Milpitas planners recommend 1,000‑foot school buffers, flavored tobacco ban to curb youth access

The Milpitas Planning Commission on Thursday voted unanimously to recommend that the City Council adopt a zoning text amendment that would limit where new tobacco retailers may open and strengthen local rules on flavored tobacco and sales at pharmacies.

Principal Planner Lillian Van Hoa told the commission the city‑initiated ordinance would bar new tobacco retailers from locating within 1,000 feet of a public school, require 500 feet of separation between tobacco retailers, prohibit flavored tobacco products and ban tobacco sales at pharmacies. "No new tobacco retailer will be allowed within 1000 feet of a school," Van Hoa said in her presentation, and staff proposed that stores selling tobacco as an accessory use obtain a minor conditional use permit.

The proposal stems from county public‑health grant work and local data staff shared showing substantial youth vaping in Santa Clara County. Van Hoa said city staff visited all 38 tobacco retailers and distributed flyers; staff also noted existing retailers within the proposed buffers would be legal nonconforming uses and could continue operating but would lose that status if they expanded or abandoned the use.

Commissioners focused questions on enforcement and scope. Vice Chair Kong asked how the minor conditional use permit would be implemented and whether the city had funding and staffing for enforcement; Van Hoa described a business‑license checkbox, staff review of new applications and primarily complaint‑driven code enforcement, and said the city’s MyMilpitas app and code enforcement officers would support follow‑up. Attorney Quiches and staff explained the city previously explored a licensing scheme that would have included more active enforcement (youth decoys and annual inspections) but did not pursue it after county partners and the city concluded it required more staff resources.

Several commissioners urged clarifying the ordinance’s definitions. Staff acknowledged the mapping shown to the commission omitted private schools and recommended changing the language to explicitly include both public and private schools and commercial child‑care centers; the commission directed staff to add that clarification.

Local residents who spoke during public comment urged stronger protections. Wilfred Kong, a long‑time Pine community resident, said the city should consider neighborhood privacy and traffic impacts tied to nearby development projects when setting policy. Business representatives raised concerns that separation rules could make it harder for neighborhood gas stations and convenience stores to sell regulated products and asked the commission to consider exemptions; Brian Lam of the California Fuels and Convenience Alliance asked the commission to avoid rules that would unintentionally push responsible retailers into the unregulated market.

Commissioner Calkins moved that the planning commission adopt Resolution No. 26‑004 recommending the City Council approve Zoning Text Amendment ZA26‑0001 with staff clarifications to include private schools and childcare centers and explore enhanced enforcement coordination; the motion passed on a unanimous voice vote. The recommendation now moves to the City Council for final action.

Next steps: the commission’s recommendation and the draft ordinance will be transmitted to the City Council for consideration and final adoption. Staff said outreach and post‑implementation education funded by the county grant will continue regardless of the council’s timetable.