominant neighborhood ' pattern. New construction ~ 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 tbree-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, unarticu)ated, exposed second story walls sbould 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 borizon,tally and symmetrical in number, size and. placement. h. Porches are encouraged. . i. Living area should be closer to the street, while garages shPQ1d 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 fiont 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 ~ore 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. 20055-4 a. For a cOmeliot; 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 Rl-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 Rl di$trict shall be set back a minimum of twenty feet from a Street property line. a. For projects with three-car prages 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. B. 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 m;nhmlm of twelve feet from a street side property line and twentY feet from any rear property line of a single-family dwelling. 3. Sureharge. 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 ip this section. F. Basements. , ,1. The number, size and volume of lightwells and baseme~t windows and doors shall be the minimum required by the Uniform Building ~ode for egress, light and ventilation, except that in the case of a single-story house with a basement, one lightWeU may be up to ten feet wide and up to ~ 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 sball be five feet; b. The minimum' rear setback for a lightwell retaibing wall sball be ten feet. 3. Lightwells that are visible from a public street shall be screened by landscaping. ' 4. Railings for lightwells shall be no higher than three feet in height and shall be located immediately adjacent to the lightwell. 17 -45 19.28.OA CupertiJlo~~ 32 s. The perimeter of the ~ and alllightwell retaining wiuls shall be treated andIOf reinforced with the most effective root barrier measures, as determined by the Director of Community Development. G. Height. ,1. . Maximum BuiJding Height. The height of any principal dwelling in ~ Rl zone sbaI1 not exceed twenty- eight feet, not including fireplace chimneys, anteDDae or other appurteDaI1CCs. 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-tive-degree roof line angle projected inward at the ten-foot high line referenced in subsection . G(2)(~)(1) of this section. b. Notwithstanding the building envelope in subsection G(2)(a) of this section, 11 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 Heigb.ts. Fifty percent of the total perimeter length of second storY walls shall not have exposed wall heights greater than.six feet, ~ shall have a minimum two-foot high overlap of the adjoining first story roof ~gainst the second story wall. The overlap shall be stIUCtural, and shall be offset a ~ 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 buildinp within a designated area be limited to one story in height (not exceeding eighteen feet) by affixing an "i" desf&oation to the Rl ~ning district. H. Secqnd Stoiy DeCks. All new or eXpanded second story decks 'with views into neighboring residential side or rear yards shall file for aMinor 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. 1bis 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 8-4 2. The miDimum side-yard SC;~k shall be fifteen feet. 3. The minimum rear-yard setback sbill be twenty feet. I. Solar Design.1k se~ck 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 iDfriDge upon solar easements or adjoining property owners. Any solar strQCture tha~ requires variation from the setback or height restrictions of this chapter may be allowed only upon issuance of a Minor Residential Permit sul?ject to Section 19.28.090. ' (Ord.: 1954. (part), ~OOS; Ord. .1868. (part), 2001:' Ord. 1863, (part), 2000: Ord. 1860, g 1 (part), 2000; Ord..1834, (part), 1999: Ord. 1808 (part), 19.99: 000. 1799 g I, 1998: Ord. 1784, (part), 1998; Old. 1637. (part), 1993: Old. 1635, (part), 1993: Ord,. 1630, (part), 1993: Ord,' 1601, Exh. A (part), 1992) , 19.28.070 ,Landscape ReqWrements. . To mitigate privacy impacts and the vistial mass and bulk of new two-story homes and additions, tree and/or sJuub 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 sec~nd~stoIY 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 acco3J1P&Died 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 ea~h 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 Arborlst 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. 17 - 46 33 Single-Family ResldeBtlal (Rl) Zones 1'.28.070 \.- b. Affected property owner(s) may choose tQ 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'mitigarlon 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 JDUSt 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 IDinimuIn height of siX feet. The Director of CoIIlJIlUDity Developnlent 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 pianting 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. Covenint. The property owner shall record a covenant with the Saitta Clara County Recorders Office 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(I)(b) of this section. F. Maintenance. The required plants shall be ;nll;ntllinelt' Landscape planting mamteriance 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 w.ith 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-confonning wall and the extended wall may not be increased. 2. The maximuID length of the extension is, fifteen feet. ' 2005 S-4 3. 'Jhe extension of any wall plane of a first-story a~n ,is not permitted to be within three feet of any 'property line. 4. ~y one such exteDS~on 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; Ord. 18~, (part), 2001; Ord. 1868, (part), 2001; Ord. 1860, G 1 (part), 2000; Ord. 1834, (part), 1999; Ord. 1808, (part), 1999; Ord. 1618, (part), 1993; Ord. 1601, Exh. A (part), 1992) 19.28.090 MInor ResideJltlal Permits. Projects tbat require a Minor Residential Permit shall be reviewed in accordance with this $ection. The purpose of this process is to provide affected neighbors with an opportunity to co1'nment on new development that could'have , significant impacts on their property or the neighborhood as . a whole. A. Notice of App1ication. Uponrecelptofacomp1ete application, a notice shall be sent by first class mail to all owners of record of real pro~rty (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 ~rmit 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. 17 -47 ' 19.28.090 CupeJ1iDo . ZoDiD& 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 mall or electronic mall. Any interested party may appeal the action pursuant to Chapter 19~ 136, except that the , Planning Commission will ma~e the final action on the appeal. D. ExpiratiOn of a Minor ResideDlia1 Pennit. Unless a bui1<tin.g penirlt is, filed and accepted by the City (fees paid and control number issued) wi~ one year of the Minor Residential Permit approval, said approval shall become null _ and void unless a longer time period was specifically prescn'bed 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 Commuriity Development may grant a one-year exteDSion without a public notice if an application for a Minor. Modification to ,the Minor Residential Pe~t is tiled before the expiration date and substantive justification for the extension is provided. 'E. Concurrent APPlications. At the discretion oftbe Director of Community Development a Minor ReSidential Permit can be processed concurrently with other discretionary applications.(Ord. 1954, (part),2005) 19.18.100 Two-Story Residential Permit. Two-story additions or two-story new homes require a Two-Story Residential Permit in accordance with this section. Two-stpry projects with a floor area ratio under 35 % shall require a Level I Two-Story Residential Permit, while a tWO-Bt9ry project with a floor area ratio over 35 % shall require a Level n 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 Iha1l 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 allall be a weatherproof sign, at least two feet tall and t:hrCe 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 known, or the location of the property, if the address is not known. 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; 2OO5S-4 d. A deadline for the submissipn of. public comments, which shall be at l~ fourteen .days after the date the notice is posted;' . e. A black and white ortl;1ographic rendering of the front of the bOl,lSC, at least eleveJ1 incbes by seventeen inches in size.'1he City shall approve the illustration or rendering prior to posting. B. Notice of Application {Level m. Upon receipt of ,a compl~ application, a notiee 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 Tw(}oStory Residential Permit. D. Decision. After the advertised deadli11e for public comments, the Director of Community Development shall approve, conditionally approve, or deny the application. The permit can be approved only upon ma1cing all of the following ,findings: 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 seale 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 man. 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 buUding permit is tiled and accepted by the City (fee~ paid and control number issued) within one year of the Two- Story Permit approval, said approval shall become null and void unl~ 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. Tbe Director of Community Development may grant a one-year extension, without a 17-48 35 Single-Family ResldenUaI (R1) Zones 19.28~100 L pIlblic 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. (000. 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 ofa complete application. the Community Development J?epartnient shall set a time and place for a public bearing before the Design RevieW Committee and s~nd 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, incl1,lding those acroSS a public or private street,. shall . receive a reduced scale cOpy of the plan set with the pub~c ootice. ' B. Decision. After closing the public hearing, the decision-maker sba11 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. Un1~ss a ~ding permit is filed and accepted by the City (fees paid and control number issued) within one year of the Exception approval.. said approval sba1l 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. Pindings 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 fulfills the intent of the visible second-story wan height regulation in that the mmiber 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 prescnDed design regulation and the minimum variance that will accomplish the purpose. "- \- 20058-4 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 makingall,oftbC 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 welfire. 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 DevelopD;1ent Regulations-Eichler (Rl-e). . R1-e single-family residence "Ei~erdistricts" 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 Rl-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 minimlim front yard .setback is twenty feet. B. Building Design Requirements. 1. Entry features facing the stree~ shall be integrated with the roof line of the house. 2. The maximum roof sl~ shall be tbree-to-twelve (rise over run). , 3. Wood or other siding materia1located 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 0(4) sba11 be considered a guideline in the Rl-e district. 6. The first floor sball 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 Pacing Second Floor Wmdows. In addition to other privacy protection rCquirCments in Section 19.28.070, the following is required for all second story windows: 17 -49 ,19.28.120 CupertlDo-ZoDIDa 36 a. Cover wiDdoW8 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 miniml1lD above the second floQr. (000.' 1954, (part), 2005; Ord. 18~8. (part), 2001; 000. 1860, 11 (part), 20(0) 19.28.130 Development Regulatloos-(lU-a). , Rl-a districts are intended to reinforce the semi-rural setting in neighborhoods with large lots. RegulatioDS found . in the other sectioDS of this chapter shall apply to properties zoned Rl-a. In the event of a coDflict between other regulatioDS in this chapter and this section, this section shall ' ' pre~. . A. Lot Area Zoning DesignatioDS. The minimllJ'O 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 DO 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 IQinimum side yard setback is ten feet. 3. Rear Yard. The minimum rear yard setback is twenty feet.. B. Setback - Second Story; 1. Front Yard. The minimum ftontyaOO setback is thirty feet. , 2. Side Yard. The combined side y~ setbacks shall be tbirty-five feet, with a minimum of fifteei:1 feet. ,3. Rear Yard. The minimum rear yard setback is forty feet. ' 4. The setback surcharge in Section 19.28.060 B(3) does not apply in this district. . F. Second-story RegulatioDS. 1. Second story decks shall conform to the second- ' , story buildiDg setbacks~ and may be located on the front and rear only. 2. The second-story sball not cantilever over a first- story wall plane. 3. The front-faoing wallplane(s) of the second-story must be offset a minimum of three feet from the first-story wallp1ane(s). The intent oftbis regulation is'to avoid a two- story wall plane on the front elevation. G. Front Yard Paving. No more tbanfifty 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 zmpdmumexterior waIl height and . building height on single-story structures and single-story sectioDS of two-story 'structures must fit into a building envelope defined by: a. A twelve-foot high vertical line measured from natural grade and located ten feet from property lines; b. ~ twenty-five degree roof line angle projected inward at the twelve-foot high Une referenced in subsection H(2)(l) of this section. I. Variation from the Rl and Rl-a regulatioDS sball require a Variance pursuant to Chapter 19.124 of the Cupertino Municipal Code in the Rl-a district. . ]', Design Review. All two-story development sball 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 stibsection N(I) of this section.. K. Design Guidelines. 1be guidelines in this section shall be used in conjunction with the. City IS 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 sball be considered acceptable only if the applicant shows that there are DO adverse impacts ft:om the proposed project. 1. Second-story wipdows. Windows on the. side elevatioDS should be ~ and obscured to a height of six feet above the second floor, should have permanent eXterior louvers to a beight of six feet above the second floor or should have sill heights of five feet or greater to mitigate intrusion into a neighbor's privacy. 2. All second story waIl heights greater than six feet, as measured from the second story finished floor, should have building waIl offsets at least ever, twenty-four feet, with a minixnum 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 consideied a guideline in the Rl-a district. 4. Garages. The m,aximum width of a garage on the front elevation should be twenty-five feet, which' will accommodate a two-car garage. Additional g~ge 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 constIucted according to existing yard and setback regulations at the time of construction encroaches, upon present requirCd yards. one encroaching side yard setback may be extended along its existing building .line. a. The extensiQn or addition may not further encroach into any required setback and the height of the existing non-conforming waIl and the extended wall may not be increased. -.-/ ---,' 17 - 50 37 SiDg1e-FamUy 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 carpoIt$. 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. whlch is the result of the granting of a variance or exception. either before or after such property become part of the qty. 2. Arcbitectural 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 stIUcture, 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 sball 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 mustbe designed such that the appeirance is DOt 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. Detalling. 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. J JI"()l1Rr..aping plans shall be required for all additions or new homes. The pmpose 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. . \..-i L' 2OO5S-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 C~, except that: a. Privacy planting shall have a minimum setback from the property line equivalem 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. Pront yard tree planting shall be placed such.that 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 atborist 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 findings 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.Z8.1~ Interpretation by the Planning Director. In Rl zones, the Director of Community Development shall be empowered to make reasonable inteIpretations of the regulations and provisions of tbischapter consistent with the legislative intent thereof. Persons aggrieved by an , interpretation of the chapter by the Director of Community Development may petition the PllInning Commission in writing for review of the inteIpretation. (Ord. 1954, (part), 2005; Ord. 1860, g 1 (part), 2000; Ord. 1834, (part). 1999; Ord. 1808, (part), 1999; Ord. 1601, Exh. A (part), 1~92) .17 - 51 Landscape Mitigation Measures PRIVACY SCREENING MATERIALS ., I. NON-DECIDUOUS TREES A Cedrus Deodara- Deodara Cedar B. Melaleuca LinarifoHa - FIaxleaf Paperbak C. Pinus Helipensis - Aleppo Pine D. Eucalyptus Polyanthemos-Silverdollar E. Cinnamomom Camphora-Camphor F. Arbutus Marina G. Magnolia Grandiflora-Southern Magnolia" ,. 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. . Height to 80' 30' 40-60' 20-60' 50' 40' 80' Planting Distance- 'MaXimum 20' 6' 10' 5' 20' 15' 20' Spread 40' @ ground 12~15' ~25' 10-15' 50' 35' 40' n. NON-DECIDUOUS SHRUBS A Pittosporum Eugenoides B. Pittosporum Tenuifolium C. Pittosporum Crassifolium D. Pittosporum Und~tum.- Victoriari Box E. Cupressus Sempervirens- Italian Cypress F. Podocarpus Gracilior.-Fem Pine G. Privet Ligustrum - Glossy Privet H. Laurus Nobilis-Grecian Laurel I. Rhus Ulncia-Afrlcan S~c 40' 40' 25- 15-40' 60' 60' 35-40' 15-40' 25' 20' 20' 1S-2O' 15-40' 3-6' 20' 20' 20' 20' 5' 5' 8' S' 5' 10' 10' 10' 10' The'minimum shrub size shall ~ lS-gallon minimum and a minimum of 6' high planted height. See I:'age 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 o,rder for approval of other planting materials. Pocumentation shall inc;lude a letter from anlntemationally ~ed 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 yearll growth following planting. ' ~, The purpose of this list is to give the minimum planting disf:!mce between the required street tree/shrub planting in front yard setbacks and the City street tree. ---../ 17 - 52 "- CITY STREET TREE SPREAD PLANTING DISTANCE- MINIMUM \- A. St Mary,MagnoIia'" B. Crape Myrtle C. Privot , D. Califurnia Buckeye E.Birch F. Holly Oak G. Aristocrat Flowering PearII' H. Flowering Plum'" L Mayten J. Me1a1euca K. Eastern Redbud* L. Brisbane Box* M. Uquid Amber N. Carob O. Geigera P. Rhus Lancia Q. Urodendron R Chin~e Pistacio* S. Ginko* T. Chinese HackberryII' U.Elm V. Sycamore W. Mulberry X. Silk Tree Y;-Raywood Ash Z. MedestoAsh AA. Shammel Ash BB. Camphor Cc. Zell<ova 20' 20' 20' 20' 20' 20' 30' 30' 30' 30' 30' 40' 40' 40' 40' 40' 40' 50' 50' 50' 50' 50' 50' 50' ?O' 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 lis~ and may currently exist as a street tree. (Old. 1860, ~ 1 (part), 2000; Old. 1834, (part), 1999) \.- 17 - 53 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 ~ release agreeing to modify or delete the requirement. " Date Property Location Address I agree ta waive-or modify the privacy protection measures required of the Single-Family Residential Ordinance as follC!ws: Property Owner: Address: Phone: Signature: (Or~ 1860, ~ 1 (part), 2000; Ord. 1834, (part), 1999) ---/ ----,' 17-54 ' \.- L \.-, Privacy Protection Planting Affidavit Purpose: To as~ the decision-makers and neighbors that the privacy protection planting has beeIi installed according to ihe planting plan. V aiidatio~ An Internationally Certmed 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. Submittal 'of this form shall be required prior to final inspection of the residence. Planting Certification: I certify that ihe privacy protection planting and irrigation is instaII.ed at address and it is consistent in design., height and location with the landsqlpe planting and irrigation plans drawn by: ' dared (attached). Name Title Professional LiCense # Date (Ord 1868, (part), 2001; Ord 1860, S 1 (part), 2000; Ord. 1834, (part), 1999). -. \ 17 - 55 , . 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...010 CHAPrER.19~40: RESIDEN11AL 'fBJ."t$IDE ~ ZONES. Purpose. Applicability of regulations. Permitted uses. ComJirinnal uses. Site development regulatioiJJ~ Building coverage. setbacb aDd height reStrictioas. Design staDdards. Fencing. Permitted yard eocroacbment. Geologic and soils report procedures. , Private roads and driveways. Solar design. Interpretation of planning director. Bxceptloos for development of certain individual hillside lots. Applicability. · 'Prior history: Ord. 1601. 19.40.010 PurpoIe. The purpose of the RHS ZODing aistrict is to regulate deveJopmem CODIIDrIJIIII'8 with community goals. as desCribed in the GeDeral Plan. to preserve the natm:al setting in the hillsides. This chapter utiliZes pedormance standards and ~ific regulatioDl to ensure that the utilization of land for residential uses is balaft('NI with the need to conserve natural resources aDd protect life and property from natural hazards. Specifica1ly. this chapter is intended to accomplish the followiDg objectives: A. ~.nb~tbe~ ofresidentia1 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 resideu.tial neighborhoods; D. Maintain spatial relationship between structures and within neighborhoods; " B. Reinforce the predominAntly low-intensity setting of the coJ]]J]]1J.Dity; F. ~Aintain, a balance between resid~ development and preservation of the natural hillside setting; G. Promote compatibility of colon aDd materials of structures aDd the surroundiDgDBtural seams. (Ord. 1634. (part). 1993) . 19.40.020 ApplkabUitJ of RepWioDI. No buildinI or structure or laDd shall be used. aDd no , buDding or structuIe shall be beI:'eafter erectocI, structurally altered or eoJarged in ar-Vl~t1.1 hillside (RHS) zone. otherwise ~ in conformance with the provisions of this chapter and other appnc.ble provisions of tbis title. Notwithstandina any other provision oftbis chapter to the contrary. structures wbJch were JegaI1y constructed prior to the effective date of the ordinAnce codiftediD this section , shall be deemed legally conformiDa; provided. however. that any structural alteration, eDlargemeDl or remodeling of such existing struct1Ue shall either comply with the site deve10pmcut regulatkn (building coverage. setbacb height ~ctioDs and design staDdarda) of this chapter , " ---../ shall obtain an exception as provided in Section. 19.40. 140. (Ord. 1725, (part). 1996; Ord.I634,(part), i993) 19.40.030 Permitted U~ ' , The following uses shall be permitted in -an RHS . ZODing district: A. Single-family dwelling units with not morethm one dwelling unit per lot; B. A second dwcllina unit which conforms to the pf9CC(lure. standards and requircmeDts of Chapter 19.84 of this code; , C. Home occupations which conform to the. procedure, standards and requircmeDts of Chapter 19.92 of . this code; D. Accessory buildings which confonn to the procedures. standards and requirements of Chapter 19.80 of this code; B. Small-family day care home; F. Residential care facility with six or less residents not including the provider. providCl family or staff. that has a license from the appropriate State. County agency or., depaitmem; G. The keeping of Animltl. U follows: 1. Household pets limited to one animal per tbJ'P- . , thousand square feet of lot area except: 51 17 - 56 1'.40.030 CupertIDo . Zo7-~1 51 l ,L .AduIt clop are limited to a t"'nbnnm of two for "'-"" lots less than ODe acre aud four for lotS greater tbaD ODe acre, . b. 1be number of pelle, c1ucb, cbickeo., rabbits and other farm lmimAhl are not Umitcd on a site greater than one acre, 2. Small household pets, ' 3. Large Animal_. such II horses, cows. sheep, and goats, limited II follows: a. Two large ATlimal. fOr the first forty thousand square feet of land area, except mules aud doDkcya ~hich , require eighty tho~ square feet for the first BDimal, b. One additional large animal' for each twenty tbousaud squaEe feet of laud area, c. One additional large ~ if said animal is ndsed for a 48 project, ~ pro~ sponsored by recopized agricu1tural orJ'lni~rinn ora scbool project, 4. The required lot area for a large animal sbaJl not be iDcluded in the requJred lot area for a household pet or vice versa. except that a maximum of two household pets may be kept with large ImbnAh, 5. AD animal_ pmst be kept and 1TlSlmtSl;nM in accordaDl:e with other Cupertino or Santa Clara CountY codes and orr'm~, 6. No 1m;1TlSlIll kept and 1TlSlmtll;ned in an RHS zoning district may be raised for coJDDJmCial purposes, "-' 7.' Crop" tree or horticultura1 farming for personal use. Produce grown on the site may be sold if the business activity is conducted in a mlmMl' consisttnt with the home . rd- occupatiOn 0 1nsmce; H. Large family day care home which mi:cts the parking criteria CODtaiDed in Chapter 19.100, and which is at least three hundred feet from any other large-family day care home. The Director of CommuDity Development or hislb.er designee' shall atlmin;~tratively approve large day care homes to e:DSUl'O compliance with the parking and proximity requirementa; I. Congregate residence with ten or less residents. (pm. 1658, (part), 1995; om. 1688, 13 (part), 1995; Onl. 1657, (part), 1994; Ont. 1634, (part), -1993) 19.40.040 ConditioD8l Uses. ThefoUowinguses may be conditiouallyallowed in the RHS zoning district subject to the issuanCe of a conditional use permit: A. Issued by the Director of Community Development: 1. Temporaryuses subject to regulations established by Chapter 19.128 of this code, 2. Large-family day care home which otherwise - does DOt meet the criteria for a pennitted us~. The \.-; cOnditioDll Use permit shall be proCessed u provided by Section 1597.46(3) of the State of Califomia Health and Safety Code, ,3. 1be keepq of anY aDima1 DOt otbcrwiJe pemiitted in SectioD'19.4O.030G, 4. Home occupatioDa that reqnIre a condlt4nnp' ue pel1Dit pursuaut to Chapter 19.92 of ddI code, s. BuDdin.. or ItrUe111reI which mcorpoIite aolar design features that require varlatioDs from setb8cts, upon a determiDation by the Director that the desip feature or features will not result in privacy impacts, sh8dowiDg~ or intcDsive no~, odor, or other ~ iiupacts to the surrounding, area, . 6. Second, dwdling UDits which require aoonditional use permit pursuant to Chapter 19.84 of this code. 7-. Crop~ tree or horticu1tura1 farming for commercial purposes; B. Issued by the Pllmfting Commission: ,1. ,Limited ~mmercia1 recreation uses, such as ridiDg clubs and related stables and trails, golf courses. swimming and picnic grounds. 2. Residential care facility, that is not required to obtain a liceDse by the.State, CoUDty agency or department an4 'has six or less residents, not iDcluding the provider, provider family or staff. 3.' Residenti91 care facUlty, 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 distaDce of five hundred feet ' from the property boUndarY of another residential care facility, 4. Residfl!r1tiAl care facility, that is not required to obtain a permit from the _ State, County agency or departmeDt license ~ has "seven or greater residents, not iDc11Jt1ini the provider. provider family or staff, is a minimum distaDce of five hundred feet from the,property boundary of another residential care facility and his a m;nhnnm of seventy-five square feet of usable rear yard area per occupant, , S. Congregate residence with e1eve:a, 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; Ont. 1688, ,- 3 (part), 1995; Ord. 1657, (part). 1994; Ord. 1634, (part), 1993) i9.40.0s0' Site DeveIopmeut ReplatioDl. The fonowing guidl'!Unes are a compUation of policies descn'bed in the Geneia1 Plan and are intended to govem the preparation of development plans in RHS zones. All. provisioDsofthis section. except subsections A. a-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 17 - 57 53 llesldeDtIaIlIDIslde (llBS) ZoDelI 19..._ RHS ZODiDI district sbaIl be ddamiDed by the Geoeral PIaD. based upon slope deDsity staDdarda described 1bereiD. 2. Upon recordadoa. of a subdlvlsloD map or parcel mip in an RHS zoDiDg district. deuaity credits derived from application of a slope deosity formula to a lot or group of lots may not be traDSferrecl to property outside the subdivision or parcel map bou11dary. B. Lot Area.- 1. The minimum lot area for a specific property shall correspond to the n~ber following the RHS zoning symbol (multiplied by one thousand square feet). Examples are u follows: ZoDiD& Symbol Number' l'tfInlmnm Lot Area ID 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 puIpOSCI of subd1vislon. the minimnm lot area shall be the average lot area computation for a zero percem slope ~ as contained in AppcDdix B of the GeDcral Plan, UDless clustered In accordaDce 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 hUDdredci&hteen thousand square feet for the 5-20. 'Ibc minimum lot size in a clustered subdivision is tell thousand squire feet. !...ots which potcDtially are subdividable will be asSigned a lot size , number. at the time of subdivision. 3. 'Ibc minimum lot area for legally-created; developed lots, which are not subdividable, shall reflect the ' existiDg lot size. C. Lot WJC;lth ltIinimnm' ,The mi"lmmn lot width in an RHS zoDiDg district is seventy feet, mCasarCd at the front. setback tiDe; provided, however, that there is no minimum lot width for lots served by a private driveway and which do not adjoin a pubUc street. D. Developmemon SUbstaDdardLots. No structures or improvements proposed OD existing, vacant legal lots in the Foothill Modified and Foothill Modified Half Acre slope density designations of the General . Plan which ire substandard in size, shall occur unless an eXception if; granted. B. Lots AdioiniDa Public Opea Spaces. For Jott' lidj_to pub6c opeIllplCO; ~ or paIb. h dri~eway aDd bl:dldiDs shall be located in a IDIDIIer to be lICIt - II fir u feuib1e ftom the preservo or park IUd desip!d in ' a mA1lIIflt 10 'l'IIinimi_ iD.1pIctJ OIl the preservo or part. F. Site GradiDI. 1. All site gradiDa IhaU be limited to I CU1J'IIllative total of two tbousaDd five buadredcubic yards, cut plus fill. The two thousand five hundredcubic yards includes ifIdinI for building pad. yard areas, driveway BDd all ~ areas requiring gndiDa, but does not iDc1ude b~. The graded area shall be limited to the buildiDa pad area to the greatest exteDt possible: Gradiq qu-ntitiM for multiple driveways sba11 be divided equally IIDODI the particip-tht, loti. e.g.. two lots ahariD8 a driveway wUl divide the driveway gradiDg quaDLity in half. 1'be dividccllbare will be charged agaiDIt tbD,andiDI qUIIdily aUowed for that lot dcve1opm&mt. A mu...w of two thouIIDd aquue feet of flat yard area. oxcludiD& driTeway.. may be padcd. All cut and fill areas shall be l'OUDded tofoUow the Datura! CODtoUrI and planted with ,iand--.piDa which -=-. the requirc:mmts in Section 19.40.0500.' . .2. A, UceDsod land... archit.oct shall review gradina plans and, in consultation with the app1icaDt and the City F..ng;1V!f!r., sbaIl SIlbmit a plaD to prevcat soD erosion aDd to screen out aDd ftll slopeI. . o. Laudlcapiq. 1. A liceDsedlandape arcbitectshall prepare I tree' plaDting plan for the site whidl will scmca aradiDg areas. and resideQtiJl 'structures, to the greatest possible extent. u well as to reint:rodUce trees on barren slopes which were denuded by prior IIficultural activities. 2. l"-''''~ improvemeat shall meet the requiremmts as established in tho Xerlscape LaDdscaping OrdinR!'M, Chapter 14.15 of this code. 3. Vln"~ improVemmatl sbal1 be iDstI11e4 prior to occupancy UDless such jmtJal1lltioq is impracticable, in which cue. the applic8Dt sbIll poat a boDd. cash or other security to insure installation within all eigb~~~ period from occupaDCY. All such )JUld_1pC areas shall be . properly lTlRintainM. 4. No specimmsized treas may be removed without a permit u provided for in the Heritap aDd Specimen Tree Orrlill1lnr..e. Chapter 14.18 ofddacocle. Native treeS should be integrated into the Site design 10 the greatest extent possible. H. Watercourse Protection. 1. Any watercourse ~tified in Figure 6-J of the . . Cupertino Geueral Plan and its existing riparian vegetation must be shown on all development plans. 2. All new developmeDl. iDclud.ing str1JCtU1'P" grac!lDlaud ~g. must be set bact .1_ fifty fee , 1013 which are less than one acre in size and ODe Iumcfi'eiC( 17 - 58 19.40.050 ~tlk-. Zmit"l 54 l I feet On 1011 Which lie ~ dI8Il,ODe.ICre... The setback '-" sba1l be meuurtd from the top ofbaDt of thO ~ or from existiDa riparian veptattdD, wbidJever is greater. The setback from riparian vegetadOnwUl be measured from the drip line perimeter. t. Devel~ Near 'PromiDeat RidgeliDes. 1. The development Of DeW , indepeadeDtstrUCtUteS shall not dimlpt a fifteen Percent site lb).e from a prnmhvD ridge as jcJ~tified in Appendix A. The fifteen percent site line shall be measured from tbetop of ridge at the closest point from the structure. 2. AdditioDsto lepUyexiidDgbomel1oclfcdwithin tbe fifteen pcrccmt site line of a promiDeDtridp1lDe may not further eDCl'Oach into ~ site line, e.g., d1e additionmay not add height or bulk which may increase the disruption to the fifteen ~ ridgeline site line. 3. ShoUld these requirements becoDie impractical, alternatives will be coDSideted through L' the exception process. J. Deve10pmeat on' Slopes of Thirty Percent or Greatcr~ 1. Site plans for all development prOpoaIs shall include topographical informational contour intervalS DOt to exceed ten feet and a horizontal map scale of one inch equals two hundred feet or la11W. Areuwhere dopes exceed thirty percent shall be kJeJlrifW,l on the site \....- development plaD. , 2. No stnicture or improvemems shall occur on slopes greater than thirty percent UDless an exception' is granted or unless no more than five hUDdred square feet of , development, including gradb1s and structures. occurs on an area witb a slope greater than thirty percent. K. Trail LiDkages. ' 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 Geueral Plan TrIll 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 respousibility of City Oovemment to ~ the privaCy protection of the building permit app1icaDt or owners of Suuoumting properties that may be affected by the strDctDre under coDStruction. However, the Director of Community Development may confer with the building pemlitapplicant to discuss alternate means of preventing privacy intrusion andpreservingviews. (Ord.172S, (part), 1996; Ord.1658, (pan). 1995; Ord. 1634. (part). 1993) "-' 19.40.060 BuildIDc Co'ferqe, Setbacks and Height RestrletiOIlS. All, provisions of Ibis section may be deviated from upon an uception gramed by the PIaDDing Commiuinn in accordaacc wiIh Section 19.40.140. A. FlOor Area. I.L For 1011 with less than ten thoU88Dd square feet of net lot area the ~floor area ratio sbaJ1 be forty-five percent of the net lot area. Formula: A == 0.45 B A == Maximum allowable bouse size. D == Net lot area. b. For lots with more than tell tbousaDd square feet of net lot area the m.~[[l'l11Tl floor ~ shall be four thousand five hundred square feet plus 59.S9 square feet for every one tbousaDd 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- ((11..10,000)/1,000)(9.59)+4,500 A == Maximum allowable house size ' prior to instituting the ~imu,", 6,500 ~ foot building size. B =- Net lot area. 2. Lots Within Clustered SubdivisIoDI Conhl;ftmg Common Open Space. Lots within clustered subdivisions in which land is reserved u cominon opeD space, may count a proportioDate IIDOUIlt of the'reserved private open space , for calcu1adng the allowable house size, except that no developable lot would be subject to greater than a forty-five- percent floor area ratio prior to slope considcratlon. The average slope of a lot within a clustered subdivisio... shall be calculated on the developable lot. , , 3. Slope Adjustment Criteria. For lots with an average slope greater than tell percent, the allowable floor area, prior to institutinl the maximum six thousaDd five . hundred square foot allowable building size, shall be reduced by one and one-half percent for each percent of slope over ten percent. For lots with an average slope over . thirty perCent the allowable floor area sh8n be reduced by a constant thirty percent. Fo~ C- A- A x (1-(1.5 x (D ~ 0.1))) Maximum allowable house size ' based on' subsection 1. above prior to instituting the maximum. 6,500, square foot building size. Maximum allowable building for lots, with greater than 10" average slope. Average percent slope of net lot area. ' c== D- 17-59 55 RNWeA''''' RlIWda (RIIS) ZoBel D...... Ave. sIo~ RedudIaD 10~ or lea .11~ 12~ 13~ 14" lS~ 16~ 17~ 18~ 19~ 20~ 21~ 22$ 23" 24" 25" 26" 27" 28" 29" 30" or sreater 0" ' 1.5" 3~ 4.5 " 6" 7.5~ 9" 10.S" 12" 13.5" 15" , 16.5" 18~ , 19.5" 21" 22.5 " 24" 25.5" 27" 28.5" 30" . , B. Setbac)W-P"1fIt Floor. 1. Front Yard. The minimum front yard setback is twenty feet, except that if the grade uceoda, twenty percent within the first twenty feet from the __ ekvation, the minimnm front yard setback may be ten feeL. The driveway and garago must be designed to euable vebic1es to park off- street. 2. Side Yard. The minimum aide yard setback is tell feet, provided that a minimum of fifteen feet shall be provided on the street side of a comer Jot. 3. Rear Yard. 'Ibe minimum rear yard setback shall be twenty feet. C. ' Setbacb-Second Floor. 1. llroDt 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 Yard. The minimnm rear yard setback shall be twenty-five feeL 4. DowDbill Elevation. l'he downhill elevation shall be offset ill the followiq manner: at least seventy-five percent of the second story downhill ficing wall plaDe shall be set back III ~verqe of seven and one-half feet and ill no case less than five feet from the first story downhill wall 'p1aDc. 'Ibe J'l'!'ftAining twenty-five perceDt may not extend past the first story wall plane. , 5. SJpdd 1M dowDIUIl CODtoPtI DOt be.~ tr ODe ehmdoD. ,1haltbo:dowahiUoftiel sba1I be ~ tl --/ the primaIJ eetback a~. 6.' A secODd.., offIct may be measurecl1ita the outside pCfimeter of the first-story ~ porcbeI. The roof of tbo,porch IDD8ilIQldCh., in pitda 1D411tyle, the roof of : the maiD liUUClUIe. T.be porcb mualallo be at least five feet in width aad eDDd die ~ of die WIll on which it is located. ' , D. ~-Hib~ ~ Floor. The minimum setbacks for a habitable third Ooor aha1l be tile lJIIDe U those for a IeCOII4 fJoaI'. except tbIt die minimum side yard setblCt IIbaIl be ~ feeL B. Heisbt of ,PriDCiPa1 BuUdqap IUd Structures. 1.", The ",.~ beigbtof a priDcipa1 ~1ild",& in III RHS ZODe shall be thirty feet (excfult;ng chimDcys, IDftIom"'I!!I. or other 1lpp1IlIIl:DII1). 2. HeightI CX~" tweDty feet sbaJl be SDbject to the setb8ck regulatioDs prescribed in Secdon 19.4O.060D aDd B. , .I 3. The . ma:rimum wall height On the downhill elevation sbaU bofifteID feet. (Ord. 1725, (part). 1996; Ont. 1658, (part), 1m; Old. 1634, (part), 1993) 19.40.070 . DelIla StudardI. AU piOYJIioDi of thia IeCtioIlmay be deviated fror" upon III exception Jl8Dlecl by die PIalmina Cnmmluu.. accordance widl Section 19.40,140. ,,--/ A. Bui1dtDa .. Roof~. l. ' Tho. buil6iD& .. foUow u dosely U possible the primary natural COIdOUr of tbe Jot. The main building ,mass shall be on'the UptJope side of the buiJdin& and the roof pitches shall ,trend doWDSlope. .2. Second Story dooDen are permitted within the second story setbacks u IoDg as they are miDor in shape and mze. . 3. The downhill e1evationofthemain atructure,shall . have a minhnmn of four offset bIJ.ildiDa aud roof eleme:DtJ. . These requiremeDfI are iDteDd~ to provide varied bui1diD& fol'lDl to produce shadow pattems which reduce the impact of visual masS. i" 4.. wan p1aQel exc-~'ti"l ODe story or tweDl}' feet in , height, whic;hever is more reitrictive, must contain architectural elements which provide relief and break up expansive wall pianea. B. Colon.Bmerior colon of all structures on the lot shall use uamral earth toile .sIor vegetation colors which complemcm the Datura! surrouudinlS and sball not, exceecl a reflectlvity value of sixty on a flat surface. Natural earth-toDCl and vegetation colon iDclude natural hues of brown. green and shadei of gray. ' C. Outdoor Liahtina. AU outdoor lighting.shall identified on the site deve10pmeDt plan. No high-mteDSttf lights are permitted for tcaDiI co~ or other recreat,ional 17-60 19.40.070 Cut-dM. Zcm. . S6 purposes, Movemeat'-tctlv..security liIbU. DOlto exceed V ODe hundred WMtI. are ~mIltecI bat ~ be IIJIe1tW to avald aU aff-site iDtruaioD. All otber lights JDlJ8tbe ctirectcd to meet the pardco1ar need. (Orcl. 1125. (part). 1996; Ord. 163~. (part), 1993) . 19.40.080 p~: All provisious of this section may be deviated from upon an exception granted by the Planning Commission in accordance with Section 19.40.140. All feDces in an RHS ZODing district shall be govemed by the followinJ regu1ationa~ A. SOlid board"fencing shall: 1. Nat be limited on lots of less than thirty thousand square feet net area; 2. Be limited to a fi~e thousand s.quare foot area (excluding the principal buDding) for lots exc~it\gthirty thousand square feet in net lot area. B. Open feocIng (composed of materials which result in a mmimum af ieventy-five percent visual traDSpareDCy) shall be unrestricted except that such fencing over three feet in height may not be constructecf within the front yard setbacL (Ord. 1634. (part). 1993) 19.40._ ~mltted Yard EDcroaehmeDt. All provisioDs af this section may be deviated from upon an exception granted by the Pluming Commission in accordaDce with SectioD 19.40.140. A. Architeclura1 teatu.res (not including patio covers) may extend into a reqUired yard' a distaDl;c DOt exc-iing three feet. provided. that no- iItchiteclura1 feature lOr combinatioD thereof, whether a portion af a priDcipalDr accessory structme. may extend closer than three feet to any property line. ' B.. AdditioDs to Existing Structures. Except for structures located within the prominent ridgeline site line. where a single--famUy dweWng legally constIucted according to existing yri and setback regulatioDs at the time of construction cucroaches upon present required yards. one encroachiDg side of the; existing str1J.etW'e may be extended along the existing building lines even when the existing first floor ~ks do not meet the requirements of this chapter. Only lOne such extension shaD be permitted for the life of such building. 'Ibis applies to the first story only., This section shall not be coDStrDed to allow the further extension of an encroac.hment by any buildinJ which is the result of the granting of a variaDce. either before or ~ such buildin8 becomes part of the City. 1be exteDDon or . addition may not furdlerencroachfDtoaatyrequ.ired setback; e.g.. a single story may be extended aloDgan exisdD& five- foot side yard setback even though the other side yard does not equal ten feet. However. in no c;lSe shall any wall plane af a first story addition be placed closer than three feet to any property line. (Ord. 1634. (part). 1993) \.- \- 19.40.108 . GeoJo&Ic ~,SoDs Report Proeedur& A. A poloP* report ~ by a certified ~' goo1o&iIt and '. soils ~ ~ by a registered civil erlg;n~ cplaUfiM in ~ils Jiv!cllann by the slate' sba1l be su\)ln;tted prior to the ism.n,r.e af a buildiDB permit for constrUCtion of any bui1diD8 or structure which: 1. Is located an propeny in an RHS zoning distiict which has been desipatcd by the Gcoera1 Plan to be within a geolapca1 hazard area; and' 2. Where an addition. alteration lOr repair of an existing buUdiJlg Or structure include at least ODC af the following: a. The improvements iDelude iDcreasing the occupancy capacity af the dwelling such as adding a bedroom or secoDdary UDit. or b. The cost of the completed addition. alteration or repairs will. during any ~od of twelve months. exceed twenty-five percent of the valueaf the existing improvements as determiDed by the building official based on cum:ot per foot value af the proposed structure to the existing strUctUre'. value on a parcel of property. For the purposes af this section. the value af e~ improvements shaI1 be deemed to be the esnmlltM cost to rebuUd . improvements in kind. which value shaD be determined by the building 'official. ,B. 'Ibcse reports shall be filed in conjunction with a site development plan and. in addition to the requirements of Chapter 16.12 of this code. shall contain: 1. All pertincDt data. interpretations and evaluatiOns. based upon the most current professionally recognized soils and. geologic data; 2. The significance' af the interpretatioDl and evaluations with respect to the actual development lOr implementation of ~ intended lai1d use through idetVificationof any significant geolagic problems. critically expansive soils lOr atherUDStab1e soil conditions which ~ not corrected may lead to structoral damage lOr aggravation of these geolagic problems both on- and off-site; 3. Recommendatioas far corrective measures deemed necessary to prevent lOr sigTIifir.mtly mitig~ potential damages to the proposed project and' adjacent properties Dr to otherwise insure safe development of the property; . 4. Recol'nTlV!ft(h'tlaDl for additional investigations that should be made to insure safe development of the property; , s. ~y ather iDfarmationdeemed appropriate by the CitY Engj~. C. No building pemJit shall be issued for the construction af any buildiP& or stI'UCl.11re an property which is subject to regulation UDder this section. unless the building and site pia incorporate the above-described cOrrectlv, measures and. unless the plans are approved by the City P-ng;neef. (Ord. 1634. (part). 1993) 17 - 61 57 ~I RllWdA (IlBS) Zones , u.a.lIo 19.40.110 Prl'fate ltoeds aDd Drl'fewayL AU. provisioDs of this sectiOD may be deviated from , upoll an excepdo!l arantcd by the PIaDDInI'CcJ4.~lIl.lJioa in' accoi"daDce with SeCtion 19.40.140. . A. PavetneDt Width. and Design. Tbe paVemeDt width aDd ,design for a private road 01' co~ driveway 'serviq two to five lots and a single-lot driveway shall comply with~lopment standards contained in the Hillside SubdiviSion OIrlinllnce, Chapter 18.52 of this code. B. ReclprocallngressIBgress. An applicant for a 'building permit for a lot served by I privaIe road or' cqmmon driveway shall record an appropriate deed restriction guaranteeing reciprocal iDp'essIegress easement to adjoining property owners who utilizo the prlvato road or common driveway for the primary access to their lot(.). C. Reciprocal Maintenance Agreemeut. The applicant for I building permit for a lot served by I private toad or common driveway shall record III appropriate deed restriction guarameemg participation ill a. reciprocal mlllintflm"~ agreement with other lot owners utilizing the private road 01' common driveway for primary acceu. D. Gates. Gates may be used to control acceSs to private roadI and driveways provided that the design of the gate, inc1uctin.g location, dimeDsion aDd the locking devices, arc approved by the Director of ComonmJty'Deve1opment after CODSUltadon with the Cemral Fife District. (Ord. 1784. (part). 1998; Ord. 1634, (part), 1993) 19.40.120 Solar DesIp. The setback and height restrictions provided in this chapter may be varied for a structlire utilizecUor paasive or active solar purposes; provided. that DO SDCh st:rUCtUrC shall infringe upon sOlar access or propertY rights of adjoiniq property o~. 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 Ptsmnil\g Commission. (Ord. l~. (part), 1993) , 19.40.130 Inter'pretadOD or ptann~1 DIredor. The Director of Community' Developmem shall be empowered to make reasonable interpretatioDl of the regul~ns and provisions of this chapter. CODSisteDt with the legislative intent thereof. Persons aggrieved by an interpretation of this chapter by the Director of Community Development may' petition the P1amiing CommiBinu in ~ for review of the interpretation. (Ord. 1634, (part). l~) , 19.40.140 ExcepdoD for Dcnlopment or Certain , Indlvidu81 Rmside Lots. A. With respect to Ii request for development of a ' legally created Individual hillside lot which does DOt meet the, development requirements contained, in, SectiOnl 19.4O.05OD thrOugh M and 19.40.060 throUgh 19.40.090 ao4 19.40.11Q ~ J9.42.12O, of~thia chapter,tbt> piRnni1\a Connni~.. sIJaU IfIDlID. excepdo!l to '1110\ deYelopmalt if the subject p10pelty camio& be D:zpd with - adjlClDl ~ pursuIIIt to Govemmciat CodeSectioDs 66451.10 - 66451.21 aud if the r.nmmiuion, based upon' substantial evidence, ~ all of the following fiDdiDgs: 1. The proposed developJDCDt will DOt be iDJurious to property'or improvements in the area DOt be deI:rimental to the public health and safety. 2. The propoaod devc1oPmcot will not create a hazIIrdous conditioa for pedestrl8n or VpJtiNJ)ar traffic. 3. The proposed deve10pmeDt bas legal access to public strcdI and public services are available to ierve the devc1opmcDt. . 4. The proposeddevelopmentrequirel an exception which involvestboJeut modjfi~of, or deviation ~ the dcvc10pmcDt ~ prescribed in this chapter necessary to accompJ.ish a, reascmable use of the parceL 5. All alternative 1ocadons for development on the pan:e1 have been CQIIIideredaDd have been found to create greater, envfrm1J1vm~l impads than the location of the proposed deve1opmeDt. , 6. The proposed development does oot CODSist of st:ructures on or near known geolojica1 or envlronlTll!l'ltal hazards which bav. been ~ by experttestimoDy to be UDIIfe or hazardous to structures or persons residilJ'" therein. (See Geoenl Plan PoUciet 2-49.) 7. 'the proposed dev~ includCs jl'IdiDg lIDir drain8ge plana which will euure tbal,erosion and scarriDg of the'biJ'mc.~; by aecessuy ~D of roads, hoasiDg sita, aD4 improvemema will be mintmt7,ed. (See Genenl Plan P91iQies 2-53.2-54 and ~..S7.) 8.,. The, proposed development does DOt consist of structures which would disrupt the natural silhouette of ridaeJjDes as,viewed from established vantage points on the valley floor unleu either: a. The Iocadon of a structure on a ridgeliDe is necessuy to avoid greater aegative enviro'lJN!fttsll impacts; or b. The struc:ture could DOt otherwise be physically located on the pan:e1 and the size of.the strUCtUre is the minkm1f11 which iI ~IUY to allow for a reasonable use of the parcel. (See Geocral Plan Policies 2-46, 2-47 and 248.) 9. The propo~deve1opmeDt coDBists of struc~ incorporating designs, colors,. materials. and outdoor lighti"l which blend with. the natural hillside enviromDent and which are designed in ,such a IIJIDDeI' as to reduCe the efftJctive visible mill, iDcludiol buildiDg height, 18 much as possible without creating other aeg8dve enviromTlflmtA1 impacts. (See GeDeraI Plan Policies 2-46, 2-50. 2-51 /Inri 2-52.) 10. The proposed development is located on tu6 parcel. 81 far 81 possible from public open space preser:ves 17-62 19.40.148 CupertiDo - Znn", S8 \.- or parka (if visible tberefrom), rlparian conidon, IUd wildlife habitats UDIess such location Will create other, more negative enviroDmImtalimpacts. (See General Plan PoUcles 2-55, 5-14 and 5-28.) 11. The proposed deve1opme.ot,iDcludes alAnrhll'.qpe plan which retaiDs as many specimen trees as possible, which utilizes drought-tolerant native plants aDd groUDd coven consistent with nearby vegetation, and which minimi7.e1 lawn areas. (See General Plan 1>>olicies 2-54, 5-15 and 5-16.) 12. The proposeddevelopmentCODfiDes solid feDcing' to the areas near- a structure rather than aroUDd the entire site. (See Geoeral Plan PoUcy 5-17.) 13. The proposed developmeDtis otherwise CODSisteDt with the City's General Plan and with the purposes of this chapter as descn'bed in Section 19.40.010. B. An application for exception must ~ submitted on a form as prescribed by the Director of Community Development. 'Jl1e appliCation shall be accompaDied by a fee prescribed by City Council.resolution, no part of which shill be refundable, to the applicant. Upon receipt of an appUcation for III exception, the Director shall issue a Notice of Public Hearing before the PJAnning Commission for III ex.ception UDder this chapter in the same manner as providedinSection 19. 120.060 (relating to zoning changes). After a ~Iic hearing, and CODSide~ of the application in conjunction with the msandAtory findings contained in subsection A above, the Planning Commission shall approve, coDditionally approve or deny the application for III 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 withi;D two yean folloWing the effeCtive date thereof, shall become\null aDd void and of DO effect uDles. a shorter time period shall specifically be prescn'bed by the conditiODS of such permit. or variance. An exception permit shall be deemed to have been -usedW in the event of the erection of a structure or structures when sufficient building activity has occurred and continues to occur in a dlligent mauner. D. In addition to lilY other rcIi1ed.ies, the City Attorney is authorized to COIIUIlellCe aDd mAintain a civil action to enforce the provisions of this chapter or any COJlditions sattJllr-bed to the granting of any permit or exception granted under this chapter. (0reI. 1725, (part), 1996: Ont. 1634, (part), 1993) 19.40.145 Applieabllity. This chapter shall apply to any peanit mid after ~pril 8, 1996, provided, however, that an exception previously granted. and fo~ which building permits are obtained two years after the effective date of the ordinAN:e codified in this section, is exempt. (Ord. 1725, (part), 1996) "- L 17 - 63 . ~ 1/ U.l ".:t;l o/.::::$:'}~' ij". :k::~~~ . il,~.A.,.t ,'~. V'l lis>,,: [} iaJi ~I~-""~~' 1:1 \ I'" {flFV" "h'~~~~O~ )2t~:~:.i!~~-~\'';;'1 r';:~~"~::~ ,lli::r,~( ". '" "'" f I I?' .... -" '", .~~ '~""',c:~ 0 [7" . r;!r~~tb.., ':'!w:"'I ~ I' · Ii" \sob'i.I, . \ I 1 I . . ~ ..... ' 6" ~.. --, '. ..~. ~ ..,..... · Ii L~tJii'~Al: 16ft 1., "!~: !CJ )",: .~ 1"'11 ~ ,.~.~ \: . 'C'," ,-V ";IV" ~.I '... .~q'~'''' Ir. I~' ".rm ~,i. ~~~~~] .....~ i'\.. '" "'\. I .... \:' .... 'i!ll:. 'of ~', t ,. ,l I~' '"'~~m. ~.,' . il':"'rM :r;i,.loi~1 ~ I 'l~ 'a' ~~'.~ ',,'/1. ll'~~"~:'I; ~""". i I Ni I...... ".' -_':~. I ~+'''- i: CL- 1.J '-'1:.//"."" " . .:.' -- ~.,. . I J "" \, 1___) "'. !'::~~"'~ Jo.c"~ )\"'r. 01... 11-. ~'::'"%1 . \ ~ '. ~ " '~, . .l ~, . '.~" ...... Ff~F.F.vlJ.v :l;:: ,...ry\ ::~C"'11 .5 ~ ' 10 .f + I':; ~. _ "', ....'. ~ J\.~! .:. ~ '. . '.," '. t ,- p\ : )ill\~ "'. \ ~ ~ ;, ,A '-i.,;':,;:.': :~"'..NN.\~'" ~:~-i:t~~ :::::. :U.~~.ihl' 1'6:.: '.'1: ~ \ )jJ ,! 1 ......... ,:0.. .,~~ ~,I""" 'I . :\.1 1'. "'1': . _I ,\ ~ J . i!\. -- . .. . ..... ,... ...:.."'.-..-....... . r---'~ ~. ~' .# 'lit ..;~ 1/,..... ~f,;. ../. ,.' :":'.~~ :: ''1, ""., '. "'.:::. l.. f'" I u "'j;." .. \. 'l~~ ~ '## . ~ .if' , I. Ill,:- ~.n:./i . _ ", "'". ',~ I...,. 'j; \ r" "_ . \. 'l /. .' "I'I~ .- I ' ~ 'l ~ " . l' ..-' 'f J '.... '-1,'; . ",. I ' '1 ~ ....0 '..... . .....:.. -~:::--_.,~ I/..~ Ir- " . ," .:~ - t, . . \ . I r.;~ ,_. ". \ :.,.. ! i1~~' ~I~ij' ~'i \ ., ...). ~~2:" :..~~{-~~~.i/ )r\l~ ~~)jl.~~~1. :~J> '~~ Irt\,r~ ~ 'I,' ~". I j .; \,~ ~ ~:o-\W"...--i I' .~, I" .. I ~)J; I ~ ,-:'0 , . 'P-i ~ I: "~"I ' ~~_V.., .:.., .,........L...-,;.>_.. .,.. . .' ~_vL:?j,loIlOn ! .Y;Jli I. . \ ~-I:'" i-. .l131~' 14- ',..': '. I.~i ~ ;. ~ ~-,.., mil.tX-; .........< I : _ . I" .!..::::~ '~. il .:trCNS rr ~ 1l?3 ..,..,cn'::r.. - j;1~-7 r . "I,/I.~ R ~~ :::::':J.,:D ;_J .._l;1 \\~,. ,.." ..\ 1 \. .iIlEA" ". ._iL : ~ ~~"~/, !lL)l:('~ , s ~l~ Mq ~ ISlA. ~ ~ 1\,......:, '..:..'Cpl.l.t:G t~~ ,f #,~ ~ ~ ~ . .lijJ:: WI..:'. ...:.c..:I:1 ~''d'' II ,\~, ...- ~ 1-111". I ..,~.,.,u.:.;. 1\ _ o{J. : ~ -....:". I' "~JI____,.:~F. .~. .,:." I k " ':. ," ....." .- \. '\.. ..... \.... ._....r ~. ,.'; '. . d ~ ... . J · · ~.' H- ..-yo''\)'1'1'"lr?1 lkh.a!"[f' :~!€:'. ~CDlIU l ...... ~J\. u=-; ,..!.., " /I' ",n ...." '"i \} ;p . /.. '.J I oJ. '- I ,. . ... '. ... I . .' ""'.. "..,. . .' . ':':(1 j:..,tJi." ^ ,\'1 \-. 'b ~-\ \" , . : / . g.;~:'\. ,~I I I . I~.. .: i i': ~~ 'I~'i \. ..,:'.:1 '~~. I :\ 1 ; :.'i I_ "'1-':"':;;- . . (.1.. ~::.:" :r~~~":; . ; ';l ~ '\ .~I~i~ I ~ ~~\"I ,,~J!;CAJ.~ ~.' ~ w,:-- ...~.~ ~.' . '../,'~ -'. '. l,J.~-r' '~~ ll.~l>t ~~. ;m :::'.l1J:J ~~ ,~fI.'<'i'''Y>:\;~:;[J ~~i' ~:~ I .. >'r~ 171~:~'f. :. '\ !...\ijf)I!. ~.) - r.J.{-'~1I riff!. f1':'~.. '.. rW-. t .;.~' III h 1-.1-.1. ~1l1 ~ i'" ~"I"'~ijj. ~.~. J ~'~ :l~~ ..,..p-.~~~ 10' -II~ III ~'~"\~\'~rirr{~\ '~1I#' .~" ~ s~ ~ \~ ~~:l1~, 1:i~&ii\~.;1 i{ - \lrr.;t(!)M\~rJ~t€.:{;J ~ \))fh. ~~A(. ~ . '. I' ~'I' ~..... \ ~ ~, '" M'! "~~1; ~G '/Ii'~/l/~ ~ . ~ ~~I~~j,:.:-: CJo'" r."=-. L..""..., ';[ ,~:. . -~. \ .~ ~) ~~ ~ 'il~~' f(ilj ~:/!r.;}~":i "I ,.; '7' '-, ']_':::::.'""~.: "-' . .~... ': .='1 .,~ I t3--22\ j , ~ Ie.... .. O~-. . ~ ~Ur..i I. '. ~ ~, " ':1- " ......\t!"l, ...n,. .~~~IMr~L'" '. .:.: k \~~ ~~- ~. ~J 7'" ~:I" ; , I~ -,' "\ "'.~"" i"~ "i':::::~;'~ .~~~'i- ~..: ~~ . I-'~ /;/./f/. ;LX.-:o" 1 " """ ~..~ 1:." :~I.)),' [~1 :--I~ .,M :il':~ ~ ~..,. 1,I.t....I~~..~,,'':'.I~.il~ . '.<\l\A '" _" = =- """ < ,~ . ~'Q ,j ~. ~ ~ ). "hi.\ ~ ~~ "N ~. ~~ ,......-:,.~r Jl ~4' .'. t. .. ; . ..n~::~ t, ~r..;'" ~~~== ~r ~ .!ii - · ~i._;~I;'+ (. ...~'J,H ;;: ~ . - .. \\ ".>- 'f '. D!l8~/,. nrJ ~'t. ~ :1' S\ I' ''/-Jf;!: \.""" .0'; I ~ \ ~~ " ~DO . . 'l.AJIr. : 1\ " \ l \C: ~ 'la, :JJ' JA' . . . t \ \. ',1 I" ~l . \ ~ t::::.~II'S , /rJ ~ ~~; "~""'~ ,.....". ,.. \~. !/, ~ Ir"~,) ~;;:: '. ,~ " ...... "... . ~ \ .' , r/;("r... .....'.;a"j .', ...., \~\ l. J . _ I;:~ -vc rr?t ;;~~. 'j :,t., \'1 ( ) -J. --' .. l . .~... ~ rJ' m ~ ,,",,~"f' ~ ~~:~J~r; 'Ii ~L~;;.~ ~: :i"=~":~' '~'~~~"-':~~~~~IJ~~"; ..~~ :t ~': 1.1:(, IlIf((. ~~~~:d:. ~,,-?~ ~~~ ' ~\'{...~..-l 1 . .~l..:\ ~(("(~...., ~..... ~ .. (1r:\1~'8Q/1 I ~~\\l .. ' ~~oa;-~I , /PAl)'. . ." ~ \ '0 - : APPENDIX.A PROMlNENTRIDGELTINES Chapler 19AO oflhe Cupertino Municipal Code Adopler by Ihe Cily Council under Ordiilance 163", October II, 1\193 17 - 64 L D".OlO CRAPI'ER D.20:, AGRlCULTVRAL-RESIDENTIAL (A-l) ZONES 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. AppIicabUlty of repllltlnm. Pe$mitted uses. CoJIcJitfnftaJ. uses. Bxc1uded uses. Site ~e1opmm1t regulldODl. Pe:tmittecl ylrd ~ft'Vl!I'I.... SolII' design. IDterpretadoD by the PlaIming DIIector . \.- D.20.010 Purpose. Apicultural-resid~~'" zones life iJmoDt'ed to preserve agricu1tme or forestty ICtiviI:ieI in areas suited to that purpose, and to iDclude IhereiD residen~1I developmeDt of a semi-rural character. (On!. 1601. sm. A (part). 1m) D.20.020 AppIlcabIIltJ of hpIatloDL No buiJrfiIlI. strocture or IaDd sbaJ1 be used, 8Dd DO bui1diDg or sttuctme IIba1l be hereafter erected, stxucturaUy alteml or en1arpd in an agricultura1-residc::Dtial (A-I) district other tb8D ill CODfomJlllCe with the provlsioDl of this chapter and other applicable provisiODl of this title. (Ord. 1601, Bxh. A (part). 1992) 19.20.030 P...aaitted Uses. The foUowiDg uses shall be permitted in III A-~ district: \....- A. Apicu11ure. ~ture. viticulture and forestry, iDcludiDa but DOt limited to. the foBowiq uses: 1. FJeld and truck crops. iDcludiDa dryinJ' and storage, 2. 0rcbantI aDd vincyIrda, iDc1udiDg bott1in& aud storage, , 3. Treefarma, botaDical couavatories aDd arboreta. 4. Bams aDd sbeda. s. ~iDI of draft ~1. aDd lI'Qnn.l. providlllg products usod on the pI~ty. and bousebold pets; B. SiDg1c-family dwclJiD& UDit; , c. Resider"'" of fam1 workers 8Dd their tlimilics whose primal)' emp10ymeDt is incidental BDd necessary to agricultural opcntioDI CODd.uctedon the SID pared oflaDd on which such resicf~ life loca1cd; D. A aeccmd dweIIiD& UDIt c:ouformlIla to the provisioDa. staDdmtI. aDd pmcecImeI of Qapter 19.84 of this title. except for a BCCODd dwellJDa UDit requiring a CODditioDal use permit; B. N~ial stables. aDd the bepiDa of DO more than three ridina' borseI, except tbIt &dditi()fttll foalS may be retained for a period of six lDODtbI after binh; P. AI;t:;t:smry facilides aDd UIICI. customarily iDcidental to permitted UIICI and 0I:berwisc c:onformiDa with the provisioDa of 0Iapter 19.80 of this tide; G. HomI: occupatioDa. wheIl ICCeSIOI)' to olber permitted USCI aDd otherwise c:onformiDa to the provisioDs ofCbapter 19~92ofthis tide, aDd subject to any r.nndmnaal use permit requiremcDtI ~ In 1bIt chapter; H. SmIIl-fimily clay care home; I. Llrp-family dq care homo, which m=ts the parking criteria C(u...hwt in Chapter 19.100. and which is at least three huDdred fa from any other larp-timily dq carehome. The Director of Community DeVeIopmeot or bisIhcr desipcc shall IdminHmalively. approve IBrgC clay CIIfe bolla to easure comp1DDcc with the parkiD& md proximity requiremeDtI; 1. ResidM1~Rl care f8cility that is licaJBed by the , appropriate State. County apDC)' or departmaIt with DOt more than six residents, DOtincludiD& the provider, provider family or staff; Ie. CoDgreptc reaid~ with tell or 1ciss reskfentJr. (OM. 1688.13 (part), 1995; Ord. 1657, (part), 1994; Ont. . 1601, sm. A (part), 1992) , 19.20.048 CODdltiODal Uses. The foUowinauscs may be CODditioDallyallowed in the A-I mDiD& district. subject to the issuaDce of . coodmnw usepcrmit: , A. Issued by the Director of Cnnmmnity Developmeut: 1. TemporaryUlClsubjccttorepl!1tinnJlestabU,hed . by Chapter 19.128, 2. Animal breediD&, . 3. Home occu.patioDs rcquiriDs a conditinDal use permit purauaDt to Chapter 19.92 of this titlt:. 23 17-65 U.20.040 Cup- tL.o . Zon" 24 4. BuiJrfh\p or IIrUcbIreI which incorporate solar design features thIt require varlatioDs from ~h upon a ddeLl..lnIlt'lOll by Ibe J>iredor that lbe'desJp feature. or feIturea will DOt resa1t ill prlvlC)' ~, 1lbadowiD&, or intrusive DObIe, odor, or other advene I~ 10 the surrounding area. S. Larp-family day care home, which othenriae does DOt Jmet the criteria for a permitted use. . The conrfit1ons1 use permit sbaII be proc~aed u provided. by Secdoa 1S97.46 (3) of daeStlle of c.JUbrnia Health ad Safety Code; B. Iaaed by the 1'1-" Conwnillltinn. 1. lJveIIoct nacba lid dally tamil, 2. ~ of dairy products produced on the property, 3. Pur fIrmI, 4. Poultly nIsJDa aDd hItchai.eI, 5. ApiarIes, 6. NunericI, peeabooIel1D41-'....ma prdeDs, 7. BoardIq bImeII, 8. Tr-lIIftlllldnn 1iDeI, htnafon!a' ;t"'~. teIerisIoD IIId ndio 1DRrI, ad other pubJJc utiUty aDd cornmnni~ 1ItnIctDreI, 9. Nom:o~ stablea for rktiDa hones in excess of tile ~ p-nitted by Section 19.2O.030B of this chapter, 10. R~fI!fttt.. care 'faC:UitY that is DOt required to , obtain a JiceaIe by the State, CoImty apncy or cJepartm=Dt and baa six or lea resideatI, DOt iDc1nrfh\a the provider, provider fImiIy or sratl, 11. ResideDdal cue facility that ha the appropriB , State. Couuty apIIC)' or depII1meDl Uceme ad ILMD or greater rmdems, DOt iDcludiD& the provider, provider family or staff, is a minfmmn diP- of.flft huDdred ftlet from the pm~ty bouDdary' of mother rea~ care facility, 12. ResideDtW care flcility that is DOt requirecl10 Obtain a Ucease by the $t*, CoImty IpIIC)' or cIepartmeDt and hu seveIl or peller resIdeDtI, DOt iDcludiD& the provider, providerfamily or staff, iI a tnlnlmmn d~ of five hundred feet from the property bouDdaIy of IDOtbCr ~.1 care ficility, 13. CongreptD resideDce widI deYe8 or more tpftIP!iD which ill n.lnlmwn diF- of ODe IbousaDd feet from the bouDdary of IDOther congregate resideDce and hu a ""n'mom of seventy-five square ftlet of usable rear yard area per occupant; C. limed by the City COUDCil after CODSideratkm of the PIaImiDa Commission's r~~! 1. Retail ale of wiDe, fruit and berries produced on the ploperty, 2. Cemeteries, crematoriumI, mausoleums, and columbaria, 3. . MiDea, quarries aDd gravel pits, 4. RidiD& ac~. ~ stablel, lIDd the boardIDa of horses, 5. Ouest rIDC'heI, 6. Golf cow_ IIId driviD& rmaes, 7. Cbn.-.da1lWt....~... poolIlDd pk:aic areal, " 8. Public IDdqual-public 1mJ'~ and 1ISeI. (Ord. 1m. (part), 1999; Ore!. 1688, I 3, 1995; Ord. 1657, (part), 1994; On!. 1601, Bxh. A (part), 1992) 19.20.050 Emuded U... The 1bUowJ.Da uses IbaI1 'DOt be pc:anittecIlD III A-I ZDDin& district: A. Boa fmDI; B. Cattle farmlmaIDly ~i"lupoafeedbmusbt ODtotbepl~t1; . C. S1..~~, ferdIizI::r yank, teecI yards, boDeyIrda, or plaDtl tor die ~ of IIIimal matter; D. eo....~-ciaI feed sales; B. Other semIapicu1tun1 ~ maiDly depf-fn" OD raw materiIJa, se1"ifimllhed products, or feed brought onto the pmpwt1y; P. Other apiculturaI WIClI whic1a. in tho opiIJioD of' tho Director of CtJ..11.\Il*~nity ~ creIIe I private or publtc 11111_. (Orel. 1601, Em. A (pm), 1992) 19.-._ SIte ~ B,ecqJftIoaf. A. Lot Area ZDDiD& Deaip'.tlODJ. IIlA-l mDeI, the mmhmnn lot Ila. ~ cortelpODd to tho IlDJDber (multiplied by ODe thousm1 square feet) foUowiD&tbo A-I zODiD& symbol. Examples are .. foDo~: z-m. Symbol NIIIIIbIr ~nhnmn Lot Area ID Square I'eet ~ --' A A 43 215 43,000 215.000 B. )linhnmn Lot Area. 1. Tbe minlm1l1ft Jot me for a lot in III A-I ZODiD& district haviq DO iDcideDal ~.. use is two huDdrecI fifteeD tho1IIIDd iquare feet. 2. 'l'be min~ lot size for a lot in an A-I disIrict havIDa ~ ~lIjtl" .. is forty-tbrec thousand' square feet per dwellin& lIIIit on the lot. DwelIin& 1IIIlta ill fann labor camps for temporary 1Iboren, aDd secGDd ciwelliDa UDita, shall DOt be counted for the purpose of determIDiD& required IOtal area UDder tbJs IClCtion. C. Requtrecl Lot Shape. BacIllotiD an A-I ZODe' sbaIl have a shape that a square with I sldD of two huDdrecl feet can be iDScribecl in the lot. D. Lot Coveraae, BuJlding SetbIcb, aDd Height", RestricdoDa. 1. The maximum. buiIdiDi coverage fa forty perceDl of the lid lot area. ' , 17 - 66 -.-" . 2S . Aarl~ResldeatIal (A-1) Zones 19.20.060 \..- 2. The ma:rfmrlm floor area ratio is forty-five perceDt of 1he net lot area. ' 3. 116mhnmn Selbpt!h, L First Floor. i. The m;nUnllm froDt-yard setback is thirty feet. ii. The nmmmnn side-yard setback is twe:Dty feet, ill. The mhtUnllm rear-yard setback is twenty feet. b. SccoDd Floor. i. The miDimum froDt-yard setback is thirty feet. ii. The minbnmn side-yard setback is twenty feet, iii. The mmhmnn rear-yard setback is twenty-five feet. B. HeJgbt of PdDcipIl BniJdh\p IDdStracturel. 1. The ma;rimnm height of a priDcipal buildiD& or structure is twc:Dty-eipt feet. F'm:place chimDeys. 8D1eDD1e. or other appurtenances are excluded from this restriction. 2. Hei.gbtI ~mg tw=ty feet shall be subject to the setback repll1tiODl in subsection D of this section. 3. The City CouDcilmay prescribe that all blli1t1il'lp in a detri 1"1Ih!t1 area be limited to ODe story in height (DOt to cxceed eighteeJl feet) by affixina to ~ A-I zolling district symbol the ~.tV\u &i.. , _ 4~ Bxcept:ion for Hillside Areas. NotwithstaDding IJI.'f provision of subsectionD oftbia section to the contrary. uponrec>>' .,n lI'!I'VIatioDofthe PJmming CommintOn. the City CouDcil may approve buildiD& Jieiihta in an A-I zoniDg district greater than tweDty-eight feet upon mlllm\g all the following deU4:n.lnlltinnll: L The mbject property is in a hillside ,area and bas ~ average slope of b:D percent or greater; , b. Topograpbical features of the subject property mate an exception to the standard height restrictiODl necessary or desirable; and c. In no cue. shall the mJi7iml1m height cxceed thirty-five feet for a principal structure or twenty feet for an accessory structure; d. In no case. shall the maTinmm height of a structure 10cated on a promiDeat ridge1iDe IS defined by Sectiml 19.40.05006 re1atiD& to RHS zo.aiD8 districtI. or above the four-huDdrecl-ftfty-foot CODtODr. exceed twenty feet in height. (0reL-1630. (part). i993; Orel. 1601. Exb. A (part). 1992) \.- L 19.20.070 Pta..dtted Yard J!:Dcro8pm-nfll, A. In A-1 zones. when a builtIml 1epJly . ccmstructecl accordiDg to, exiJtiDa yard aDd setback regllhttinn. at the time of CODIt1"IICIion e:acroacbeI upon preseat required yudI, one eIlCtOIClUDI side oftbe existinJ structure may be ex1eDded ilOna existiDa bui1diD8 Unea eYeD ~ the exiJttl\l first-Ooor setbacb do DOt meet the 'require:mr:mI of this chapter. 0aIy ODe such exteDlioD. sbaU - be permiUed for the life. of sUch buDclIDg and ahall only apply to the first story. 'Ibis section shall not be ccmstruecl 10 allow the ftuther exteDIion of an e:acroacIuDem by any buildiDg which is ~ result of the &rIDtiD& of a variaDce. eidIer before or after mch property ~ part of the 'City. ' B. The extaIsioD or .Mit1nn .., DOt further encroach into any requirecl Jetbpek:~ e.g., a aiDgle story may be exrn"lId a1on& an ~I five-foot side-yard setback even dlougb the other side yard does DOt equal b:D feet. However, ill DO case Iha1l my waIlpllDe of a first-story addition be placed closer than three feet to any pIOpwitl liDe. C. AreJ1~1l featu1a (DDlIDc1ntl..patio covers) 'may em:ad iDlo a'recpred yard a distaDce DOt exceetIi"l three feet; provided that DO arddtectural feature. ~ combination thereof. whether a portion of a priDcipal or accessory ~ may extend closer than three feet to any property 1iDe. (Ord. 1601. Bxh. A (part). 1992) 19.10.080 Solar Deslp.. , The setback and belght restricIioDI provided in this chapter may be varied for a stmcture utilized for passive or active solar purposes ill A-I ZOIleS, provided that DO such structure shall infringe upon solar access or property rights of adjoining property 0WDCrS. Any solar stn1Ct11reI which vary from the setback or height restrict:i0Dl of this chapter shall ~ allowed only upon issuance of a CODditioDal use permitby the Director ofCommnnity Dcvelopm=t purswml 10 Section 19.20.040A4of tbis chapter. (Ord. 1601. Exb. A (part). 1992) 19.20.090 Interpretation by tile pI.llm"l DIrector. 'lbc Director of Cnmmnnity Deve10pmcDt shall be empoWered to ~ reascmable iDteIp1etaticms of the regulatioDs aDd provisiODS of this chapt,er t coDSisteat with the legislative intent thereof. PersoDS aggrieved by an interpretation of the chapter by the Director of Cc:wmnnn~ Development may petition ~ ptllnn"" Q)mmiuion in writing for review of the interpretation. (Ord. 1601. Exb. A (part). 1992) 17 - 67 . Exhibit E ---Original Message-- From: Marshall Wang [maltto:marshaltw@slgnlatech.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2007 5:31 PM To: CIty of Cupertino Planning Dept SUbJect: Please Remove the Unfair Ordinance 19.28.050.C Importance: High -----./' Dear PlQnllb1g Co.,.miqioners, In January 2005 a section of new Rl Ordinance was passed without public input. This unfair section (l9.28.050.C) efTectively rezoned our Rl properties and lowered my property value. . , Please remove this unfair ordinance. Thank you. Marshall Wang 21822 Lindy Lane Cupertino, CA 95014 ----/' ~ 17 - 68 Exhibit F \.-. Dear Cupertino City Council and PIam1ing Commission membtm, We the undersigned are AGAIN51' the lS'lJ RHSoveday of Rl properties. Please treat everyone equally in Cupertino and REMOVE section 19.28.0s0.C (both Cl and C2) of the Rl ordinance. ' Name Address -4b it 'l>M!D G.6rr- to) '1$ ~ r:t-,~ S~\e.-r1:l/or 1W~~ ItJ35~ K.rt'~ cf. ~'rv:> -I r~ //-t-, Ii? ~O,7 /J1'flSrAY!) Cr.~~l/N'\3. ~ W"~ I '3 7 ~ I .-8- ~-J He 0 7 ... "'Q.-!A. ~ ~ ,/(/4.7 A-~/ 6/,." UyUA,P'l11J L S; /~. ~ 1S>-l?~~ c/~ ~ ~/tD; !Iv? ~ "t:. vvrbtf VD~ ,4l^-- ~~'").. 5otv~~{..; . ~JJ~ \10$<. ItVL~~ ./J1~d D\o\~c:\4~ \D65:.1 ~~~ LlA(~~ e~ Ckf."\)01' t1l?:'i ~~ 10, i p' crS-e1t Kl1"QV\ RQl"\e.. lObS'S- SCU\tcc WcAQ Rot, ~ Cj~Cllt: smifo. ~qt\L -11 106<< A"~~M RJ., c...p. <is-OI+. Jelj' ~ w(l- J \- P-titi,... '^ _.....". 1'l:Clf.1)~ nv~..... 17-69 Dear Cupertino Oty Council and Plan.. (:omm51UliQD meqabers. We the undersigned are AGAINST the 15'J1 RHS overlay ,of Rl properties. Please treat everyone equally m Cupertino and REMOVE section 19.28.0s0.C (both Cl apd (2) of the Rl ordinance. ' Name 4 Le/ } ~ Address, I1tJ/1l1/1E1J >I!OvW I () ~ft, )A"rJ L tJf..rA .~ rzd~ )~, ' , ' -' 0":}5 r ./P~" (Ot:;r.~ ,('1>. ,'pf/.t1/A//AC'UfJUtlu(/M / _ I~,J" ~ ~ , 2;/1 f7l LoA' A/YJ r '-:IV {J.JI-'. G-u ~'"'"14:"'J~4 .." " .... · ~ ..;~ ~4"-)~' l,~/5 $;--4<:<. '~c..'_'~ ~~ I1JMvCY tiPruo, /t>>/S- 51Me, '!-i./.C7A' Rd yV'<L "- .tl1 "r~' 1\'l/~1:f1 tJfJ 7fL'5"'" ~~~ ~o. ~ ~ . , ~.j{,- "t-~. vJ; V\~4v-- I ~ :r as ~ "I~A' L~fct U- k ()I"~ -r" .1{fA.Q,"1-- (D723 Sc,., ~ LkeTo.... R4 , t6ac... 0JtUiat /' 1~7'ff ~Al'f" L.I#~UI ~"N " .:L~/~~ Shb,J~,:t. -lOi.!:lJ ,,~~ .Lvtf4 'KI V~r~"M~ '/o7rl s,-e;~;- ~. oP~ ldlSI S~/4Au&( ~J. '-.-/' p........ '^ _.. I..... VA~.--.I_ 17 -70 ~ Dear Cupertino Ot1' CoUndlaud Planning ComIrrission members, We tho 1IIlCItnigned are AGAINST thfi'UtJ& RHS oftday of~l piOperties. Please treat everyone equally in CupeJ1ino and REMOVl! sectiOn 19.28.050.C (both Cl 2Uld e2) of the Rt ordinance. Name Address t3tw~ ~#~ _~ --zLi'l3 /.-;LJt)Y L LrJ '~tEC 1 ~ L ' ~ .J-__ NRR.~J.lALLW~41 ~ ~ ~:z.2. 11VOY LII/, fetunfr, Gi6~J kVTO& MPr~ 2/1~1- LiNDY L,N,CuPGR..n~JCA'~ Ikt/J;f a/K~ I/MlI~~~/~'~f(J. &~ ~A5p!,~ // // // // a~ &~#- // ~;of.. &.4~# / / / / // // // // .// CIf/2f ( C#~ M .J1'ZO (, ~.,- C/2..ffSr PIL UlI('6fI!-17J1'O tf ~/ ~ .1H~7 L~ V1S~'})~I~;;;"~ ti&~ · e... ~ 111&'1 llrJdD-J titS&- VI(. Cu~Ai . q6b. &1JMtcx 'f~"/.J7 l.fll't /-,AI>>! LAN"E _ C(/'p~7,,~ ~/J7'.ilt7/) 1Utit4 ~ . f) l4-5t1'h L //1 IIJlt/1 tnt. uegtf'J. ~h~O 1/ 9ro/L.; \.- Pootitinn fn _mnv. (I\tI. QU~ n....rl_ 17 - 71 Dear Cupertino City CoUDCll and ~nirtg Commission mem.ben. We the undersigned are AGAINST tboJSlJ>> RaS ~ afRl ~ Please treat everyone equally iu Cuperdao ~ RBMOVB sectioa,19.28~OSO.C (botb. Cl and C2) of the R1 ordinance. . ~~..,r'" S;'#".~ /Afr~~ ." okU-Z'L :..r; h Z.l ~ rL l~- - ~_ lA<>- . 'U.,:. 1) L 9.. . R-ti.~ In ..........~ I Il... PR'~ n......... ~/y~d 71K.~d'/'U/'Ao.e A~- ~4, ~ ~Sd . 213'3<) T~<.<...~. ~1t<J/t~ ~ ~ 7tnlc, I ~lftq~ ~~ t-....~ 2f'DJcj--/ J J 6 7S" ReOlVi:'+ 12J .}G.r....+;" 0 'TS7:lf. '"1" ~' 17-72 Dear Cupertino at;y Council and Planmng Commission members, We the undersigned are AGAINST the IS9(, RHS oWrIayof Rt prope11ies. Please treat everyone equally in eupertino and REMOVE sectiOD 19.28.0s0.C (both Cl and C2) of the Rl ordinance. \- Name Address ~M-AdIJfl, ~ 0141 /9)J BHoy , rt W leli Jt-II ,.JO"iAtl' HrN ''''SI V4?! ~HAaJ ~I/o., S/I"~ ,fo~~81kr, ~~ aJ.. ' ~i ~ ~(J'3-,c.. Kv Il... So'c:> "i""<=- '- B ^ 1Q.'-"\ JL /.c.. c...,", ~~ 13o.r('1~r \e.- ~ tvLoV\J ~ .#~~ ~ ;2:' L P-li...... tft _.. 1"l:ar. 'D~ ",,-,_ I J 2- S-"', ~ r c.etf s~ .PoL Cu 1"&er1,..)o ~ t:.A' .YD/y P''''''~~No'l'-S ~ AlDr~A'/L.. ~ 4" -J 11/21- LWJcI.a. ~ ..ph ~Ynl? eA ~~/~ 1f/~1 UW lA~-hr Qrv ~~I\..C,) "o.lr" ~ 11' / V- I1~UJ/~ ~ , I' ~ ., ~'t-dA '^"~ 14v . ~. J CoA- qro I~ Il.~t<.. _ sf" ~ '1ft HoOO. Co ~ lJ/47 L.\t./" }/..,(' J.. IJ.... 6k.1e.c..h (! k~~ .l:,W\. " ..... ' 1/1S-7 U~ .UsTtr 'J/k.- L. d L b~.!rlce:....~.~ ,z" S 'fCf In y 41l.-Go- 1..(~6L LtNP( I ~6- -6~~ll4a~ ;.,I'f' I l.,~Jy lI1C~,~.JA4 c4 '1.rdtt ~i51 L,~J' ~~ G~I'd.i/o/~#, 17 - 73 Dear Cupertino ~ty Council and PJanning Commission me~bers, We the undersigned are AGAlNSI' the lS~ RHS ovellay ~ RI properties. Please treat everyone equally in Cupertino and REMOVE section 19.28.0,$0.C (both Cl and C2) of the Rl ordinance. ---/ Name Address f"';""~ - ....1..,),';. J!!3",,;;; ~ ~ '~"") o>A qSDI4 ~~s ~ ~-... ~Soc4- I~_- ' IJ e...,p~~) ~/7:J.6 ~w~T~. 4J"SDl~ ~ i3S KrJk<t~+ (l.JJ / 'a,,6'~~ t:t~/4 ~73S.~~. ~1~1l q&>l'i . ~ ::e-.r~ 21!'1l"2.. L.~~ l. tt ~1S'lI -/ rBe-~~ {>,4~ !l11(J~ Li~ L~J;.,""1PJj 5(Jrenl{ L1'h fIJI/if lilt. {!,le$lp;. O/~~t?~ Wl~ ~ {;J. .r5ae. a-; . (I'fl? ~- VI:,;) D: ~a4/.D/~ Un. TAD IIJIt-/:h' ~II/ 71 Blo -r;. ,.,,.,.--~ O....:ti" CM/,,,-;i,...,, CA- , 5t) f'I -a s Clef , L. ..-- qVtJ~ V<!"12 0 '" I peA:: If ~MllCrlll' ? {'ita J rrr..,. (.:>ti.;'t (V.J..rN. {" , ~ "4- I ' L~~y tVq IIUJ' M7. Cf.6tI JAfl. Cu{lrlflr'iNfJ / CA'fS-oli -S\.v~ (jal>~t "RoIi'Hwolft --. 1"<<'ln'~ ..........ow ---./ 17 - 74 Dear Cupertino City Coundllied ~g Cqmmission m~bers, We tile unclcrsiped arc AGAlNS'J' the 15% lUiS overlay of Rt properties. Please treat everyone equally in Cuperdno and REMOVE section 19.28.0S0.C {both Cl and (2) of the Rl ordinance. \- Name ~~ ~f- .. ...:t'Y, S;~.... ~ ~''H' 1< J /. <t '0 ~ 1.. r,' ~ ~ 2. ~ . \..- _1V{a~rn 1abnl:?~cL- . S~--. L.. eJ..;. ~ ~la;.~~ .&~ Sl\.S~ ~.oj~ ~,. lJL,,~ tv: I f ;4~ C. W.e.,l/.$ ~ ~~- \-, ~tiIVlln _nv. 1 <;;qr, RR"COl -........ Address 1/4-.t () c MVtJN t/~ C~A c L&-. , (#W.f"l-rNo/D, a4 9h 19 . IfD.ftl1bn1!. fP'~"""<<3,; tMfQ/t~i) ~ 'f$f/'-f I( 2-l; , tTe.l1~ gc 11 ))1.- (."Jl.:""1"""n r,. ~~~ I'Ll J12~, Te.oa l>e-JIa. 't:>r. 6Nf~'yU'J Ctf;"o J 4 t I '3 0 S-- 1.vl,"'I"~ Bet( a.. ?".... ~ "vw \l3.oS"" -1v.M- ~ ']).... ~....., J()(.\OltJ,~~6.O-~. C~Q;\l~O -1041.,1 ~'tk- ~~~ 1643' f}vJZ.";o\lli Lit Cv ~-t ,'I'I/:) I. 0 1(0"1 ak~<<. I PCl1J'4. ~ ~~k4l;o II Y" 7 tJ ~~__~,. t#n,:r'r.";"h., IDC//f... AVe.Allb~ J..N. c.vt,4~A.r/Jf)'O 17 - 75 Dear Cupertino Oty Council and Planning CODimission melDbers, We the undersigned are AGAlNSf the IS'I> RHS oveday of-B.I properties. Please treat everyone equally in Cupertino and REMOVE secdma 19.28.050..C (both Cl aad el) of the Rl ordinance. Name . ")J. Tit M,'- !, - ZCLOU 5~~ ~ If', ,Lk \ ....//l)J1dS ~J&7" ~ d_l~ :J4fg ~ C fA '-~ ~~~ .. (' . ,v:::::::' A/ - .!-.//'$f ,..~C. d tt'~ ~ .~ " 1~rA- ~... C~ 'Patiti.... t^ __ 1'1:& VQCi: .......... Address '7st1! OY7 B~5oiA Dr. ~e;(:l<<i. ,Ibq CClJ,\tHe-lI'1lx Wu.t c:u.peyt1: 770' O~~~:~~no 1I~>1J lfa-:Y~ hty),c.{[g PJ", /:~/J,>ti.,u> rql1t ~I /~Il C"'fa:l~ .. (.A....a ------ /$0<" f~/~r~ &~/~ / /dlw(/~4'/J?r. /fd,J7t;JJ / I J', Y.t-.,., ex Cqp~1J II" y~ C7: Cufa~~ 17 -76 \.....- Dear Cupertino Oty Council and Pt.~ing ComnUaiOR memberS, , We the undersi&!1ed are AGAINst' the IS'*' ,R.IIS overlay of Rl properties. Please tre8t everyone equally in Cupertino and REMOVE section 19.28.OS0.C (both Cl and (2) of the Rl ordinance. Name AddreSs 1<"';- a..", ! I~IJ Ml. CtJ.nT J)~ c.v~T....-o ~. ',,' q501"t -1!l.11Ul J.. : , 1).3> -r..",. 4 JJ.JI4. .v y _ t ;' ~(>.I~ &.w~~M'. " / ~~~ ~ -- /l ~rq:J L-(~. ~V f -' Zol 7R? L/Itr.f)C( t,AdB <rSol4 \.- Of ( 9Jot tA1re ~flr uftiJJ ( ~ ~o'f \- D.titinn tn _....- '''ClIo ouc;: .......-1.... 17-n Dear Cupertino Qty Council and Planning ~ssiOG members. We tbeundersigned am AGAINST theiU9&RaS,9verlay of Rlproperties. Pl~ ~ everyone equally in Culatino and REMOVB section 19.28.0s0.C(both Ct and C2) of the R1 ordinance. ---L1'255 ~ GR~~(-r PL II"M"r k ~ ?L-. . J?J-7/c. ;(1('" ~ /1 ~ ~ -'>>4Q.v-rCU'-€:1:T" {#()f,A-.J fQN{ LlZto fNl,UN7 tA~r c;t? ';;1:;:;; -~~~ /J~o;nour:r~1-OrI.~~y . \.L ~ ", t'i>>~ ~ ~,' c.u~I'4'hJICA. a..= ~~O 14 ~N~ Name '4t-L $L ~.. ~Q. f\t~~~k C~~~ fir..- e ~~-A~ \A\\l. ~ No.1;.,: cr C'\,,,~'( PJotiIi__ tft _.......~ ,..... QAC: .....-.... AddRSS . ~ :UbB~ I.~~) ~;~ '-tb~h.. ~n:k!~.. ~Ft: ~ cj\950/~ ~l{) I Li~ ~_ G.c..t-r-h:~ CA ~Sl>l( /~j{.p "lV'1kd~ef- ~ 1'$0 'fI~i' hY,'S-lcc- G ~ '=frol, 17 -78 '--' '~~r ~ /,\ , Exhlbn G "-, City of Cupertino 10300 Torre Aven~e, Cupertino, California 95014 CUPERTINO DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT Agenda Date: August 14, 2007 Application: MCA-2006-01 Applicant: City of Cupertino Property Owner: Various Property Location: City-Wide Application Summary: Report on the R1 Ordinance regarding neighborhood meetihgs on the Residential Hillside overlay. RECOMMENDATION Staff reconu,nends that the Planning Gommission: . 1. Take public testimony; and , Z. Explore optionS'tc;>~w flexibility while preserving the hillsides , 3. l1:ovide reoopunendations to the CitY Council. BACKGROuND:. " . IIi. January ,20tJ5'th, ;City:~Coundi::,incorporated RHS development rules 'into the R1 ordinancerevisiol1!J for prop~es upslope from the 10% line and with average slopes of 15% or greater; 'Following th~, actions residents in the affected areas stated .they w~e not , aware the Council might apply the$e 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 hUlsides while preserving the property ownersi development options. ~' '-- A more detailed discussion of the background .is. , discussed on the . attaChed exhibit B. 3D Aerial Map of the Lindy Lane R1 Hillside Area from Google , Earth (illustrative' purposes only not intended to be to scale) 17 - 79 MCA-2006-01 August 14, 2007 ~,fage 2 ~' ;~: . ' , , I Hillsides and Valley Floor Development Standards -../' The hillsides are~pecial places and more sensitive tQ. deve).oPDilent 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 Cupert;ino 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 anc:i supporting strategies which read as follows: GOAL F HILLSIDE PROTECTION Policy 2-48: Hillside Development Standards Establish building and development ,standards JOT the hillsides that ensUre hillside protection. Strategies: 1. Ordinanc, RellUlations and DnelolJment AlJlJTOvals. Apply ordinance regulations and development approvals that limit de4lelopment on ridgelines, hazaTdous geologicalaTeas and steep slopes. Control colors and materials, and minimi~e the illumination of outdoor lighting. Reduce visible building mass through such means a.s,~Rg , stnlCtUre5 down the hillside, folJowir.w the ~ contours, and limiting,tM height and maSs' of the wall plane facing the valley floor. ' )- 2. Slobe..densit'Y Fonmda. Appl'j a slope denJk, formula to very loW'intensit) residential development in the hillsides. Densit'. sholllPe c:alcu1ateQ; lXued on the . , foothilJ. modified, foothill modified l/2ocre and the 5.. 20 a.c:re slope densit; f~. ~ lot sites and de4lelopment areas wm:be dete'nT1ined thi:QUgh t~ ordinances, clustering and identification of 5igntficaitt : natural features and ~ological constTaints.' " ~' 17 - 80 MCA-2006-01 August 14, 2007 Page 3 "-- The hillside RHS ordinance contains development standard~ 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 R1 Ordinance amendments in 2005, the Council was concerned that som~ areas'in the hillside 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 and have limited development opportunities. ~ POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS Ordinance Options If you imagirie the R1 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 Planning Commission to consider: 1. ~evert back to the R1 hillside development standards pre-2005,R1. 2. Hybrid ordinance tailored to the Rl hillside area. 3. Retain the current R1 hillside development standards (2005 Rl). 4. Rezone the Rl hillside areas to RHS. The current 2005 R1/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. \.- 17 - 81 MCA-2006-01 Aupt 1.-, 2OO'l Page -I , Valley Floor Rural Hillside ~ ~ ~ Existing R1/~ (2005) " " " " - 45% max. house size - R1 development standards - 30% or greater average slope triggers hillside development standards .;. Rt Oensfty - House size adjuslment based on slope - 15% or greater average , slope triggers Hillside - Controls DensIty - Hcue sIze-tuslMent based on slope -HIIfsIde development Standards --,/ Reverting back to the pre-200S 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 R1 (2005) vs. pre-2005 R1: ' 2005 Rl (current) Pre-200S Rl Fomlula: 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) = S,D96 sq. ft. 5,096 - 5,096 (.15) = ~ 20,000 (.45) = ~ -/' 17 - 82 MCA..2006-01 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 orclli:1ance hillside standards ~ 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 R1-10 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 R1- 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 prominen~ 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 pr<?vides 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 Planning 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. \.- 17-83 MCA-2006-01 August 14, 2007 Page 6 S. 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 ---- lilllside properties. 6. Change the zone of the At properties to Rl with lot size minimw.ns 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 De 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 incorp~rate a similar requirement. . ~. 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 ~ fl Steve Piasecki, Director of Community Developm~ ---./ Enclosure: Exhibit A: Existing Rl Hillside Orqinance Exhibit B: Background DiscUssion Exhibit C: House Size Comparison (Rl vs. RHS) . --.-/' 17 - 84 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 Residenti~ Hillside ordinance, Chapter 19.40, or the Rl zoning ordinance, Chapter 19.28, whichever specific regulation is Il}ore restrictive. 2. No structure or improvements shall occur on slopes of t~ 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, QCcurs on an area with a slope of thirty percent or greater. (Ord. 1886, (part), 2001; Ord. 1868, (part), 2001; Ord. 1860, ~ 1 (part), 2000; Ord. 1834, (part), 1999; Ord. 1635, ~ 1 (part), 1993; Ord. 1601, Exh. A (part), 192) D. An application for building permits filed and ac~epted 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. . \.- 17 - 85 Exhibit B ,BACKGROUND The following is a brief chronological summary of prior events leading up to the current date: . ' ------ Prior to 1993 , The Oty had.limited policies and guidelines regulating properties located in the hillside area. General Plan ()j1993 Incorporated more extensive development standards 4'ttended 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. Tanuary 18, 2005 (R1 Ordinance of2005J . The City Council approved amendments to the Rl Ordinance applying hillside standards to R1lots with an average slope of 1,5% of greater. The Cotmcil voted UIijlDimously to approve the'amendments to the Rl 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. ~lease refer to the onlirie 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 channel/webcasting archives 2004/in dex.asp Tanuary 2006 Several affected property owners expressed concerns that the new Rl hillside standards were approved without enough public notice and input opportunif:ies. Consequently, the Council directed staff as part of its work program to re-open the R1 hillside standards for discussion,and public input. Tanuary 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 Rl Hillside standards prior to the 2005 Rl Ordinance. April 3. 2007 The City Council discussed the applicability of the hillside standards to properties located in the Cupertino foothills 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 Rl hillside standards was not meant 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 17 - 86 L 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. April 17, 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 1, 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. Tune 20, 2007 and Tuly 19. 2007- NeiKhborhood MeetinKs Neighborhood meeHngs were held at City Hall 07t June 20, 2007 and July 19, 2007. Neighbors were asked to identify common objecHves 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 opHons with regards to the R1 hillside development stal1.da.rds. The spectrum of options available ranged from reverting back to the pre 2005 R1, do nothing and retain the CU1Te71.t R1 hillside developm.ent 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. Severallteighbo7's (representing the north Lindy Lane area) expressed tlte desire to revert the Rl hillside development standards back to the pre-200S Rl Ordinance wltere only developments occurring on slopes of 30% or gJ'eater is subjected to both tlte Rl and the RHS Ordinance, whichever is more 7'estrictive. 17 - 87 -/ Exhibit C Home Size Comparison between R.l VB. RHS (.ass11JIling 20% avg. slope) HIlL 1 I Im_~ '~~) .~ . 1 l"~ 1 1124"'i'"ML "I.- 17 7 1 11254 ML :lNII, 1 1 11 11244 ... 0I1IIIl 1 ., 1 271 11 1 1 1 r71 , 1~4 YilT "7 11208 ... 0I1IIIl 1 5 1 11 11 11204... CIIIII 4 101 8:11 1 11111a-T_ 111l1ft1 " 7 4188.41 1 1 4 1 11201 s.ntaT_ ,. 10'iT 2939 145 4235. 1 1 11215". c- 'll'MTI 13, 11 11210 ML CIIIII 241 3415 10 4 11 4 I 11208 ... CIIIII 17 <II' ~.1I1 1 1 411 111 112!;!;'" CIIIII 11 7 1IJ1551 .3 ~T_ 1 7a1 ,. , , 31 11 ,. .35 1 B "'1 18 ,. 11443 521 1848: 13 1 =It 111- I 8 1 7 13 121850 L.lndoI 1 S7 , 7 21851 lildv 78 404T 8 34, 7118. ", - 24 24 1 LIndv 8147 4118 348L 1441. 1 LIndv PL 104 2 4 7iId -. lI!llI. 1 21 LIndv 8 27881 4 12 3lIll5 m. 31 , r;i;ii] LJndv 1001 2~ 4 1 g; l.Indv 10.4 .~ 8 104 T3ll 4 1 .. -'1 1417 17%1 1 4 1712 2 ""'-I " 44 I'"if' . .,.r 1 10454T 2.888 4704 .00 11 G'K.I 74 21 85831 4 1 1 en. 2105 8 1 ""iIiiiir 4 ,. 1 1001101 '418 4 . 1 1 .....1 It 4 2 1 114 17~ "1471 411111 H~ 1 I 10.011l1 4.-1 3125.111' 1 471.111 .,54 85831 l! 1 1 431l!1 _&CN ,. I.IiO ." , 1 1 :i 2.s1l21 2.lWlI :I ,74~ -4 1 27221 4.!1121 I 21; L 3~81 3l1l1!ll1 7 I 10.llllDI 4151 48011 3170. 1465 2" 10018 4001 4_1 _II 1 4; 2.1 1- IlJ!781 'POIII 37241 31..57 1 1 IA~ 10,018 188 4.1;081 Ii 2 S4C)J 10454 721 4704\ 11 . 4 1-1 21 AIIiaMrI 1147 2741 41181 . 21745 AeanIll1 10 IiQi\f . 2.508 4,901 3I7O.oa 1.382.08 54 11117 VIlla '4.111 2074 8 4OIIlI. 1 1l84,83 8B% :I ilU27 iVllla 13 83ll 2074 A/l!U UM.d 4111111 ml! :::: 11.7111 2. ~ I m ;; 11 11712 1 m) := 7405 2.25S 3 ,41 4lJlKJ 7405 2 'U' 577.41 28"Xo I ;I .vau 7405 , A1 07'" ~ 111 Villa tMiIff -, ,,' :J &77.41 1118 I....... 7"JW\f 1 . 111111 . d~ ~ ~ 11201 SanlaT_ 24111' ~ 74% . ----,' 17-88 Exhibit D "- EXISTING ORDINANCE 19.28.050 Development Regulations (Site). C. Development on Properties with ~ide Characteristics. 1. Buildings proposed on properties located west of the 10% hillsIde slope line as defined in the Cupertino Generat 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 structtires, occurs on an area with a slope of thirty percent o~ greater. (Ord. 1886, (part), 2001; Ord.1868, (part), 2001; Ord. 1860,91 (part),'2000; Ord. 1834, (part), 1999; Ord. 1635,91 (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 applicatio:p processing under the ordinances in effect at that time. ' " , \- 17-89 Exhibit H Emlbb H EXISTING ORDINANCE . ' ---/ 19.28.050 Development Regulations (Site). C. -Development on ~operties with Hillside Characteristics. 1. Buildings proposed on properties located west of the 10% hillside slope line as defined in the ,Cupez:tino General Plan, that have an average slope equal to or gre~ter than fifteen percent shall be developed in accordance with the site development and design standfU'ds specified in Sections 19.40.050 through 19.40.140 of the , Residential Hillside otdinance, Chapter 19.40, or the R1 zoning ordinance, Chapter 19.28,' whichever specific regulation is more restrictive. , 2. No sttucture 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 struChrres, occurs on an area with a slope of thirty percent or greater. (Ord. 1886, (part), 2001; Ord. 1868, (part), 2001; Ord. 1860, 6 1 (part), 2000; Ord. 1834, (part), 1999; Ord. 1635, 61 (part), 1993; Ord. 160i, 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. --./' 17-90 '- ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF11IB CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL AMENDING CHAP'J'BR 19.2&050 OF~ MUNICIPAL CODE,.~INGLE FAMIL).' RBSlDENTIAL ZONES (R.-l),REGABDINq Rl~20~D PROPERTIES GENBAALL Y LOCATED SO~H OF THE LINDA Vl$TA. DRIVE, SOUTH AND WEST OF THBSANTA TEUSAAND TERRACE DRIVE, WEST OF TERRA BELLA DRIVE AND NOaTH ()F iiNDY LANE. -,. "',' . ". T~6 <;ITYC()~CIL QPTHB CItY OF ClJPMTINO ~ES ORDAIN AS FOLLOViSi " Chapter 19.28.050, of the Municipal Code ot Cupertino is hereby amended to read as follows: C. Development on properties with Hil1side~cteristics. 1. BttikiiRgs p19pesea eft prepmies le~" west af tile 1(}<<l't. llmside slape line aG defifteEi ifL the Cupe!tifta Ceneral Pltit, taat have an ay-erage slcpe etpK 1!e Sf gpaatB tMR BiteeB. pueeat,shaIlee tlevelepetl iR aecel'a&Ree v"itk the si. a~"d:e'meftt __ .. s_~ &pedftea if\ Sedieaa 19.49.9&9 tlveusk 1-9.49.119 litE" 'lA&e.tial HIlt;iEle ~ee, Ckaptel' 19.40,81' 1:fte Ii1 i5eftiflg a~e, Chapter 19.~, whid\evu speeifie ~ is !Rape festftetive. '- 1. BuildiniS pro.,posed on properties ienerally IQCated south of Linda Vista l)rive, SQ,Uth ond ~~QI Swtta T~resa'fI\<l1euace op.ve, west of Terra ~Qrtve iWd porth ()f J.4pdy LaMeSee ~p'QiJowl zoned Rl-20. that . have an ay~r"B slope equal to or pater than fifteen percent and are zoned for lot sizes ifeater than 20,000 square feet shall be developed in accordapce witl.Ubl..f.2U9'!in1 ,i~ ~ft~l9,PqJ.ent stan~ i 17 - 91 '- !: Site Gradirts. ~ " i. All site grading shall be limited to a cumulative total of two thousand five hundred cubic yards, rut plus fill. The two thousand five hundred cubic yards includes grading for buildinl pad;yard areas, driveway and all other areas requiring grading, but d~s not include basements: The graded area shall be limited to'the buildingpadc area to the greatest extent possible. Grading quahtitiesfor multiple driv~ways shall be divided equally among the participating lots, e.g., two lots sharing a drivewajrwill 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. -----/ ii. All cUt and fill areas shall be rounded to follow the natural contours and planted with landscaping which meets the r~quire~entsiit ~ction 19.40.050G. ' iii. 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. J b. Floor Area. i. The maximum floor area ratio shall,be forty-five percent of the net lot area for development proposed on the flat pad portiori, , defined as pad areas equal to or less than 10% slope.. of any lot; FormUla: A = 0.45 B: where A = maxilrium allowable house size artd B = net lot area~ ii. The maximum floor area for development where any portion of the building is proposed on a slope ~ea exceeding 10% shall be four thousand five hundred square feet pluS 59.59 square feet for every one thousand square fee\ over ten thousand square feet of net lot area. In all ca~,the,maximum floor area shall not exceed six thousand five' h~~ 'sqlJllre feel without an exception. >, --../' 17-92 "- Formqla: : A=((B..lO.ooolJl..000}(S9.59)+4;500: .whereA= maximum allowable hoUSCi! size prior to instituting the maximl1\I\ 6,500 squareJoot buildin~ size and B = net lot area. iii. The floor area ratio may be exceeded for development on pads exceeding 10%. if a site and architectural permit is approved by the Plannin~ Commission in accordance with Chapter 19.134 'of the Cupertino Municipal Code. c. Second Floor Area and Balcony The second floor and balcony review process shall be consistent with the requirements from the Residential Hillside Zomn~ District (Chapter 19;40). The amount of second floor area is not limited provided the total floor area does not exceed the allowed floor area ratio. d. Re~ining Wall Screening. L 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. e. Fencing. i. Solid board fencing shall be limited to a five thousand square foot site area (excluding the principal building). . ii. Open fencing (composed of materials which result in a minimum of seveno/-five percent visual transparen~) 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) f. Tree Protection. Up to two protected trees with a diameter iess than 18 inches may be removed to accommodate a building pad subject to approval of the Director of Communio/ Development. Removal of protected trees exceeding 18 inches or removal of more than two protected trees requires approval of a tree removal permit by the Planning Commission in accordance with the Tree Ordinance. ~ 17 - 93 2. No structure or improvements shaW 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, ~ 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 MaLek 1, 2095 the effective date of Ordinance may proceed with application processing under th~ordinances ~effect atthat time. J I, ; -.--/ 17 - 94 \.- '. CUPERJINO City of Cupertino' 10300Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 (408) n7;'3251 FAX (408) m-3333 Community Develo ent'Department ;~~F~:~~t~~~~at~r'i' -;.),~;]ri,r7 ' '''\ .,_,~1.tay..l:~_~ 1 taft Use Only EA File No.EA-2007-G9 se File No.MCA-2007-01 PROJEc1 DESCRIPTION: ~ Project Title: Amendment to the R1 Ordinance lChacter 19.28.050C1l to e~plude croDertles zoned R1-10wlth an averaae sloce of 15% or areater located west of the 10% slqce IIl')e. In addition. Identify the aDcrocrlate hillside develocment. standards (Section 19.28.050C1l for the remalnlna 15:t foothill crocertles zoned R1;'20 ucsloDe of the.1 0% hillside transition line. ' Project Location: ProDerties In the foothills of CUDertlno Project Description: See cro~ect title Environmental Setting: Standard slnal.fam,lv .ub~lvlslons. foothllllhillslde ~roDertles PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Site Area (ae.) - _N1~ Building Coverage -.wA Exist. Bulldlngo- J:MA..s.f. Proposed Bldg. - NJA s.f. Zone -81 G.P. Designation - Residential Low 1-5 DU/Gr. Ac. Assessor's Parcel No.. - _~ _ If Residential, Units/Gross Aere - Applicable Special Area Plans: (Check) ,0 Monta Vista Design Guidelines o S. De Anza Conceptual S. Sara-8unny Conceptual Stevens Creek Blvd. SW & Landscape o o N. De Anza Conceptual Stevens Crk Blvd. Conceptual o o If Non-Residential, Building Area - s.t. FAR': Max. Employees/Shift - _Parking Required Parking Provided Project Site Is Within Cupertino Urban Service Area - YES. !XI NO 0 \- 17 - 95 ." . . ."",. ."- _,ji::i,_,::,:~:}l;,s';~~,~~> ','.' '-,':l~;..l:~q,~~~ ~I~T ; ,._ p, -,., -.' . . -' . ~ ;..1:f::..:.f".~i.: .,,:..:., .:".' ~". :~:.:.._~. ..~ A. CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN SOURCES 1. Land Use Element, 2. Public Safety "Element 3. Housing Element 4. Transportation Element 5. environmental Resources 6. Appendix A- HIDslde Development 7. Land Use Map . 8. Noise Element Amendment 9. City Rldgellne Policy, 10. Constraint Maps B. CUPERTINO SOURCE DOCUMENTS 11. Tree Preservation ordinance 778 12. City Aerial Photography Maps 13. "Cupertino Chronicle- (CaIifomla History Center, 1976) 14. Geological Report (site specific) 15. Parking Ordinance 1277 16. Zoning Map 17. Zoning CodeISpeclfic Plan Documents 18. City Noise Ordinance 18b City of Cupertino Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Plan C. CITY AGENCIES Site 19. Community Development Dept. Ust 20. Public Works Dept. 21. Parks & Recreation Department 22. Cupertino Water Utility D. OUTSIDE AGENCIES 23. COUnty Planning Department 24. Adjacent Cities' Planning Departments 25. County Departmental of Environmental Health D. OUTSIDE AGENCIES (Continued). " 26. Mldpenlnsula Regional' Open Space District 27. County Parks and Recreation Department 28. Cupertino Sanitary District 29. Fremont Union High School 0Isbtct 30. Cupertino Union School OIetrlct ' 31. Pacific Gas and Electric 32. Santa Clara County Fire Department 33. County Sheriff 34. CAL TRANS 35. County Transportation Agency 36. Santa Clara Valley Water DIstrict 36b Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program 36c San Jose Water Company ~ E. OUTSIDE AGENCY DOCUMENTS 37. BAAQMD SUlVey of Contaminant Excesses 38. FEMA Rood MapslSCVWD Rood Maps 39. USDA.. .Soils of ~ Clara County" 40. County Hazardous Waste Management Plan 41. County Heritage Resources Inventoiy 42. Santa Clara Valley Water DIstrIct Fuel leak Site 43. CalEPA Hazardous W_e and Substances Site 43b National Pollutant DIscharge elimination System (NPDES) Munic;:1paI Stonnwater Discharge Permit Issued to the City of Cupertino by the San Francisco Bay , Regional Water Quality Control Board 43c Hydron1Odiflcatlon Plan F. OTHER SOURCES 44. Project Plan S.tlAppllcatlon Materials 45. Field Reconnaissance 46. Experience wlproject of sltnUar scope/Characteristics 47. ABAG Projection Series --.../ A. Complete All information requested on the Initial Study Cover page. LEAVE BLANK SPACES ONLY WHEN A SPECIFIC ITEM IS NOT APPLICABLE. B. Consult the Initial Study Source List; use the materials listed therein to complete, the checklist information in Categories A through O. C. You are encouraged to cite other relevant sources; If such sources are used, job in their title(s) in the "Source" column next to the question to which they relate. D. If you check any of the "YES" response to any questions, 'you must attach a sheet explaining the potential impact and suggest mitigation If needed. E. When explaining any yes response, label your answer clearly (Example "N - 3 Historical-) Please try to respond concisely, and place as many explanatory responses as possible on each oaae. F. Upon completing the checklist, sign and dats the Preparer's Affidavit. G. Please attach the following materials before submitting the Initial Study to the City. ,(project Plan Set of Legislative Document ,(Location map with site clearly marked (when applicable) BE SURE YOUR lNITI/\L STUDY SUBLlITT AL IS cor,lPLETE - ItJCOr,lPLETE L1ATERIALS [,1AY CAUSE PROCESSING [)ELAY~ I. AESTHETICS - Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? [5,9,24,41,44] b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? [5,9,11,24,34,41,44] c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? [1,17,19,44] d) Create a new source of substantial light or 0 ' 0 0 l&l glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? [1,16,44] The exclusion of the R1-10 properties (approxfmately' 124 parcels) from Section 19.28.050C1 (R1 Hillside Development Standards) should not have significant Impacts to the general aesthetics of the Cupertino hills and the surround neighborhood. Most of these properties are already developed and do not significantly, contribute to the overall protection of the Cupertino hill~. Most homes on the R1-10 properties are already built on existing,flat pads at the toe-of-slope in existing established neighborhoods not highly visible from the general valley floor of the City. EVALUAnONOF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: L ISSUES: [and Supporting Information Sources] \- ~1: e: 1: e: .2 e:1: jBj as. 0'S ..13 13 ~C)=i'" ~.g I o II i!E II'~.. a ~ zQ. ..e:e I) a =8 ]Ce S 8.'- a_ ..JCi) :=lie: Ci) - o o lID o o o o l&l o ,0 1&1 o Approximately 15 R1-20 properties are being considered for hillside development standards. Even though some of the R1-20 properties are located on a knoll, most of them are developed. There are only 2 or 3 homes left ,ti:tat may be developed into larger homes. Each of the 15 properties will be reviewed individual for potential impacts and mitigation measures. "- II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of. Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique . Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the o o o lID 17 - 97 ~... ~i si i'" 'I' Ii 1$ ~11$ 01 ISSUES: .i~ I itilf ~!E I za. [and Supporting Information Sources] .scE C E E 00>>- 0>>_ - .- ..J .- :& u Ci5 D.(/) (/) C - . maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and ~onitorlng Program of the California Resources Agency. to non- agricultural use? [5,7,39] b) Conflict with existing zoning for 0 0 0 1m agricultural use. or a Williamson Act contract? [5,7,23] c) Involve other changes in the existing 0 Cl 0 lEI environment which, due to their location or nature,. could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? [5.7.39] III. AIR QUALITY - Where available, the significance criteria established by the ' . applicable air quality management or air , pollution' control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of 0 0 0 mI the applicable air quality plan? [5.37.42,44] b) Violate any air quality standard or 0 0 0 (XJ contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? [5,37.42.44] c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net 0 0 0 IXI increase of any criteria pollutant for which , the project region Is non-attainment under an '. applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing .eJTIissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for - , ozone precursors)? [4,37.44] d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial ' . [J 0 0 (8) pollutant concentrations? [4.37;44] . ' e) Create objectionable odors affecting a 0 0 0 (8) substantial number of people? [4,37,44] IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect. either 0 D. 0 (8) directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive. or special status species in local or realonal Dlans. Dolicies, or reaulations. or bv 17-98 ---./' -/ \- ~.. C" co2 c" ilju !~iil caC u t=l!1 ISSUES: E!EB ]!Eo OJ 01 [and s,..pportlng Information Sources] IIi c. ii- Z.s ' , OJ ~ () " US ~.5 ..JUS the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? [5,10,27.44] b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any 0 0 0 [g] riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community Identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Servic~? [5,10,27,44] c) Have a substantial adverse effect on 0 0 0 [g] federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, " filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? [20,36.44] d) Interfere substantially with the movement 0 0 0 [g] of any, native resident or migratory fish or wildUfe species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or , impede the use of native wildlife nursery ,sites? [5,10,12,21,26] e) Conflict with any local policies or 0 0 0 [g] ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or orpinance? [11,12,41] f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural 0 ,0 0 [g) Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? [5"10,26,27] V. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in 0 0 0 [g] the significance of a historical resource as defined in ~15064.5? [5,13.41] . b) Cause a substantial adverse change in 0 0 0 [g] the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to fi 15064.5? [5,13,41] c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique 0 0 0 [g] paleontological resource or site or uniaue \- \..- , 17 - 99 :-.- c- CO c'E -c · c 0 i 'ii&a't) ~B.cio ..'0 '0 -u. i~& ISSUES: - u:: g. I) !E:t: CI e- ,0 I c._ z . [and Supporting Information Sources] ~.ij liJ:Eo is i , D.(I) ....- ~() Ci5 U) .5 geologic feature? [5,13,41] d) Disturb any human remains, including 0 0 0 IX) those interred outside of formal cemeteries? [1,5] . VI. GEOLOGY AND SOilS - Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, Including the risk of loss,injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as [] [] ~ 0 delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo . . Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on otl)er substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. [2,14,44] ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? 0 0 0 l2D [2,5,10,44] Iii) Seismic-related ground failure, Including 0 [] 0 IX) liquefaction? [2,5,1 0,39,44] Iv) Landslides? [2,5,10,39,44] [] [] 0 (XJ b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the 0 [] 1m 0 loss of topsoil? [2,5,1 0,44] c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is' 0 [] [] IX) unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? [2,5,10,39] d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined 0 0 0 l&l in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1997), creating substantial risks to life or property? [2,5,10] ,. 17 - 100 ~ \......- . ISSUES: . [and Supportlhg'lnformatlonSQurces] e) Have soils Incapable of adequately supporting the use of septl~ tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? [6,9,36,39] :-.- iiB'O i!E~ lis D.(I) o Ii 'E c~ ,c- Ot! ~u,c'l I !E :t: CI iJ:1! .... .- IIIIi! U U) -=05 o c'E .-'0 I!: !II i is .JU) o '0 '0 - za. S IXJ The majority of the R1-10 properties that are being excluded from the hillside standards have developments on existing flat pads. In the event If development will occur on slope of 30% or greater (In an area that exceeds 500 ~q. ft.) then an exception approval is required. The. potential grading, drainage, geological and environmental Impacts and the associated mitigation measures will be asse~sed at the time of review. VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS - Would the project: L 0 0 0 " IXJ a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous' materials? [32,40,42,43,44] b) Create a significant hazard to the public or 0 0 0 1m the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving th$ release of hazardous materials into the environment? [32,40,42,43,44] c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle [] 0 [] l&l hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? [2,29,30,40,44] . . . d) Be located on a site which is included on a 0 0 [] IX) Iist'of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? [2,42,40,43] '- e) For a project located within an airport land O. 0 0 IXJ use plan or, where such a plan has not been 17 -101 >0- 0 !Ji -c c'E c= 'iillts !~jli ts ISSUES: =uII ~l c!E g [and, Supporting Information Sources] ~js I)i 1'15 I) iE E ~.- ~() ~U)- - D.(I) U) C - adopted, within two miles of a. public airport or publiC use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? [ ] f) For a project within the vicinitY of a private [] [] 0 IE] airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? [ ] g) Impair Implementation of or physically [] [] 0 IE] interfere with an adopted emergency . response plan or emergency evacuation plan? [2,32;33,44] , h) Expose people or structures to a [] 0 D. IXI significant risk of loss, Injury or d~ath Involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized area~ or where residences are intermixed with wlldlands?[1,2,44] VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY - Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standard~ or [] 0 0 IE) waste discharge requirements? [20,36,37] b) Substantially deplete groundwater 0 [] 0 IE] ,supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit In aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing ., '. nearQy wells wQUld drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? [20,36,42] e) Create or contribute runoff water which [] [] 0 IE) would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or . provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? [20,36,42] f) Otherwise substantially degrade water [] [] 0 !XI quality? [20,36,37] g) Place housing within a 1 Oo-year flood [] [] 0 IE] hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood 17 - 102 .J '- :-.- C- cO c- -c caC oi caC -cats .:il ts .~ U I ~~,cI8. ISSUES: ~!E oas za. [and $UPportln9 Infonnation SoUl'C$s] !.iE ~ilats !I- i 0._ - - :iu Do(/) (/) .5 Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate. Map or other flood hazard delineation map? [2,38] h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area 0, 0 0 IX) structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? [2,38] i) Expose people or structures to a significant [] 0 0 IX) risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? [2,36,38] j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or 0 0 0 [&I mudflow? [2,36,38] IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project: a) Physically divide an established 0 0 0 IE] community? [7,12,22,41] b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, 0 0 0 IE] policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? [1,7,8,16,17,18,44] c) Conflict with any applicable habitat 0 0 0 IE conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? [1,5,6,9,26] X. MINERAL RESOURCES - Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known [] [] 0 IE mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? 15,10] b) Result in the loss of availability of a 0 0 0 IX) locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? [5,10] XI. NOISE - Would the project result In: a) Exposure of persons to. or generation of, 0 0 0 IX) \..- \..- 17 - 103 >0,'.. c - cO c'E -c - Ii o! , 'iifj'O caca'o ts I!:uil ~ul ISSUES: Iii I!E. CD~ .!E 01 [and Supporting Information Sources] . i-I! 0 'Ice Ze m_. - D.(/) _1(;; :E g ....Ci5 - noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? [8,18,44] b) Exposure of persons to or generation of [] [] 0 [&) eXQessive groundborn.e vibration or groundbome noise levels? [8,18,44] c) A substantial permanent increase in 0 [] 0 IXI. ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? [8,18] d) A substantial temporary or periodic 0 [] 0 IX) increase In ambient noise levels In the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? [8,18,44] e) For a project located within an airport land [] [] 0 tm use plan or, where such a plan has not been ,.. adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would t~e project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? [8,18,44] f) For a project within the vicinity of a private [] [] 0 IX) airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? [8,18] XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING - Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth In an [] 0 0 IX) area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or ,indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other Infrastructure)? [3,16,47,44] b) Displace substantial numbers of existing 0 [] C] IX) housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? [3,16,44] c) Displace substantial numbers of people, [] O' 0 [&) necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? [3,16,44] XIII~ PUBLIC SERVICES 17 -104 -/' \..- :-.- 0 c'E -c i i SI -8i '~&l- 13 ISSUES: ir;:g t= !E. = i 0 o as lis ]-iilt ..;: E za. [and SupportlnllMor,.tlon Sources] CD Dl_ S .- :lEu .JCi5 D.(/) (/) c - a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental faciUtles, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain. acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? [19,32,44] 0 [] 0 IXJ Pollee protection? [33,44] 0 [] 0 IX) Schools? [29,30,44] [] [] 0 IX) Parks? [5,17,19,21,26.27,44] 0 [] 0 IX) . Other public facilities? [19.2.0,44] [] [] 0 IX) XIV. RECREAnON - a) Would the project increase the use of 0 0 0 'IX) existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deteriotation of the facility would occur or be accelerated? [5,17,19,21,26,27,44] b) Does the project Include recreational [] 0, D [gJ facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an,adverse physical effect on the environment? [S.~4] XV. TRANSPORTATIONlTRAFFIC-:, Would the project: a) Cause an Increase in traffic which Is [] [] IXI' 0 substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of t~e street system (I.e., result in a substantial ihcrease in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? [4,20,35,44] b) Exceed, either Individually or cumulatively, [] 0 0 [gJ a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? [4,20,44] \..- \......- 17 - 105 :-.- 0 c'E -c li'E ci ~B'O ~. 0 "BU ts ISSUES: -=~ "511 I ~ -= ^I.': o . !E.- CD ~j.5 I it-!! ~Ii' za. [and Supporting Information Sources] i " D.(/) ....US :Ie - c) Result in'a change in air traffic patterns, [] 0 0 (Xl including either an Increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safely risks? [4.1] d) Substantially increase hazards due to a [] [] tJ IX! design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous Intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? [20,35,44] e) Result in Inadequate emergency access? [] [] .0' IX! [2,19,32,33,44] f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? [] [] 0 (Xl [17,44] g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or [] Q 0 IE] programs supporting altern~tlve transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? [4,34] There are approximately 124 R1-10 properties located upslope of the 10% slope line. By excluding them from any R1 hillside standards, there may be po~ential for larger homes. However, the cumulative Impacts from the Increase home sizes are insignificant. The cumulative home size impact does not have any direct correlation with any increase in traffic count or pattern since the occupancy type for eac~ of the homes do not change. Same concept applies to the R1-20 properties depending out the outcome of the final' ordinance amendment. If the ordinance is made more lenient that allows for full R1 45% floor area ratio irrespective of property slope, then larger homes may be built. However, the cumulative impacts of this effect are insignificant. XVI. UTIUTIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS - Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment [] [] 0 'IX! . requirements of the applicable Regional' , . Water Quality Control Board? [5,22,28,36,44] b) Require or result in the construction of [] [] 0 IE] new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? [36,22.28,36] 17 -106 ----' L ~c'E ' 0 c'E : C'E c= Iii !J 0 II IIBU '0 ISSUES: ..-ill- is u:: II 01 ..- a. [and Suppo~lng Information Sources] f is ~'i'E I ,I: .5 zi 'I:>> D.Ci5 .- ::I .!ICi5 (/). . - c) Require or result in the construction of . [] [] 0 I:&l new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities,' the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? [5,22,28,36,44] '. e) Result in a determination by the [] 0 0 IX! wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the proj~ that it has adequate ' capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? [5,22,28,36,44] f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient 0 [] 0 I:&l p~rmitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply With federal, state, and local [] [] 0 IXI statutes and regulations related to solid waste? XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE (To be completed by City Staff) a) Does the project have the potential to [] [] IX) 0 degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have Impacts that are [] [] I:&l 0 individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (-Cumulatively considerable- means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other cl!rrent projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Does. the project have environmental effects 0 0 0 . , IX) which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? ~ L 17 - 107 I ',. PREPARER'S AFFIDAVIT I hereby certify that the Information provided In this Initial StUdy is true' and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief; I certify that I have used proper diligence In responding accurately to all questions herein, and have consulted appropriate source references when necessary to ensure full and complete disclosure of relevant environmental data. I hereby acknowledge than any substantial errors dated within this Initial Study may cause delay or 'discontinuance of related project review procedures, and hereby agree to hold harmless the City of Cupertino, its staff and authorized agents, from the con~Liences of such delay or olSCOntinuance. ~. ,.....' " ' Preparer's Signature ' . Print Preparer's N8f'!1e C7A:R-i 'CfJA-O 17 - 108 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (To be Completed by City Staff) , " ENVIRONMENtAL FActORS POTENn~LL Y AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that Is a .Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. '-' [] Aesthetics 0 Agriculture Resources 0 Air Quality [] Biological Resources [] Cultural Resources [] Geology 'Soils [] Hazards & Hazardous 0 Hydrology' Water 0 Land Use' Planning Materials Quality [] Mineral Resources 0 Noise [] Population' Housing 0 Public Services 0 Recreation .0 TransportationlTraffic I;] Utilities' Service [] Mandatory Findings of Systems Significance DETERMINATION: On the basis of t~is initial evaluation the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) finds that: "- I&J The proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. 0 Although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect In this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. [] The proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. 0 The proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impacf or "potentially significant unless mitlgatedU impact on the environment, but at least one' effect 1) has, been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier ' analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. [] Although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standard~, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. \..- Date Date , CITY OF CUPERTINO RECOMMENDATION OF ENVIRONM;ENTAL REVIEW COMMITIEE September 5, 2007 '; , . -/ As provided by the Environmental Assessment Procedure, adopted by the City Council of the City of Cupertino on May 27, 1983, as amended, the following described project was reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee of the City of Cupertino on September 5, 2007. PROTECT DESCRIPI10N AND LOCATION Application No.: Applicant: Location: MCA-2007-01 (EA-2007-09) City of Cupertino Cupertino foothill area DISCRETIONARY ACTION REQUEST "J ~ Municipal Code Amendment to amend Chapter 19.28 S~g1e Family Residential (R1) Zones to ex~lude properties zpned R1-10 with an average slope equal to or greater than fifteen (15) percent slope Municipal Code Amendment to amend Chapter 19.28.050(Q1 of Single Family Re~idential (R1) Zone regarding hillside development standards fo~ buildings proposed on properties. zoned Rl-20 located west of the 10% slope line -.-/' FINDINGS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMlfTEE The Environmental ~eview, Committee recommends the granting of a Negative Dedarati n finding that the project is consistent with the General Plan and has no signific ten. ental impacts. ~ g/rntREC EA-2007-09 17 - 110 ' E -.) \, EXHIBIT Why do we need a special zoning for only 15 properties? This just doesn't make sense... it1 There is ONE fair solution · Make ALL Rl10ts the same and REMOVE 19.28.050.C Hillside Houses? An R 1-10 House Excluded Properties West of Cupertino, .. J n General Plan Line · 19.28.050 C " . . . located West of the 10% hillside slope line as defined in the Cupertino General Plan, " . . . Tuesday, August 21, 2007 Cupertino City Council Meeting Agenda Item #23 Slide # 10 The 15 Property Compromise · 1. RHS fencing rules apply, no 30Ksf exemption. · 2. The allowable Rl floor area shall be reduced by one percent for each percent of slope over 15 % within the building footprint. The maximum reduction shall be 30%. The Rl maximum floor area still applies, however, proposed structures whose floor area exceeds the reduced amount require Planning Commission approval. · 3. RHS 2nd floor rules apply. · 4. RHS Balcony rules apply. · 5. Retaining walls over 5' shall require screening.